Bitcoin Forum

According to Economic Confidential blog " IMF says, Crypto Assets May Displace Local Currencies in Developing Countries". Source: Economic Confidential, Facebook page..

Bitcoin is taking over the internet for online transaction, therefore, most of  the local currencies in the developing Nations are affected.. because developing Nations are not inclined in the e-currency transaction while the new generation youths use the e-currency for transactions. That making the local currency weak.

Can Bitcoin really weaken the Local Currencies in the Developing Nations?

Do you have any more reliable information that would somehow support this claim? Other than this Facebook page, is this information somehow corroborated by more credible sources?

Anyway, it is not illogical if the IMF perceives that cryptocurrencies, I mean Bitcoin, could indeed displace local currencies of developing countries in the future. For one, these local currencies are weak. But such displacement does not mean the country is consequently placed in a disadvantageous position. It could be otherwise. As a matter of fact, it is the developing country itself that would fully embrace the use of Bitcoin alongside fiat even if that could mean the demise of their fiat.

I think it is not, but I do not know in the future because the government still does not like bitcoin and will make it slowly be adopted.
It depends on how the new generation of youths react to bitcoin because many of them are still not aware of the presence of bitcoin and do not try to find out more.
Although the local currency is weak, it still works for most people who use it for transactions.
But if bitcoin can grow and increase its popularity, it could make the local currency weak because people will start to move to bitcoin and use it for their investment and not just for making a transaction.

Lol, on the contrary this article or blog just wanted to bring bad light to crypto itself.

I mean governments now have their own CBCD to counter this isn't it? So this argument is weak from the beginning and as I have said this is pure FUD. People are smart, if they see the both their local fiat and crypto has it's own advantages they why used both regardless if it is a developing country or not. And regardless of the IMF stance, we should understand where this guy is coming from. I mean they lend nations money, it's their business so they need to attack crypto as some point because they may think it is a threat for them specially from developing nations because that's where the bulk of their money is going.

So that means there is a political and sentimental game is playing to prevent mass crypto adoption of crypto by these big players? Many big companies are involved with crypto and many are coming in. So this kind of fud will not a valid in the future. Youngs is aggressively coming in crypto so e-currency will be the main currency and paper cash will be removed. That means the world is leading towards a truly decentralized economy and that makes sense why IMF is worried about it.

We have seen Bitcoin on several count Bitcoin weakening the local currencies of many countries even after the introduction of e-currencies many still choose crypto over e-currencies both for transaction and reserve but crypto will never replace e-currencies because the government from the onset has not been in support of them and might not be even in the nearest future

Bitcoin probably will not be able to, but I believe that after years some states will introduce digital money, since this is a common money evolution.

We're seeing it in some poverty-stricken countries right now, and bitcoin has seen some increasing popularity and utility over these areas. In countries where their local currencies are massively devalued, bitcoin offers an avenue wherein they can still purchase goods and services and getting most out of their money.

Then again, it can only be used side-by-side and not replace fiat currencies. We are far from it, given how small the merchant infrastructure and network is for bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.

There's a conflict in what you've said. It's actually the opposite in developing countries if you look at the stats about them on how verse the people there are with cryptocurrencies, you'll see good stats and volume from within. And in these developing countries, it's not only the youths are into crypto but it's on different ages of the society.

No.
Bitcoin or crypto could even fuel the local economy which includes the local currency for that country if most people are contributing a lot to them through their earnings in cryptocurrencies.

I would contend bitcoin will make local currencies in developing nations stronger.

The way competition between AMD and intel forces both to develop stronger processors. Iron sharpens iron. Initially, locally currencies might weaken. The long term outlook however could see local currencies adjust to become more competitive and offer better terms to consumers.

Regulators and heads of local currency management can be happy that bitcoin might create incentive for them to do a better job serving the public benefit. Bitcoin is a win/win scenario for them as well.

Yeah, I can't stand when a thread starts like this, with a claim that a pronouncement was made by someone and no reference links are provided.  It's hard to comment on something that I don't really know is true.

