The Authorities Are Not Smart Enough to Do This

[Davidvictorson]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

[1715005307]

1715005307

[1715005307]

1715005307

[1715005307]

1715005307

[1715005307]

1715005307

[1715005307]

1715005307

[Zaguru12]

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

I bet you they are definitely smart enough to think this, in fact I will say smarter but one prevents them from doing it which is greed. Do you think the government aren’t aware of the inflation problem associated with fiat currency and the problem to solve it? They do but they use this inflation to either weaken people’s business growth and to boost there’s through other means.

Another advantage bitcoin has over fiat is the freedom and privacy that comes with. This one is the most powerful thing the government or say politicians do not want its citizens to have. A free man is seen as a threat to their ambitions and with the privacy bitcoin overs they wouldn’t be Able to place surveillance on the citizens which is something they can not afford to lose

[Jawhead999]

It's not that the authorities aren't smart, but they're just don't want to completely fight it.

If Nigeria is known as one of country which has a really high Bitcoin adoption, it means many of Nigerians aren't really protect their privacy. The authorities can just caught or threat their citizens, however this will give a bad effect to them and it's not that important to seize someone who don't have a lot coins.

[Odohu]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

Unfortunately,  what you are suggesting is akin to the authorities handing over their power, their authorities and the very thing that enable them decide "who gets what, when and how". Imagine government allowing Bitcoin to flourish,  lifting all restrictions and limitations placed on it and allowing citizens to decide what they prefer. Do you think many will not choose Bitcoin? Do you think that their is much the authorities can do stop inflation? If there was anything to be done to stop it, some countries would have done it and inflation will not be happening across all currency. As long as they have the power to print unlimited supply of fiat currency, inflation is bound to become a recurring decimal.

The authorities thrive by the control they have over the financial system and anything that threatens that power will be resisted or at least forced to conform to their terms and conditions.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

Ignoring Bitcoin is like ignoring someone who comes to take your land, resources and even your wife. How can you ignore something that you cannot ignore? There was a time my country threatened to ban Binance because they complained that the money people have in Binance was bigger than what they have in their bank accounts. People were practically saving their funds in Bitcoin and USDT rather than in the banks and this was affecting the banks in terms of lending power.

Bitcoin cannot be ignored even if they try.

[tranthidung]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin

They will fail as they have already failed many centuries. It relates not only to economics but also politics and politicians prioritize their career than benefits of citizens and they have power to use central banks for it. It's naturally for politicians to use such power to print more money as temporary nurture for economy but in a long term, it is harmful. Their national fiat currencies will lose purchasing powers but politicians usually don't think longer than 4 years or 8 years.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems.

They can create more laws, regulations and barriers to prevent Bitcoin adoption growing more. They are more seriously to control centralized exchanges, Peer-to-Peer marketplaces and they also are trying to create a kind of competitive currency (CBDCs - Central Banks Digital Currencies) to get money flow of citizens into their controlled flow.

They will somewhat succeed with the efforts with power they have but I have rights to make my decision from many choices and I believe technology will be developed more. Governments will always go behind their citizens in technology developments.

[tabas]

That's their only way to stop people from using Bitcoin and that's through banning Bitcoin itself on their countries and giving sanctions to the citizens that will be found to be dealing with it. But that's the reality that they can't stop Bitcoin no matter how hard they try it, they can see the broken system on their financial system especially on your country where there's a massive and quick adoption rate that increases over time. Eventually, like what we're seeing for some countries that they have been vocal about Bitcoin and starts to give some hint that they're about to adopt it, maybe that will also happen there in no time.

[Woodie]

As much as we might want to blame the authorities for the poor performing economy and dwindling currency when it comes to the first strategy, I think as citizens in a privileged position that have access to all this information thanks to the internet and newspapers etc have a duty to explain some of the factors affecting a country as these are things beyond their control such as oil prices on the global  market are going up which always affects everything as when it comes to costing transport will be factored in and this in turn pushes price up and demand too pulls price!

Tbh, the real problem in all this is politicians make promises they know they cannot keep and have to say it anyway to get into office and we can not blame them because citizens never want to hear the truth, it's almost as good as trying to get a girl and you sell all these lies to her for you to win her heart , otherwise the truth would make it easy for everyone  

Btw, people are smart enough to know how to get their crypto with or without strict regulation and we have seen this happen over the years...best approach is let the element of choice exist to avoid unnecessary waste of tax payers money of taking people to court when the money can be redirected towards more pressing issues.

[hg_away]

Those who buy Bitcoin seek profits and consider it as an investment rather than peer-to-peer money or a currency in which it is necessary to have support for privacy. Therefore, you will find that many have no problem providing identity verification data, even to parties far removed from regulatory regulations, in exchange for obtaining some profits and some services. Decentralization bans users because they are from a specific country or against a specific policy, so regulating cryptocurrencies will not be difficult.

[Lucius]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin.

Do you think it is even possible to fix fiat currencies in the way you imagine? If the criterion you are talking about is only a bad/weak national currency, then how do you explain all those who invest in Bitcoin in countries like the US or the EU - unless their currencies are also bad like your national currency?

