You can argue about it any way you like, but at the end of the day, it all boils down to the economy. For a time, you may still have a strong demand for the USD despite an unstable US economy. The US government may print and print money out of nothing in order to support crumbling companies. But if massive economic bail outs remain futile and bankruptcy is still taking place one company after another, then the hollow currency will start to become apparent. A currency unsupported by an economy is nothing. You cannot have a vibrant USD and a failing US economy.

Winning on the side of having a mortgage cannot make up with losing on the side of having to confront with rising prices or devalued savings. The former is but a minor consolation for a generally unpleasant situation.

Anyway, the fact alone that fiat depreciates in value over time makes Bitcoin more interesting and attractive. The higher the inflation goes, the more attractive Bitcoin becomes. Anything whose value is appreciating or remains constant is much better than fiat. So stocking up copper, tin, and so on is way much better than keeping a fiat savings account.

I don't understand why you will have to force yourself on Binance.com. If you are a resident of the US, you are not allowed to use Binance.com. Of course, as others have shared, you can get away with it using VPN. However, as history has proven, Binance may suddenly ask you for a KYC despite not reaching the transaction limit for unverified users.

Now, if you have 2 valid IDs from separate countries, I'm afraid it will only complicate the issue further. Here you are with the same name, birthday, face, and so on and is located in two different countries. That might only trigger more suspicion.

Yes, you can use use Binance.com with a VPN even if you're from the US but that is courting risk, frozen funds, and a locked account.

I guess the government will have to weigh on the primary purpose of the tax increase and its unintended consequences not just on gambling itself but also on other things such as the sustainability of football leagues in the country.

They will have to set priorities and do a careful study as to the practicality of the policy and its overall impact. There is a possibility that instead of aiming to raise cash, the policy would backfire and would only significantly decrease gambling revenue.

Also, gamblers might end up reducing their gambling expenses, or perhaps many of them might shift to illegal gambling for the sake of shirking high tax responsibilities. As a result of a dwindling income, gambling businesses might close shop or leave the country.

If the policy is to discourage gambling, I doubt it will be that effective unless efforts against illegal gambling are also intensified at the same time.

A lot. If you want to earn without necessarily investing, you could write articles. A lot of online contents such as those in blogs, pages, review sites, and so on are products of freelancers. You could also create video contents if you have the skills. You could also apply for such jobs as virtual assistants, tutor, or even online teacher. I guess you know basic conversational English.

If you have the money, you might also want to try online selling. That's one of the businesses that are seen rising in this pandemic times. I have also read a number of play-to-earn crypto games, those which are using NFTs. I have read a number of times how a lot are earning from playing Axie Infinity, for example.

Just try to explore, join groups and pages, ask a friend, and so on. Just be careful, though.

My country is in a terrible situation right now. Of course, I am not referring to the billionaires and millionaires out there whose lives are not really bothered by the pandemic. But the huge majority of ordinary people are really tightening their belts to make sure they will survive this pandemic. The COVID situation in my country is unbearable not so much because of the fast spreading of the virus as the losing of jobs, closure of small businesses, and so on.

I'm not investing into crypto alone. I have stocks, real estate, small businesses, and others.

This problem has been El Salvador's problem even before Bitcoin came into existence. At this point, we cannot tell for sure whether the adoption of Bitcoin as a legal tender would in fact cause the proliferation of drug and weapon smuggling in the country. The adoption has just began. Perhaps we may revisit this question with statistics to back the findings after a few years.

However, to my mind, this is not going to be the case. If we are to believe the president's words, 70% of El Salvador's population is unbanked, which could mean to say people are using cash in their transactions. Cash is more anonymous than Bitcoin. It leaves no trace.

This is a thing of the past, or perhaps a thing also for newbies who are excited to have their first share of Satoshis. Personally, I don't think it is worth it burning hours doing small tasks in exchange for small amounts of Satoshis. I'd agree with mk4. I'd rather do some hourly jobs or freelance works and use my payment to buy Bitcoin.

But if you really are interested, you might want to visit the Micro Earnings board for an array of micropayment services.

Probably very small if put in comparison with the opposite, insignificant even. However, I am interested to see some figures which somehow prove that there is indeed high stats in so many countries as far as day-to-day cryptocurrency spending is concerned. Surely, though, cryptocurrency or Bitcoin ATMs and how widespread they are cannot be made as a measure as to the level of use of cryptocurrency or Bitcoin in daily payments.

I've always been in the thinking that Bitcoin is indeed a tool more than a direct solution to a lot of financial, political, social, and economic ills of society. However, it is also worth acknowledging that Bitcoin is actually of so much help to address certain problems resulting from inequality, financial exclusion, and others. So to a certain extent, Bitcoin indeed fixes some of these problems.

Take for instance the case of El Salvador where 70% of the population is unbanked and at least 20% of the GDP is based on remittances. Cross-border transactions are heavily reliant on remittance centers such as Wester Union which charges high fees and whose nearest branch may not be readily accessible to a lot of people. Bitcoin indeed solves this problem.

In the long term, bad governance and corruption which include indiscriminately printing money out of thin air, distributing it among themselves and their businesses, lack of economic foresight, and so on would result to a weak currency, uncontrollable inflation, and overall crumbling economy. Somehow, Bitcoin fixes this.

