Bitcoin the fundamental tool for economic liberation/independence

[Tellek Garing]

The Santoshi idea to cryptography was the scalability Of all financial transactions which translates to decentralization and financial independence to or users, whether be It individual or government. Take El Salvador for example the country now accepts Bitcoin as a legal tender and also holds a large percentage of the country treasury in Bitcoin. Let say bitcoin rise above $100,000 in the nearest future the country will stand to profit large interest in the investment which will translate into the economic viability which can give the country a hedge over other developing countries.

[fiulpro]

We cannot say that the people are :
Independent
Liberated
Because of the following reasons :
Even if a crypto is a legal tender in one country, its governed by rules and regulations, which are quite a few and therefore there would always be a slight probelm when it comes to cryptocurrencies and independence from the economic system of the old world, if I might say.
Other than that it provides :
Partial-independence
Hedge against inflation
Liberal views and no need for the third parties in the middle.
Complete independence is quite difficult to achieve therefore I feel like as long as there is a healthy relationship between the government and the people in regards to cryptocurrencies it would work wonderfully well, like in El Salvador, I have very high hopes for this country.

[Rruchi man]

Your topic OP seems very ambiguous, bitcoin is instrumental and can liberate someone economically, but it is not the fundamental tool IMO. The fundamental tool for me is knowledge. You can own some bitcoins without knowledge and still be not financially liberated/independent. knowledge is the key. The knowledge of how to liberate yourself economically with bitcoin is another aspect. Owning bitcoin is not just enough, knowing what to do with it and how to handle it is key.

[Upgrade00]

The Satoshi idea to cryptography was the scalability Of all financial transactions which translates to decentralization and financial independence to or users, whether be It individual or government.

You got the last part right about decentralization and financial independence to its users, and governments are not left out as they are free to hold bitcoin.

Take El Salvador for example the country now accepts Bitcoin as a legal tender and also holds a large percentage of the country treasury in Bitcoin. Let say bitcoin rise above $100,000 in the nearest future the country will stand to profit large interest

While there is great potential for bitcoin to grow, it is not an ideal strategy for a country to be speculative about its reserve funds. While bitcoin can grow over $100k, it can also fall below $40k and enter a bear market. It is a positive development and a move I believe would pay up, but I do not believe nations should look to bitcoin for speculative profits.

[Wiwo]

Your topic OP seems very ambiguous.

I have to read over the topic severely before I was able to comprehend the massage, Liberation is an ambiguous word, and that using it in the context of financial freedom may deviate our attention from the main context of the thread which is Bitcoin as an economic mechanism against the third party system in financial dealing.

[pooya87]

I disagree. Bitcoin is all that for individuals not for the government. The government (and the whole country) can reach independence without needing to use bitcoin. For example El Salvador could drop USD and create their own currency to be more independent. But that's not enough, a lot more work has to be done so that history is not repeated (they apparently had their own currency and their economy was failing that they had to adopt USD).
By adopting bitcoin the country will gain some good amount of profit in the coming years but that still wouldn't be enough to reach the goals OP outlined. I don't follow El Salvador news but from here and there I see their president is doing some good work. The infrastructure, bitcoin city, attracting foreign investment, ...

One thing is certain though, adopting bitcoin as legal tender is so much better than creating your own cryptocurrency. Like what Venezuela, India, China, Africa and a couple of others have done or doing that has either failed miserably or is waiting to be fail as the govcoin gets released.

[Hispo]

One thing is certain though, adopting bitcoin as legal tender is so much better than creating your own cryptocurrency. Like what Venezuela, India, China, Africa and a couple of others have done or doing that has either failed miserably or is waiting to be fail as the govcoin gets released.

To be fair, in the case of my country (Venezuela) the Petro was a shitcoin from the begining: centralized, non-mineable, closed-source and with no real usecase/demand.

Our government is highly incompetent when comes to economical measures they do not even care to understand.
I believe China and India would be more efficient and competent with a state-minted crypto.

Not saying I would agree with their existence, but they cant fail as epicly as we did in Venezuela.

[Wind_FURY]

I disagree. Bitcoin is all that for individuals not for the government. The government (and the whole country) can reach independence without needing to use bitcoin. For example El Salvador could drop USD and create their own currency to be more independent. But that's not enough, a lot more work has to be done so that history is not repeated (they apparently had their own currency and their economy was failing that they had to adopt USD).
By adopting bitcoin the country will gain some good amount of profit in the coming years but that still wouldn't be enough to reach the goals OP outlined. I don't follow El Salvador news but from here and there I see their president is doing some good work. The infrastructure, bitcoin city, attracting foreign investment, ...

