Bitcoin Legal Tender in Central African Republic

[DrBeer]

There's something that can never be argued because we know too well that the rise of bitcoin is gain or profits of another while the fall is lose to another but the tendency to utilize this opportunity then lies in the hands of the holder be it a trader or whatsoever.

Well I won't argue with you at some point because, any falling or fallen economy can never be built through bitcoin introduction, as I believe is left on the hands of their government to take appropriate care of their economy, I think bitcoin can only create additional opportunities to the inhabitants but as a means of restoring a fallen economy is something I can't say with all certainty.
You are absolutely correct!

Absolutely agree with you. To summarize, the situation will be like this:
1. Bitcoin will never save, any economy. For a simple reason - it cannot do it
2. Bitcoin is a good means to make money on speculative transactions. Yes, let me remind you again - cryptocurrency today is absolutely a speculative asset.  Well, or an opportunity to make money for not very honest people who can take advantage of the current problems of bitcoin owners and capitalize on them.

Everything else is fairy tales and dreams

I agree with two of your points which are:
1)  you and your ideas are fairy tales and dreams.
and
2) cryptocurrencies (not talking about bitcoin) are speculative to such an extent that the vast majority of them are some form of scam in terms of printing money and/or affinity scams upon bitcooin trying to seem like or to be like bitcoin.

Your point about bitcoin not being able to fix countries is lame, and surely improvements to any situation is likely a product of multiple things going on, and bitcoin would not be the ONLY thing that is going on but within a package of other things in which it may or may not be able to take credit for its "on the margin" kinds of contributions in any situation, whether personal investment, institutions and/or governments.  It is easier to look at the situations of individuals, so if you attempt to apply bitcoin systems to institutions and/or governments, then more complexities come into place, but a lot of the same individual are still going to apply to the more complex systems of institutions and governments, but there are just more things going on with institutions and governments as compared with individuals.

 

Stupid - because you can't prove otherwise ? Fairy tales - because you have no arguments and to my arguments and explanations your response is "get the hell outta here" !?? ))
I gave arguments to which you could not answer anything but attacks. I even gave you a chance and asked you to show which economy Bitcoin has already helped - in response only unintelligible sounds. I asked you to show how Bitcoin can help the population of the country, but you showed an example when a person invested, "thanks" to you, 5000 dollars in Bitcoin, and you did not warn him of the risks and volatility, and then returned him 2000 dollars.  You are confusing the general public with investors, and telling some fairy tale excuses
It is not interesting to communicate with you, but it is funny

[1714604204]

1714604204

[1714604204]

1714604204

[1714604204]

1714604204

[JayJuanGee]

There's something that can never be argued because we know too well that the rise of bitcoin is gain or profits of another while the fall is lose to another but the tendency to utilize this opportunity then lies in the hands of the holder be it a trader or whatsoever.

Well I won't argue with you at some point because, any falling or fallen economy can never be built through bitcoin introduction, as I believe is left on the hands of their government to take appropriate care of their economy, I think bitcoin can only create additional opportunities to the inhabitants but as a means of restoring a fallen economy is something I can't say with all certainty.
You are absolutely correct!

Absolutely agree with you. To summarize, the situation will be like this:
1. Bitcoin will never save, any economy. For a simple reason - it cannot do it
2. Bitcoin is a good means to make money on speculative transactions. Yes, let me remind you again - cryptocurrency today is absolutely a speculative asset.  Well, or an opportunity to make money for not very honest people who can take advantage of the current problems of bitcoin owners and capitalize on them.

Everything else is fairy tales and dreams

I agree with two of your points which are:
1)  you and your ideas are fairy tales and dreams.
and
2) cryptocurrencies (not talking about bitcoin) are speculative to such an extent that the vast majority of them are some form of scam in terms of printing money and/or affinity scams upon bitcooin trying to seem like or to be like bitcoin.

Your point about bitcoin not being able to fix countries is lame, and surely improvements to any situation is likely a product of multiple things going on, and bitcoin would not be the ONLY thing that is going on but within a package of other things in which it may or may not be able to take credit for its "on the margin" kinds of contributions in any situation, whether personal investment, institutions and/or governments.  It is easier to look at the situations of individuals, so if you attempt to apply bitcoin systems to institutions and/or governments, then more complexities come into place, but a lot of the same individual are still going to apply to the more complex systems of institutions and governments, but there are just more things going on with institutions and governments as compared with individuals.

