Bitcoin Forum

Instead of btc they would just started using stablecoins.
Btc is not and never will be suitable for payments.
Neither will be eth/ tron ltc.. they are just digital gold reserveres once the banks start more usdt adoption then surely they will need digital gold such us btc they will need it most.
Btc are just digital gold (and its backing up usdt) you cant just mint usdt...it will inflate like a current fiat money.
For paymemts always good stablecoins.

Well, it is a decision that goes beyond one single entity, in this case the whole government. It probably was made to make a point and to let everyone else know what they believe in digital cryptocurrency, and Bitcoin specifically. Who knows perhaps in 5 years from now everyone else will see that they made the best decision - it just takes time to see the impact of this decision.

Yh, stablecoins are one thing but in this case the country is enforcing a real economy via Bitcoin - that's something!!! Plus, this state of activity reduces the argument that everybody holds Bitcoin and never spends it.

In my view, I think what's important is the acceptance the country took towards Bitcoin, and will be glad to see similar acceptances else where over time.

Surely banks would seek to mint their own stable coins? They could then use those coins to make the price of btc more stable (if they wanted to) or just keep people locked in to using their services anyway and increasing their balance sheets.

USDT might, in itself, be a danger to financial institutions as it can be printed by the company that issues them and there's no limit on how many can be minted - what if supply doubles and it's badly managed.

You are wrong on both cases. BTC is not backing USDT, it doesn't make any sense what you are saying, Tether is backed only by USD, and even then it's very questionable just how fully it is backed. Which leads to your second point, they absolutely can print USDT out of thin air, and maybe they were doing it for a long time.

At least with Bitcoin they have asset that is resistant to inflation and is not controlled by some centralized organization and not tied to a currency of a foreign government. Plus USD is already their official currency, what sense would it make to add USDT?

Usdt are backed now with...
Eth solana tron  those are gold( digital gold) so value of usdt is safe.

Just weird though that suddenly we've seen threads about stablecoins > bitcoin now. LOL.

In any case, stablecoin run on fractional reserves. And one reason why the President of El Salvador is for remittances and then for those who are unbanked.

And there are a chance that a certain stablecoin might collapse as compare to bitcoin who is too big too fall now.

Just educate yourself more then come back.

---

If stablecoins collapse its end of crypto.
 whos making those rumours lol about stablecoins.?
Its baseless fiction and nothing to do with real things.

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

1. Stable coins are fiat representations. Their value is dependent on fiat's value. Therefore, stable coins are still subject to the devaluation of fiat.

2. In El Zonte in El Salvador, Bitcoin has been used as payment since 2019. Bitcoin isn't just used as a form of payment, the economy itself is centered around Bitcoin. Goods and services are prices in Satoshis.

3. Banks will never adopt USDT as their default currency.

4. USDT is not backed by Bitcoin; it is backed by USD. Isn't it obvious?

5. Just like the fiat that it represents, USDT could be inflated ad infinitum.

Fiat not going to devalue if the full replacement is not there.
And stable coins adoption what will take the current fiat currency to the another level.

You cant back usd with usd ...ask anyone whos well informed about those kind of things you just said it wrong  to back up something you need scarcity asset.

Now read again please :) and tell me did you learn anything

What's done and chosen is the one chosen and being used by them as backed up by the state. They can also have stable coins in use if they want to.

You sure about it that it's no suitable for payments? Well, go and check the fees for most bitcoin transactions and they're cheaper even if we're currently in the bull run. It's actually better than the last bull run of 2017 because fee this time is way cheaper.

It's a store of value and at the same time as a method of payment. The government of El Salvador is also holding bitcoin but they've just adopted it as a legal tender which means as an actual money.

Pay your things with stable coins and let people pay bitcoin if they want to, save some and spend some.

Yes it can be perfect store value.
Yes you can use it as payment method but its not perfect for this.

Btc in maximum scenario could be suitable only for those who do understood about btc good and regulary dealing with btc even using it as payement option.
If we talk about adoption and easy use case then im afraid usdt and other stablecoins do it better in this comparsion.


Finally some very pro member should add her/his point of view.

Fiat will devalue with or without replacement. Fiat's devaluation is according to design. Fiat is meant to devalue over time.
 

Have you heard of CBDCs? That might be enough to replace stable coins. That's fiat's another level. Stable coins are not issued by central banks and governments.


I didn't say USD is backed by USD. I said USDT is backed by USD, or so it should be. But it seems, just like USD, much of USDT is backed by nothing but thin air.

Cbdc are future usdt and paxos standard ....dont forget that they cant create cbdc out of thin air just.
And usdt not out of thin air its created by every moment capital flows in btc.

They have made best decision by implementing btc as legal tender and what's the fun of using pegged stable coins when they already have USD domination in the country before that? How come you can say that it's not suitable for making payments? You simply pay the amount in Bitcoin to the vendors through LN at whatever the rate is at that time.You are making no sense in your statement and it's their decision and they have considered everything.

It is not you to decide , are you a EL Salvadorian that against Bitcoin legalizing in that country? why you sounds like being so much affected by that government decision?
and besides if you look differ for what is the main reason why EL Salvador adopt bitcoin that is many of their people are working abroad and this is the simplest and best way to send Money.