One thing is certain though, adopting bitcoin as legal tender is so much better than creating your own cryptocurrency. Like what Venezuela, India, China, Africa and a couple of others have done or doing that has either failed miserably or is waiting to be fail as the govcoin gets released.

I believe Bitcoin is for all, whether an individual, a financial institution, or a government/state entity. It’s a permissionless, open protocol for anyone who wants to use it for its main value proposition = Censorship-Resistance. OR as a back up/hedge/fall back in case of the people in the government/Central Banks loses control of the financial system.

[Poker Player]

I see the OP's message as too optimistic. Bitcoin can be a tool for liberation but for those of us who use it P2P mainly. Those who use it through decentralized exchanges and custoddial wallets we can't say they are very liberated.

And then the OP mentions the price rise, which to me is a consequence of the essence of Bitcoin, but we can't rely on it. The most important part is the first one.

[pooya87]

To be fair, in the case of my country (Venezuela) the Petro was a shitcoin from the begining: centralized, non-mineable, closed-source and with no real usecase/demand.

The 4 characteristics you named are the fundamental characteristics of any government issued digital currency.

Our government is highly incompetent when comes to economical measures they do not even care to understand.

Looking from outside the economical problems the country is dealing with doesn't seem to be all because of the government. Your country is dealing with a ton of external issues, from sanctions, foreign intervention and espionage to the soft/cold civil war that has been going on for at least 20 years.

I believe China and India would be more efficient and competent with a state-minted crypto.

The Indian project was abandoned AFAIK and if some day Chinese CBDC succeeds it would be because China is an economic super power not because of the government's competence.

[witcher_sense]

I believe Bitcoin is for all, whether an individual, a financial institution, or a government/state entity. It’s a permissionless, open protocol for anyone who wants to use it for its main value proposition = Censorship-Resistance. OR as a back up/hedge/fall back in case of the people in the government/Central Banks loses control of the financial system.

The government is not an independent entity, it is just an organization in society that consists of the same individuals like you and me. Should these individuals have the right to access and interact with a decentralized permissionless network? Not only should they have such a right, but also no one can prevent them from exercising this right should we think otherwise. The problem with the government as an organization, however, is that it obtains its income not through voluntary mutually agreed and mutually-beneficial peer-to-peer exchanges like other individuals do but through coercion and aggression against people who happen to be born on the territory the government controls. The government doesn't need to ask permission to enter the network, and it also doesn't need permission to take away your bitcoin. The government will never agree to be a part of a decentralized system because it is a profoundly centralized institution that always wants to control everything and everyone. The government that once had the power to manage the whole economy will not accept the decentralized monetary policy and fixed supply that can control no one. The government will never accept the idea of the free market in money because it cannot obtain money honestly without aggression and coercion. Bitcoin is not for the government.

[davis196]

I kinda got sick of all the posts praising Bitcoin as the ultimate tool for independence,liberation,decentralization,building wealth,protection against inflation,protection against the greedy bankers/corporations,protection against the greedy and oppressive government,privacy,etc...
I mean,what's the point of your post,OP?This is a Bitcoin forum we are all Bitcoin fans(with a few exceptions).
Do you add anything interesting to the discussion?Nope.
Are you posting this to boost your post count?
El Salvador isn't a great example,because it's a small country,that can be really dependent from it's neighbors for export/import trading,getting natural resources and all kind of political stuff.
Bitcoin cannot increase the level of independence of El Salvador,or any other small underdeveloped country.
 

[Tellek Garing]

I see the OP's message as too optimistic. Bitcoin can be a tool for liberation but for those of us who use it P2P mainly. Those who use it through decentralized exchanges and custodial wallets we can't say they are very liberated.

And then the OP mentions the price rise, which to me is a consequence of the essence of Bitcoin, but we can't rely on it. The most important part is the first one.

My thoughts as outlined in the post is to point out first of all the economic advantage of Bitcoin to both individuals and cooperate entities and also its decentralized mode of operation which delists the involvement of third parties.
It goes further than that but I just stopped there for future discussion on the thread.

[crwth]

That is what the country leader is hoping for, for sure. I think the vision that El Salvador's leader has been looking forward towards the rise in BTC. I believe with the support of the prices previously, and we can reach higher prices if it sustains the prices that we have. We will never really know what happens but hoping for the best can lead to a better future for its citizens. You'll never know when it's going to be the time when other countries follow suit, right?

With that, I think you can safely say that we will reach higher highs with that. BTC will be more and more scarce but still demanded.

[Wind_FURY]

I believe Bitcoin is for all, whether an individual, a financial institution, or a government/state entity. It’s a permissionless, open protocol for anyone who wants to use it for its main value proposition = Censorship-Resistance. OR as a back up/hedge/fall back in case of the people in the government/Central Banks loses control of the financial system.

