Topic: El Salvador has become the first country to make #Bitcoin legal tender! 🇸🇻 - page 128. (Read 38852 times)

Does El Salvador have a loan made with the IMF? It appears it has begun. The IMF will influence the economic and fiscal policy of a country again hehe.

If anyone does not know, the IMF and the World Bank are the institutions that use debt trap policy for many of years before China begun using it. They let countries borrow money in exchange for influence on that country’s policies.



IMF sees legal, economic issues with El Salvador bitcoin move

The International Monetary Fund said on Thursday it has a number of economic and legal concerns regarding the move from El Salvador to make bitcoin a parallel legal tender.

“Adoption of bitcoin as legal tender raises a number of macroeconomic, financial and legal issues that require very careful analysis,” said Gerry Rice, an IMF spokesman, during a scheduled press briefing.

Rice said the Fund will later on Thursday meet with Bukele to discuss the bitcoin law. El Salvador is in discussions with the IMF seeking a near $1 billion program.

Source https://www.reuters.com/article/el-salvador-bitcoin-imf-idUSL2N2NS1PB

Bitcoin is not Ethereum, and this is not cryptokitties.. .fuck that smoke and mirrors nonsense, even trying to suggest that bitcoin and ethereum are similar.. ethereum is not even up and running that is why the diptwats involved with that project are proposing that they have to move to another system.. which is really a whole new system to even get the nonsense to work.. so yeah.. they can keep up the smoke and mirror nonsense trying to appear that people can actually run nodes, when it does not even function now, and surely the cryptokitties showed that it did not function a few years ago either.


Not sure about your point exactly.  Bitcoin is decentralized and Visa/Mastercard is not... bitcoin can learn from visa/mastercard, but bitcoin is not just visa/mastercard it is more.

Yes, lightning network and strike are layers built on top of bitcoin, and of course they take time to develop, but still bullish as fuck for bitcoin to see increased attention towards developing bitcoin and incentivization systems within a country to attempt to attract development in their location and with their citizens as guinea pigs.. at the same time El Salvador did not just jump into this blindly because there had already been some practice and expanding of the strike/lighting network and bitcoin ecosystem for a couple of years on bitcoin beach... so they seem to be building on that and more of course, and they seem to also be inspiring both OGs in bitcoin and very technically and business minded folks to them.. think of Adam Back jumping on board almost as soon as the thing was announced.. .,. so sure some things might break or need to be improved, but it is hardly bad for bitcoin nor something that should be feared in any kind of meaningful way in terms of whatever visa/master card was doing in the 50s/60s and 70s which is more like 50-70 years ago rather than 100 years ago.. but whatever... all systems have some aspects of building on other systems whether we are talking about payment systems or communication systems or banking and sound money systems.    Bitcoin is no one trick pony, either... so there are a lot of angles in which it can be used by people, institutions and governments, and there seem to be a lot of people working on it and changing their perceptions and uses of it with the passage of time, too.


We know some stuffs right now. and we will find out more as it gets used more and more, won't we?  So who the fuck cares if various aspects break, it will get fixed and bitcoin seems quite capable of handling the project.  Of course, there is a difference between bitcoin the base layer and bitcoin the lightning network and other second layer solutions that might be going into El Salvador to "assist".. sounds like exciting times rather than doom and gloom nonsense times that seem to be coming from a nocoiner/bitcoin naysayer, aka worldtraveller321



Fair enough.. what you going to do to stop this?  Whine on the interwebs that "we are moving too quickly"?  Maybe you should go down to help out El Salvador if you believe that they are insufficiently armed to handle the influx and of course, you are not saying anything new when you are suggesting that this is a work in process, so not sure if I am understanding the level of your negative nancyisms.

We are not ready...

we are not ready.. .


so fucking what?  the time has come, and some peeps are stepping up to the plate of the various challenges.. and quite proud of the various work being done by a lot of bitcoin techie peeps, business and government folks too.  Sounds like a great thing to me, rather than some nonsense about we need to wait longer.. blah blah blah.. bitcoin gives no fucks if you ready or not, people are going to do what they are going to do.. you want to help or whine about it?



So?  There are always difficulties in anything that is new or being incorporated into lives of people and systems that are being touched.


