My read of your argument is: fiat currencies dominate because people actually prefer the stability (and other benefits) that only state-backed fiat currencies can afford. This makes sense. But I’m having a hard time with your conclusion that, due to those preferences, fiat currencies will dominate into the future.

Why are you so confident the trend will continue? You don’t think it’s possible that people’s preferences could change over time as they accumulate direct experience with a viable alternative to fiat currencies? Or that their preferences (for economic stability, etc.) could be met by a decentralized technological solution rather than a centralized political one?

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, I just found myself unconvinced by your argument on that particular point. What am I missing?