44 countries will meet in El Salvador to discuss Bitcoin

[batang_bitcoin]

Whenever there is news that is negative about bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, we don't like it, we hate them. And when there is news like this, it's favorable and it's always a developing story, an open story that we're looking forward to because of the positivity that it brings not just to the market itself but as someone, who's involved in this community. It's a very good news that they're having a meeting and the subject of that meeting is bitcoin and for sure other interesting things about digital money.

[Pmalek]

I find it quite interesting to see Egypt and Pakistan listed.

I don't know about Egypt, but I remember reading that the government of Pakistan was considering banning all Bitcoin and crypto-related transactions at the beginning of 2022. I am not sure how all that ended. Besides that, Pakistan is an Islamic nation that respects Sharia law. And according to Sharia law, crypto is forbidden. Anything that involves interest, gambling, and speculating is against the law. I am certainly not an expert on the subject, but I would be interested to hear what someone who is says about it. Muslim nations have a very traditionalist viewpoint and they don't deviate from what they consider to be values that must be maintained. 

[dezoel]

I honestly doubt that he would be able to pull off what he is promising. I get that he could have meetings with those places (or maybe he won't) but at the same time just because he discusses bitcoin doesn't mean anything great for bitcoin neither.

This is why I believe that this is nothing of worth, nothing that we should get excited about the crypto world nor would it impact the price of crypto. Even with El Salvador making it a legal tender, it didn't impacted at all and why would the action itself wouldn't impact the price but discussing it would? Only possibility would be convincing someone much bigger to do it and that would impact it, but I doubt he would be that convincing, nor that quickly.

[pooya87]

Besides that, Pakistan is an Islamic nation that respects Sharia law. And according to Sharia law, crypto is forbidden.

You have to realize that there are different fractions of Islam. For example there are extremists namely Saudi Arabia regime, the birthplace of ISIS, AlQuaide, etc. who practice what is commonly known as radical Islam. Who knows what they think about crypto, they still nail people to the cross in the middle of their streets.
Then there are more moderate ones (Shia and Sunni) like Iran and even though there may be some difference of opinions but what I've gathered majority of them say bitcoin is halal if used for anything halal. In other words if you receive a payment for an honest job in bitcoin, there is no problem.

Anything that involves interest, gambling, and speculating is against the law.

Usury and gambling are prohibited. Interest or speculation is not.

[noorman0]

Bitcoin is starting to become part of a serious discussion by several countries showing that this is a real economic change in various parts of the world. What's a little ridiculous, bitcoin price volatility can still be caused by a small factor such as the influence of a character.

[P2PECS]

Exactly, that is why I told you is not a debate, you made a statement and when asked about that you started crying and accusing others of not having arguments.

Yes, let's agree that this is not a debate, or at least what would ideally be a debate, because if you insist on lying to pretend to be right what you are doing is to give a speech instead of debating.

And here, again, you are misrepresenting. You were the one who started despising those countries and what I said is that it is normal that those countries are the ones who are interested and not the countries with the highest GDP. From there you started to misrepresent exaggerating and twisting my argument and wanting to put the burden of proof on me, when the nonsense was said by you.

I refer to statements such as this one:

Please explain to me how is Bitcoin going to save Angola and what radical economical change it will bring.

And you keep on giving a speech (not debating) with bullshit like this with which you pretend to be right:

Btw, you know that a transfer from the US to a bank account in Salvador cost 4$ for 2k? So the amount of savings is negligible at best.

You are still in primary school, right? Do I have to explain to you that the important thing is not what you save in one transaction but in the total of all transactions per year?

Bukele has said that these innovations will save Salvadorans $400 million annually in remittance fees.

https://blockworks.co/el-salvador-bitcoin-wallet-could-disrupt-traditional-remittance-markets/

I don't know how the issue will be in real numbers today but at least that's what he said.

[stompix]

Bukele has said that these innovations will save Salvadorans $400 million annually in remittance fees.
https://blockworks.co/el-salvador-bitcoin-wallet-could-disrupt-traditional-remittance-markets/
I don't know how the issue will be in real numbers today but at least that's what he said.

Bukele also said that he dug a 95 MW well in one month and miners in Salvador will get cheap energy. It turned out to be fake too.
Let's look at the article itself and focus on the can

Residents often receive funds from money services providers like Western Union which can have fees of 30% per transfer depending on the sum being sent, CNBC reported. President Nayib Bukele said this is one reason why he advocated for bitcoin’s adoption in the first place. Digital wallet, Chivo, allows Salvadorans (living at home or abroad) the chance for free cross-border payments instead

Let's go to the examples at hand:

“In this day and age, it is wild that I had to go to a physical Western Union office, give them actual cash, and then hand them another $25 on top of that, before they would send my money over,” García said
Since he last sent money home, García told CNBC, he now has the option to make an online payment via the Western Union app, but he still faces steep fees – 12.5% for a $100 transfer – and it doesn’t solve the problem of what happens to those picking up the cash in El Salvador.

