Topic: 44 countries will meet in El Salvador to discuss Bitcoin - page 4. (Read 1487 times)

Not a good moment for this meeting. The timing is wrong and it can give the impression El Salvador is despaired after the last bitcoin crash which lead the country investment in btc's losses to tens of millions of dollars. How can this fact look persuasive in a meeting that is supposed to push adoption upside in emerging countries? The reality is showing exactly the opposite.

And frankly, the event should count with the participation of more influent and productive countries to give credibility to itself and especially to bitcoin...

That could be a thing as well if you ask me. I mean if we are talking about just low level nations all get together and build some bridge via bitcoin, that would actually be something awesome for them. Imagine growing bigger all together, let's say 40 nations, if 40 of the poorest nations all get together, and have some "organization" or whatever situation, then we are going to end up seeing them be richer when the price of bitcoin goes up.

And considering they could all focus on just one thing together, that would be a ton of money as well and that means a ton of leverage as well. Putting 50-100 billion into it, could end up with 1+ trillion dollars which would allow them to use that as leverage to build so much and get richer.

Yes. For example banks in Islamic Republic of Iran do give interest on the money you have in your bank account and there are loans and mortgages that you have to pay interest on. A lot like any other bank.

There is a difference between interest and riba. The former is a profit that is agreed upon by both parties and is paid at predefined intervals but the later is a profit that the lender decides on and enforces and can change at any time. The later is not allowed not the former.

The other difference is (I suppose) that the bank is obligated to invest the money into the economy.
Other than that there is a lot of technical details that I'm not informed enough to explain.

Yeah they might show interest, it also doesn't mean that many of them would immediately make Bitcoin a legal tender in their own country by the way, and even if they do, i honestly do not think it will have too much of an impact on Bitcoin (not immediately at least), especially when you take a good look at the countries having the said meeting. I know it is not possible right now for first world countries to take steps such as this regarding Bitcoin, of course not, they are solely focused on continually improving their fiat currency/economy, but if that happens somewhere along the line, then we could call it a big news, and one that will have an effect on Bitcoin. Don't get me wrong, i am not just merely pushing this away as nothing, of course not, if you look at how old Bitcoin is as a currency (relatively young), then you would understand that it is actually something worthy of note for countries to include its adoption in their discussion, irrespective of the countries that make up the meeting.
They should obviously have done their research, they definitely would be aware of the risk in the network, and that it it not a stable one, so this shouldn't be any problem at all in respect to the general view/discussion.

Poor countries from Africa although have many participants and support still not enough I think with one words from one bigger country like United State, but have good news with bitcoin slowly become popular digital currency transaction for the future and adopt by many countries right now. Good way take by El Savador how to build some countries community make bitcoin as legal currency transaction, that true for the future faced problem with poor country get difficult about internet access, mobile phone, and computer who support when using bitcoin as legal currency transaction.

We are not sure yet how this meeting is going to affect bitcoin and the adoption of bitcoin but from what we can see most of these countries are the countries with no strong fiat currencies so they may show interest in accepting bitcoin like Nayib Bukele did accept in El Salvador. But on the other hand, this meeting is going to happen just a few days after the recent crash in the market that things happened to some altcoins like luna which can have some bad effect on their aspect of view from bitcoin, we should wait to see how Nayib Bukele is going to present bitcoin in this meeting and what's gonna be the result of this meeting.

Wow this is some pretty impressive stuff here in regards to positive developments for bitcoin. Obviously El Salvador is a big bitcoin/ cryptocurrency adopter so the fact that they are all meeting there shows their great interest in bitcoin and potentially making it one of their currencies. Can’t wait to see what comes of this.

That makes sense. Whether I pay you in cash, Bitcoin, herbs and spices, or precious stones, I am paying for a service that you rendered. On the other hand, if you were to purchase and invest in Bitcoin with the intention to sell it in the future and double your money, that would probably not be acceptable.

Are you sure about that? I don't think interest is allowed in Islam. Googling it finds plenty of sources saying it isn't.

Then there is Islamic Banking.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/oct/29/islamic-finance-sharia-compliant-money-interest

Banks do make money though (obviously) but in some other means as described in the article.

Bukele also said that he dug a 95 MW well in one month and miners in Salvador will get cheap energy. It turned out to be fake too.
Let's look at the article itself and focus on the can


Let's go to the examples at hand:

Ok, let's do the math, 2.5 million people that send back through WU at least 6 billion, which makes around 2500 per person, or 200$ a month so why would anyone send 25$ each week? And if you argue that some send less and some send more, then the percentage obviously goes down, right?

But how about we stop taking data presented by others and look at the real deal, isn't this the way bitcoin works? Don't Trust, Verify?
And here is WU, and suddenly there is no 12% for 100$ but 8%, and 5% for 200$ and here we're talking about instant cash pick-ups because if I would go an use a bank account to pay for this it woudl cost only 6$ for 200$, that's 3%.
Now, with the 200$ batches, there isn't even enough in fees to save $400m as all the fees would be $300m.

But let's say I'm stupid, I'm evil and I'm ill-intentioned, all my figures are bankers' lies and the WU site lies also,  so let's stick to logic.
After one week of hard-working for a few hundred $, would you use a service that charges you 30% to send money or just pull your funds together with a few friends and buy a damn plane ticket back home with that cash? 
Are you telling me that the people who figured out how bitcoin works and how it can be used were too dumb to find a transfer method that wouldn't charge them 30%?

Use your brain, don't swallow propaganda, even if it's the propaganda you want to believe in!

Yes, let's agree that this is not a debate, or at least what would ideally be a debate, because if you insist on lying to pretend to be right what you are doing is to give a speech instead of debating.