Yes.. let them speak up.  There are a lot of bitcoin naysayers and whiners like you who say all kinds of nonsense.. and sure they scare some people off, especially scaring off the fence sitters, and in the end, people have to decide for themselves if they want to participate in bitcoin, and sure if you are operating a business in El Salvador then you are likely going to receive some pressures to learn about various technologies and/or to add features that you do not want to add.



that's obvious.

this is good news, we have to wait for the future, hopefully this will become a reality, and can improve the economy in the country of el salvador, but this is still in the process, because there is still much to be done first by the president of el salvador, the president of el salvador must send it to congress past..

I think this is a mix of good and bad.  I think in some case this is too soon for adoption in this manner. The tech of Bitcoin has yet to evolve.
just like the situation with ETH in 2017 and cryptokiddies that shut the network down since many more people were on it.

Visa and Mastercard has had 100 years to work on their network. They are able to work on the network in a scenario of let's say billion people did a transaction at one time. System can handle it.

With Bitcoin, we have no idea how the system could handle a very large number of transactions at one time. Sure the lightning network is improving. However, things with all tech are based on trial and error.

There will be many difficulties in this route El Salvador is going with. Right now we have not heard of the ones who are opposed to this. For sure there are many people in El Salvador who are totally against this movement as well.

Correct me if i am wrong, nothing is perfect.

The new laws making bitcoin legal tender in El Salvador will only become actual and active in 3 months time from now.

El Salvador is the first country to make Bitcoin a legal tender but as of this moment, it isn't been passed to the congress so there is a slim chance that it might not happen but I'm optimistic on it and for sure it will pass into the congress.

If this will be a success then it will be good for the crypto users and this might create a domino effect towards other small countries and they might do the same... or not . On the other hand though, I don't expect for some 1st or even 2nd world countries to do the same as what El Salvador did.

El Salvador uses Bitcoin as legal tender, demonstrating its acceptance and recognition of Bitcoin.This move will also affect other countries and promote the economic development of Bitcoin.

This is great! Well congratulation because they made it to be the first country to make bitcoin legal. It is one great move for them and and it will be a challenge for other country too, to accept bitcoin and adopt it and become part of their economy's system, and for those who are still skeptical about it they will observe it and see what will happen to them if if really be worth it.

Fair enough with a kind of cautionary consideration of the term probable, and it is possible that we could be saying very similar things, but just using different words to say it.

On a personal financial level, I don't have very high expectations in terms of future financial increases, so I am quite content with something in the ballpark of 6% per year on average - but then there comes into play a bit of spoiledness once we have already reached certain prices, then the bottom of the BTC price moves up and the 6% per year needs to be calculated from a higher bottom, rather than from wherever the BTC price might have been one or two years earlier.. because it seems that we have transitioned into a different realm of calculation - so in that sense looking at the stock to flow price prediction model can be quite helpful to see that the BTC price has actually moved up a kind of ladder - which does not guarantee future BTC price but it kind of brings some foundation to the price where we are at.

Another good measure of the foundation seems to be the 208-week moving average, which is currently at about $13k... and in March 2020 when we had the liquidity event, the 208-week moving average was ONLY about $5k (even though the BTC prices dropped below it for nearly a couple of weeks).  Anyhow, the higher prices in BTC have brought up the 208-week moving average quite considerably.. which seems to be a pretty damned conservative bottom indicator.

Regarding comparing BTC's market cap to gold, there is likely some fair considerations therein, and surely, I think that there is a lot of fair considerations to consider bitcoin to easily be somewhere between 10x the value of gold and 1,000x the value of gold - however, it is very difficult to reasonably speculate regarding how much time it could take to get to gold's market cap and even to exceed gold's market cap, especially getting to levels that are 1,000x or so of gold's market cap.  There is a kind of battle that could take several years to play out and perhaps even several decades.

I think that you are getting quite distracted if you believe that shitcoins deserve much if any calculation in terms of how far bitcoin can go or what is reasonable in terms of both bitcoin's price performance or even kind of suggesting that bitcoin is meaningfully sharing much if any value with shitcoins.  Yeah, I know that shitcoin pumpers and bitcoin naysayers talk some pretty BIG game, but in the end, there really is no there there in terms of Gresham law type considerations, and the value flows into the soundest of monies, which is bitcoin.  Sure people are distracted by a variety of shitcoins and thinking that they might offer something concrete, but either that value is going to get absorbed into bitcoin or if there might be anything salvageable in any of the shitcoins, there could be some pegging (maybe like second or third or some other layers on top of bitcoin?), but still seems erroneous trying to calculate various shitcoin projects in terms of substantially or meaningfully taking away any of bitcoin's value propositions.