Stupid - because you can't prove otherwise ? Fairy tales - because you have no arguments and to my arguments and explanations your response is "get the hell outta here" !?? ))
I gave arguments to which you could not answer anything but attacks. I even gave you a chance and asked you to show which economy Bitcoin has already helped - in response only unintelligible sounds. I asked you to show how Bitcoin can help the population of the country, but you showed an example when a person invested, "thanks" to you, 5000 dollars in Bitcoin, and you did not warn him of the risks and volatility, and then returned him 2000 dollars.  You are confusing the general public with investors, and telling some fairy tale excuses
It is not interesting to communicate with you, but it is funny

I have already told you that I have no obligation to provide examples or to complete your assignments, when largely I had been rebutting you rather than arguing any of my own case... and largely you have been making various arguments regarding how bitcoin is not valuable or helpful to people, institutions and/or governments, which the on the ground facts seem to already rebutt you without my even having to say anything - even though it still can be helpful to point out the various times when you are out of touch, which seems to be quite a bit of the time.

In order to understand bitcoin as already being a success, there is no need to point out any particular country, since the fact of the matter continues to be that bitcoin is becoming more and more liquid around the world on a regular basis and serving as an alternative way to hold value and to transmit value, including transitioning between currencies.

So one aspect of bitcoin is its ability to be transacted right now, and another aspect is to hold bitcoin and to consider the extent to which your purchasing power may or may not be increased in the future, which it not guaranteed, even though we can see that historically bitcoin's purchasing power has continued to increase, so the guy who sold his 0.333 bitcoin to me at around $6k in mid 2018 and only got around a bit more than $2k for it, would have been able to receive right around $8,650 today as I type, but he chose not to hold the bitcoin until now and he chose to sell it in mid 2018 at a personal loss.  His choice.  I had no obligation to say anything to him, and I might have said more than I needed to in terms of trying to suggest that he does not sell his BTC to me at a loss... but he was insistent, and he is in the best position to know what he wants to do, even though he admitted that he was receiving less than half the value from the coins as what he had bought them from me right around 6 months earlier.  He seemed fairly embarrassed by the whole situation, and maybe part of the reason is that I already knew him from the earlier transaction, and if he knew of some other place that he could have sold his bitcoin on the same terms, he might have gone to the other location in order to save himself from some of the embarrassment that he seemed to have had been experiencing when he sold the coins to me at a personal loss to him.

Whether bitcoin value comes from the utility of using it for transmissions of value or from storing it or from some other kinds of use case, there seems to ongoingly increases in the value in bitcoin based on many use cases that people find, including just holding it. 

Surely there are some currencies that are more liquid than bitcoin on a world wide basis, and it seems that the dollar is the most liquid of currencies, but some folks seem to not want to transact in dollars or to hold dollars, and so bitcoin serves as one of the other options for those people. and even institutions and governments are making similar kinds of choices to hold bitcoin rather than dollars or to figure out some kind of balancing regarding how much of each of those currencies/assets that they would prefer to hold, and even if they don't know what is Gresham's law, many of people are likely motivated by Gresham's law principles in terms of choosing which kinds of currencies(assets) to spend first and which currencies/assets to hold for longer term periods.

Regarding the extent to which bitcoin helps any economy, those kinds of answers go back to fairness in regards to distribution of currencies and bitcoin's ability to provide a counter-example regarding it's limited supply - which ultimately creates better incentives over the money printing dynamic of fiat systems that both undermines the holders of the currency that is being printed out of thin air and the printed out of thin air money also ends up getting distributed in ways that advantage those who are closest to the money printer as compared to those who are further out being more disadvantaged because their money devalues through inflation,

...and so bitcoin does not have that kind of money printing corruption, and so its built-in fairness likely helps all economies by improving the incentives and not taking value away from people who hold onto their currencies.  As more and more people realize bitcoin as being the soundest of monies, then it seems quite likely that bitcoin will end up expanding various economies because it is a more fair money, and so bitcoin seems to do these kinds of fairness creation things overall.. and maybe we will see results in El Salvador first, since El Salvador seems to be attempting to be a beacon of Bitcoin adoption, even though there are enclaves all around the world that seem to be attempting to imitate aspects of El Salvador's bitcoin adoption. and attempting to be more permissive regarding bitcoin and perhaps increasing ways in which bitcoin is being used in circular economy kinds of ways.   

[SmartGold01]

Snip

Hello Jay
I don't think you should keep stressing yourself over an issues or discussion that I think at last no credit could be given to you as I believe argument always linkage to some personal beefing. Why not just give a deaf ears to this thread and let it be as I think this could be something that may ends tragically as I have seen post that I myself can't continue to keep replying to this thread. You have given your points and there is nothing much to prove to anyone about what he is saying

I think I am off from here.

