Topic: 1.7 billion people are still Unbanked; chances for bitcoin - page 4. (Read 507 times)

Indeed, it is true that a significant number of individuals are unbanked. However, I ponder whether those who are unfamiliar with the traditional banking system are also familiar with Bitcoin. In my experience, utilizing Bitcoin is often easier than navigating the complexities of the banking system. In recent times, many banks have adopted digital banking systems, allowing individuals to manage their funds from anywhere in the world using smartphones. This convenience is similar to the accessibility of Bitcoin, where one only requires a smartphone and an Internet connection. Consequently, I am somewhat skeptical about the likelihood of Bitcoin reaching those individuals who are not acquainted with digital banking systems.

Sadly but true and unfortunately btc is not the a commodity you can openly buy from the local market otherwise these number of people don't need the bank to be able to own a btc.
The fact that such a high percentage of people around the world are still unbanked makes the future of btc more interesting. The probability that at least above 10% of these number will likely buy btc is much higher. 

that is true, the reality is most of these banked population are also into bitcoin because it is easier for them to learn how to transact with crypto. with unbanked, they keep that way because they don't want to be influenced by technology. so how can you convince them to go into crypto, which for some is more complicated than having a bank account? people sometimes exaggerate things but they failed to see the real scenario.
how many projects have such kind of mission, reaching out the unbanked population and yet, they were the first ones to abandon their project. you can't guarantee that these people will opt to crypto transactions rather than the traditional banking system.

Looking upon the incident, it arises me with the question ? The 1.7 billion people were unbanked not for the same reason or a reason like they're not connected to the real world. The truth, they don't need banks, they were not that educated to handle Bank. In such a situation how will this be possible that 1.7 billion or a part of the unbanked population move towards bitcoin. For the purpose of conversation this looks good, but in real time we can't expect this to be successful.

Right now the banked population needs to do the best making some regular bitcoin transactions. Doing this will surely make a better bitcoin market than what we're seeing around. This will be the better way than educating the unbanked groups of people.

Of course it's a huge possibility for Bitcoin but I fear things are more complicated than bank buildings. First, Bitcoin should be accepted as legal tender and companies start paying their employees in Bitcoin. Bitcoin should also be accepted pretty much everywhere too. Otherwise, I doubt this is going to work.

That's some unbelievable information, i am from pakistan and i do understand, many people prefer to send money to each other using phone number and ID card instead of banks, even somehow they find a cheap way to send money into Pak, without using Banks.

Tbh, i think BTC and banks have direct relation with each other for example before entering into crypto verse i do not have any bank account, and when i started to earn some money and when i exchange it to tokens then i have to use bank's ATM, so for some time i used my friend's bank account, because i merely gets reward and when i do so instead of making my own bank account i prefer to choose my friend or any of my relative account.

The point is, once you get involved in crypto you will make or depend on a bank unless you give highest priority to anonymity and do not want anyone to know that you are involved in crypto.

And i do agree with your last statement and it was one of the main factor that convinced El-Salvador to accept BTC as Legal tender. Btc will open a lot of door for business but in my POV, for people to come in Crypto/btc they first have some knowledge of banking sector because that's how they will understand the benefits of Crypto (when they will understand drawbacks of banking sector in todays world)

who the hell would want to use any service, system, currency where it costs their days labour just to perform a transaction.. do you not see the problem with systems that cost too much to use for a large population?? i find it strange you are even questioning simple economic logic that no one wants to pay more than their days wage on just buying things..
ive visited many countries and the biggest hurdle of bitcoin (the actual bitcoin network) is not internet access.. its the tx fee.



according to statistics. majority of the unbanked are from countries with low minimum wage.
also when it comes to "services" you need to try to remember that bitcoin is only truly held if you hold the key to sign the utxo.
other "services" remove the purpose/utility of bitcoin and just become like fiat service stuff pretending to be bitcoin. there is a whole reason and purpose for bitcoin away from needing custodians/middlemen/channel hosts

Location of the bank in rural areas play little to no role
Mobile bank apps exist
Which make registration and transactions fast and easy
People remain unbanked for various reasons like
Lack of trust
Lack of education? No I would say ignorance
Easy access to their money
Poverty; which I believe is the reason for most developing countries
Having citizens unbanked
They most times work to mouth
So have no spare money to save in bank
Which can be saved in their house
Bitcoin is not the solution
Many people would even find using bank than Bitcoin

Your write-up is clear to me, however there is still a vacuum to fill about the unbanked issue; in my nation, those having a bank account represent for roughly 25% of the total population. The government is even attempting to involve them in the banking system, but they continue to deviate from it. Rural people think differently than educated people; the main reason they do not participate in the banking system is due to scammers; in my place, before you open an account, you must register for the BVN (bank verification number), which allows you to open an account with any bank of your choice. The fraudster obtains their mobile phone number and poses as a banker, asking for their information, which they will provide due to their lack of education.

Most of them are unbanked basically because of lack of education. They are mostly uneducated in the rural areas and this explains why they are mostly unbanked. And also, because if lack of trust for the system.
I am sure the same issue affect BTC, most people lack the right education about BTC.

