Bitcoin Forum

To me I believe that bitcoin and blockchain technology can be of help to poor countries with inadequate infrastructures in numerous ways, if been legalize in those countries.

Bitcoin as a decentralized digital currency can allow peer to peer transations without the need of bank in countries with inadequate infrastructure, just with the use of their mobile devices if been ligalize.

Could you believe that blackchain base microfinance platforms can provide access to credit other financial services to small businesses owners and entrepreneurs in poor countries, if been ligalize.

Bitcoin can make transactions faster and easier and also low cost of remittance in poor countries, if been ligalize.

Bitcoin can be accessible and use through mobile devices in countries with inadequate infrastructures, for payment if been ligalize.

Could you also believe that  bitcoin related projects can make poor countries develop their internet infrastructures, improving connectivity and access to informations, if been ligalize.

Here we go again. The sceptic in me sees a post that is designed to seek merits. A closer look at the account posting shows it is definitely not a newbie therefore has to be either an alt-account or part of a farm. If I had to make a choice, I would have to go with it being part of an account farm being operated by a puppeteer.

The OP has brought nothing new to the table by mentioning what Bitcoin does as a function but did manage to come to my attention.

What you mean by bitcoin related project? If youre talking about btc ecosytem that runs in the altcoin industry then half of them do but not all can be of help sincr some purely made that out to make some money.  Guess the best answer is bitcoin helping poor country by learning about it and take advantage of it when they do know that now. By means of the process is like investing, make it grow, uses mining and many more utility for bitcoin.

Every country can start looking at BTC differently, poor or rich, it doesn't matter.

I don't think it's about "BTC-related" projects, in a meaning of something new, but about interacting with BTC on all the levels, from lower ones to the ones in charge.
And pushing the adoption further.

You didn't explain two important things. First being the problem you claim bitcoin can solve and second being the way it can solve it. Just saying bitcoin is decentralized and has low cost doesn't explain your title at all.

This subject is not new. But so far people who like bitcoin think of it as a magic solution to solve every problem. It may be able to do that for individuals but not on a bigger scale for a country. The countries that are poor and with little to no infrastructure are like that for a reason. Bitcoin cannot fix that. The people of that country should find that reason and solve their problems that way.

Like el Salvador. Most people think that tiny and poor country's economy improved because they adopted bitcoin. But that was not the reason at all. They found their issues (eg. the gangs and crime rate plus the lack of foreign investors) and started fixing them. THEN their situation started to improve. Bitcoin's contribution to that whole thing is probably less than 10%.

Bitcoin is just one opportunity from many opportunities for someone to change their life.

But, they need to have few criteria in order to access Bitcoin:
1. Understand and familiar with technology.
2. Have a cellphone, electricity and internet package.
3. Money.

If they don't even have one of them, they will not able to access Bitcoin.

Banks already offer lending services, those small businesses owners and entrepreneurs can go to banks instead of waiting for another centralized institutions.

OP's statement sounds very idealistic. Convincing government to legalize Bitcoin as currency or payment method is very difficulty, even when they generally don't take protectionism stance. And since we talk about poor countries, how many people willing to face Bitcoin volatile price and non-free TX fee? https://mempool.space/ (https://mempool.space/) currently suggest 2 sat/vB or $0.25 for no priority, while some bank and digital wallet these days offers free transfer under certain condition (e.g. to receiver in same country).

If underserved and undeveloped countries where to even consider implementing BTC and the Blockchain technology, they would have to make remarkable commitment that will include investments in setting up digital infrastructures, providing the right education, and they may have to work on  the regulatory process that is needed to appropriately ensure everything goes fine in the long run.

Undeveloped countries can definitely benefit in terms of having a say in the financial framework of the country where there's financial services for the unbaked, lower transactions cost and lower fees, transactions across borders, faster and more direct transfer without third party interference and there's transparency which would enable innovation and acceptance.

Agreed through and through here.
Unfortunately, for daily usage - it's nonviable for most users out there, anywhere, in fact.