[DrBeer]

.....

If you didn’t have to strain yourself and write another post, you could copy your previous post:

Get the fuck out of here.

I don't have any burden or obligation to try to make any kind of case to establish that bitcoin has improved some country in order to make my earlier point that was largely asserting that your earlier post was full of shit. You are the one who has the burden to prove your case rather than me.

The semantic load is the same - absolutely empty A lot of words, no arguments, no reasoned answers. Unilaterally, in order not to waste time, I stop this useless and meaningless dialogue

PS Yes, I have nothing against the fact that some people believe in some fairy tales, that's normal

Good luck and prosperity to you

[JayJuanGee]

Snip

Hello Jay
I don't think you should keep stressing yourself over an issues or discussion that I think at last no credit could be given to you as I believe argument always linkage to some personal beefing. Why not just give a deaf ears to this thread and let it be as I think this could be something that may ends tragically as I have seen post that I myself can't continue to keep replying to this thread. You have given your points and there is nothing much to prove to anyone about what he is saying

I think I am off from here.

I am not upset.. and yes, no problem if you want to bow out.. because surely each of us decide the extent to which to participate, to respond or not... and sometimes the posts get repetitious and other times they start to deviate too much from the thread's topic... and sometimes threads get locked or someone rage quits... I cannot say what might happen, but I don't see any kind of tragedy, yet, even though both DrBeer and I seem to be starting to repeat ourselves on some of these points... which largely might end up allowing for the natural death of the continuation regarding these threads of discussion.

.....

If you didn’t have to strain yourself and write another post, you could copy your previous post:

Get the fuck out of here.

I don't have any burden or obligation to try to make any kind of case to establish that bitcoin has improved some country in order to make my earlier point that was largely asserting that your earlier post was full of shit. You are the one who has the burden to prove your case rather than me.

Great point.. I was pretty sure that I had remembered making such a point.. .so yeah. .thank's for doing the "looking it up" work for me... You proving yourself to be a great little helper DrBeer.     

The semantic load is the same - absolutely empty A lot of words, no arguments, no reasoned answers. Unilaterally, in order not to waste time, I stop this useless and meaningless dialogue

Don't stop.  I was just getting to know you.

You can't stop now.

PS Yes, I have nothing against the fact that some people believe in some fairy tales, that's normal

Good luck and prosperity to you

Yes, and good luck with your no coiner (or is it low coiner?) status.  You are likely going to need it, and no one here, including yours truly, is saying that you have to be some kind of bitcoin lover and to allocate high amounts to bitcoin in order to potentially prosper, but turning a blind eye to bitcoin or arguing that people should not get involved at all seems to be where you are coming from with your ongoing nonsensical belaboring of dumb and non-fact backed up points.

So think about position size of 1% to 25% into bitcoin, and if you are on the bearish side, then stay on the lower ends of that.. such as 1%... you don't need to take more bullish stances in order to still be able to prosper quite well... and between about 2014 until 2020, I was largely suggesting the initial investment range to be in the 1% to 10% territory, but the investment thesis for bitcoin has gotten quite a bit stronger since March 2020 which justifies the movement up to 1% to 25% and also the movement up from $10 per week to $100 per week, yet at the same time, each of us needs to figure out his/her own particulars in order to figure out the right amount of balance in terms if we choose to be aggressive in our bitcoin investment without devolving into a territory of overly aggressive in such a way that we end up recking our lil selfies, which also seems to be part of the example of the guy that I had provided earlier for him to be buying 0.33 BTC at $15k and then to be selling that same 0.33 BTC at around $6k.. which surely was a demonstration that he had been over investing into bitcoin in such a way that he had not prepared himself financially and/or psychologically for the price movements that ended up being contrary to the direction of what he had expected.

[d5000]

There were some news in late August about the Central African Republic: It seems the law about tokenization of natural resources got approved and signed by President Touadéra (see also this twitter post).

The Sango website also continues live, according to their roadmap in 2023 a "masterplan" for a Crypto City on an island in Ubangi River should be unveiled. I'm not really believing that will become true, but anyway will be following these developments.

[TimeTeller]

There were some news in late August about the Central African Republic: It seems the law about tokenization of natural resources got approved and signed by President Touadéra (see also this twitter post).

The Sango website also continues live, according to their roadmap in 2023 a "masterplan" for a Crypto City on an island in Ubangi River should be unveiled. I'm not really believing that will become true, but anyway will be following these developments.

