Yeah I see what you're saying. But in my proposal, regular users only "translate" money to bitcoin at the moment of transaction. The regular users do not buy bitcoin to keep them for any definite time. Only conscious investors do that (which is commendable by the way). Say if you are a regular user not interesting in investing in bitcoin. You put $100 in your wallet. Your dollars do not become bitcoin at the time of your deposit. They stay as your original money in your wallet. The next, you pay $10 to buy something. The $10 automatically converts to the equal amount of bitcoin based on the market price at the moment, and the converted bitcoin is transmitted over the Bitcoin network (got to be BSV to be efficient) to the wallet of the payee. If the payee is also a regular user (i.e. not interested in investing in bitcoin), the bitcoin received is automatically converted to his preferred local money, and it does not have to be the US dollars. All above happens behind the scene without requiring the users to do anything, not even seeing what's happening. You see, with this design, the value of the users' money is not affected by the fluctuation of the bitcoin at all, because the transaction can be finished within just a few seconds. This way, regular users don't even realize that they are using bitcoin. But the entire inner-working of the system is not the traditional fiat money banking system, but the bitcoin network. The design may leave the option of investing in and holding bitcoin to those who want to. It's OK if fewer than 1% of the users are actually interested in keeping bitcoin. The rest may not be even interested in the story of bitcoin, much less holding it. They only want to take advantage of convenience and efficiency of the tool. But these regular users are contributing to (and being benefited by at the same time) the bitcoin network without even knowing it. Again, as I said, bitcoin's success depends much more on these regular users than on the bitcoin enthusiasts.