 This is something we're all familiar with but the question you should ask yourself is that would those in the poor countries be willing to adapt Bitcoin. You mentioned that it can be accessible to countries with inadequate infrastructures and is it not possible that they may be not be able to access electricity and all the other basic amenities.
 In countries that are still developing, it's easier to pitch these sort of idea and have them buy it because they would be initially eager to try out anything that may help boost their economy and create a better living for them but eventually, their interest would move elsewhere due to the fact that Bitcoin is highly volatile and they may not have the resources to keep up.

How if I may ask?

Bitcoin is not the solution to countries that are corrupt and can't build their infrastructure from budget allocation that goes into the private accounts of the few or individual who pad budgets to their own benefit.

If Bitcoin creates liquidity for individual through long time hodling, will it all create good roads for business and transactional movement, buying and selling that will increase GDP?

If Bitcoin creates the investment through P2P arbitrage trading and the country doesn't have electricity which is the engine for manufacturing, don't you think diversification will be a mirage?

So the priority of poor countries whose majority of the populace might even be illiterate to Bitcoin or Blockchain technology, is not Bitcoin but good governance that will reengineer the people into developmental milestones.

Please be informed that Bitcoin fee is dependent on the network congestion.  Since Bitcoin confirmation queue is not first come first serve basis, but rather a competition of who will pay more, I am somehow hesitant to say that Bitcoin transaction or remitance is low cost especially when it will go through a centralized services since on top of the Bitcoin transaction fee, there is also this service fee.  With that in mind, I do not think that Bitcoin remittances will be a low cost one.

Aside from that, Bitcoin transaction is instant but confirmation takes 10 minutes in average, so centralized services is much faster when sending a transaction within the same application, and local bank transfers is also almost instant.  The only thing where Bitcoin shine is the international transaction but I believe there are also some services that offers instant transactions in global transfers.


Same goes with financing applications.  The best thing with Bitcoin is that we can transfer our funds without asking the third party approval if we do a blockchain transfer.


I have not seen such a thing in my country, because Bitcoin-related projects often falls under financial services, while internet connections falls under technology and communication.

There is no doubt that Bitcoin technology offers a variety of opportunities to everyone, the main concern would be the leaders of the government since they are the one who gives a go signal on which regulations and projects to implement.

This is not about legalizing bitcoin as an acceptable means of making payments or a legal tender by any country as the major challenge, but how they are going to maneuver their opportunity from taking this step to develop their country for good, am going to site in two examples for you to take a look at, Bitcoin has been made a legal tender in El-Salvador and Central Africa Republic, but is it obvious that El-Salvador had plans already in place for its decision and that is why they never for once regret taking this decision on bitcoin use, whereas things have almost remained the same in Central Africa Republic after it's own adoption, all because the necessary plan before the strike in action take effects were not in place, Bitcoin can help improve on any challenging economy of a country, only if the leaders and the people will all work towards a common goal to acheive what bitcoin has to offer, but most of our leaders may not allow for this.

Why do you always relate Bitcoin to poverty while in fact this is not the reason why this coin created.

Maybe read here what is the purpose on why Bitcoin created https://www.coinbase.com/learn/crypto-basics/what-is-bitcoin

Also poverty solution will depends on the action of government and people  since if rampant corruption is happening and less education plus effort done by people there's still nothing will happen even if Bitcoin will exist.

Poor countries have their issues nationwide that need to be resolved first. Like if they have problems with infrastructures for the Internet, they have to fix it, and Bitcoin can not help Internet infrastructures there. The same with other social, economic, political things in those nations, that are not Bitcoin responsibility and Bitcoin can not help.

After they fix national problems, they can join Bitcoin party as Bitcoin miners like Bhutan or purely investors like El Salvador. They have to change themselves and their nations first, then Bitcoin is accessible for them to boost changes and can be one of contributors to their national economic growth and other improvements.

As we know government are the most difficult people to bend about Bitcoin especially that of poor countries which I can assumed to be poorly in their understanding towards the technology, as they have different scope of view about Bitcoin.

