Scarcity does not impute nor destroy value. Scarcity is merely a limited supply of something. My 4 year old can make a limited supply of finger painted portraits, but them being in limited supply does not impute value, nor does it destroy it. Value comes from consensus of a marketplace. Once something is valued, it's scarcity can accelerate it's value but not destroy it. Only consensus of a marketplace can destroy value.

Based on his idea every scarce asset (fine art, beachfront real estate, gold, classic cars, historic relics and collectibles, rare coinage, aged fine wine and liquors) all destroy value once they are adopted beyond initial holders. This is simply not the case. While a beachfront property going from 50k to 2M from say 1950-2000 and then going from 2M-10M from 2000-2020 as it became more scarce and more sought after. The initial holder derived more value on a percentage basis (4000% vs. 400%) but the next participant derived more value on a tangible basis (8M vs 1.95M) and this is likely to continue as the next participant will pay 25M and then 50M and then 100M and so on. As long as the scarce asset is denominated in a fiat melting ice cube.

Mike Green is just another intelligent person (his thesis on passive fund flow is great) whose brain has been broken by bitcoin over the last decade. It is not uncommon for intelligent people to suffer greatly from overconfidence bias, especially if they have been proven right on other theses. These people (there are a number of them) simply cannot accept that maybe they have just been wrong about bitcoin for the last decade so instead grasp at every straw and narrative possible to try and prove why they are not wrong. It is especially prevalent for finance people because the reality is their last decade's work trying to manage money, trade, mange risk, carve out an edge, slightly outperform the broader market was all a waste of time. They should have just spent the decade hodling bitcoin and buying the dips. They cannot accept this.

The intelligesta bitcoin naysayers are very similar to the shitcoiners in this way. Despite all their narratives always failing, they cannot admit they were wrong. They must always come up with a new narrative.