We have heard it on the news, CBDC is about to come that all governments might just have their own, it sure would make them easy to add zeros to thier money supply.
Hard to see it will have any difference from what we have today.

The government will have to buy up all the cryptocurrencies including all the ones that are yet to come in that case. Because I don't see developers going to stop creating one after another.

So far nobody (not just El Salvador) has been interested in shitcoins apart from pump and dumpers, that includes stablecoins.
Countries like El Salvador have only adopted bitcoin as legal tender and nothing else. This is unlikely to change.

Bitcoin is, has been and will continue to be suitable for payments.

The shitcoins you named are neither currencies nor "gold reservers" they are more like what penny stocks are, some short term trading tools that gamblers choose to make more profit on the amount of bitcoin they have.

Banksters may some day try to create a cryptocurrency of their own but they will never adopt USDT since they have no control over this centralized shitcoin, the company that runs bitfinex does.

Bitcoin is a currency and it has nothing to do with USDT.

YOU can't but the company that has full control over USDT can and has been minting however much they wanted to.

No they are not. For payments either bitcoin is good if you want decentralized currency or if you want centralized currency you use banks or something like PayPal.

I agree with you statement! Where regular payment is concerned, stablecoins are always better, faster and cheaper! But USDT has a reputation issue. They are claiming that their coins are backed by USD at 1:1 ratio but they have never tried to prove that neither thye have done any auditing.

So I am not sure why El-Salvador is opting for USDT. But I understand it's a decision taken by the government as bitcoin adoption didn't go as intended. So let's see how this pans out!

I can't maybe and you neither probably, but somebody somewhere is printing it like there is no tomorrow.


Stable coins still use their parent's blockchain though. So, when you use USDT, you use ETH.


Probably true but we don't know what tomorrow is going to bring. Maybe taproot will fix things. I haven't looked into it.

Where are you reading your history? I am kind of curious and will try to understand it.
You know there are no stablecoins when Bitcoin started right? So, I don't pick up where you are getting the idea of "without stablecoins, crypto is dead".
Lots of altcoin came out and still no stablecoins. We even have the idea of "Bitcoin up, altcoin down" market before but there is nothing like, "Bitcoin up, stablecoins down".
Without stablecoins, we are just going back to the traditional way before they came. That's how it will be.

Paypal is last thing i would use ever if ever.

People are now with use to with USDT that cant think that we would not have a usdt its cheap and fast in most cases not erc20 ones but over all its good.
Also the binance busd is good one

The government of el savador officially accepts and invests bitcoin, this is a good thing for the development of bitcoin in the future, the more companies and even countries that legalize bitcoin the better the future of bitcoin will be.

Bitcoin can have multiple use cases (using second layer and sidechains) and it's not a one trick pony.
Stable coins like USDT and all others are not really decentralized and they can be frozen by central authority, and it's question if they are backed by any fiat money in banks.
There is nothing really stable with stable coins or fiat currencies especially if they are not backed by anything, except maybe with military power and atomic bombs.
Ask citizens of Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Yugoslavia and all other countries that had hyperinflation in history how ''good'' and stable their fiat currency was, and if they were happy when all their saving was gone along with their buying power.

They already have the USD, so why would they need USDT? They have a stable fiat (as stable as it gets, anyway), so what's the point of introducing a stable coin? Clearly, that's not what they were going for. They decided to go for Bitcoin because it raises attention and makes them crypto-friendly. That means (potentially) businesses moving there, and this means new jobs and revenue. Stablecoins would never do that. Also, it seems that they managed to adopt the Lightning network and show that it's a viable solution to use Bitcoin as payment. It's a risky experiment, but it might just bring the boost they so desperately need.

The traditional point of view is there with that answer, even though it is mentioning cryptocurrencies, and that is what is known as a paradigm shift, we are getting used to thinking about having bitcoin in the traditional line of thought.

It seems that there is no escape from these comparisons, having to get involved in the traditional comparisons, e.g the mentioning the digital gold should only be an explanation for comparison in the reference, but is not the absolute with the bitcoin.

I would like you to read the whitepaper once again and see what Satoshi says when he introduced BTCitcoin, even if you read the headline you will know that he created a peer to peer electronic cash system and not some bullshit hoarding asset used for mere speculation. USDT you mentioned is fishy as hell which is not even transparent and if you trust those centralized coins, good luck to you.

Tether is being called as a huge scam which will bust some day soon but BTC is a very different thing. Just because USDT is pegged to 1 USD per coin doesn't mean banks will start accepting it as a payment method and announce it as legal tender. There are various procedures which such stablecoins need to pass to become a country's own digital coin. Bitcoin can be called Gold but it's even better TBH and El Salvador knew what they did and they're also buying more and more BTC to boost the adoption there. I can understand why you said that BTC can't be accepted as a way to store money, but that's what BTC was made for and it's not inflating anything but increasing the value of El Salvador itself.