To me they still need proper sanitization about Bitcoin and even if they must legalized Bitcoin in that country let it be that they all understand how the volatility works and are able to accept the risk involved in Bitcoin before legalizing Bitcoin in such countries.

And of course you made a good point and if that country is so poor would they be able to accept all that comes from Bitcoin which you already outlined above and, country with poor economy could be hard to accept such from bitcoin except for those who are civilized or that are not based in those countries.

But how will bitcoin help improve a country's economy? What role will Bitcoin play in a country's economy to impact their economy? Like El-Salvador, they have accepted bitcoin as legal tender and what problem has bitcoin solved for their economy when their problem is crime, lack of jobs...? Does Bitcoin create jobs or help them crack down on crime? If bitcoin can save the El-Salvador economy, why should they accept the deal with the IMF and borrow money from them?

Many individuals, organizations...have been able to improve their economic situation through bitcoin but when it comes to a country's economy, this is a different and much bigger issue. And to improve the country's economy, we need to find out the causes and appropriate solutions. We cannot rely on one highly volatile asset class, and pump or dump at any time, to improve the national economy.

At one point, we might think that Bitcoin will help poor countries but I think it wasn't much of a help for El Salvador. Sure, it did a good job but it wasn't something spectacular. Btw on the other hand, to my mind, blockchain technologies have a good chance to help poor countries. For example, in my country we started early adoption and development of blockchain technologies, successfully implemented them in different sectors, and one of the most important adoption was done in land title registry.
The development and adoption of blockchain technologies brought some investors to our country and created an opportunity for local people, to become blockchain developers and get a high-paying jobs.

Even for countries that are civilised, we still can’t overlook the point that ABCbits made and the question he asked: Can you choose to use a service for which you need to pay a fee charge of $0.25 for each of the transactions over a service that offers you a free interbank transfer? Among them, which will you prefer to use in a normal sense?

Let us not be biased in our opinion; we all know what the answer is, unless in a case of another form of transaction that involves two bitcoiners and there is more to the transaction than just being used as a payment method.

The interest may be there but let us admit the fact that to sustain the use of this market, they need stable source of income as well. Hence, their interest may not be sustained as they need to find a way how to make a living and provide their basic needs first. So in my opinion, the government should address first the basic necessities of its constituents. Otherwise, they won't patronize this market in the long run.
However, some poor countries already found this market to assist them in finding alternative income. But only for those people who have access with the net and of course electricity. Now, don't expect that a very poor family without access of net and electricity will actually discover and join this market. That's not gonna happen.

Nahh I can't believe bitcoin can do that!

Bitcoin is not a magic. it's money just as your fiat but digital and a significant difference is that instead of depreciating years after years it increases or appreciates in value.

For a poor country to become more developed they must fix their government first bitcoin is not a saviour to come and elevate poor countries to riches or high economic power however if a good government is in position their can grasp the opportunity to invest in it and help their economy from what they get from it.

Can the poor people from poor countries afford the transaction fees of bitcoin for a transaction?

Poor nations can benefit from Bitcoin if they invest in it. Countries like El Salvador and Bhutan have invested massively in Bitcoin and I guess that they are now in profit. Bitcoin could also help nations and business owners to avoid the exuberant fees paid to middleman during international trade. Beside these two benefits I don't know if Bitcoin can reduce poverty in a nation. People from poor countries are more interested to survive, hence many of them might not consider Bitcoin investment.

Internet facilities are very expensive. I don't know how Bitcoin will help people from poor nations to develop internet facilities. Maybe they can join financial resources together and buy a satellite connection maybe from Starlink.

AFAIK they have not sold their bitcoins which means you can't really say they've made enough profit to solve their problems. They just have an asset in their reserves that has appreciated in value and economic problems won't be solved just by having a valuable asset "in the vaults".