Honestly, I don't want to be paying a loan for 25 or 30 years just to have house. I'd rather save and invest and look for alternative sources of income to be able to build myself a house without getting a loan to be paid for almost a lifetime. That may take a decade or two, it doesn't matter.

But as far as my locality is concerned and its socio-economic situation, only a few minority could do this. The huge majority will have to apply for a housing loan to be able build a house. Majority of the working class in my country cannot avoid getting loans every time they buy something expensive like a car or a piece of land or a house.

What seems to be the problem with it? Surely, you do not dismiss a development effort simply because it doesn't cater to every single person, do you? After all, such initiative does not put others to a disadvantageous position. As a matter of fact, even if Bitcoin is already a legal tender in the country, those businesses without the necessary technologies are not required to accept Bitcoin payment. The same goes to ordinary people as well. If they prefer to use fiat instead of Bitcoin, they're free to do so. There's still the USD anyway.

Just when El Salvador is trying to address a perennial problem on the access to traditional financial services, and has decided to try easing it out with adopting Bitcoin as a legal tender alongside the USD, the IMF comes in bringing bad news.

IMF is now talking about "macroeconomic, financial and legal issues" just as the sovereign country is looking for means to improve the life of its people.^[1]

I don't understand. 70% of the people of El Salvador do not have access to banking services. This is a huge hindrance to its development as a country. Poverty is rampant. 4 out of 10 are living in poverty with 50% of the "country’s children and teenagers live on less than US $1.25 per day."^[2]

El Salvador's situation couldn't get any worse. And now that they are trying to experiment with something which could probably address a significant facet of the nation's problem, with something which is completely free from control, politics, internal power struggles, abuse, manipulation, and so on, the IMF, which is primarily tasked to secure financial stability, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world, is now discouraging it.

I mean, what the heck! What do you want to happen to the beautiful country of El Salvador? To remain stuck in its cesspool?

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-10/imf-sees-risks-in-el-salvador-law-making-bitcoin-legal-tender
[2] https://www.humanium.org/en/el-salvador/

Personally, I don't agree that banning Twitter is tantamount to stifling freedom of speech. Whatever you want to tweet you can always speak somewhere else. It is not as if Twitter is the only way for people to have a voice. It is not the only public platform either. Neither is it the only avenue for voices to be heard.

As a matter of fact, Twitter itself is also doing the sifting of which tweet is allowed and which is not. So Twitter cannot be made a poster boy of freedom of speech.
 
Moreover, a sovereign country has the privilege to choose which site is allowed and which is not. At the end of the day, Twitter is but a private site owned by a private company. Any country is free to accept it or not.

I play Chinese Poker but I have yet to encounter a crypto casino offering such game. I'm not looking for one either. I'm satisfied physically playing it every once in a while with friends. But you might want to check out https://www.betonline.ag/. There is Chinese Poker in there and cryptocurrencies are accepted. I am not sure though if your kind of Chinese Poker is exactly the kind offered on that platform. There might be variations. I've played a couple variations of Chinese Poker. They might just be local variations, though.

Policies change every now and then, so there is nothing surprising to hear a country issue statements from time to time which may not necessarily be consistent with one another. This is not too different from India's case.

Anyway, in the age of the internet, the state can only do so much in terms of control and monitoring. I know that the Chinese government is basically operating within totalitarian principles, but the online world is too wide for China to closely police every single citizen in the space. Suppression is getting hard by the day.

The message that White was sending in response to the Mayweather-Paul match was that there is indeed money in that kind of garbage show. There is indeed market in that kind of joke, a huge market in fact. Nunes-Kardashian was an example he floated. It could be done. It could raise a huge amount of money. Hell, it could even hit the pay-per-view. But, quoting him verbatim, "It's not what I do." It's not the business that I'm in."^[1]

Listen to White's exact words from the link below. Sometimes, people can't read between the lines.

[1] https://twitter.com/aaronbronsteter/status/1402087175383093253

No, not gonna happen, most probably ever. I'm 100% sure it is not taking place at all, at least not while Amanda is under UFC contract, and 99.9% sure when Amanda will finally be let go by the UFC.

And I don't think Kim would be interested either. I'm 100% sure Kim won't fight MMA against Amanda and 99.9% sure she won't do it in a boxing match.

Sometimes we just have to learn to appreciate tongue-in-cheek statements.

I think there's nothing personal in here but just some light jokes. The joke's gonna be on us if we take this seriously. But this is gonna be a huge disgrace if it ever reaches the octagon.

Anyway, Kim Kardashian had once worn the gloves and trade punches inside the ring. That was against Tamara Frapasella in the event dubbed as The Kardashian Charity Knockout. The fight was a two-rounder and, as expected, Kim lost.

This is indeed a strange world, very strange. But not only strange, it is also a mad world. But what is actually strange and mad is humanity. When I was a kid, and until now, I cannot really understand how people buy a family's few years' worth of food for just a piece of shoulder bag. Until now, I'm still baffled at how one man goes to sleep hungry while a neighbor feasts on unbelievably expensive food, how a father losses a child only for not having that small piece of paper they call money, and so on.

Why is Bitcoin or even a mere meme coin worth something? Because we are a strange species.