But let's assume the IMF said what it said for the purposes of my post.  I don't know how much developing countries and their citizenry value their currency, and I assume it depends very much on which country we're talking about.  If it was a country like Venezuela, then I'd say crypto might pose a threat to their fiat currency, but even during their hyperinflationary crisis I didn't hear tons of credible stories of how bitcoin or any of the altcoins were taking over; I think Venezuelans used the US dollar as a substitute currency.

And this just isn't true:

Bitcoin has been around since 2009, and most people still don't own any--and pretty much everyone uses the internet.  So that should tell you with no ambiguity that bitcoin hasn't gained any dominance over traditional payment methods.  A lot of people shop on Amazon and related retailers online, and what do people have to pay with?  Their credit or debit cards, not bitcoin.  Bitcoin isn't even close to "taking over the internet for online transaction(s)".

We have adopted USD as auxiliar currency, that is a fact and it is the reason we have been able to slow down the inflation here.

On the other hand, I must say that cryptocurrency, even though it has not taken over completely the economy of my country it has indeed gain a big amount of adoption, mainly because we have been mistreated by services like Paypal for years, and the fact it makes easier to conceal our savings from bad people or even send money anywhere.

Nowadays, here even the most common USD wallets offer crypto options so even if people do not much about Bitcoin or crypto they have at least been exposed to it to some degree.

In my city for example, there is a candy shop which accepts BTC, a department shop which also does so and stablecoins are being used much as payment method. Caracas (our capital city) is a place where one could live on crypto.

Any questions about how crypto is doing here, I am glad to respond.

I barely doubt that. Moreover it’s funny why they are stating this for the developing nations ? I mean they are the one who are worst hit by the government slap for not using the crypto and banning it throughout the nation. They already don’t have that much infra or peeps from developing countries are not that much interested in the same.

I can understand if this statement was made for developed country where the use is way heavy than any other nation. Whether it is bitcoin mining, developing new projects, bitcoin ATM or paying online everything is available at their places and they should be one who are scared of replacing the Fiat economy with crypto economy.

no news yet regarding what OP wrote ,which developing country he is referring to neither ! local currency is still in great demand and is a top priority in physical trading etc. ,many people's minds are still not open thinking about bitcoin how the currency weakens because of bitcoin ! That is not true ^{this is a hidden message?}

As now-a-days bitcoin transactions are increasing day by day on the internet so the value of the local currency is affected by this.
As some of the countries don't even know about the e-currency so they are having affect on their economy as well.
But those countries which are already using bitcoin are becoming stronger and more more stable.

In my country exactly not. Because Bitcoin cannot be used for payment.
Additionally we  can also see the positive impact of technology in which this can help local economic or communities to enhance their oerformance, financial syatems, and also the qays or strategy to boost the local economy. Online marketing will help so much, so it doesn't weaken the local communities.
It means that ut may depwnd on what kind of local economy, but so far afaik, this will help, not to weaken.

It's nice to hear from somebody who has really experienced things first hand.

So, indeed, there is crypto adoption in Venezuela although not as wide as crypto publications might seem to portray. In other words, fiat still rules the country, although not anymore the local Venezuelan Bolivar.

By the way, how do these shops accepting Bitcoin, like the candy and the department shops that you mentioned, manage the fluctuating Bitcoin fees? Is the Lightning Network being used there already?

No, because developing communities are not going to use Bitcoin, and that's okay.

Any crypto advocate's goal should not be that every country in the world adopts bitcoin, realistically that'll never happen. The goal of people in developing countries is merely to survive, not to thrive and so there is no incentive for them to adopt a technological "digital" currency, when they probably don't even have access to clean water, let alone any reliable electricity.

Bitcoin's adoption remains solely on large countries shift away from traditional currency systems. Whether someone in Syria or Afghanistan adopts Bitcoin is completely irrelevant to the global economy. There aren't any developing countries that have a large GDP for their economic activities to matter in the first place.

The department store uses a payment processor called "crypto-buyer" which is also a not custodial exchange which allows to convert Bolivars into crypto and vise-versa.

In the case of smaller shops they can opt to hold they crypto the earn or make use of very popular apps which allow them to convert easily to stablecoins, like Binance, Reserve or Uphold.