The "if been ligalise" thing in your text makes me laugh. Do you mean "if been legalized" or you mean something else?
Are you coming up with the assumption that blockchain technology and Bitcoin are banned in poor countries? I don't have any info about this and I think that blockchain technology isn't banned in the poor countries. Nobody is stopping the people from using crypto and blockchain technology. The problem is that the people, who are living in poor countries don't have money to buy crypto. Blockchain projects require skilled programmers and capital. Poor countries don't have good education systems and skilled workforce.

Until they do so, the PNL of their investment and their plan, so to speak, is not realized.
I do agree here.

Microfinance platforms based on blockchain could also open up new opportunities for entrepreneurs who might struggle to access credit otherwise. Plus, the lower costs of remittances would be a huge advantage for families relying on money sent from abroad. Many people in those areas have smartphones, so being able to use Bitcoin for payments could really help ease transactions. Improving internet infrastructure for these people through these projects could also have a ripple effect in enhancing the overall connectivity and access to information. This is quite an exciting prospect

"Bitcoin helping the poor" - that’s one of the usual lines scammers love to use. They’ll showcase investors who struck it rich with Bitcoin, making desperate people believe they can do the same. That’s why so many fall for these scams easily.

But when it comes to remittances, Bitcoin actually has real potential, as long as governments are willing to adopt it. Imagine sending money globally without needing a third party.. (faster, cheaper, and more efficient.)

I remember reading an article years ago about countries spending too much on remittance fees, the Philippines and India, IIRC But now, those same countries have embraced Bitcoin. In the Philippines, we now have local wallets like Coins.ph, and even other popular digital wallets are starting to integrate Bitcoin.

What was once seen as a future solution has already become a reality, so other poor countries that have not adopted it, they should allow and follow a simple path of other countries.

Lots of opportunities, but mostly, it would come from better management of all the other systems - surely, what you described would help people and would do so a lot, but, it should be built upon a proper investment base / the ability to create and sustain such big and tech-strong projects, and so on.
To keep things the way they are developing.

It won't help poor countries. Because poor countries need to fix their own problems by using foreign loans or resources they have. Bitcoin won't help anything, let alone blockchain-based microfinance like you said. It all has to start from how the country's leaders can solve their domestic problems, such as crime, corruption, inflation, etc., then after their condition improves they can issue pro-bitcoin policies and then slowly start to use it either to invest in bitcoin or regulate exchanges to get taxes.

A country should start from the bottom - sure, the reserves of the BTC and other related to Bitcoin or crypto projects are great and should be encouraged / developed, however, first, there should be a solid base to do so.
That would, by its nature, provide everything that's needed for such projects. Because they won't fix the things you mentioned, I agree with that.

first of all thanks for your observation towards my spelling of ligalise instead of ligalize, I don't know if should call it typing error or I should say that is newbies for you.
Responding to the what you said this not by assumption that bitcoin and blockchain technology is banned in those countries, I just came up with an opinion if those poor countries can adopt bitcoin and blockchain technology that it we be of help to them in many ways just as it have help other poor countries to grow.

I do think they would be in good shape to go into crypto (said countries) once they are on the right track everywhere else.
These techs and so on won't help them to get rid of the problems they already have. Sure, some people would have more opportunities to use the blockchain, and so on, but the standard of living would still not go up.

They can make profit if they invest in bitcoin but it will not help them improve their economy nor can it help them escape poverty and become a rich country. To improve a country's economy, we need many solutions and a combination of many different factors, not just relying on a volatile and uncertain asset like bitcoin.


But you also need to pay attention to the volatility of bitcoin, the volatility of bitcoin is unpredictable and you will suffer heavy losses if during the transfer, bitcoin suddenly drops 5-10%.

Honestly, I don't see bitcoin bringing much benefit or having a positive impact in improving the economy for poor countries. It is just a volatile currency or investment, it cannot create jobs, cannot attract foreign investment into the country...how can it improve the national economy when it cannot solve the fundamental problems of the country?