The government is not an independent entity, it is just an organization in society that consists of the same individuals like you and me. Should these individuals have the right to access and interact with a decentralized permissionless network? Not only should they have such a right, but also no one can prevent them from exercising this right should we think otherwise. The problem with the government as an organization, however, is that it obtains its income not through voluntary mutually agreed and mutually-beneficial peer-to-peer exchanges like other individuals do but through coercion and aggression against people who happen to be born on the territory the government controls.

Can you clarify? It’s confusing.

The government doesn't need to ask permission to enter the network, and it also doesn't need permission to take away your bitcoin.

How can it take away MY Bitcoin “without permission”?

The government will never agree to be a part of a decentralized system because it is a profoundly centralized institution that always wants to control everything and everyone.

That’s subjective. The government can HODL Bitcoin as a reserve asset, like Gold.

The government that once had the power to manage the whole economy will not accept the decentralized monetary policy and fixed supply that can control no one. The government will never accept the idea of the free market in money because it cannot obtain money honestly without aggression and coercion. Bitcoin is not for the government.

Is that all according to you? Because any government, or any entity can decide Bitcoin anytime.

[Tellek Garing]

Your topic OP seems very ambiguous, bitcoin is instrumental and can liberate someone economically, but it is not the fundamental tool IMO. The fundamental tool for me is knowledge. You can own some bitcoins without knowledge and still be not financially liberated/independent. knowledge is the key. The knowledge of how to liberate yourself economically with bitcoin is another aspect. Owning bitcoin is not just enough, knowing what to do with it and how to handle it is key.

Knowledge may be an essential tool in life but again and to knowledge happens to be a primary tool for human existence but If you talk about secondary tools and in an economic point of view then one will talk about bitcoin because it eradicates so many middle men and third party.

[Sterbens]

I believe Bitcoin is for all, whether an individual, a financial institution, or a government/state entity. It’s a permissionless, open protocol for anyone who wants to use it for its main value proposition = Censorship-Resistance. OR as a back up/hedge/fall back in case of the people in the government/Central Banks loses control of the financial system.

This is the statement I want to hear. Bitcoin for all is not reserved for anyone and any group, nor any institution. Bitcoin comes to anyone offering freedom of what you should have and anyone who adopts Bitcoin be it governments, state systems, then gradually when large inflation occurs in all your countries and adopting countries are saved.

[Dhaniii]

The Santoshi idea to cryptography was the scalability Of all financial transactions which translates to decentralization and financial independence to or users, whether be It individual or government. Take El Salvador for example the country now accepts Bitcoin as a legal tender and also holds a large percentage of the country treasury in Bitcoin. Let say bitcoin rise above $100,000 in the nearest future the country will stand to profit large interest in the investment which will translate into the economic viability which can give the country a hedge over other developing countries.

Owning bitcoin can't say you have economic freedom, because in general getting into the crypto world is vulnerable to pure risk when you can't control it like a panic sell like this week bitcoin is experiencing a very sharp decline from the price of $68k back to $45k, the market which is very risky if it can not be controlled.

[MrcMrc]

I see the OP's message as too optimistic. Bitcoin can be a tool for liberation but for those of us who use it P2P mainly. Those who use it through decentralized exchanges and custoddial wallets we can't say they are very liberated.

And then the OP mentions the price rise, which to me is a consequence of the essence of Bitcoin, but we can't rely on it. The most important part is the first one.

Well, I will not say the ops is overconfidence because when it comes to decentralized financial services Bitcoin happen to come into four play as its users are free from the banks and government over-involvement in financial dealings.

[Swordsoffreedom]

The Santoshi idea to cryptography was the scalability Of all financial transactions which translates to decentralization and financial independence to or users, whether be It individual or government. Take El Salvador for example the country now accepts Bitcoin as a legal tender and also holds a large percentage of the country treasury in Bitcoin. Let say bitcoin rise above $100,000 in the nearest future the country will stand to profit large interest in the investment which will translate into the economic viability which can give the country a hedge over other developing countries.

Owning bitcoin can't say you have economic freedom, because in general getting into the crypto world is vulnerable to pure risk when you can't control it like a panic sell like this week bitcoin is experiencing a very sharp decline from the price of $68k back to $45k, the market which is very risky if it can not be controlled.

I've been waiting for months to get to where you see the risk. Usually, I buy bitcoin every month, but I saved some money when the bitcoin market dumped in December so I bought some coins at dip. That's the decent thing to do, and it should end there. Those who buy Bitcoin and hold it long-term will benefit the most in this dip. At $45k it is energizing, soon to be on the way to the new ATH