Topic: El Salvador has become the first country to make #Bitcoin legal tender! 🇸🇻 - page 112. (Read 43205 times)

This doesn't age well. Is it just me or feel like they're going too fast and too forceful with all the transit and implementation the Bitcoin in El Salvador's economy. Not taking into account the bear market and high volatility from it pushes normal citizens to stay out. Only use it to the bare minimum to keep their fiat value stable.

One thing that is common to bitcoiners is that they keep on buying even when it's going dip, that's the kind of mindset we have in, El-Savador interest on bitcoin isn't just as a currency but also as an investment which will yield in due time, they bought about 500btc earlier when the price goes down to $30k and yet that is never good enough to stop the buy now that it's as low as $20k, the more the buy the higher the tendencies to realize more when the price begin to pump up.

We do not know the plans they had before making the conclusion to buy bitcoin at the price they bought it. It would have been more profitable if they buy at low price though, but what if they have made the analyses and knew bitcoin will at one point fall but later rise. People should not just conclude that El Salvador do not make research before investing.

If bitcoin hit $100000 like in next two years, don't you think El Salvador will be an example that would show people that bitcoin is a safe haven if they hold for long.

El Salvador has not sold any bitcoin they are holding.

But El Salvador has not sold bitcoin still means that they are not yet losing, remember 1 BTC = 1 BTC. From the news we have read recently, it is clear that El Salvador is not selling any bitcoin holding. If selling, not this time.

A hard decline have happened, but the government is very clear with the plans and the El Salvador President Nayib Bukele have mentioned with the positive and powerful facts of cryptocurrency. Don't go behind the charts, just enjoy bitcoin and have patience the recovery will happen.

A country won't directly get into adoption of bitcoin just because the president is interested. Though it is a small country it took its time and then only made it legal tender. So, they're well aware of the positive and negative part of cryptocurrency.

For this President indicated that the amount spend on bitcoin reserve of 2301BTC is not even 0.5 percentage of the country's budget. So, this isn't gonna affect them as the entire holding is still available and not sold.

Appreciated what did by El Savador and make bitcoin as legal currency digital transaction in their country, but first time when bitcoin adopt by El Savador president price still expensive and what happen with El Savador assets bitcoin nowadays. Before adopting bitcoin as legal currency transaction and they invested on bitcoin need to make research about bitcoin negative and positive side, exactly El Savador try to be investor with bitcoin trough price still pump. I think they have spent much state budget for investing with bitcoin but nowadays when bitcoin drop drastically how much money loss, hope they have sold bitcoin trough have reach higher price and right now they can try to buy back when bitcoin still have lower price.

Education, and without it it is not possible to eliminate poverty, has never come from below, it is always declared and imposed from above, everything else, no matter how well it is organized, plays the role of enlightenment, and in any case, the "declaration on universal education" will include certain forms of propaganda, which is just interested in in maintaining the status quo, but not in the fight against poverty.

Even the President of El Salvador, who initiated the legalization of bitcoin in this situation, which you describe in the field of education, is also a kind of awareness-raising activity, which, however, pushes people who have the opportunity to own a digital asset to engage in self-education, which, it seems to me, always benefits both the person himself and society as a whole.

So speaking about the benefits of the act of legalization of bitcoin for the growth of its popularity, it should be borne in mind that it also benefits society as a whole, as it helps at least a little, but to improve the literacy of the population, which in the future may become a trigger in society's need for change.

My initial response was to the below cited for convenience post:


Even though no one besides me complained about not understanding what you were talking about in the above cited post, I doubt anybody really understood what you were talking about in any kind of a sufficiently and adequately meaningful way. 

Their failure to respond does not mean that they understood anything, and yeah sure they could guess about what you meant, but that does not mean that you had communicated very much substantive meaning.. or even made it clear what you meant. especially when there would be a lot of vagueness there and even multiple readings could be arrived at. 

So you can deny and blame me for your vagueness, ambiguity (and possible misleadingness) all that you like... I doubt that you are being very realistic in your expectations that you had been communicating clearly about what you were talking about.


It could be true that I read too much negativism into your assessment of the problems that you were pointing out.. but since we are on a public thread, there is no reason to take that kind of an overreading personally.. and in any event, it allowed some further fleshing out of the topic, too.