Of course, you are free to include shitcoins in your thinkenings about what is possible or what is going on in the space, but seems to be quite a big distraction in my thinking.. and sure, I am not denying that shitcoins exist and I am not even denying that people are investing in that nonsense as well as some of them making a lot of money from various shitcoins, but still muddy thinking to me if you cannot attempt at least consider their value (to the extent that they have any) as sucking off the teat of bitcoin rather than bitcoin actually suffering from any kind of meaningful competition or loss of value because of such distracting pee wee junior leagues nonsense.



I don't know who you believe is assuming that?  We have a lot of things going on and a kind of war going on with the  greatest wealth transfer in history.  Why would anyone be presuming things to be staying the same?  Almost anything can happen, and bitcoin does seem to be designed to be able to account for a variety of scenarios in the next 5-10 years.  

Maybe you need to explain exactly how your presumptions differ from the presumptions of those of us who are too optimistic?

By the way, bitcoin hardly gives any shits about these various worldy issues, and if people find utility in bitcoin, then they will use it and if they don't then they won't, but bitcoin is already built with sound money incentives that value is quite likely to gravitate into it and does not really matter if you want to or not, if you fuck around and delay getting into it, then you are likely the one who is under-appreciating the power of bitcoin's already existing design and it is currently the best asset and system to deal with a variety of uncertainties, and it has already been up and running for 12.5 years in order to continue to show its various strengths to deal with new variables and let's see what happens and let's see if you can throw bitcoin off of its already inbuilt genius of a design that is able to deal with the knowns and the unknowns and even the unknown unknowns in way better ways than any other existing system that we currently know about.. so good thing if people make sure that they have some bitcoin in order to be in a better position on a personal level to have options no matter what happens.


You are referring to status quo powers that be such as governments and financial institutions.  O.k.... so what?

The status quo powers have already been employing various tools to fight bitcoin, so sure, they can ramp it up and try some other tactics, but I doubt that it is really clear and obviously to their advantage to make these kinds of direct fights with bitcoin because bitcoin is world-wide, and sure they can attempt to coordinate fights, and then countries are going to take sides, and people will take sides too, and bitcoin seems to already be designed to be ready for these kinds side taking, and sure it's price might suffer during some period of these kinds of battles but so far we have not seen anything really meaningfully being thrown at it.. so your fears about potential battles seem to be the same nonsense that was asserted 6-7 years ago when I first got into bitcoin, but the fact that bitcoin has been around for 6-7 years since then and has gotten stronger and stronger, makes it quite a bit less convincing that bitcoin would not be prepared for such a battle and even question the extent to which such a battle is going to happen, like you are speculating (seemingly mostly blindly speculating).


So?  These are still new developments that have one act on one side and then an act on the other side and seems to me that we should be watching how it plays out rather than just concluding that automatically one side is going to trounce the other side...


Ok.. let them do it.  There is already decent embedding of bitcoin into various US systems, so they are going to have a lot of constituents that are NOT going to appreciate US Govt actions that strive to confront bitcoin too directly in terms of stunting its growth..




You are not really saying anything too novel, so far.  


Here's some more muddied thoughts.

Are you talking about bitcoin or some amorphous concept?

If we are talking about bitcoin, then let's talk about bitcoin.

As far as cryptocurrencies, who fucking cares?  There are a lot of them trying to be like bitcoin and they have a variety of central points of failure, so sure they are all over the place, and some governments and financial institutions likely consider the various shitcoins as potential allies to try to beat up on bitcoin that is much more difficult to touch.. so sure, various governments and banks might be using various shitcoins to try to get some grounds in undermining bitcoin, but it is not exactly clear how a lot of that is going to play out and for sure a lot of shitcoins are way too frothy so some purging of their baloney is likely in order.. but I cannot say whether purging of shitcoins in the short to medium term, if it happens, is automatically going to drag bitcoin down.. who knows?  Some value will flow into bitcoin, especially in the longer term, but in the short term, prices and perceptions could go all over the place and there are going to be a decent number of casualties, including people who do not know what the fuck ios going on and they confuse bitcoin with shitcoins or some other nonsense like that, but there are also likely going to be an increasing number of folks who recognize that bitcoin remains the solid pillar in this whole mess.. so sure, it could well have some messy times in the short to medium term to figure it out and for individuals, institutions and governments to figure out how to play their allocations... and those who are gravitating into bitcoin will likely be rewarded in the long term, even though in the short to medium term there could be a decent amount of unclearness about if they are being rewarded (or not) for gravitating their financial and psychological (including their mental resources) into bitcoin.