What I hope for this progress is to help some of their people to alleviate their way of living.
So if this government project will push thru, I hope some of its citizen will improve their lives for the better.
We know that corruption is rampant in their region, so hopefully, with transparency in crypto, it will lessen this aspect.
What we all wish for here is that any crypto project should help people to achieve their goals in life, and for the betterment of their financial status.

[Zlantann]

There were some news in late August about the Central African Republic: It seems the law about tokenization of natural resources got approved and signed by President Touadéra (see also this twitter post).

The Sango website also continues live, according to their roadmap in 2023 a "masterplan" for a Crypto City on an island in Ubangi River should be unveiled. I'm not really believing that will become true, but anyway will be following these developments.

The government of the Central African Republic is still going on with its other plans and programs. The only setback was that the country repelled the law making Bitcoin a legal tender. The Bitcoin investment citizenship program is still one and other projects are ongoing. President Touadéra and his administration should do more on infrastructural development, education, and security. Basic education will facilitate the spread of Bitcoin education, facilities such as the internet and power supply will boost Bitcoin adoption, while security will attract more investors to the country. I am convinced that if the country's internet access increases further from its 10% level, more people will build interest in Bitcoin.

A few years ago many people never believed that Bitcoin would be accepted as a medium of payment. Today it is accepted in many countries and reputable institutions are now clamoring to be part of the Bitcoin system. The effect of Bitcoin on national economies might be debated but I believe that soon the impact will be visible.

[Sayeds56]

A few years ago many people never believed that Bitcoin would be accepted as a medium of payment. Today it is accepted in many countries and reputable institutions are now clamoring to be part of the Bitcoin system. The effect of Bitcoin on national economies might be debated but I believe that soon the impact will be visible.

Absolutely correct, Bitcoin has come a long way since its inception, and its acceptance as payment method is an ongoing evolutionary process. It is important to acknowledge that the road to Bitcoin adoption is not without bumps and obstacles, such as regulatory uncertainty, price volatility and security concerns, and these hurdles are likely to persist in coming months and years. However, as Bitcoin ecosystem continues to mature, some of these obstacles will be addressed. The path to widespread adoption will be market by both advancements, such as acceptance of Bitcoin by El-Salvador and Central African Republic, as well as hurdles that Bitcoin will encounter along the way.

[wmaurik]

Absolutely correct, Bitcoin has come a long way since its inception, and its acceptance as payment method is an ongoing evolutionary process. It is important to acknowledge that the road to Bitcoin adoption is not without bumps and obstacles, such as regulatory uncertainty, price volatility and security concerns, and these hurdles are likely to persist in coming months and years. However, as Bitcoin ecosystem continues to mature, some of these obstacles will be addressed. The path to widespread adoption will be market by both advancements, such as acceptance of Bitcoin by El-Salvador and Central African Republic, as well as hurdles that Bitcoin will encounter along the way.

If these two countries (El-Salvador and the Central African Republic) are able to face several obstacles such as regulatory uncertainty, price instability, and security problems. Other countries will not close their eyes to this either because these two countries could also be a very important influence for Bitcoin in attracting more other countries to do the same, namely adopting Bitcoin as did El-Salvador and the Central African Republic.

However, what I fear is that the Central African Republic will eliminate crypto as a legal tender with changes to the law as reported by centralbanking.com in March this year, although I will not immediately believe this news because I am more confident that the African Republic The center will look for ways to continue to legalize Bitcoin as legal tender there.

[Zlantann]

If these two countries (El-Salvador and the Central African Republic) are able to face several obstacles such as regulatory uncertainty, price instability, and security problems. Other countries will not close their eyes to this either because these two countries could also be a very important influence for Bitcoin in attracting more other countries to do the same, namely adopting Bitcoin as did El-Salvador and the Central African Republic.

Another main impediment to the adoption of Bitcoin as legal tender in most nations is external influence.  Some of these nations still have close ties with powerful nations that will always discourage them from using Bitcoin. Some developing nations still depend financially on other nations that directly regulate their economic decisions. Lending organizations like the World Bank and IMF also manipulate indebted nations which is why these nations will not make independent decisions like legalizing Bitcoin.

However, what I fear is that the Central African Republic will eliminate crypto as a legal tender with changes to the law as reported by centralbanking.com in March this year, although I will not immediately believe this news because I am more confident that the African Republic The center will look for ways to continue to legalize Bitcoin as legal tender there.

