Topic: Why inflated countries should adopt Bitcoin to help boost their economy. (Read 689 times)

It can be a money for you but not for others. It's freedom of human to use it or don't use it as money.

Inflation is issue of a national economy and their governmental policy, Bitcoin can not help them to solve it. Bitcoin itself is a volatile currency so we can see stable coin loses its peg by backing with volatile assets. A national treasury if is backed by Bitcoin, will be volatile too and I don't deny that in long term, it will rise but in short term and mid term, it will be high volatile enough to cause very big issue for a country and its national treasury.

With this big risk, it's very impossible that central banks will add Bitcoin as their main asset in their national treasury. They can invest very small part of national treasury to Bitcoin as a risky investment.

Bitcoin is indeed the future of money.

But when we talk of a country adopting Bitcoin and trashing its own currency, I feel such a country loses its identity! I know the catch here is to eliminate the negative effects of inflation, but Bitcoin has its cyclical movements which can affect many when price is dipping which could cause panick for those that don't understand it. Perhaps allowing it to run parallel to its local currency is the best option just to allow for preservation of identity, and allow others to learn about it while they see it being used.

Otherwise going full crypto as a country had its pros and cons especially that cryptos are not centralised. Imagine a country being hacked and it's holdings of millions worth of crypto being stolen because some human error was involved....we still have a long way to go.

As long as you cannot force someone to invest or trade bitcoin, you cannot force anybody to adopt bitcoin. So it's kind of funny that you said a whole country will be forced to adopt bitcoin in the future, which you know is impossible. Did you know how long it will take for a country to shut down their fiat that they have been using for a very long period of time to accept another currency? I think you are just saying these based on your own imagination, because I totally disagree with what you said. However, you cannot fight a government, and by adopting bitcoin as legal currency, I don’t see how it will make the country's economy stable.

However, as you stated, the bull run is just coming every 4 years, if I’m not mistaken, so how do you think these will have an impact on their economy? You can see that it will not be possible, although some governments may do it, but it won’t be an easy thing to do and won’t happen the way you think. 

Now this is just wrong at least for now. Due to the blockchain being congested, we can expect that lesser and lesser transactions are being made and transaction fees are getting more expensive.

I disagree with this post. I don’t think inflation will be solved just mainly by bitcoin. Inflation is not caused by the people and bitcoin can only help the people themselves. It can improve the economic situation of a person but I don’t think it will exactly solve inflation of a fiat currency

I believe you guys do not understand how the country's economics and government investments work, that's why you often preach about this the way it is common on the forum. Bitcoin is not the world's saviour when it comes to the economy and never will it be, just treat it as an asset, and that is all. It is true that Bitcoin can enrich some citizens and governments if they can take the high risk, but can't do more than that for the economy. What helps the economy is internal, and this is why the Policies, the GDP and the Trade balance must be ensured to be positive among others. Bitcoin is just an asset and governments often have enough assets all over the world, so it mustn't be Bitcoin, while many are also being bought in the form of Bonds.

Now, you can see that it depends on the government if they would be interested in the purchase of Bitcoin or not since it is not by force, and do not forget that no government in the world lacks asset purchases, they do it periodically. You are only suggesting but many of them have enough assets that are yielding and are hedging inflation both at home and abroad. Fine, Bitcoin would have been an added advantage, nevertheless, you can't blame any government for not buying it or trusting what they do not believe in. Governments often believe in what is centralised and that can add to the economy directly, and I respect that, but Bitcoin is not that thing. Illicit flows are also a concern.

You are only thinking about the money that can be gained, but when it comes to the economy, Bitcoin can't help since it is decentralised. This is unless the transaction is passed through a centralised system like ETF, exchanges and others for proper records and accountability. Some economies are even suffering because many citizens' FX inflow can't be traceable/accountable to their country of origin due to the decentralization of Bitcoin. Is this what you say would help the economy?

This is the 1000th forum post about this topic. Can't you come up with more original ideas.
I wish I could see 10 million or 100 million people transacting with BTC buying foods and groceries on a daily basis. Why would they spend their BTC if the Bitcoin price could hit 70K or 100K USD after a week or a month? How much would the transaction fees increase if 100 million people start making small transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain on a daily basis? Wouldn't this make the blockchain congested again?
The Bitcoin adoption in El Salvador kinda failed, I don't know why people keep pointing this country as an example for successful BTC adoption.