Sure.. you are not the ONLY one... and there are many of us who have already done quite well from bitcoin, and will increasingly do well because we are in the midst of the largest wealth transfer in history so folks with bitcoin will be greatly advantaged as compared to those who fight it or are not allocating in bitcoin.  Another sense is that none of us likely even need to have very much bitcoin (in these times) in order to profit stupendously.. despite some possible upcoming battles that might be uncomfortable.

So, for you and I, we already may well be quite prepared because we have a certain value in bitcoin, but there are likely quite a few people who have either no bitcoin or they have only small amounts such as less than $100 or something like that.  Sure, each of us can profit stupendously, even with small allocations into bitcoin, but we likely need to be a bit more aggressive than something less than $100.  So, of course, there could be some larger lump sum investing or there could be DCA type investing for folks who don't have any kind of lump sum cash available.  So sure, $10 per week or $100 per week could be meaningful and sufficiently aggressive strategies, but each person has to figure out his/her level of aggressiveness (if any).. Institutions and governments are in similar places regarding such decision making, and sure individuals, so far, have been lucky to front run institutions and governments, but in the past couple of years, and even  these recent events, we are finding out that some institutions and governments are getting in, so could make it more expensive for individuals to garner as much of a decent stake in BTC, relatively speaking - even though still seems like we are quite early days, too...   never really easy times, and most people seem to conclude that they are too late, but if they do not start to take a stake or to get set up, then they are likely to have fewer abilities (relatively speaking) to be able to garner as much of a stake in BTC, relatively speaking.

"The Bitcoin law is ambitious, but simple," Bukele said on Twitter. "Futhermore it is well structured to have zero risk for those who do not want to take risks. The government will guarantee the convertibility to the exact value in dollars at the moment of the transaction."

I have always taken a more cautious approach when compared to the other users. $250K is "reachable" in this cycle, but I would not say that it is "probable". Having an exchange rate of $250,000 per coin would mean that the market cap of BTC alone would be in the $4.5-5.0 trillion range. If you add in the altcoins as well, then there is a good chance that the cryptocurrency market cap may even move past that of gold. Once again, such a scenario within the next 6-7 months is possible, but not probable.

A lot of the optimists assume that things will remain the same for the next 5-10 years. But I can foresee a lot of conflict from the establishment. El Salvador's announcement to make BTC as the legal tender is very significant. It means that Bitcoin is directly competing against the US Dollar. Being a skeptic, I would predict action from the US government authorities to stunt the growth of Bitcoin. Now I don't want to dampen the mood here.. but I don't expect the next few years to be a cakewalk for cryptocurrency.

In my case... Bitcoin has already made me rich from my investment in 2012. In case the exchange rate rises to $250K, then it will make me insanely rich. And if your prediction of $3 million is realized... then I will be unimaginably rich.  

I see reason with you. Since El Salvador stopped use of its own currency
some years ago and adopted the United States dollars, it has been at the mercy of the united states. Adopting bitcoin is just another economic strategy to help soften or dampen the effect of an economic sanction from the US if the need arises.

Also Because El Salvador is a country with a high rate of crime, drug and weapons smugglers and street gangs just like most countries in central America, there are concerns particularly that this acceptance will only further aid crime lords and smugglers to move money around more better.

Only countries that are relatively poor are incentivised to accept bitcoin as legal tender.

The big players like US are unlikely to do the same because accepting bitcoin as legal tender means that bitcoin is officially defined as a "currency" which means they won't be able to tax it. What are the incentives for US to accept bitcoin as legel tender if they can't tax it?