For now lightning network is not common here, bussinesses usually manage on-chain transactions, that it one of the reasons the average venezuelan Bitcoiner also have some altcoins like Litecoin, Dash, ect. In order to avoid fees if one needs to buy small things, for bigger transactions we use BTC or ETH, so the fees can be neglected when compared to the price of the product.

Allow me to share a pic of the candy shop. (https://imgur.com/a/AsjblB0)

Just like El Salvador, LN must be used also in many places and the rest in South America.

Venezuela has an option now with crypto's existence, unlike El Salvador who has no option back then but to only adopt USD. Now 3rd world or developing countries have the option to use BTC to go around economic sanctions. IMF always has to do with sanctions so if they publish things like this, it's not going to be surprising. OP didn't add the link to the source I kept searching for it but none.

I think it can weaken US Dollar and it is already doing it as number of transaction to buy good and services by using crypto is increasing worldwide but not local  currencies. In fact in third world countries there is huge trend in youth and IT Professionals to invest/trade in crypto currencies to generate income as well as through mining, airdrops and  bounties and local economy takes benefit of it.

Crypto assets may displace local currencies as we saw with El Salvador but it will not weaken the local currencies if the government still decide to use their currency besides using crypto. Bitcoin can take over the internet for online transactions besides using existing transactions that people already used. But I still do not see bitcoin as a threat to local currency as long as the government can be wise to treat how to use bitcoin besides their local currency. If they can work together, I am sure that can help the economy of the people and also the country economy.

I think it's too much for the government to see Bitcoin as a threat to the local currency. Because not all areas can be reached by Bitcoin,
and there are also some transactions that are convenient to do in local currency as opposed to using Bitcoin. After all, the local currency is
still very important, after all, the majority of the world's population still believes in fiat compared to Bitcoin. So the collaboration between
local currency and Bitcoin will complement each other, indeed from the beginning Bitcoin was created not to replace fiat, but as an alternative
payment that can facilitate human life. I also really hope the government can be open-minded and treat Bitcoin more wisely, so many people
will receive the benefits and the country's economy should also get better.

I don't think it would weaken them. I believe it would usurp them, in a good way though even that word means not. And that would probably be a net positive for that state. They wouldn't have as high as inflation rate, and could save money on transfer fees. Be borderless. Be decentralized. The list goes on and on. El Salvador will tell us a lot, and I believe it will be positive for sure.

Of course, if the government is worried about the presence of bitcoin, they can make clear regulations, so that both can be used side by side with clear strata. the possibility that later it will also not be able to resist the development of the era in the digital world, such as elsalvador which can be used as a model to further refine existing regulations

Cryptocurrencies cannot weaken local fiat currencies,because local fiat currencies were already weak,before the creation of cryptocurrencies.
Local fiat currencies of the underdeveloped are weak due to the wrong monetary and fiscal policies of the underdeveloped countries,which lead to high inflation and fiat currency devaluation.Blaming cryptocurrencies for the mistakes made by the governments is a pretty stupid attempt to manipulate ignorant people in those countries into hating the crypto industry.
I'm not convinced that the cryptocurrencies will take over fiat currencies in the underdeveloped counties,because there's a high amount of people,who don't have computers with internet access in these countries.

EI Salvador is a place where many people are against the current regulation with bitcoin quite a lot, a lot of classes feel more stable with the local currency but the government here is too harshly suppressing these classes, this model is very fragile when bitcoin is in critical condition, especially the recent dilution, believe that a lot of the shouting of the insurgency is attacking with the EI Salvadoran authorities. In order for bitcoin to have integration and cohesion of contracts and relationships, localities should only offer investment funds, turning it into currency causes a lot of obstacles.

I live in a developing country and still don't have any businesses, establishments, services... that accept bitcoin payments, but that doesn't mean my country will always be.  Although, developing countries are seriously lacking in IT infrastructure, even some areas don't have internet infrastructure yet… It's difficult and I think it will take a long time to adopt the culture or  the message that bitcoin brings.  