And here, again, you are misrepresenting. You were the one who started despising those countries and what I said is that it is normal that those countries are the ones who are interested and not the countries with the highest GDP. From there you started to misrepresent exaggerating and twisting my argument and wanting to put the burden of proof on me, when the nonsense was said by you.

I refer to statements such as this one:


And you keep on giving a speech (not debating) with bullshit like this with which you pretend to be right:


You are still in primary school, right? Do I have to explain to you that the important thing is not what you save in one transaction but in the total of all transactions per year?

Bukele has said that these innovations will save Salvadorans $400 million annually in remittance fees.

https://blockworks.co/el-salvador-bitcoin-wallet-could-disrupt-traditional-remittance-markets/

I don't know how the issue will be in real numbers today but at least that's what he said.

Bitcoin is starting to become part of a serious discussion by several countries showing that this is a real economic change in various parts of the world. What's a little ridiculous, bitcoin price volatility can still be caused by a small factor such as the influence of a character.

You have to realize that there are different fractions of Islam. For example there are extremists namely Saudi Arabia regime, the birthplace of ISIS, AlQuaide, etc. who practice what is commonly known as radical Islam. Who knows what they think about crypto, they still nail people to the cross in the middle of their streets.
Then there are more moderate ones (Shia and Sunni) like Iran and even though there may be some difference of opinions but what I've gathered majority of them say bitcoin is halal if used for anything halal. In other words if you receive a payment for an honest job in bitcoin, there is no problem.

Usury and gambling are prohibited. Interest or speculation is not.

I honestly doubt that he would be able to pull off what he is promising. I get that he could have meetings with those places (or maybe he won't) but at the same time just because he discusses bitcoin doesn't mean anything great for bitcoin neither.

This is why I believe that this is nothing of worth, nothing that we should get excited about the crypto world nor would it impact the price of crypto. Even with El Salvador making it a legal tender, it didn't impacted at all and why would the action itself wouldn't impact the price but discussing it would? Only possibility would be convincing someone much bigger to do it and that would impact it, but I doubt he would be that convincing, nor that quickly.

I don't know about Egypt, but I remember reading that the government of Pakistan was considering banning all Bitcoin and crypto-related transactions at the beginning of 2022. I am not sure how all that ended. Besides that, Pakistan is an Islamic nation that respects Sharia law. And according to Sharia law, crypto is forbidden. Anything that involves interest, gambling, and speculating is against the law. I am certainly not an expert on the subject, but I would be interested to hear what someone who is says about it. Muslim nations have a very traditionalist viewpoint and they don't deviate from what they consider to be values that must be maintained. 

Whenever there is news that is negative about bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, we don't like it, we hate them. And when there is news like this, it's favorable and it's always a developing story, an open story that we're looking forward to because of the positivity that it brings not just to the market itself but as someone, who's involved in this community. It's a very good news that they're having a meeting and the subject of that meeting is bitcoin and for sure other interesting things about digital money.

I doubt that this meeting has any impact on the price of BTC, because for days we have almost identical situations where the price changes in the range of about 5% in both directions within 24 hours. Social networks are full of people who do not understand that this is not a meeting focused exclusively on Bitcoin, but obviously any good news creates hope that the price will rise.

---

I checked what it was about and immediately saw that it was the former Swaziland that changed its name in 2018, but I must admit that I missed the news. The Kingdom of Eswatini even sounds better, and if the country has the potential for tourism, I think it can attract more tourists looking for some new tourist locations.

---

I think that every decision is subject to change, especially if we put this meeting in the context of the time we are currently in. Many have ignored Bitcoin in the past and then changed their minds, let’s just remember what Saylor thought about Bitcoin a decade ago. We can hope that at least some countries will change their hard line on Bitcoin, at least in the sense that they will remove it from the black list if nothing else.

This is good news and a breath of fresh air during these hard times in the crypto industry wherein people were really felt negativity all over the place. With so many people have many paper losses with bitcoin situations right now, this news will definetly change the winds of negativity to positivity due to this news.

I see most of those Banks come from 3rd world countries, so my thinking is just the opposite of what you guys are thinking. What if the President of El Salvador is asking these Banks to come together to discuss the ways in which these Banks are handling the un-Banked in their countries ...and not to share El Salvador's experience with Bitcoin as a legal tender?

We know the IMF have turned their back on El Salvador..... so they are now seeking other ways to loan money.. and they know that they not going to get it from the IMF. (1st world countries) 

I've been skeptical about this ever since El Salvador went into military/police crackdown on the streets. Initially sounded like good news but then as the details of Bitcoin implementation came about and then you saw how non-transparent they were with the disbursement and awarding of company contracts, you understand that this was just another semi dictator playing with his own toys.

In the end, it's still better than borrowing US dollars like they used to and seeing themselves get into debt with the international community anyway I guess.

South Asia (Nepal India Bangladesh Pakistan etc) is not well known for the way they handle crypto for sure, always trying to tax their poor and even on their remittances but I actually think educating the countries about Bitcoin is a good thing. Maybe they change their minds about it and let their workers save money with remitting Bitcoin.

This is big. This is not just an ordinary meeting. By the looks of it, it seems the IMF and the World Bank will have to call some central bank governors and heads to confirm their attendance to this said event and perhaps relay some subtle threats and bad-mouthing of Bitcoin. But regardless of the possible repercussions of this huge meeting, I’m excited of the output. I’m excited of what’s going to come out of this. Whatever happens, financial inclusion and banking the unbanked should be the top priority. Bitcoin is just here as an alternative technology to achieve this.