"Is it because the implications predicted by orthodox monetary theory?"

---> Bitcoin is not money <----

There is no 'economics' or 'finance' or anything at play.

It's Tulip Bulbs without the Tulip Bulbs.

There are numbers, being traded back and forth for money 'because'.

There is no way to price BTC - there are no real underlying drivers - just what your cab driver and the guy in your office is willing to pay in that day - for an arbitrary number.

If anything, it's a study in pop culture, memes, and how information flows through social networks and the media.

It's just a number. That's it. God knows why some people want to pay $10K for a number they can't do anything with ... unless of course they believe, for some arbitrary reason someone else well.

Most bubbles are fuelled by speculation that is a multiplier of some underlying activity. But there is no 'underlying' BTC. So it's a study in pop culture. Not monetary theory.

What are your dollars but numbers being added and subtracted in a database? Things have value because people assign them value. There isn't some magical property that makes the trust in US government more legitimate than trust in math and cryptography. It would seem a lot of people would argue in favor of the latter as well.

"What are your dollars but numbers being added and subtracted in a database? "

You can use Dollars to do buy zillions of things large and small.

You can use BTC for nothing.

Dollars are backed by assets, not that it matters that much.

I'm not sure dollars are backed by anything, but the faith in the government? I suppose that's more than BTC has. Hm.

Dollars are created and exchanged for TBills (and since 2007 a lot of real estate) on the free market by the Fed.

So TBills are in fact a kind of 'faith in the governments ability to pay' - but that is a measurable, tangible, verifiable thing.

Euros are generally backed by real estate and other 'high quality' assets.

Most good national currencies are managed that way.

So - the central banks basically control how 'one asset (i.e. real estate) is turned int currency' back and forth, keeping enough currency going so as to allow for economic expansion, and to keep inflation at about 2% and unemployment in check.

At least in theory.

If you're in the US, your taxes are denominated in US dollars. You can buy US dollars or be jailed.

Because if nowadays we consider inequality a problem and the 1% holding half of the wold's wealth obscene, in bitcoin it's orders of magnitude worse, and a lot of that early wealth is in the hands of people that from what I've seen I hope they never get that kind of power and influence. Hell, I like Satoshi but I wouldn't want a single person to own 5% of the global wealth.

One that comes to mind: it would be profitable for miners to burn through $12 million dollars every 10 minutes for the block reward alone.

$12 million worth of electricity every 10 minutes is indeed mind boggling. I don't expect that BTC will be valued at $1 million anytime soon, but if that would happen, and a large percentage of the world population would use Bitcoin, it would have captured a large percentage of global capital and market activity. So for this scenario, judging the future price of electricity in USD doesn't tell you much about the actual value of that electricity.

But there are many other uses of energy that various subsets of people don't agree with, yet, as long as that electricity is paid for, the system keeps chugging along. What we have to fix is that tragedy of the commons, where we dump carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at no cost.

Sure: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15867841