Inflation is the main cause of the loss of value of local fiat.  Bitcoin is the Light that can pull us out of that grave.
Specifically: The US has the highest inflation rate of 6.8% in the past 40 years.  It is the number 1 country in the world.  Imagine how high the rates would be in developing countries.  Lol

No bitcoin is never the reason that local currency of developing nations are suffering. Such countries have not kept to the real indices of building economy that will help there currency. It is the system of the country and the ways that they are corrupt determines the economic progress. For example if a country is an exporting country it will help her foreign exchange.


Bitcoin has no business with devaluing any country's currency or that of developing countries. Any country whose country is falling is not bitcoin fault but leadership issue.

Cryptocurrency is really taking over the internet for online transactions. However, this does not mean that it is used as a means of payment, so that it could displace the local cryptocurrency. Anyway, I don't think bitcoin is widely used as a means of payment in developing countries. As a financial asset that is growing in value and therefore being held massively, it can be. Various top altcoins have been used as a means of payment for a long time. And this is the harsh truth. But after all, in order for the cryptocurrency to be used as a means of payment, one desire is not enough. We also need to create an infrastructure for its walking. And the states are not interested in this. Although the situation may still change.

Many have been asking about a source for the info about the IMF, and I don't think anyone provided it yet (sorry if I missed it), so here's something (https://blogs.imf.org/2021/07/26/cryptoassets-as-national-currency-a-step-too-far/) I found. It's from summer of this year, and I guess that since it has authors and is in the blog section, it's more like an opinion article rather than an official position of the IMF. But the only thing I could see here is actually quite far from the claim the op makes:
As for Economic Confidental, I believe here's the article (https://economicconfidential.com/2021/12/crypto-assets-local-currencies/) from there. Oh, and through info in this article (https://blogs.imf.org/2021/12/09/global-crypto-regulation-should-be-comprehensive-consistent-and-coordinated/) I think I found the real source, which is an article on IMF blog by the same authors as the one I linked earlier. Here I see the following:
But again, I'm not sure that it's not merely a position of these authors, and I see no evidence here being provided to back up the claim.

It's difficult to say at this point what will be the effect of crypto on local economies but yes currencies will obviously not survive if crypto becomes mainstream. Think of it yourself why would anyone want an additional currency when there is a big currency which everyone is using, moreover it's just a myth these days that everyone can't do online transaction, I have even seen street vendors in my city accepting Payments digitally. In India especially UPI has brought a revolution and this can also help people in adoption of Cryptocurrencies.

I believe that very weak local economies, in places like El Salvador, it is quite obvious that even without crypto they were not doing amazing. Imagine this; they are investing few hundred millions of dollars into bitcoin because that is what they can afford as the whole government, whereas Tesla invested 1.5+ billion dollars just themselves. Any nation that has a smaller marketcap as government funding than Tesla should be considered a small country.

I am not saying that they can't, like for example my nation is not rich at all but they can invest more than 1.5 billion dollars, in fact we make 100 billion dollars loss every year, what is 1.5 more? But they won't, I am not talking about the ones that won't, I am talking about the ones that can't even if they wanted to. Those nations have horrible finances without crypto anyway, and crypto could only be salvation for them.

Bitcoin might have been all over the place, making waves in almost all spheres as we see it today but positive and negative as a part of its revolution but, its far from taking over traditional currencies, neither have it become the most used for electronic transactions.

Mind you, many merchants are yet to understand let alone, use it for a medium of exchange in there various business. With governments of the world still taking a stand against its legitimacy for a currency, it becomes so difficult to attain the global recognition and acceptance that it needs to serve a broader purpose for a means of some livelihood.

When it gets accepted on a broader scale, I don't think it would be some exclusive kind of relationship between the virtual and fiat currency but they would evolve some kind of relationship that would make them both stronger in the spheres they operate.

Blockchain is transparent. If you will make your own investigation you will find out that the most amount of BTC is concerned in limited number of wallets. Most of those wallets belong to huge corporations that invested in BTC huge amounts of money and now hodl it. So when press is talking about Bitcoin online transaction possibly they are mostly talking about small transactions. Can huge amount of small transactions effect on economic condition of developing countries?  I doubt that BTC have such huge influence and can displace local currencies of developing countries.  I think that banks of those countries will quicker provide CBDCs and displace local paper money on digital money by themselves.