The problem most of these physical entites like banks have is that having to spend on building banks, they still need to employ people to manage there and some these are challenges because it is most at times hard to get people to live in remote places like this. Other thing again is the fact that most of these rural areas hardly use the banks daily, the only go to them either monthly when they receive there salaries or wages or when they have issues. So putting in employees there would only be waste of resources by the banks.

bitcoin actually solves all these issues since it doesn't need any physical entites but the problem is you need the internet service which are somewhat not available in these places or the knowledge which is needed to set up wallets or how to protect it. Also these set of people hardly trust anything that the government didn't approve, so adoption of bitcoin in these areas is still not feasible just yet.

The chances that the 1.7billion unbanked individuals will choose to only adopt bitcoins without using any kind of normal fiat bank. There is barely anyone who uses bitcoins  and don't have any bank account. Even if there is the benefit of making transfers over long distance easily with bitcoins, not all your beneficiaries are using bitcoins yet, so they still need the banks sometimes.

Bank marketers are also very hardworking, they can infiltrate these places where there are many unbanked and convince them to open up bank accounts faster than the story of bitcoin will reach them.

There is no way people won't look for an alternative in the time of situations where the government is not helping the people and in the situation where the government of Sudan is forcing themselves into citizen building to seize their valuable things.
But I don't know how the World Bank got the calculation of 1.7 Billion people relying on unbank since an estimated 1 billion people around the world were said to be using cryptocurrencies early this year, I guess we see a huge increase in cryptocurrency users few weeks ago.

So, according to you, people who are unbanked should not look for services that allow them to become banked, unless these services have fees lower than their daily wage.
You also imply that the unbanked earn less than a dollar a day. What about people who are unbanked and don't meet these requirements?

Many of you point towards internet connection and that's a viable point, but take a look at the expansion of the Internet. If Bitcoin follows this, it's going to keep growing very fast.

those supporting that bitcoin fee's should be worth more then a US coffee and transaction counts should be less than 4000 per block.. are ignorantly suggesting that bitcoin fee's should be more then a days wage for the unbanked. and that bitcoin should not be used for the masses..  thus bitcoin has lost its utility to facilitate usage for the unbanked

and no this is not time to then advertise another network that pretends to be bitcoin.
bitcoin never leaves the bitcoin network, other systems that peg bitcoin value are riskier options and dont offer the same security as bitcoin does.

what people need to understand is when they lock up bitcoin. and using another unit of measure on another system which peg back to bitcoin when settling up..is like
vaulting up gold. and then playing with 1920's bank notes (promissory notes) that can settle later for gold.
a bank note is not the same as gold. even if the value of an old bank note is measured in gold

and as we have learned the hard way in the last century. when vaults/accounts/channels can be pegged without a confirmed gold/bitcoin balance as some crappy flawed subnetworks allow. it can cause problems

and no opening an unbacked channel (zero confirm value) is not a feature. its a flaw
but with all that said networks that can be used with different currencies is not "bitcoin" its a bridge network for different currencies.. much like mastercard is not "dollar". but a network allowing passage of different currencies (supposedly) backed by locked value such as dollar

holding actual bitcoin is not the same as being given inbound balance from some service app on another network. so lets not advertise that crap, lets get back to making bitcoin accessible to the unbanked

Bitcoin is for everybody, you don’t have to be rich to send & receive money with bitcoin. The lightning network is ingenious too. It is still early but the unbanked can bring themselves into the 21st century & even begin to start a business. It’s going to take a while but mass adoption is coming, just make sure you position yourself ready.

When talking about the unbanked, Bitcoin doesn't necessarily fix it, because neobanks can. Bitcoin comes in when talking about malicious government actors and fucked up local currencies — not necessarily the unbanked.

First we need to know if internet connection is available on the areas where those unbanked people live. Since they don't have accounts at banks, I suppose they must lack many other resources, what makes me believe internet could also be one of them.

Moreover we need to know what is the educational level of those people and if they have proficiency dealing with electronical devices. As you mentioned rural areas, I think it's a valid concern, because usually such areas in third world countries don't have schools nearby or stores where they could acquire electronics.

And even though they don't have access to banks, they must have access to paper money. So they are inserted on the traditional fiat system, anyway.

To be honest without bank account you can't even buy your bitcoin now for example if you have $100 worth of fiat in your hand and imagine the options of buying bitcoin without owning a bank account, it's kind of close to impossible job unless you can find someone in personal and exchange the cash when they sent BTC to your address.

Then how about spending the Bitcoin without converting it into fiat, gift cards just spent as BTC for exchange of goods the chances are too low as well so as of now people in the rural areas who doesn't have a bank account are not going to be the users of Bitcoin.

I can't comment on the rest of the world, but here in the United States all you need to open a bank account is a smartphone.

You still need a Social Security number and other forms of ID and all those kinds of things but you don't need a branch nearby. And once you have that, people can send you money. And you could do your banking. You also have all the other 'bank like things' including PayPal, cash app, and so on for doing financial transactions.

Do things like this exist in these other parts of the world that are undeveloped? If they do then Bitcoin / crypto is another answer it is not the answer. If they don't exist then yes Bitcoin and crypto will help these people greatly.

-Dave