It's finally official! This is really great news as El Salvador has become the first country to make this happen. I wonder whether it will use Bitcoin as a currency for a long time. Maybe big countries won't do the same in the future but still this is great news for Bitcoin adoption I think.

It is logical and natural that the process has begun. The first swallow in a chain of countries that realize the benefits and necessity of such a solution. Sooner or later, everyone will come to such decisions in one form or another. Especially those countries that are experiencing problems in the financial sector or have problems with financial sovereignty. I hope this process goes faster.

Considering the quick market recovery as a result of this rumour I must say that I like it. If it really is true and a full public disclosure on this follows then it will be a cause for celebration as it will make way for many more to follow.

El Salvador will only be the beginning of the new great crypto era.

Fair enough... I largely already responded, and sure you can consider sneaky motivations of El Salvador, which might not be completely untrue, but it still seems to paint a kind of quasi-irrelevant skew to the matter for you to seemingly be getting all worked up about whether El Salvador may have bad motives, and I doubt that king daddy gives any shits about whether their motives are good, bad or indifferent... so probably a more important point remains the extent to which this is good for bitcoin's development of various kinds of services that might spring through these kinds of government incentives, including whether some of the copy cat influences might take place, too.. and perhaps, we might need way more folks learning about bitcoin and going to these various places around the world (starting with El Salvador) to help build various kinds of bitcoin related infrastructure. 

Sure, the initiative could all peter out, and sure the US Govt and IMF might consider bitcoin activists who are helping El Salvador as enemies, but in the end, that kind of hostility (even though you claim to not be hostile) or attempts at moralizing towards these kinds of bitcoin developments, seems to be getting caught up in nonsense in terms of not being willing or able to appreciate how bitcoin is quite likely a very good tool for this whole situation, and especially good if you can recognize and appreciate bitcoin's likely ongoing  developments and maybe even either getting some bitcoin if you do not have any or getting a few more bitcoin if you had not expected how quickly bitcoin is getting adopted in a variety of scenarios including increasingly being endorsed by various governments, whether you consider them as good guys, bad guys or some other variant... bitcoin gives no shits about if they are good, bad or not nor if you or I consider them to be, either.

i'm not being negative, i'm just saying that El Salavador govt seem to be doing this in order to prepare and circumvent the next US sanctions (it wouldn't be the first time that a country from south america does something crypto related when facing potential foreign sanctions, venezuela with their Petro cryptoscam is an example of that, but at least el salvador were smarter and didn't waste resources on making their own centralized crypto) and that not many countries will not follow suit because countries from central america are not perceived as role model.

"taking the side of IMF and US Govt"? oof! no, i'd rather not take any sides in this matter (:

You are kind of negative, tomahawk9, and taking the side of IMF and US Govt (seems a bit presumptuous on your part), which are likely known to have been ongoing bullying tactics for more than 20 years at varying levels for many countries, not limited to South America...

So yeah, there is a kind of passive aggressive war going on, and I would not assume that IMF and US Govt is going to win this war in all kinds of ways, even if these entities might team up and ramp up some of their pressuring tactics on El Salvador and any copy cat wannabes...

I am not going to proclaim to know how all of it is going to play out, but we are ONLY less than a week into the legal tender proposal announcement (that seems to be getting activated fairly quickly - 90 days from now.. and sure various kinds of building up in the next 90 days, too) and we are also showing a variety of signs of solidarity from some other government leaders in other South American countries (who is to say that such solidarity might not spread to a variety of other countries.. still early days, early days, early days.. and who's to say if other countries will follow or not?.. and maybe some of them would not mind a bit of a war (or battle) in the financial realm and use bitcoin as a kind of leveraging point..

Is this good for bitcoin?  time will tell, but seems to be good for bitcoin, at least in the short to medium term.

Are there casualties in war? of course. 

I would be a bit reluctant to presume that the IMF and US Govt would be able to completely get their way in this kind of matter and a lot of the changes going on in the world and the multitude of actors in a pretty complicated and increasingly decentralized world.. with king daddy having quite a few preparations already in its systems to be used as a leverage in these kinds of possible battles, but I am also not going to presume that they (on either side) would be giving up without any kind of fight.. move, countermove and can you tell the future exactly, or are you going to presume the status quo just stays the same and bitcoin plays no part in this?

Who said the the developed countries would follow?