Bitcoin is no longer a legal tender in the Central African Republic. As you can read from the website you quoted the law that made Bitcoin a legal tender was repealed. No clear reason was given but I suspect that this decision was externally influenced. But El Salvador is still setting the pace for other fearless nations to join the moving train.

[YUriy1991]

A few years ago many people never believed that Bitcoin would be accepted as a medium of payment. Today it is accepted in many countries and reputable institutions are now clamoring to be part of the Bitcoin system. The effect of Bitcoin on national economies might be debated but I believe that soon the impact will be visible.

Absolutely correct, Bitcoin has come a long way since its inception, and its acceptance as payment method is an ongoing evolutionary process. It is important to acknowledge that the road to Bitcoin adoption is not without bumps and obstacles, such as regulatory uncertainty, price volatility and security concerns, and these hurdles are likely to persist in coming months and years. However, as Bitcoin ecosystem continues to mature, some of these obstacles will be addressed. The path to widespread adoption will be market by both advancements, such as acceptance of Bitcoin by El-Salvador and Central African Republic, as well as hurdles that Bitcoin will encounter along the way.

You are right. For sure The idea is that if people have done and put their money into Bitcoin. Yes. Future circumstances could change its trajectory. More and more countries are joining the bandwagon and it is no longer just an image. Well, what happens when this Adoption starts to take place and many shops, people accept and use bitcoin or they start investing in bitcoin. and it will say "Buy, sell, send and receive bitcoin" in several places.

[Sayeds56]

Bitcoin is no longer a legal tender in the Central African Republic. As you can read from the website you quoted the law that made Bitcoin a legal tender was repealed. No clear reason was given but I suspect that this decision was externally influenced. But El Salvador is still setting the pace for other fearless nations to join the moving train.

This is indeed a sad news for Bitcoin enthusiasts and disappointing development towards Bitcoin adoption. Your point is valid that there could be external influences those have played a role in reversing their decision of Bitcoin adoption as legal tender.  However, we should continue holding our Bitcoin with firm belief that Bitcoin inherent deflationary nature will continue driving its demand. I am optimistic that Bitcoin represents best alternative to the current fiat based financial system, which is increasingly losing its credibility.

[MarjorieZimmermanGinger]

This is indeed a sad news for Bitcoin enthusiasts and disappointing development towards Bitcoin adoption. Your point is valid that there could be external influences those have played a role in reversing their decision of Bitcoin adoption as legal tender.  However, we should continue holding our Bitcoin with firm belief that Bitcoin inherent deflationary nature will continue driving its demand. I am optimistic that Bitcoin represents best alternative to the current fiat based financial system, which is increasingly losing its credibility.

This is what is feared to happen when a country tries to impose bitcoin but their resources are not strong enough to withstand many things that might have an impact on its progress. Failure to maintain bitcoin as legal tender will continue to be fried by countries that don't like bitcoin and they will set a bad example for them. I prefer the idea of the President of El Salvador and he set up a broad framework when he started accepting bitcoin, so he considers the impact and then provides solutions to problems that will arise and has proven quite successful so far.

No one denies that bitcoin has advantages in many ways, but this can only be seen by people who do not reject bitcoin. Bitcoin provides a system of financial freedom if implemented with the right framework especially when a country begins to accept its adoption as a means of payment. This will be a lesson that when it is not ready any country does not need to force it and what they need to do is learn what El Salvador did, so that this adoption does not need to be stopped for several reasons that have been stated by the Central African Republic.

[slapper]

This is indeed a sad news for Bitcoin enthusiasts and disappointing development towards Bitcoin adoption. Your point is valid that there could be external influences those have played a role in reversing their decision of Bitcoin adoption as legal tender.  However, we should continue holding our Bitcoin with firm belief that Bitcoin inherent deflationary nature will continue driving its demand. I am optimistic that Bitcoin represents best alternative to the current fiat based financial system, which is increasingly losing its credibility.

This is what is feared to happen when a country tries to impose bitcoin but their resources are not strong enough to withstand many things that might have an impact on its progress. Failure to maintain bitcoin as legal tender will continue to be fried by countries that don't like bitcoin and they will set a bad example for them. I prefer the idea of the President of El Salvador and he set up a broad framework when he started accepting bitcoin, so he considers the impact and then provides solutions to problems that will arise and has proven quite successful so far.

No one denies that bitcoin has advantages in many ways, but this can only be seen by people who do not reject bitcoin. Bitcoin provides a system of financial freedom if implemented with the right framework especially when a country begins to accept its adoption as a means of payment. This will be a lesson that when it is not ready any country does not need to force it and what they need to do is learn what El Salvador did, so that this adoption does not need to be stopped for several reasons that have been stated by the Central African Republic.

