I think one would have to factor in how much of the population is actually personally involved in that, the rich hold a large majority of all the money and wealth [1] and the amounts of money they move are lightyears away from the amount of money an "average" person uses for everything their daily life encompasses.

A rich person can move more money than whole towns combined. We are left with the question: Which one does better reflect the "actual" usage of money? 2-3 rich people doing speculations or thousands of "regular" people (living expenses, entertainment, work supplies etc.) with way less money?

Compared to that there is the problem that something like bitcoin is actively harmful towards practical usage due to the extremely high transaction cost, slow transactions, volatility, absolute lack of privacy, extremely high energy cost (that already surpasses whole countries with only very few people using it).

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_Unite...

> the average 'consumer unit' (ugh... I guess that means 'person'?) in the US spends about $63k per year

Surely it means 'household'? There's no way the average American spends $63k per year. That's more than the average salary.

>> USD is paper and bits we believe has value.

> Speak for yourself.

Raaa-haaaight. Next time you don't believe USD has value you'll skip picking up that $100 bill on the street. When you get robbed you'll laugh and give the robber your worthless USD and say "good luck using this for anything!".

>> BTC is bits that most people believe doesn't have value.

> This is changing rapidly, is it not?

I wouldn't say so, no.