Any country that wants to elevate themselves from poor to a standard developed country should first look into so many things going on inside, if they are poor as said, how are they supposed to work the resources to be used for investment purpose. The country needs to be relevant from its sources, economically fit and a well balanced resources to see them through the process of investment. Just like what the US government is trying to initiate, reserves like that for a poor country can help them but it needs to be in the long run, if they are unable to create a favorable economy up until the reserves are matured for sell it will cause them to tamper the long term initiative.

I end up saying, Bitcoin can help poor countries get to a standard financial economic condition but won't be the sole achievement to pull them from poverty, start domestically and close the chapter by making reserves that will surface later to stabilize the economy the more.

Volatility of Bitcoin especially in bearish months is challenge and it's not wanted by small businesses and merchants in El Salvador. They did not have plans to hold bitcoin as investors, and they lacked of strategy to deal with Bitcoin volatility. Additionally, for small transactions between merchants and customers, it's hard for merchants to convert bitcoin to for example fiat currency or stable coin, because it will cost them more in on chain transaction fee and trading or conversion fee.

It won't bring big impacts as poor countries have many big problems to solve, and Bitcoin can not change severity of corruption, bad governance and many social problems in those nations.

Their governments have to do more things to fix bigger problems and improve life quality in their countries, before doing something with Bitcoin that mostly relates to economic growth in their countries but only somewhat.

Honestly, I am sure that it has helped them a bit, because their investment grew, they got in at a lower price, now have more money, that's a benefit isn't it? Secondly, it "can" create jobs, depending on which nation we are talking about. Of course El Salvador wasn't seen as prime location, but if it was, every big crypto company would open their headquarters there, and hire people to work there instead.

But, El Salvador wasn't big enough or good enough to attract companies like that. At the end of the day, if USA makes it legal tender one day, which isn't impossible if you ask me, could happen in the future, then we could see a lot more stuff changing and then it could help a lot of people without a doubt.

You are right, El Salvador is yet to sell but the Royal Government of Bhutan has sold about $33.5M of its Bitcoin late last year. However, the country still holds close to 12,206 Bitcoins as of last year.

https://coinmarketcap.com/academy/article/bhutan-cashes-out-dollar335b-in-bitcoin-still-holds-dollar111b-in-btc

Making an investment in Bitcoin is one of the ways they could seize the opportunity in it to change their own economy for good, but before that, there must be some instrumentation laid on ground for the fair policy on how to go about it, this will help them devise a means to invest, the strategy to use and the duration the investment will go for, when there is adequate planning on ground made already, things will work out for them, but before then, they have to have a concession on how to start.

But as far as I know ,  most of Bhutan's bitcoin comes from mining, they have taken advantage of their abundant hydropower resources to mine bitcoin and made a significant profit. But not every country has the same advantages as Bhutan. There are even many poor countries that don't have enough electricity to power their people, let alone use it to mine bitcoins . So I don't think  poor countries  can benefit from bitcoin and bitcoin can't help them improve their economies either .

To improve a country's economy , we first need to improve the government apparatus and then have economic policies that are appropriate to the difficulties the country is facing . We cannot rely solely on investing in a volatile asset to solve the country's problems , bitcoin was not created to solve those problems nor does it have the ability to do so .

Only Bitcoin cannot turn the fortune of a country. The nation has to put in place necessary economic policies that will improve living standards, improve infrastructure, and attract investors. El Salvador has a good plan for its Bitcoin investment, which is why they have been hodling it for a long time. An example of a country that failed to plan before adopting Bitcoin as a legal tender is the Central African Republic. Lack of planning was the reason why the country's Bitcoin experiment failed.

Resources yes but I think foreign loans are risky and should not be considered for a while. Bitcoin can actually help. What about us regular individuals that also supports it? It also help us right? It provides income, so if a country has enough income, they don't need to take loans anymore and they can use the money to improve their condition.

Before all, I think yes, this should start here because if the leader is poor or corrupt, they won't still use Bitcoin properly or they will only use the income that they get personally and not to help the country that they manage even though it was the publics money is the one that they are using to invest on it.