When will countries learn? If you're going to enter the big league of Bitcoin, then at least wear the right shoes! Not these makeshift attempts that fall apart at the slightest critique. It's painfully clear when a nation hasn't done its homework. And to them, I'd say, if you can't handle the Bitcoin heat, maybe you should exit the digital kitchen

El Salvador's President? Genius move. He saw, he came, he conquered the crypto. Other countries? They're just crying because someone else took the candy they were too scared to reach for. So, here's a piece of advice: Next time you think about adopting Bitcoin without proper infrastructure, maybe have a chat with El Salvador first. Might save you some national embarrassment

[JayJuanGee]

This is indeed a sad news for Bitcoin enthusiasts and disappointing development towards Bitcoin adoption. Your point is valid that there could be external influences those have played a role in reversing their decision of Bitcoin adoption as legal tender.  However, we should continue holding our Bitcoin with firm belief that Bitcoin inherent deflationary nature will continue driving its demand. I am optimistic that Bitcoin represents best alternative to the current fiat based financial system, which is increasingly losing its credibility.

This is what is feared to happen when a country tries to impose bitcoin but their resources are not strong enough to withstand many things that might have an impact on its progress. Failure to maintain bitcoin as legal tender will continue to be fried by countries that don't like bitcoin and they will set a bad example for them. I prefer the idea of the President of El Salvador and he set up a broad framework when he started accepting bitcoin, so he considers the impact and then provides solutions to problems that will arise and has proven quite successful so far.

No one denies that bitcoin has advantages in many ways, but this can only be seen by people who do not reject bitcoin. Bitcoin provides a system of financial freedom if implemented with the right framework especially when a country begins to accept its adoption as a means of payment. This will be a lesson that when it is not ready any country does not need to force it and what they need to do is learn what El Salvador did, so that this adoption does not need to be stopped for several reasons that have been stated by the Central African Republic.

When will countries learn? If you're going to enter the big league of Bitcoin, then at least wear the right shoes! Not these makeshift attempts that fall apart at the slightest critique. It's painfully clear when a nation hasn't done its homework. And to them, I'd say, if you can't handle the Bitcoin heat, maybe you should exit the digital kitchen

El Salvador's President? Genius move. He saw, he came, he conquered the crypto. Other countries? They're just crying because someone else took the candy they were too scared to reach for. So, here's a piece of advice: Next time you think about adopting Bitcoin without proper infrastructure, maybe have a chat with El Salvador first. Might save you some national embarrassment

A lot of the whole matter of getting involved in bitcoin, especially including in terms of what seems to have had been the wiffle-waffly nature of CAR's having had gotten involved in bitcoin seems to have to do with position size rather than whether or not they should have had gotten involved in bitcoin, and surely it seems that another problem that CAR has had is their ongoing distractions from the start by shitcoins, crypto and bitcoin adjacent (or bitcoin-like projects that are not really bitcoin) and seeming to not be able to focus whatever they are doing on some variation of bitcoin ONLY...

Sure, small little deviations into shitcoins and shitty projects, such as a few percentages of the bitcoin size may well be acceptable in regards to trying to learn and to hone an adequate approach that will not cause a reckening or contribute to a need to abandon their getting involved in bitcoin, but 95% or more of their addition of bitcoin into the country should be focused on bitcoin, especially in their early days of establishing their bitcoin plan that they are carrying forward.  

Another thing in regards to position size, maybe it is the case that they are ONLY able to really put 1% to 5% of their countries investment portfolio into bitcoin kinds of building, and maybe their country is in such a disarray that they might not even be in a position to put more than 1% of their investment portfolio into bitcoin or bitcoin-related (bitcoin-focused) projects because they have to deal with getting their own house in order prior to being more aggressive in their bitcoin approach (so that they don't devolve into gambling and/or overdoing it), and so they need to assess their own situation in order to make sure that their position size does not end up contributing to their getting taken out of the bitcoin game (investment) because they had overdone it rather than being able to stick through the rough times, as you already pointed out, @slapper.

[Sayeds56]

Another thing in regards to position size, maybe it is the case that they are ONLY able to really put 1% to 5% of their countries investment portfolio into bitcoin kinds of building, and maybe their country is in such a disarray that they might not even be in a position to put more than 1% of their investment portfolio into bitcoin or bitcoin-related (bitcoin-focused) projects because they have to deal with getting their own house in order prior to being more aggressive in their bitcoin approach (so that they don't devolve into gambling and/or overdoing it), and so they need to assess their own situation in order to make sure that their position size does not end up contributing to their getting taken out of the bitcoin game (investment) because they had overdone it rather than being able to stick through the rough times, as you already pointed out, @slapper.