In order for a country to develop, the leader of that country must plan for development. El Salvador is a relatively backward country, but since Nayeb Bukili took over the country's economy, the country's economy has started to grow. Bukili's move to make Bitcoin legal tender and hold Bitcoin has been opposed by many, but over time, his decision has been applauded. Today I believe that the country of El Salvador has been greatly improved by Bitcoin. The opportunity Bitcoin has created to bring money into the country by leveraging its remittance warriors will definitely see El Salvador make huge strides financially with in a few years, if properly harnessed.

We all know that the price of bitcoin is quite volatile and that it could present serious difficulties for both consumers and businesses; therefore, I guess I disagree with you, OP. Relying on a currency that is prone to extreme price fluctuations, for instance, could increase economic instability and make long-term planning more difficult in nations that already struggle with inflation. Furthermore, because not everyone is aware of bitcoin and because some governments may forbid using that form of cryptocurrency, recognizing bitcoin as legal cash without sufficient regulation could expose the economy to risks including money laundering, fraud, and tax evasion. As these are merely subjective opinions, let's consider the potential outcomes of your thoughts, OP.

Yes, when it's on a country level, every country will be at the mercy of the other countries. On a country level, it's super risky when more than one country is involved in it. In overall, a country has to withdraw coins when others put too much USD into the Bitcoin market cap and when a country manages billions of dollars, it becomes very risky, there can be a fatal crisis if things don't go as expected and predicted.

I completely agree with you, macroeconomics is very different from individual finances and it's impossible to compare them to each other but it's still funny to discuss. Btw I started talking about it because El Salvador is the only country that has been trying something like this.

And could you also imagine what happens to that country if the price of Bitcoin retreats by 75%, like it did only 18 months ago?

You are talking about putting your country's assets on a roulette wheel here.

You're right to a point though, there's no win win in Bitcoin due to it's volatility, but with the current bull run and the upcoming halving, if inflated African countries could adopt it's use for transactions there's or investments, there's a probability that it could serve as an inflation hedge an help reduce the level of poverty as well as strengthen their economy to an extent.
 Well let's take for instance, El Salvador that invested in bitcoin during the bear market, I put it to you that the countries is now reaping a lot of profits currently, they owned about 2848 worth of BTC and with the current surge of the price of BTC above 60k, El Salvador's assets in Bitcoin has passed $60 Million USD, now if they could get that figure with BTC just a little above 60k  you could imagine how much they'll be worth if Bitcoin reaches ATH.

I don't believe that the scarcity is going to be the only factor as to why bitcoin when used as a currency (optional or mandatory) will combat inflation, remember that what needs to happen is the value of the country's currency to go down not adopt a new form of currency, it's a headache for the people if they suddenly switch.
Well, transaction fees are expensive too, and they don't vary on how much money is being moved, it's just the payment currently at the network to have your transaction prioritized.
That depends on how much you're paying for transaction because if you're at low priority, it might take a while before the other party might receive their payments and if you want it to be fast then you're going to be paying premium if not the current average.
This I can agree but the problem with this one is that people are going to be paying taxes besides the transaction fees. It can be influenced by corrupt officials, they can just conspire to criminalize it's use or remove it's legality in the country and bitcoin would be gone from that country.
The reason is that bitcoin is decentralized and the government is centralized as it can already be, that's the opposite of them so they're going to be resisting the potential to adopt because they aren't just compatible.

From my little knowledge I believe Bitcoin was never created to handle the mainstream transaction of a country, it was created as an alternative currency or payment method. it works Viz vice with the fiat of a nation.

there are little things that most be considered if it's going to be a country's standard payment method like goods that are worth less than a dollar etc. and it's transaction fee for such kind of goods. its probably not going to work in this current generation maybe another generation.

I don't live in America so I don't know how smart Americans are. But I know that to become president you need the support and votes of the people and if Trump is stupid and corrupt. Why did Americans support and nominate him as president? So who is the bigger fool in this case? Furthermore, stupid means not knowing anything, but why can one become a billionaire or president?

If being stupid could become a billionaire or lead the country, I think none of us would refuse. And why are we smarter than them but we are nothing in this world? As far as I know, all leaders of companies, organizations, and countries are talented people, I've never heard a story about someone stupid enough to become a leader.


