At no point, since the price will always correlate and rise according to the mining difficulty and expense as long as there is market demand.
That doesn't make sense. There are two mechanisms at play here:
- Cost and Rewards from mining (which let's just say set the minimum price for bitcoin)
- Supply and demand in market (which will set the actual price)
Why do you suppose these must remain in sync?
Let's take gold for ex. if all easy available gold is exhausted and mining price shoots up to 10x the price of gold. Would you expect the price of gold to shoot up to keep pace with it regardless of supply and demand in market? Ofc not. Mining would be unprofitable in that case and would stop.
But in case of bitcoins, mining is critical to operation. What good is a hoard of wealth if it can't be moved? Although now that I think of it, it would just mean the number of miners would go down to the point where the lowered difficulty and competition makes it profitable again. But this makes the 50% attack all the more likely. And not to mention the future of computing including quantum computers.
Don't get me wrong, I'm on your side in this debate. Blockchain is definitely here to stay, cryptos most likely too but bitcoin in it's current state has problems that a laymen like myself can see (I could be wrong ofc). Let's see what happens in a few years. For now, HODL!!!
PS: Fuck the tulip referencers. Is it really so easy to believe everyone else is in this world is so stupid?