Ok, let's do the math, 2.5 million people that send back through WU at least 6 billion, which makes around 2500 per person, or 200$ a month so why would anyone send 25$ each week? And if you argue that some send less and some send more, then the percentage obviously goes down, right?

But how about we stop taking data presented by others and look at the real deal, isn't this the way bitcoin works? Don't Trust, Verify?
And here is WU, and suddenly there is no 12% for 100$ but 8%, and 5% for 200$ and here we're talking about instant cash pick-ups because if I would go an use a bank account to pay for this it woudl cost only 6$ for 200$, that's 3%.
Now, with the 200$ batches, there isn't even enough in fees to save $400m as all the fees would be $300m.

But let's say I'm stupid, I'm evil and I'm ill-intentioned, all my figures are bankers' lies and the WU site lies also,  so let's stick to logic.
After one week of hard-working for a few hundred $, would you use a service that charges you 30% to send money or just pull your funds together with a few friends and buy a damn plane ticket back home with that cash? 
Are you telling me that the people who figured out how bitcoin works and how it can be used were too dumb to find a transfer method that wouldn't charge them 30%?

Use your brain, don't swallow propaganda, even if it's the propaganda you want to believe in!

[Pmalek]

but what I've gathered majority of them say bitcoin is halal if used for anything halal. In other words if you receive a payment for an honest job in bitcoin, there is no problem.

That makes sense. Whether I pay you in cash, Bitcoin, herbs and spices, or precious stones, I am paying for a service that you rendered. On the other hand, if you were to purchase and invest in Bitcoin with the intention to sell it in the future and double your money, that would probably not be acceptable.

Usury and gambling are prohibited. Interest or speculation is not.

Are you sure about that? I don't think interest is allowed in Islam. Googling it finds plenty of sources saying it isn't.

Then there is Islamic Banking.

A Muslim is not allowed to benefit from lending money or receiving money from someone.

This means that earning interest (riba) is not allowed – whether you are an individual or a bank. To comply with these rules, interest is not paid on Islamic savings or current accounts, or charged on Islamic mortgages.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/oct/29/islamic-finance-sharia-compliant-money-interest

Banks do make money though (obviously) but in some other means as described in the article.

[ChiBitCTy]

Wow this is some pretty impressive stuff here in regards to positive developments for bitcoin. Obviously El Salvador is a big bitcoin/ cryptocurrency adopter so the fact that they are all meeting there shows their great interest in bitcoin and potentially making it one of their currencies. Can’t wait to see what comes of this.

[Leviathan.007]

We are not sure yet how this meeting is going to affect bitcoin and the adoption of bitcoin but from what we can see most of these countries are the countries with no strong fiat currencies so they may show interest in accepting bitcoin like Nayib Bukele did accept in El Salvador. But on the other hand, this meeting is going to happen just a few days after the recent crash in the market that things happened to some altcoins like luna which can have some bad effect on their aspect of view from bitcoin, we should wait to see how Nayib Bukele is going to present bitcoin in this meeting and what's gonna be the result of this meeting.

[Bobrox]

All those are poor nations from Africa, Central, and South America. With or without Bitcoin, that won't change. The effects would be similar to when the Central African Republic adopted Bitcoin. It didn't do anything good. It is just a different payment method that people without electricity, internet, computers, and phones should now be using somehow. Nothing good can come out of forcing people to use Bitcoin. That transition should come natural and that's the only healthy way.

Poor countries from Africa although have many participants and support still not enough I think with one words from one bigger country like United State, but have good news with bitcoin slowly become popular digital currency transaction for the future and adopt by many countries right now. Good way take by El Savador how to build some countries community make bitcoin as legal currency transaction, that true for the future faced problem with poor country get difficult about internet access, mobile phone, and computer who support when using bitcoin as legal currency transaction.

[Coyster]

We are not sure yet how this meeting is going to affect bitcoin and the adoption of bitcoin but from what we can see most of these countries are the countries with no strong fiat currencies so they may show interest in accepting bitcoin like Nayib Bukele did accept in El Salvador.

Yeah they might show interest, it also doesn't mean that many of them would immediately make Bitcoin a legal tender in their own country by the way, and even if they do, i honestly do not think it will have too much of an impact on Bitcoin (not immediately at least), especially when you take a good look at the countries having the said meeting. I know it is not possible right now for first world countries to take steps such as this regarding Bitcoin, of course not, they are solely focused on continually improving their fiat currency/economy, but if that happens somewhere along the line, then we could call it a big news, and one that will have an effect on Bitcoin. Don't get me wrong, i am not just merely pushing this away as nothing, of course not, if you look at how old Bitcoin is as a currency (relatively young), then you would understand that it is actually something worthy of note for countries to include its adoption in their discussion, irrespective of the countries that make up the meeting.

