Money as a god and saving as an end in itself are two different failures, and the second one hides better. A saver with a target can say when the target is met and stop. A saver without one has no stopping rule, so the balance grows and the worry grows with it. Bitcoin changes the arithmetic under the habit. With a depreciating unit you add just to hold your place in the queue. With a fixed-supply one, the same discipline buys a claim that does not decay while you sleep. The useful question is what the number is for. Deferred living with no stated purpose is not discipline, it is a habit that pays interest in anxiety.

A target is what separates a plan from a hoard, so we agree on that part. The part I would push on is what the target is denominated in. One saver sets his number at "a year of expenses I could cover without selling anything". That target holds still, because it is measured in real things. Another sets his at a round figure in a unit that loses ground every month. He reaches the number and finds it buys less than it did when he started, so the goal recedes as he walks toward it. Identical discipline, completely different arithmetic. The worry in the second case is not a personality flaw. It is what a moving yardstick does to a person trying to measure his own safety with it.