 It seems that a lot of folks have become interested and focused specifically in the way that El Salvador is going about their bitcoin approach (in a variety of angles) because El Salvador had chosen to implement bitcoin as legal tender law, which put them into a kind of unique position in regards to taking a comprehensive (rather than piece-meal) approach.. so that seems to make El Salvador more interesting rather than just any thing that a "random country" might decide to do. 

Sure, there are ways in which any of us could minimize the El Salvadorean efforts or proclaim that they are a rinky-dink country or to proclaim that their efforts are so lacking in success that the results create effects that are not much different from what a piece-meal approach might have been.  Whatever El Salvador is doing (even if lacking in success in some ways) still seems quite important in the whole scheme of things including providing some more pure laboratory grounds for bitcoin adoption experimentation and it seems to be an ongoing attempt at comprehensiveness across the whole country, even if some regions/cities are more advantaged than others to advance some bitcoin transactional/adoption practices.. some locations have more businesses and internet connections and other areas have more variety of people, and of course El Zonte.. (bitcoin beach) had a head start..


Sure.  It could take a decent amount of time in a lot of ways in terms of some of the normal El Salvadorean people to just getting used to what it is like to have a form of banking that might be different from traditional banking but still if they had not really had access to any kind of traditional banking then they might have some different ways of learning about banking like activities and even some skepticisms regarding even there might be any benefits in having access to a different kind of bank (bitcoin) which would have the possibility of also increasing monetary options in which there are likely going to be a decent number of mistakes that regular people are going to make along their learning journey.. and then also if there are likely going to be some challenges for some folks in getting used to the internet and technology.. even though apparently, El Salvador does seem to have a decent amount of mobile devices penetration.. but surely bitcoin implementation can cause incentives to build and to adopt those kinds of infrastructure and usage, and also for regular peeps to become inspired to learn how to use internet (technological applications) based approaches in regards to their money.. perhaps?

With anything, some people will be in a better position to learn than others, and some people will be more motivated to learn than others.


You have those kinds of thoughts because you are engaging with fantasy-inspired wishful-thinking rather than attempting to grapple with actual facts.

What about their country's economy before they bought bitcoin? You should also ask that question! Their economy is not doing any worse that it was prior to El Salvador's investment in bitcoin, but their investment in bitcoin is a move to better the country, and even Bukele knows that it is not a short term thing, but something that will happen long term. There are positives, but you fail to see them because you want to see it in the short term which is not possible.

Now I've become interested. They invested in bitcoin clearly at a higher price. What about the country's economy now? I don't think there is much positive...

Any news on the Bitcoin citizenship investment program in El Salvador?

Right, we have different views on some terms. Your position is clear enough but I don't agree with it. I see that you are worried about possible misunderstanding but you are the only one who misunderstood me with my terminology as for now.


Returning to an idea of correct words: I never named "bitcoin education or implementation in El Salvador as a failure" so no one expects you to agree with such strange idea. I talked about problems and the ways of their solving, it is definitely not the same.

If to talk in general it doesn't really matter what way of adoption a random country chooses for bitcoin unless it's a kind of criminal ban on using or holding: bitcoin gives a lot of benefits even with just its existence. Being a competitive alternative it can give interesting options for using directly but even for those who don't use it directly it gives benefits anyway as bank system is motivated to be more client-oriented not to lose clients.

But as I do believe that it can give benefits from it's direct using and see that 71% of Salvadorians don't see the same while they've got all possible enabling legislative regulation for bitcoin I wonder what's the reason: if Salvadorians would knew what I know they'd definitely said that they have benefits from bitcoin adoption, so I conclude that the problem is in lack of knowledge. And the solution is in additional education.

I believe that I said what I wanted to say and how I wanted to say it.  We can agree to disagree, and I stand by my previous posts including my repeated criticisms of what I concluded to be the ongoingly vague language that you had chosen to use especially when you seemed to have only been willing to use the word bitcoin or even admit that you were talking about bitcoin after a lot of probing.. so I doubt that any kind of a problem, to the extent that there is any has to do with my seeking language clarification from you, and your several times recharacterizing my concerns into other diverging discussions.  