The government will have an already working policy to see to the development of a centralized stable coin that will represent they local currency on the blockchain.
El Salvador president stated something about that in it opening speech during the flag off of bitcoin as legal currency.

clearly because cause and effect has occurred, with the occurrence of elsavador's acknowledgment to accept bitcoin as an investment and certify bitcoin as a legal currency in their country, will have a broad impact on the development of bitcoin.

more and more countries will also have the same mindset as elsavador because they have already proven to benefit from bitcoin's rise. not to mention from institutions that see everything goes as expected, where profits are always shared which is directly related to bitcoin. this will make them more trust in bitcoin.

How do you believe that El Salvador's government isn't aware of Bitcoin technologies and doesn't know which is the best for their economy? The cryptocurrency industry isn't evaluated based on the stable coin, mostly evaluated based on Bitcoin and other established coins. El Salvador adopting Bitcoin means they don't want to miss the decentralized cryptocurrency train. Is a stable coin is decentralized? Most stable coin minting whenever they want. It's not a decentralized cryptocurrency at all. It's just a built-in blockchain, not a true decentralization. The stable coin wouldn't help you to make you wealthy. There are too many technical differences between Bitcoin and stable coin.

Why stable coins? 
They already had their fiat which is a stable currency and also can use as an electronic payment, what is the purpose of using USDT?  Besides, this centralized stable coin isn't trusted and I tend to agree with the comment above said, so I don't think they deserve to use it as a payment system aside from Bitcoin which truly gives decentralization.

For sure El Salvador knows this experiment they had, though is a little bit risky but to accept and make Bitcoin as a legal tender will surely give benefit to them someday and for sure many countries will do the same as what they did right now.  IMO, their governments invested in Bitcoin to boost their economy someday and I think they already understand it.

Even if I know it's somewhat unlikely, but I also do want many other governments to be Bitcoin-friendly and prolly make it a legal tender in their country, but mind you that Bitcoins long term development isn't tied to that, if governments still do not want to see the benefits of the Bitcoin network and adopt it, the network will definitely continue to grow, till it gets to mass adoption, that's because Bitcoin has a use case, it's not like most other crypto that lacks a use case and are being controlled by a group of people, Bitcoin isn't that way, there are many reasons why people would want to use Bitcoin, and as such it's almost impossible that the demand will drop considerably, Bitcoin is going to reach mass adoption with or without most governments.

If you say stable coin, that is just like a usd or a local currency. I mean what's the difference?
If you say Btc is never and will never be suitable for payments then why some of the people who owns Bitcoin have bought something from using it. Let alone, why there merchants and other service providers are willing to accept Bitcoin?

If there's anything suitable for payments based on your perception, it's not the stable coins, use your local currency instead.

And here comes another one who is unhappy with bitcoin, bitcoin is not the only one, if anyone sees that bitcoin does not give them any benefit, that person can use something else, in people who use bitcoin as a means of payment even though they pay high fees, this is because they like it and believe in bitcoin. just as there are other people who use USDT and altcoins to make payments and transfers, there is nothing wrong with that. use what you like. about El salvador, the president made their choice and from what I see he got it right

Banana republic.

You wanna hear what I say about Russia, China and United States?

Your statements are so wrong in so many ways. I do think you have to understand the fact that:

1. Stable coins are nothing but an asset backed by another asset which does mean that they might as well just use the original asset for payments etc. Why do they need stable coins ??

2. Bitcoins is suitable for payments undoubtedly, it entirely depends upon the country and the company ofc, there might be companies looking forward to invest in Bitcoin for long term and therefore, using Bitcoins as a source of payment would make it all easier for them to open seperate funds.
We leave lightning network and for sure there are significant improvements that would be made in the future certainly.

3. It's a means of exchange, it's amazing how handy it can be in international payments or the payments that might require a lot of third party, slowing down the whole system, overall bitcoins is a boon for the economy, If used correctly undoubtedly.

i think currently btc doesn't support usdt why are they mentioned with backup?
I think they made things like that because btc is indeed inflation resistant and it is even very difficult for them to experience inflation because of their limited supply.
on the other hand regarding payments it is an alternative that is run so actually I think it's pretty good because we have options for payments. Regardless of whether they want to pay via bitcoin or fiat, it's actually a choice that comes back to the owner.

We're free to choose what we're going to do with our bitcoins. Whether we use it as a store of value and just keep holding it and as well as using it for sometime as a payment method if the shop where we're buying accepts it.

I see no problem if there could be another stable coin that you believe that will portray the part of being a payment method other than bitcoin. They're actually a lot that claims to be a good payment method.

This applies to all cryptocurrencies that have a limited number of supply in the market. The problem is, if you exchange it for stable coins, the value may be less volatile but the amount of users accepting such may be relatively difficult to asses.

Again, this is a decision on the part of the Government of El Salvador in which they assessed its respective pros and cons. By making BTC as a form of legal tender, not only did this opened an opportunity for users to use as payment but it also gave the 'go-signal' for other countries to follow their example.

Such huge decisions, like making Bitcoin legal, are not taken in vague ways. With deep analysis and considering the pros and cons of making it legal, the decision is taken. I don’t find it a mistake to choose Bitcoin instead of any stablecoin.