You have pointed out a reasonable factor that could have influenced the CAR government choice to discontinue Bitcoin usage. Additionally, It is possible that CAR government were unable to readjust their position of Bitcoin holding due to financial limitations. Additionally, the presence of inadequate infrastructure and lack of Bitcoin education also likely played substantial roles. Considering that only 10% of the country's population has internet access and relatively low level of social media engagement, a vital platform for spreading awareness about Bitcoin.

It is important to recognize that, despite the challenges, African nations represent most fertile grounds for Bitcoin initiation and advancement.

https://finserving.com/cryptocurrency/why-did-bitcoin-as-legal-tender-fail-in-central-african-republic

[martinex]

And these 90% of the population have a need for money - daily. And here volatility plays a cruel joke with them - they go to buy their last 5000 dollars bitcoin, and a month later... sell it for 2000 dollars. And their life gets even worse. It will be the same with the economy, which someone will try to build in the current situation, on bitcoin. That's what we need to prove.)

That's why there is no positive answer to the simple answer - which country/economy bitcoin helped to improve the situation - no positive answer.....

I agree. Bitcoin has become an interesting hot topic and this is a reality on the ground that I often see and feel. So the question is what is the solution other than education, because when we talk about investment BTC its intrinsic value is one of the benchmarks in assessing the price, innovation and technology behind it, so many are interested and many fail in managing it due to price volatility and transaction times which cannot be predicted with certainty especially if we frequently short sell and make we losses may extend far beyond we initial investment, yes, This something that is very important to consider, especially with Bitcoin.

[JayJuanGee]

Another thing in regards to position size, maybe it is the case that they are ONLY able to really put 1% to 5% of their countries investment portfolio into bitcoin kinds of building, and maybe their country is in such a disarray that they might not even be in a position to put more than 1% of their investment portfolio into bitcoin or bitcoin-related (bitcoin-focused) projects because they have to deal with getting their own house in order prior to being more aggressive in their bitcoin approach (so that they don't devolve into gambling and/or overdoing it), and so they need to assess their own situation in order to make sure that their position size does not end up contributing to their getting taken out of the bitcoin game (investment) because they had overdone it rather than being able to stick through the rough times, as you already pointed out, @slapper.

You have pointed out a reasonable factor that could have influenced the CAR government choice to discontinue Bitcoin usage. Additionally, It is possible that CAR government were unable to readjust their position of Bitcoin holding due to financial limitations. Additionally, the presence of inadequate infrastructure and lack of Bitcoin education also likely played substantial roles. Considering that only 10% of the country's population has internet access and relatively low level of social media engagement, a vital platform for spreading awareness about Bitcoin.

It is important to recognize that, despite the challenges, African nations represent most fertile grounds for Bitcoin initiation and advancement.
https://finserving.com/cryptocurrency/why-did-bitcoin-as-legal-tender-fail-in-central-african-republic

Those seem to be different reasons than what I tried to say...

I was largely trying to say that it is a matter of position size and moderation rather than pushing too much too soon.. so there is no reason for CAR to be a failure except that they were likely gambling rather than engaging in an attempt at a prudent investment strategy... the same with individuals who get into bitcoin without an adequate view of their timeline and attempt to invest in a way that is gradually building up the bitcoin position over several years, and perhaps several cycles if your finances might already be on shaky grounds, then you have to build your various finances while you are investing in bitcoin... so if someone, some institution or some government recks themselves from the way that they invested in bitcoin, then one of the ways to recovery is to start back up more slowly and with a smaller position size and maybe even expand the investment time horizon from 4-10 years and start to plan out 10-20 years or more.. which may well continue to mean building and growing in bitcoin small in order NOT to overdo it and ONLY with cash that you can afford to lose... but still nothing wrong with being somewhat aggressive in your investment as long as you do not over do it..

Every person, institution and/or government has a variety of defects, so both you, Sayeds56, and that article seem to want to blame CAR's defects for their failure to be successful in bitcoin, and of course, they have defects just like we all have defects, so maybe in stead of buying $100s of millions in bitcoin, just start out with 1 bitcoin a day or 5 bitcoin a week more something more modest and manageable, and perhaps later on, then work their way up to higher amounts, after getting their shit together.