I think on the contrary, I think negative articles and information about bitcoin are mostly spread by those politicians and no one else. They are the ones holding the media, if they don't spread the word then who can? As for why they spread negativity about bitcoin, I think you understand and I don't need to explain.

While I'm not an expert in economics, I don't think that Bitcoin will directly influence a country's economy. It's true that the economy will boom in the bull run since numbers go up but what happens in a prolonged bear market? Everything go kaboom? Bitcoin was built as a p2p solution and whether or not the government of any country adopts it for their economy is none of our business. As long as we have access to, and use bitcoin for what it was originally created for, we should be good. OP also mentioned transaction cost. Until we can scale and have cheap tx cost, we don't need that kind of adoption. It's not everywhere that can pay $20 for a $30 transaction.

Legal tender just means you can use it to pay off debts and taxes. Cool, but it doesn't guarantee a complete economic overhaul. Even if Bitcoin isn't legal tender in a country, people can still use it for stuff like online shopping or sending money overseas. It's like having an extra tool in your financial toolbox, even if it's not the only one.

Now, replacing regular money with Bitcoin completely? That's a bit of a stretch. Bitcoin's supply is limited, and with the world's population constantly growing, it wouldn't be enough for everyone to use it for everyday stuff, like buying groceries. Plus, its value can jump around more than a kangaroo on a trampoline, making it a bit risky for everyday transactions.

So, what's the real deal with Bitcoin then? Well, it's more about offering an alternative way to handle your money, outside the traditional bank system. It's like a peer-to-peer network, cutting out the middleman and giving you more control over your dough. Plus, everything is transparent, like an open book, so you can see where your money goes.

El Salvador, for example, decided to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender. Did their economy instantly boom? Not exactly. But it's still early days, and the long-term effects are yet to be seen.

Theory, when it comes to practice not so much! Just as you have devalued your currency buy buying usd and bitcoin, the moment you sell your bitcoins for usd and using that to import stuff you're tilting the balance in the opposite way, increasing the parity of your coins against the dollar and against bitcoin and slowly removing all the effects. But the more important thing is that to do this on a scale that it would matter you would basically be at the mercy of the other countries, since for your investment to grow you need others to also buy, and when you sell you need others to buy your coins and obviously not dump a shitload exactly one day before you have your loan payments

But long story short, nobody managed that with gold, nobody will be able to do it with Bitcoin.
Again, if eveything at macro level would be as easy as individual finances!


So, then why did you say that adoption will magically change eveything when adoption with a minuscule minority is not possible?

bolded part....is that a serious question?? lol. I mean in America we just had Trump as president a few years ago (and he's actually running again! which is insane), and he is far more stupid, and far more corrupt, than the average american. Being stupid is not a barrier to leading a country.


But to answer the question that you asked the other person, most politicians indeed don't know much about Bitcoin. I'm sure they have heard of it, but that doesn't mean they are well informed about it. Most politicians probably know nothing more about Bitcoin than what they read in the headlines, which are usually negative, like Bitcoin "wastes" tons of electricity, is used by hackers, is stolen from exchanges, etc. I very much doubt there are many politicians that understand all the hugely beneficial things Bitcoin provides, and how it helps power grids by using cheap unused electricity and can solve some power imbalance issues in various places in the world. The average politician is old, and is not a bitcoiner, and therefore does not know much about Bitcoin, just like the average member of the public doesn't know much about Bitcoin, regardless of their age.

How do you know your country's leaders know nothing about bitcoin? If they are truly stupider than the average person, how can they become leaders of a country? They do not accept bitcoin for their own reasons, they understand it too well and they feel it is not beneficial to their power so they do not want to accept it. Like China, the country with the world's second largest economy also banned bitcoin many years ago. How can a country become a great power without wise leaders?

I understand how we feel living in a country with leaders who only know corruption and disregard for people's lives, but that doesn't mean they are idiots who don't know anything about bitcoin.

I strongly believe that too. We've a few countries that have tried such as examples and we know how badly they've faired in that regard. I think it's better not to make Bitcoin a national currency but allow citizens to indulge in its trade without restrictions. That way, even those who aren't employed by the government or private sector will be independent on their own. They won't be dependent on anyone but can trade and earn income for themselves. This is what Bitcoin has been able to do for many of us. To make a volatile asset like Bitcoin a national currency won't be a right move.