From my point of view your earlier conduct to communicate in seemingly intentional vagueness (which perhaps you had not intended to be vague?) that you have somewhat subsequently clarified seems to have had contributed to some of the confusion and even some of my increased hostility towards some of your seemingly ongoing dancing around the topic, even if you proclaim to have had good intentions in terms of your purportedly wanting folks to be more educated about the topic of bitcoin and/or crypto, which I cannot really have objections to those kinds of goals of better educating of folks even if we may well disagree about if you have any great teaching skills  based on your already expression of ideas on the topic and the fact that it has taken several back and forths for you to clarify aspects that you should have been able to clarify much earlier.. but anyhow.. you do you..

So sure, it does seem that I had previously concluded that your ongoing vague use of the term crypto (that you have subsequently defined in not necessarily a bad way) seemed to have been having the opposite effect in terms of educating folks about bitcoin and/or crypto (within your description of the concept of how you believe the bitcoin/crypto matter should be considered and your purported goals that people should be better educated on the topic of bitcoin from a broader perspective that goes beyond bitcoin.. ).  

Sure our view are different, but may well not be completely incompatible.. depending on context.... even though I will stand by any assertion that any of us need to be careful not to cause too much confusion when we are using the term crypto (and I question motives when people believe it is actually helpful to present matters like that in such vagueness and expect that they are clarifying matters or are more enlightened because of their use of broad and vague language like that) - especially when we are talking about bitcoin (as I already mentioned several times) and if we are also failing/refusing to use the term bitcoin in order to clarify what the fuck we are talking about.. which you seem to want to continue to employ that kind of seemingly vague language in a way that you are proclaiming to be a more enlightened approach.. and of course, I do not agree with that kind of nonsensical approach as being helpful even if you are proclaiming that yur goals are to teach and clarify when you seem to be doing the opposite through your stubborn assertion that you plan to stick with your ways of talking.. because you fear the language police and you want your freedoms of expression.. hahahahaha even though surely you have the right to speak however you like.. and I have the right to continue to proclaim that your way of speaking seems to be intentionally confusing.. if that is how you choose to continue to proceed to talk about bitcoin matters in vague ways that make it look like you are engaging in deceptive and misleading false equivalencies of bitcoin and shitcoins through such vagueness.. whether that is your intent or not. .which you seem to be suggesting that purposefully creating confusion is not your intention.. but based on your ongoing stubbornness and even more recent assertive and seemingly self-righteous assertions on the topic I have my doubts.    


I am glad that you appreciate that concept.. .. even though from my perspective, your valuing correct word usage still leads you and me to have differing views about the value of using the term crypto when talking about bitcoin and bitcoin's relationship to cryptocurrency and whether your use of the term crypto may well carry a lot of baggage about shitcoins based on actual happenings in the world.. rather than merely some abstract academic use of the proper use of the term when applying the use of the term to actual happenings in the world....and whether it matters or not..  which it seems to matter.


That's good.  Devil still might be in the details, no?


Even though I would not agree with any characterization of bitcoin education or implementation in El Salvador as a failure, it seems that we do not disagree about those kinds of general overall principles and assessments that there may well need to be more education efforts.. but surely it might be easy to know exactly without a bit more assessment of what is happening on the ground and both the Government and the El Salvadorean people would be in a better position for that than guys on a bitcoin talk forum, but surely if accurate information is coming out about bitcoin related progress that might be happening on the ground then there might be some ideas and assessments regarding some of the areas that might be in need to be improved or areas that might need more attention, but still seems like those are the kinds of assessments and factual gathering and even community tailored goals that on the ground governments would be striving to make those kinds of assessments.. or even to publish those kinds of factual representations if there might be any need for putting money, time and efforts into gathering such data in order that they can be Monday morning quarterbacked by foreigners.. to the extent that we are in a position to assess from the data that we have or even if we went for a visit we may or may not be able to see all aspects of what is happening in the streets
 or on the ground in behind the scene ways, too..

Yes, I'm still sure that I used terms correctly in how I want to say. It is about term hierarchy: crypto is a general term for everything in this topic like technology, practical cryptography, economy specifics, way of using, cryptocurrencies etc.; bitcoin is one of cryptocurrencies and is a part of crypto. So if I want to say that people should understand the idea of decentralization for instance is is a part of basics of crypto and then bitcoin is an example (may be even an only one, not sure) of a true decentralized currency. If you learn just bitcoin you can know that it is a decentralized currency but to understand what is a decentralized currency as an idea you need wider education. And you can learn crypto basics focusing on bitcoin only, and it would be still incorrect to say that it is bitcoin learning, it is bitcoin focused learning of crypto basics.