[EarnOnVictor]

Another thing in regards to position size, maybe it is the case that they are ONLY able to really put 1% to 5% of their countries investment portfolio into bitcoin kinds of building, and maybe their country is in such a disarray that they might not even be in a position to put more than 1% of their investment portfolio into bitcoin or bitcoin-related (bitcoin-focused) projects because they have to deal with getting their own house in order prior to being more aggressive in their bitcoin approach (so that they don't devolve into gambling and/or overdoing it), and so they need to assess their own situation in order to make sure that their position size does not end up contributing to their getting taken out of the bitcoin game (investment) because they had overdone it rather than being able to stick through the rough times, as you already pointed out, @slapper.

You have pointed out a reasonable factor that could have influenced the CAR government choice to discontinue Bitcoin usage. Additionally, It is possible that CAR government were unable to readjust their position of Bitcoin holding due to financial limitations. Additionally, the presence of inadequate infrastructure and lack of Bitcoin education also likely played substantial roles. Considering that only 10% of the country's population has internet access and relatively low level of social media engagement, a vital platform for spreading awareness about Bitcoin.

It is important to recognize that, despite the challenges, African nations represent most fertile grounds for Bitcoin initiation and advancement.
https://finserving.com/cryptocurrency/why-did-bitcoin-as-legal-tender-fail-in-central-african-republic

Those seem to be different reasons than what I tried to say...

I was largely trying to say that it is a matter of position size and moderation rather than pushing too much too soon.. so there is no reason for CAR to be a failure except that they were likely gambling rather than engaging in an attempt at a prudent investment strategy... the same with individuals who get into bitcoin without an adequate view of their timeline and attempt to invest in a way that is gradually building up the bitcoin position over several years, and perhaps several cycles if your finances might already be on shaky grounds, then you have to build your various finances while you are investing in bitcoin... so if someone, some institution or some government recks themselves from the way that they invested in bitcoin, then one of the ways to recovery is to start back up more slowly and with a smaller position size and maybe even expand the investment time horizon from 4-10 years and start to plan out 10-20 years or more.. which may well continue to mean building and growing in bitcoin small in order NOT to overdo it and ONLY with cash that you can afford to lose... but still nothing wrong with being somewhat aggressive in your investment as long as you do not over do it..

Every person, institution and/or government has a variety of defects, so both you, Sayeds56, and that article seem to want to blame CAR's defects for their failure to be successful in bitcoin, and of course, they have defects just like we all have defects, so maybe in stead of buying $100s of millions in bitcoin, just start out with 1 bitcoin a day or 5 bitcoin a week more something more modest and manageable, and perhaps later on, then work their way up to higher amounts, after getting their shit together.

What you've explained is educative and clever enough and could be used by the serious and wise government, and even some of the CAR's financial institutions and citizens. But the question is whether the CAR government is wise enough, I guess not. It was a welcome development in April when the CAR government announced this legal tender adoption after it was voted for in a unanimous manner by the parliament. Nonetheless, their exclusion of the Bank of Central African States (BEAC) from it was my first doubt if they knew what they were doing as there should have been a wider consultation by every stakeholder since they are not in a banana republic. Africans like to do things anyhow, which is one of the reasons they are in their current position, not always following the right procedures is an issue on its own, thinking you know it all and do it as you like. Doing things rightly is what matters, but I doubt it in CAR judging by their antecedents. BEAC and experts' involvement would have helped in charting the pros and cons as this is a legal tender we are talking about. No wonder two of their ex-prime ministers frowned at BEAC exclusion and called it "a serious offence."

One thing about African countries is that they are not always wise, they act before they think. How I see this is deeper than Bitcoin and what we see on the surface. The country is blessed with so many mineral resources, they have Copper, Diamond, Graphite, Gold, Uranium, Iron ore, Manganese, Tin and more than 10 extra mineral resources with good farmlands and a small population that should have encouraged the effect of the resources to go around, but are still poor. Even for their rich Gold, Uranium and Diamond only, they should have been financially buoyant, but corruption, selfishness and foolishness have kept them where they are. Bitcoin can't make any difference here, except for cross-border payment and some literate among them will be rich with the investment, but will not go round. A huge percentage of the people in the country are illiterate, and many of those who are literate might not even adopt Bitcoin despite the government's approval.

These are some of the challenges I see. The news and the initiative of Bitcoin adoption as legal tender is very good on its own but I don't have trust in the CAR government to be wise enough to come up with a plan that will make the positive impact of Bitcoin felt by the country and its citizens. I trust El Salvador than them.