Up until now, crypto transactions are still small compared to fiat transactions. So I don't see it as a replacement for fiat transactions especially that governments will still keep their local fiat,  because they have the full control of its existence. We may see crypto adoption but it doesn't mean, it is going to displace the local currency of the country. Unless, the government itself declare that crypto or btc is their main legal tender.

Yes, crypto transactions are still small compared to fiat transactions because many of the countries are not yet accepting the possibility that bitcoin may be used as another currency that will be circulated in their economy aside from fiat. So far there's no clear evidence or study that will show bitcoin will be a danger to the local economy but if it would be proven I think the Local economy will not only be the most affected but also the international fiat that used today as a means of the main transaction like $. In my own perception if bitcoin will be used in a wide adoption it would be first used via international trades.

We can think like that but unfortunately, we do not know how those people in the government reacted to bitcoin because most of them are old people who do not want to see a change in their places and do not want to lose their power. They do not want to learn about bitcoin and consider that bitcoin can weaken their power to control their economy because it is about personal management of their funds. If the local currency and bitcoin can collaborate and help their people, that can give more chances for their people to have a better life and the government can still watch their transactions from the banks. Yes, it needs an open-minded from them and how they can be wise to treat bitcoin.

many people use bitcoin as investment, and this apply in altcoin. but, in some country they use alt or create new coin for their payment method, and no bad thing happen, it just the other method to paying something.
in my place, local currency be the number one of payment method, the second and the third still local currency. and younger still use what older use, because they know if in that area they dont use digital economic.

Why do you think that the economically challenged Nations are investing in cryptocurrencies as well ? Why do you think that their government is allowing cryptocurrencies like bitcoins to integrate with their economic system?? They are not really stable as a whole right now so the government can take on such experiments, why do you think El Salvador was the first one and not UK or US?? Because the already developed nations do not need a second stability pillar perse, won't hurt them to add that. I don't think it would destroy the local currencies I think it would actually be super good for them !! It's going to allow people, local people to trade efficiently without third parties and take their business internationally as well.

Actually, think no, bitcoin can not weaken the local currency completely. Both bitcoin and local currencies has a great role to play in the economic development of the nation, bitcoin gives some influence to the local currency because some time the price of bitcoin in the market have effect to some local currency values, but government may not allow bitcoin to have the overall control over the local currency, so it's not possible for developing countries local currency to be over powered by bitcoin.

What you're saying makes a lot of sense, it is a fact that the majority of countries in the world are governed by old people who do not want any
change. Unlike El Salvador, which has a young president, hence the government of El Salvador made a very bold decision. By legalizing Bitcoin as
a legal tender and not necessarily dare to be done by big countries. So it is indeed very difficult and may take time to awaken the majority of
countries in the world to support Bitcoin. Maybe if the country of El Salvador experienced a drastic economic increase it could make other countries
no longer consider Bitcoin as a threat. So for now we as Bitcoin supporters have to be patient to see Bitcoin legalized in many countries.

This is one of those blogs that wishes to stare up reactions from there blogs there is only little Bitcoin can do. Bitcoin might weaken local currencies in developed countries but to an extent and can't replace local currencies due to its high volatility and instability in price. Many developed countries are still scared of Bitcoin to be more precise because of its decentralized nature which makes it more difficult to centralize

right bro....
even though we know the development of online shops, e-commerce, and marketplaces, there have been many digital payments, but using bitcoin in general is very difficult, maybe most e-commerce will use their own more stable tokens or other stable coins.

but for my country, where cryptocurrencies have not been legalized, it is difficult to announce payments with tokens. maybe in the future we will find it but not for now. I also realized that many of them use digital money for payment via deposit, but the digital money has also been registered by the government so that it is freely used for transaction purposes.

Globalized economic development has resulted in increased polarization between the rich and poor on a global scale .... the economy is now scary since there has always been a lot of corruption in governments and especially now there are more and more people cheating people  now starving others homeless have difficulty buying food their budget is not enough because the economy is really covered by the governments law and hopefully this economy will be reduced and they will see the hardship inflicted on the economy of  country.  and hopefully the crypto currency will not be affected in the world especially the bitcoin that is there and also helps the economy to protect the crypto currencies ..