And I already answered your question earlier that I don't mean altcoins promotion under crypto education. You are the only one who interpreted my words that way. It is strange to say obvious things each time: everyone knows that we are talking in a topic about that "El Salvador has become the first country to make Bitcoin legal tender".


Wow! You divided a group of arguments for highlighting a problem with not enough crypto education (yes, I still use this term as your arguments against it are not convincing for me) to start a new discourse! Knowing a problem is a first step for overcoming it. "The sleeping fox catches no poultry" and to get results a work for it should be done.


I answered your question previously. So it is not a problem of my words. It is a problem of your attitude to words: it seems that you don't want to clarify what did I want to say but to make me speaking up like you like. If you want so you need more convincing arguments, not imposing.


Using words correctly is a value.


Really? I answered already what do I mean and that I don't mean that basic crypto education have to contain altcoin promotion.


Yes, it is what I said from the very beginning: to get better results in bitcoin adoption in El Salvador better education in this topic is needed as Salvadorians IMO (statistics shows that) don't have enough information about is's nature and benefits.

El Salvador president Nayib Bukele faced terrible situation except with talking close your eye and stop checking the market situation or price right now, lets busy your self enjoy holiday or keep working. I know how many people frustrated when buying bitcoin on the top or highest price actually trough on ATH. Become weakness nowadays what faced by Nayib Bukele for his competitor how to explore bad reputation him after give allowed as bitcoin legal currency transaction payment. I am waiting what respond from El Salvador president Nayib Bukele when getting some his people against with his decision to make bitcoin as legal transaction payment, he has prepare with good reason or still confusing how to explain with bitcoin price nowadays.

Well, I don't know.  It seems that you were the one who was making that kind of an educational connection because even to attempt to justify your use of the word "crypto" or "crypto currency," you were asserting that Salvadoreans need to be educated in a direction beyond focusing on bitcoin or at least it was not really clear what you meant.. when you seem to not even use the word bitcoin in your first post and just repeating a vague-ass concept of crypto or crypto currencies  and still I am not really very clear why you still believe that there is some kind of a practical justification to continue to want to talk about "crypto" when El Salvador had passed a bitcoin law and is trying to focus on bitcoin in its ongoing  implementation efforts, and it seems to me that we should not even need to devolve into this direction of needing to talk about why you seem to to believe that there is an ongoing need to justify the use of the term crypto in this discussion.. It continues to seem like a big ass distraction to me.

In your first post or even your subsequent posts, if you had just tried to focus on bitcoin, then I probably would not have said much of anything regarding your various continuous vague assertions about why why there are some needs to continue to talk about these kinds of matters in ways that go beyond various bitcoin focuses that seem to be carried out in El Salvador.  


Seems like a BIG so fucking what to me.  The efforts are ongoing in El Salvador.  The announcement of the plan to make bitcoin legal tender is just one year, and the actual implementation is only a bit more than 9 months.  There are other metrics to show that progress is being made in regards to more usage and more awareness of bitcoin.. so the mere fact that supposedly 71 are proclaiming that they have not benefitted may well hardly reflect much of anything except that a lot of outreach is still necessary.


Your conclusion is that a majority of El Salvadoreans need to "learn about crypto" because they are too apathetic about the whole matter?  

Or could a very similar conclusion be possible if you just changed your proclamation to be about bitcoin?  

So in order for us to attempt to both stay on topic and attempt to talk about what is going on in El Salvador, you could say it like this:

"An overwhelming quantity of El Salvadoreans (maybe over 70%?) are too apathetic about bitcoin.  The El Salvadorean government must work harder to contribute towards their becoming more aware about the possible benefits of bitcoin."


Is that what you are wanting to say?

I could give less than two shits in regards to your desire to change the topic, because my reason towards responding to you in the first place had to do with your vague-ass use of the term crypto.. so I can figure out what the fuck you are talking about.. so now if you have changed the topic and you are largely talking about bitcoin and you want to say that you believe that the El Salvadorean government is failing in their educational and implementation efforts in regards to bitcoin, then no problem.. at least I have a wee bit better understanding regarding what points that you were wanting to make.  If that was what you were wanting to proclaim?


Oh?  You want to also say that you don't like governments and you do no trust them.  Maybe you will trust the politicians more if they start to talk in gobbledy-gook speak and start throwing out vague-ass terms, like crypto? when they mean bitcoin, no?  If they start using the term "crypto" and talking about "crypto", then that should hale you to trust the politicians more, no?