The title of that thread is a bit misleading, and the numbers make it appear as if they sold $33.5 billion worth of bitcoin, which their entire holding has never gotten close to that volume. Now the current amount of bitcoin they hold is worth  $884,938,350.  (https://intel.arkm.com/explorer/entity/druk-holding-investments) The article is a bit updated as their holding volume has reduced from 12,206 bitcoin down to 10.635K bitcoin, according to ARKM.

Bitcoin itself is not a magic stick, it can't do nothing if people don't do actual work. I think that the answer to the question how bitcoin and blockchain can help poor countries lies into the governments of these poor countries. They can use the opportunity and create a business friendly environment for Bitcoin and blockchain related businesses by offering companies low to zero tax rates and a high quality personnel inside the country. I think that countries can spend money on educating their talented citizens about Bitcoin and blockchain technologies and make a very good developer out of them.

It's a tool for sure, but not a solution, here I agree with you.
Clearly, to use such a tool, a country should have everything in place to make it happen, including the frameworks, infrastructure, and the desire to not only to profit from their citizens but to give them alternatives and abilities to work with the tech in their own ways.

honestly, although bitcoin is break through in financial sector, but doesn't mean it's magical tool to erase poverty, most of the countries that will benefit from bitcoin are usually countries with high income since they will use bitcoin as a hedge against inflation and for investment purpose, capital growth from holding bitcoin align with how much capital you're willing to invest, in poor countries, people hardly have money to invest, even if they do it'd be not much, therefore the capital growth gained from holding bitcoin is lower.
also talking about remittance, you can send 1000 bitcoin with just $0.25 fee and you can also send $10 in bitcoin while also having the same fee, see who's gonna benefit most from that kind of fee? I think it's the people who holds huge chunk of bitcoin.

definitely not a magical tool to erase poverty, but if it's for opening up opportunities, maybe. the point of bitcoin I think still trustless peer to peer electronic cash not a tool to erase poverty.

El-Salvador has made huge profits from its investment and it can be said that they have benefited from investing in bitcoin. But that doesn't mean bitcoin played a major role and helped them improve their economy. They never even sold any bitcoins, they just bought and bought from 2021 till now, how can say bitcoins are helping them improve the economy when they never used them?

If government can convince and attract crypto companies to invest in their country and create jobs for the people. That means their government is the one that creates jobs and improves people's lives. Like you and me are participating in forum signature campaigns and we get paid by businesses, and bitcoin is used as a means of payment. It is clear that businesses and forums are paying us, not in bitcoin or crypto.
In short, bitcoin is just money and to earn money we need to work. Bitcoin is not a company, a business...how can it create jobs?

Creating the right business environment will attract more business to the country which will create more jobs and also increase government revenue through indirect taxes. There were reports that El Salvador has attracted more tourist as well as crypto related businesses since it made Bitcoin a legal tender. With more crypto awareness, young people will find different means to make money from the industry.

There are many other ways also. Like crypto airdrops , these can be like jobs for many in developing countries. The average pay is very less in these countries and most workers are just exploited there. Thus, they can participate in the airdrops and earn good money. I am part of some crypto airdrop groups personally where I see screenshots of different users who are earning good money with these airdrops.

El Salvador is a very good example of how can a brutally awful country change very quickly and become a significantly better place. They had a terrible crime rate with a huge portion of violence, that made it terrible place for locals, nothing to talk about tourists. Then, he caught tens of thousands of criminals and started Bitcoin adoption, which played a very good role for country's development. It also significantly benefited country's positive marketing. I've read many posts on Reddit where people were saying that they wanted to travel in El Salvador to experience how it feels to live in a Bitcoin-friendly country.

Look, the huge change was happen because Nayib Bukele brutally catch people who looks like criminals. If they were still many criminals and they accept Bitcoin as legal tender, I'm sure there are no change with their country's development.

Not much people are using Bitcoin in El Salvador, IIRC it's like less than 10% people use Bitcoin.

These drops are good to start with, but not to move forward - because usually, you won't get much without a farm or being an influencer.