Usage wise? I won't go with Bitcoin and I'd rather use the traditional fiat even in my bills payment, etc..
You may ask why? Because Bitcoin is still on the part of just being kept, a reserve, a investment, or whatever they call it now.
Will you really risk using it now rather than keep it and hope for doubling your money?
I would use it for experience, but will not be as my daily money for purchases. It's been around for a long time and I can't see merchants opening that payment method so how come it's a danger to anyone. The banking industry is the one who is in danger if they will have nothing to invest due to their customers purchasing Bitcoin instead of keeping it in the bank vault.

To answer the question briefly: yes. But this is nothing new. The value of a country's fiat currency is basically influenced by three factors: the strength of the domestic economy, the amount of money in circulation, and the demand for that currency.
If one or more of these factors are bad then the currency loses value and becomes weak. This can be seen very well in Turkey at the moment. The economy is stumbling, and a lot of cheap money is being printed, which is currently pushing inflation up to 20+%. This also reduces demand, because no one wants a weak currency with high inflation. Many bring their money in Turkish currency in safety, and exchange it into the USD, the Euro, gold or Bitcoin.

I am sure that bitcoins can influence the local currencies of developing nations. But if this is actually weaking or more a strengthening remains to be seen. Of course the IMF is against crypto currencies because he can't go to national governments and ask for crypto money to lend out to troubled countries. For developing countries with weak local currencies I think they will get positive effects from crypto investments. For example if a country struggles with inflation their currency will fall, but their investment in crypto currencies will not be affected. Its a good way to reduce the dependency on the local economy.

Even in the developing countries most of the transactions are in digital which is through internet banking, etc so there is no issue for them to spend their local currency in their country but when it comes to an international transaction they will face issue and have to wait too long to reach their destination but in cryptocurrency there is no border, you can simply send and receive Bitcoin from anywhere, all you need is internet.

Personally, I don’t really think that’s going to be the case in this situation. A lot of these people make use of cryptocurrency for their online transactions, but at the end of the day they still end up withdrawing that money to their local currency. I move I don’t really see anything bad about that, because cryptocurrency has really created a lot of opportunities for the youths in these countries.

A lot of them have been able to become successful by trading cryptocurrencies online. So, this is an opportunity for them, and is also a way for them to generate income and help the country. So, it’s not really bad and I don’t think it’s going to affect their currencies at all.

Bitcoin has created a wing to the level that it can be trust worthy to certain level, the other countries that use altcoins instead of bitcoin for payment is country that don't like bitcoin but they like to promote their coin and the same vain want their coins look like bitcoin and get the same firm of bitcoin, some countries look for necessary way to introduce they coin like bitcoin.

Since many countries has started accepting bitcoin in different communities in the country. those that use to fiat business before in the community will start seeing the difference between decentralized currency and centralized currency which is the oldest currency in the community.
Many graduate in such community will do everything possible to invest more money on decentralized currency than centralized currency that disvalue during the pandemic.

I think authorities and regulators from developing countries are missing the point, because their local currencies are already weak without any interference of crypto currencies and that is a good reason for people from these areas to adopt bitcoin and stay away from fiat for investment purposes.

Bitcoin has been a potential solution and not the cause of the issue of devalued fiat currencies around the world. It's important to let it very clear to everyone, especially to the most uneducated people who fall for any government's propaganda.

I like this part... this is something we all know I guess, slowly but steady Bitcoin is taking over! But I wouldn't exclude some other popular cryptocurrencies as well, many of them are now used more than ever before! I think I may say the numbers are in favor of crypto, and people who are following the situation can agree with that...
But it's not a danger for the local economies, local economies can benefit from decentralization! It's up to people's awareness, crypto can't fix things alone, it's just a tool, it's up to us to use that tool in the right way!
Crypto is here for 10 years, I believe a lot has been done in that time, and the game is far from over! Transitions are never easy, so I guess we will see many crazy things before everything settle down! But we who are in crypto... we are ready for the rough ride, it's something normal for us I think!