I wasn't talking about any of that... or at least that was not my intention.. I was just trying to get you to clarify what you meant by crypto and how that relates to El Salvador's bitcoin law implementation.


Ok.. Again. .you are proclaiming that the El Salvadorean government is not doing enough to contribute towards better bitcoin adoption/education, and you believe that the suggestions that you made in regards to a possible better course of action may well be helpful to them to make some better progress.  

Alright.. Hopefully some representative from El Salvador is reading your suggestions so that they can receive some potential wise counsel about how easy their solutions might end up being towards making better bitcoin adoption and better education of their populace.

That is the reality. Many newbies are blind gamblers and it usually turn wrong for many newbie investors. Bitcoin and the cryptocurrency market itself has a natural bait which attracts the newbies mostly at the bull run. This happens when people who already invested at low run into massive profits. They will eventually be attracted to join the train. And unfortunately for them, it will be towards the ending of the bull run, and when the invest things turn the other way round.

As pointed out by you, many doesn't have investment plans, they jump in with what they call life savings and put all. Sitting back to watch the miracle, things might go wrong. Then they will not be patient enough to wait for another rise in the market.

We talked about what is bitcoin and what is crypto and now are changing the subject to education itself, okay. What do we have? 71% of Salvadorians say that they didn't benefit from bitcoin adoption. Over 2.6 millions installed Chivo wallet (about 40% op population) and only 12% of them stayed it bitcoin after getting airdropped 30 dollars. So I guess the majority of Salvadorians can figure out how to install and use Chivo, they just don't want to and don't see a point of. Politicians really like to imitate some work: it is easy to say that all education needed is how to use chivo, it is easy to explain why they decided so, it is easy to show how much work they've done in that way and to say when where would be no result thay they've done all they could. I thought we are not talking about how to make politician's work easier but about how to solve a problem. As I see the problem Salvadorians know nothing about bitcoin and probably know not enough economy (40 found out how to install Chivo wallet already, they can explain others, it is not a big problem). To solve this problem education should be complex: you need launch a series of television shows explaining all the basics, add school and university courses, print comics with easy answers etc. It is not needed to educate each and other directly, giving enough knowledge to most educated would be enough as they'll explain others if they'll understand that themselves. If not to do that work (doesn't matter with which explanations, even if a lack of money and resources) there would be no result. And just about 12% of those who stayed in bitcoin after installing Chivo proves it.

The move by the country was quite preposterous shifting to completely new form of currency until it has reached a certain level of stability using it as main trade currency for the country apparently it was bad.

Bukele in this situation acts completely pragmatically from the point of view of a long-term investor, but it's one thing when you run a company and invest in bitcoin for a long time and another thing when you are in an elected position and there are no guarantees that you will not be re-elected for the next term and that then, how in this case the policy in our case of El Salvador will change, regarding bitcoin.

Saylor, for example, is already directly calling for getting rid of unregulated exchanges and is in favor of total regulation in the field of crypto finance, in order to expand the participation of government agencies in the crypto industry.

Your hypothetical is a wee bit unrealistic.  Yes.. people invest everything at the top and then whine because it did not work out, but that is not the base case.. but instead an outlier and/or should be considered as such.. or at least not any kind of best practice to work your finances in such a way that you seem to be suggesting as a  kind of base case scenario.

For example, let's say that in November 2021, a bitcoin newbie had an investment lump sum of $6k that they could dedicate towards bitcoin, and they had $1k per month of extra cash that they could put towards bitcoin.  Are you taking the position that they put all $7k into bitcoin at $69k and then just sat around for the past 7-8 months whining about how much money they lost including that they had another $6-7k come in (at $1k per month) that they could have put into bitcoin?

That sounds like a blind gambler to me.  I am not proclaiming that anyone who got into bitcoin in the last 1.5 years is not in the negative price territory.. but you leave a lot of presumptions regarding how dire the situation may well happen to be.. I do agree with your suggesting that this situation may show us that there may well have been a need to have had been measured in the way that any bitcoin newbies should have invested into bitcoin in the last year and a half.. The ones who are likely getting punished in current times are those who went balls to the walls and leveraged in various ways that were beyond their means to service such leveraging outside presuming that the bitcoin's price has to go up for them to be able to service their leveraged position.