I am a person who has an idealistic nature by nature, and because of this trait when I am at a point where I have fiat and the bank is behind me, I feel very comfortable (at that time).
and then when bitcoin came around and it started to get crowded I felt this was something that wasn't right because my presumption was how it was possible for something that didn't exist to have value and I didn't accept that at first.
This is perfectly legitimate and realistically the biggest reason why crypto adoption is frowned upon. The common belief is that central banks support the legitimacy of a country's economy. After all, it's the central banks that back the value of the currency. Why would the average citizen have any reason to dispute them? Setting aside the clear reasons to not trust government, the simplest example would be going to a grocery store, paying with fiat, and accepting goods in return. Perfectly safe, correct? You're able to trade in intrinsically worthless paper for tangible goods. This creates a psychology, bonding you to fiat.
But, things turn sour when the value of the paper becomes lower, ie inflation. No longer does the paper allow for the same purchasing power. This is generally when people are awaken to the merits of crypto, and the psychology of the central bank's safety net is broken.
I agree with what you said and indeed indirectly it can indeed be used as a good reason.
on the other hand, it seems now that Fiat is indeed quite good when viewed normally but when you go deeper you can feel a clear difference that is indeed harming you little by little.
the reason most people don't respond to the loss is because indeed they only say it is a small loss even though if you look at the loss, which is said to be small, over time it will grow and balloon.
I think there is also a growing "nocoiner" phenomenon: nocoiners are people who watch with anxiety and envy while others make massive gains in these investments, and selectively pick data such as massive corrections to confirm their bias regarding the riskiness of these assets. Rather than admit they are wrong, they double and triple down so that after years have gone by and many millionaires have been minted, they remain on the sidelines with a self-righteous air.
I'm hearing this term for the first time and it's probably happened to me.
thank you for identifying and providing new insights.
and it's true because this kind of thing can't be denied because when they feel there is a loss instead of admitting that the system is lacking, they actually blame it on something else