But on the other hand, this meeting is going to happen just a few days after the recent crash in the market that things happened to some altcoins like luna which can have some bad effect on their aspect of view from bitcoin...

They should obviously have done their research, they definitely would be aware of the risk in the network, and that it it not a stable one, so this shouldn't be any problem at all in respect to the general view/discussion.

[pooya87]

Are you sure about that? I don't think interest is allowed in Islam. Googling it finds plenty of sources saying it isn't.

Yes. For example banks in Islamic Republic of Iran do give interest on the money you have in your bank account and there are loans and mortgages that you have to pay interest on. A lot like any other bank.

This means that earning interest (riba) is not allowed

There is a difference between interest and riba. The former is a profit that is agreed upon by both parties and is paid at predefined intervals but the later is a profit that the lender decides on and enforces and can change at any time. The later is not allowed not the former.

The other difference is (I suppose) that the bank is obligated to invest the money into the economy.
Other than that there is a lot of technical details that I'm not informed enough to explain.

[justdimin]

I see most of those Banks come from 3rd world countries, so my thinking is just the opposite of what you guys are thinking. What if the President of El Salvador is asking these Banks to come together to discuss the ways in which these Banks are handling the un-Banked in their countries ...and not to share El Salvador's experience with Bitcoin as a legal tender?

We know the IMF have turned their back on El Salvador..... so they are now seeking other ways to loan money.. and they know that they not going to get it from the IMF. (1st world countries) 

That could be a thing as well if you ask me. I mean if we are talking about just low level nations all get together and build some bridge via bitcoin, that would actually be something awesome for them. Imagine growing bigger all together, let's say 40 nations, if 40 of the poorest nations all get together, and have some "organization" or whatever situation, then we are going to end up seeing them be richer when the price of bitcoin goes up.

And considering they could all focus on just one thing together, that would be a ton of money as well and that means a ton of leverage as well. Putting 50-100 billion into it, could end up with 1+ trillion dollars which would allow them to use that as leverage to build so much and get richer.

[uneng]

Not a good moment for this meeting. The timing is wrong and it can give the impression El Salvador is despaired after the last bitcoin crash which lead the country investment in btc's losses to tens of millions of dollars. How can this fact look persuasive in a meeting that is supposed to push adoption upside in emerging countries? The reality is showing exactly the opposite.

And frankly, the event should count with the participation of more influent and productive countries to give credibility to itself and especially to bitcoin...

[JayJuanGee]

I would rather they discuss the underlying economic issues that the country has than bitcoin. BTC adoption means very little if the country does not address its economic and social issues, and it seems like El Salvador is ignoring all of that and jumping to a ''quick fix''. I am glad people whose local currency is worth less than a carrot, but that doesn't solve the issues, it only masks them.

Huh?  Shouldn't they be able to determine for themselves what they would like to discuss or not discuss and how much of the discussion to have in terms of their topics and whether they believe it might be helpful to discuss ?

Why wouldn't a country be able to do more than one thing at a time, even if such country might be some rinky-dinky and hardly able to afford anything location?

Last time that I checked, bitcoin is not only for rich people.

Last time I checked, you do not even have to buy a whole BTC.

Last time I checked, there are a variety of ways that something like bitcoin could be adopted or implemented.


Surely, the lightning network seems to establish a lot of potential transactional mechanisms, and bitcoin's historical price performance and even various fundamentals related to adoption seem to establish that bitcoin is an ongoing asymmetric bet to the upside, so there are a variety of ways that governments might consider employing or promoting aspects of bitcoin without necessarily increasing their risk profile - but instead potentially cause their situations to be better, not only from and institutional/governmental perspective but also various ways that their citizens would likely end up having more (rather than fewer) options.

In essence, it seems that bitcoin increases rather than lessens options, and there are all kinds of variations in the ways that countries and/or banks might consider adding those kinds of options within their countries and/or maybe the ways that they interact between each other from the country, institutional and/or individual perspective.

This is true, but what if anyone of the countries listed eventually got to adopt bitcoin as a legal tender this should at least make some difference in their economy by reducing poverty rate and unemployment, i think bitcoin adoption should still make some meaningful impact even on the developing countries.

No, not really. Bitcoins don't grow on trees and they wont simply become available to the population the day after they adopt it as legal tender. Sure, you can make an airdrop similarly to what was done in El Salvador. But Bitcoin won't land you a job at that auto dealership across the road if there are no jobs available, or no auto dealership at all due to the overall state of the country.

One might argue that Bitcoin offers opportunities of remote work. Sure, that's true, but so does PayPal, WU, Skrill, freelancing sites, and many other ways to get paid in fiat. There is potential for Bitcoin in areas where people are unbanked, but not if they sleep in the dirt, use a rock for a pillow, and don't even have drinking water. Those poor souls have more important things to care about than a decentralized economy.