Weakening local currencies in developing countries? I doubt that. Almost all crypto investors including me from developing and developed countries still depend a lot on local currencies for various reasons.

Developing countries are actually over-dependent on local currencies when compared to developed countries and this will most probably never change in my opinion.

Honestly, with some developing countries, their local currencies are more or less meaningless, and all important transactions are done through dollars, euro's or renminbi. So, mixing that in with cryptocurrencies is not that much of a strech. As far as it becoming the only currency? I highly doubt it because all serious investments in the country or serious projects being paid are being paid through other major currencies.

Please tell me - how is the issue of the loss of funds associated with network commissions resolved, with the regular purchase of inexpensive goods / food? According to my calculations, if the payment acceptance scheme works on standard terms, where there is a commission. Moreover, the level of commission can be commensurate with the cost of the transaction itself. Taking the same bread, vegetables, eggs - the price is not high, the transaction fee is noticeable, which gives rise to the problem of losing personal funds. Or has everyone included the commission in the price of the goods?

Yes, and what's wrong with it?

What's wrong with weakening a centralized currency that has had a history of being wildly inflationary which means that there is essentially an invisible tax imposed upon people every time they hold their fiats for long enough?

It's not like "local currencies" are issued by local governments. They are issued by big, centralized institutions.

There is such a trend, but it is unlikely to become widespread. If we consider the still small experience of El Salvador, then there was no national currency at all. Therefore, it was much easier to accept bitcoin as the national currency there. In countries with strong economies and hard currencies, this is hardly possible. But we really need a similar experience of crowding out the national currency in weak developing countries, and preferably a positive one.

I don't think BTC will be able to weaken the local currencies of developing and other countries. The fact is that BTC takes a long time to carry out transactions and high commissions, which in turn will not be able to ensure the work of trade and other areas. BTC is currently good as a means of accumulating wealth or just to make money, but unfortunately not for using it instead of local currencies. Moreover, the price of BTC is very volatile, which is also not suitable for use as a substitute for local currency.

Merry christmas!

I am happy to dispell your doubts once more.
Firstly, you are right, for food and small purchases the fees would be significant, as an example, a kilogram of maize flour here costs about 1$, so paying on chain is not a good idea.

For these cases people do not use on-chain transactions, they use instead wallets or exchanges like Binance, instead, which allow in-exchange transactions without fees. Binance is becoming quite popular here, so are other exchanges, people mostly are using these for those micro-payments you describe and (hopefully) the main stack stays in a non-custodial wallet.

See: https://pay.binance.com/en

I have to say local economies are getting even worse but the big nations are getting a bigger gap each year as well. We had slavery and death and so much misery for the lower class while the upper class had super fun up until 100 years ago or so, then we started to grow a bit better, that crash during late 20's caused things to get a little better, and until around 60's or so things looked nice.

Around early 70's things started to pick up, and by the time 80's came with the cold war and all the gap started to look like there is a growing gap, not a huge one yet but the gap was growing between rich and poor instead of closing. And now we have a huge gap once again, not that we are slaves anymore, but when you can't pay rent, you can't go to the doctors without getting broke, when your cancer costs are as expensive as your house value, then I am sorry but that is not really the freedom we were expecting when slavery abolished, it is really only a whip away from being slavery again.

Merry Christmas to you and your family!
And also Happy New Year - may it bring you and your family a solution to problems, prosperity, health and good luck! :)

Thanks for the answer ! And then for me the "arithmetic" component scared a little - it seems like you pay for food, and you pay even more for the commission. And the type of joint wholesale purchases - is this not practiced? You can also buy flour or some kind of products that are consumed regularly and in significant quantities in "small wholesale", saving on commission.

You have to start from the beginning, if a new, nascent economy has weaknesses and vulnerabilities, not only BTC can make it stagger, any type of financial act can do it, those who take hold under a strong economy and that have good support should not be afraid or fears for the BTC, because then it means that there is no harmony in the economy or economy model that is implemented, if there are vulnerabilities with anything there may be a crash. For old economies with high inflation, the solution is BTC, and to improve the economy it is best to take BTC into account, just as they do in El Salvador.