The real risk is not spending bitcoin, but holding too much liquidity in fiat currency.

Imagine having half of your savings in bitcoin and the other half deposited in a bank. Which of the two halves will you naturally be incentivized to spend first? The answer is obvious: the one that is depreciating, namely fiat currency. The reasoning seems logical: spending bitcoin would mean giving up potential future gains. However, there is a paradox in this choice. That potential gain is already being lost with all the fiat money you continue to hold. If that 50% of your wealth were also in bitcoin, you would already be fully exposed to all possible upside. At that point, the only real sacrifice would be limited to what you spend on your daily necessities. In other words, every time you choose to spend fiat currency while saving your bitcoins, you are effectively taking a precise market position: you are short on bitcoin and long on fiat.

There is a paradox that lurks in the Bitcoin community, and it particularly affects the so-called “Saylor Bros” – those who have made HODL a religion. While they preach unlimited accumulation and criticize those who dare to spend their satoshis, they find themselves with bank accounts full of euros or dollars that depreciate day after day. The result? Every euro or dollar not converted into bitcoin is betting that Christine Lagarde (ECB) and Jerome Powell (Fed) are more reliable than an immutable mathematical algorithm.

...read more at atlas21.com