Huh?

I agree with part of your point that some countries might not have very many activities or production that is monetized, but even poor countries have developed economies that include monetary components, and even if they might not have as much monetary activities in comparison to more developed countries/economies, bitcoin is still designed to be able to help within a variety of circumstances.. and surely, it would likely help some segments of any society more than other segments, but still would not justify that bitcoin should not be considered even though there could be some concerns about "how much" to adopt or invest in bitcoin as a country rather than "whether" to invest in bitcoin as a country.

[edited out]

It's too bad that you either fail or refuse to use the word "bitcoin" at even one point in your post, even though the title of the thread mentions bitcoin, and even though the legal tender law in El Salvador was ONLY about bitcoin.

Regarding your chosen word "crypto"  I don't really know what that is, but yeah, sure there are a bunch of shitcoin projects that are still likely hanging on the apron strings of whatever is done in bitcoin including having various interests in El Salvador and other poor countries (and people), too.

And, yeah sure there is a lot of confusion for a lot of folks to not know the difference between bitcoin and crypto, and hopefully your failure/refusal to use the word bitcoin in your post, TimeTeller, was an oversight (or maybe you did do it on purpose) rather than your actually not knowing what is bitcoin and unable to actually figure out how the focus of many of the serious (non-scam) financial institutional (and maybe even quasi-governmental) contenders is tending to be on bitcoin first (and bitcoin focused). .even though surely some serious and BIG financial institutions have also got diverted into various shitcoins too.. but hopefully, many of us in this forum are ready, willing and able to try to understand and appreciate how bitcoin is differentiated from various shitcoins and scam projects that are many times associated with folks who use the term "crypto" and not able to distinguish what is bitcoin, no?

[Dunamisx]

Not a good moment for this meeting.

hosting the meeting is not about the rise and fall of bitcoin volatility neither was it base on the fact that some make looses while others profit from it, no, they have to hold a meeting to deliberate solely about what bitcoin is, it role, and how they can maximize the opportunity in it to boost their economy, remember some discussions were better done in person, hosting a global meeting like this will as well encourages for more adoption, no one is looking at the experience that might have occured in the past but the major role bitcoin has come to in the global economy system.

the event should count with the participation of more influent and productive countries

bitcoin has gone beyond showcasing, infact it is not to please anyone or entice any country because it is decentralized and it has made justification to what fiat couldn't do, which is privacy, anonymity and decentralization. if the developed countries are not seeing the opportunity then the developing ones could maximize such to help their citizens and boost the run of their economy.

[19Nov16]

Good news in a market situation that is still red, this can make investors optimistic and of course will continue to buy, I'm sure more countries will immediately receive bitcoin as legal assets equivalent to other commodities, and some countries are currently open tender for Legalized Bitcoin.

[kryptqnick]

It is obvious that those most interested are those who potentially have the most to gain in exchange for losing control with a decentralized currency.

Please explain to me how is Bitcoin going to save Angola and what radical economical change it will bring.
Give me a few examples of this "most to gain" thing.

I'm guessing what P2PECS meant was something about these smaller countries having far less to lose, compared to let's say powerhouse countries. 3rd world countries would probably need to put more things at risk in the hopes of them being bigger in the future if successful. If.

Yeah, and I actually agree with this hypothesis. It doesn't surprise me that the countries weren't those with well-developed economies. If a country has a relatively low poverty and unemployment rate, relatively high standard of life one can afford on an average salary and overall slow but steady growth of the economy, there's a lot at risk when going into new areas and little incentive to do so. In countries that are struggling, however, taking risks makes more sense because some sort of improvement is urgently needed. Cryptos can bring new investments into the country, create new jobs, make people more engaged in the economic process. So there's a lot to gain potentially, even though it might not work in the best envisioned way.

[ShowOff]

Yeah, and I actually agree with this hypothesis. It doesn't surprise me that the countries weren't those with well-developed economies. If a country has a relatively low poverty and unemployment rate, relatively high standard of life one can afford on an average salary and overall slow but steady growth of the economy, there's a lot at risk when going into new areas and little incentive to do so. In countries that are struggling, however, taking risks makes more sense because some sort of improvement is urgently needed. Cryptos can bring new investments into the country, create new jobs, make people more engaged in the economic process. So there's a lot to gain potentially, even though it might not work in the best envisioned way.

This will certainly be very positive for bitcoin and its future. Indeed we will have good news if many countries regardless of their economic status will try to adopt bitcoin as a means of payment and legalize it. This will specifically help bitcoin get a lot of users to achieve its main function as a currency.

I honestly just think that when there are a lot of small countries starting to do it for bitcoin, then the best thing we can hope for is countries with big economic power will try to do it sooner or later.