That's got to be one of the weirdest things I've ever heard. Inflation is a side effect of war, either due money printing to fund ( rare in non-failing countries, bond issues and loans are much more popular) or, more often, due to supply scarcity ( due to more limited trade, redirection of resources to the military, conscription of men for the army).
Bitcoin does nothing for either scenario. Obviously it doesn't help supply, and no government would limit itself on monetary policy by exclusively adopting bitcoin; and even if for some reason they do, they can still emit bonds and get loans.
That is actually.. a very intriguing ( yet horrifying ) question. Were there any studies of inflationary pressures pre, during, and after a war? My gut tells me it depends on the scale of destruction ( WW2 comes to mind ), but I don't remember reading anything on that subject.
Hm. I'm not aware of anything specifically about inflation, but IMHO it would be very hard to compare due to the plethora of variables - e.g. rationing, destruction, death, all of which would be deflationary.
They can't. Unless you limit trade to your immediate vicinity, you'd need government provided and managed infrastructure, customs and what not to trade.
No you don't. If a guy on the other side of the world wants to teach me to juggle via Zoom, and I want to pay him BTC to do that, we can both trade that service directly without requiring a government to intervene.
That's got to be one of the weirdest things I've ever heard. Inflation is a side effect of war, either due money printing to fund ( rare in non-failing countries, bond issues and loans are much more popular) or, more often, due to supply scarcity ( due to more limited trade, redirection of resources to the military, conscription of men for the army).
Bitcoin does nothing for either scenario. Obviously it doesn't help supply, and no government would limit itself on monetary policy by exclusively adopting bitcoin; and even if for some reason they do, they can still emit bonds and get loans.