The problem of your country is not actually what the majority thinks, it is the corrupt and incompetent politicians who create an atmosphere of financial instability and a bad economic environment. This leads people to look for some kind of alternative, but not in the sense that you are trying to fix the financial or political system, but that you are trying to make a financial profit for yourself by investing in Bitcoin.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems.
~snip~

I don't see that Bitcoin is a threat to the financial system anywhere in the world, especially not as a decentralized currency considering that most people use it exclusively as an investment to make a profit, so I wonder where the danger is for fiat and any central bank? The biggest danger for bankers and their servants (politicians) are the so-called stablecoins. If most of the powerful countries of the world were to unite in causing serious damage to Bitcoin, all they would have to do is ban all CEX and declare all transactions illegal.

While noting stablecoins are trying to fix those issues and could drive added innovation in payments, they "pose serious risks," Lagarde said. "Using stablecoins as a store of value could trigger a large shift of bank deposits to stablecoins, which may have an impact on banks' operations and the transmission of monetary policy," the ECB head added.

[GeorgeJohn]

In any way that really affected adoption of bitcoin such information came and secondly it makes people devalue bitcoin, in nigeria most of the people are very supportive in something that concerns centralization than decentralization and they have been making use of centralization system of currency before now and anything that concerns decentralization is like foreign thing that they are not aware of it, so I believe that bitcoin adoption happens base on the environment you find yourself and the kind of policy that been innate in the geographical environment. People have known bitcoin and theirs nothing you can do that will make someone who knows bitcoin very well to try to avoid bitcoin or ignore, even though the country lift a sanctions about adoption of bitcoin their is some people who will embrace bitcoin with another system of manipulation.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

I agreed with your two approaches and deeply understand the reason why you have suggested for them, however, we should not forget some conditions also that surrounded all these together, the government has their own, the people has their own, some part of the government may actually support the use of bitcoin but couldn't come boldly to say that, secondly are the people as well, many were fast interested in bitcoin adoption while some were not and others remain indecisive about it, yet the government or it's people can't stop whatever achievement bitcoin has brought down to our table regardless of their regulations on it.

[KiaKia]

If not a matter of if, sorry I am not wishing bad for the country but since the beginning of time, this country have only enjoy improvement just once, that was when a general called Muritala took over presidency,  nothing in the history of Nigeria comes close to what this man achieved in a short period of time in power, my advice is all Nigerians should not hope and wait for some magical change to happen, fixing the country is now 100 times more harder than 20 years ago.

Since I was into crypto I have never use any centralised bank to make any payment that's related to crypto, even while the news of ban was circulating I was not worried a bit, and another thing is I don't keep money in the bank, assuming they block my bank account right now it does nothing to me, my assets are locked away in a offline cold storage anyway.

All hope is not lost for Nigeria but not until all mind becomes one there is never going to be a real change, when the poor ones start saying no to the people in power that's when things will start to take a turn, right now money still buy some people, in fact a lot of people, this is what is dragging down all sense of justice and growth in the country.

[Spaceman1000$]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

The first policy you're trying to talk about cannot fully have it implementation or effect because fiat does not yield interest.
But Bitcoin yield interest with time. So even if you put the economic infrastructure in place, in a bid to stabilize the country's currency, it won't still affect the adoption of bitcoin in Nigeria. For every economy in the world inflation is bound to take place, the level of impact can either be determined by the effect your government tries to put in place to control it. So whether there is inflation or not, it doesn't negate the fact that fiat has its own deficiencies which in the other hand gives Bitcoin its own advantage.

[uneng]

I think you are right. That is what they should do if they wanted Bitcoin to get less recognization by the local population, although they aren't smart enough to do that. Of course there isn't a complete fix for fiat currencies, since they operate in an inflationary model, where money is constantly printed to keep the economy under control, but in extreme cases like the one we see in Nigeria, I think it's pretty possible to make the situation much better through an economical reform or plan introduced by the government and central bank, supported and elaborated by specialists.

It has already happened in many third world countries and worked nicely, including my country, Brazil, where inflation was also out of control by the 90's decade, and got significantly better since then through the 'Plano Real' economical remodeling introduced in 1993-1994.

In every cases, I don't think you should feel so bad about it, because at least it's an opportunity for Bitcoin to shine and get more acceptance in your local community. Since it's being enough to supply the demands of your countrymen, that should be Ok!

[kryptqnick]

I'm not sure what the op means by fixing fiat, to be honest. I can see the info about Nigeria, but these issues aren't universal.
Some countries have major issues with fiat, like hyperinflation or just high inflation. But there are many examples of fiat currencies that have been doing quite well for a long time (if 0-5% of annual inflation is considered 'well' because that's the aim of many fiat currencies). Moreover, some would say that the problem of fiat is that it can be printed and destroyed at a whim of authorities. Others might add that the key issue of fiat is that it is no longer backed up by truly valuable assets. So, according to different people, fixing fiat would mean very different things.
As for ignoring Bitcoin, I think it's already pretty common, as active opposition to Bitcoin is an approach undertaken by a minority of countries. But some cannot allow themselves to ignore Bitcoin because they see it as a direct threat to their control over their population (as is the case in China).

[Hewlet]

The issue regarding the option of using either Bitcoin or fiat currency has never been a serious issue that the authorities would even bother to look for ways to diminish one using any of the approaches you just outlined. Although the authorities don't want to publicly accept the adoption of Bitcoin, I feel that both Bitcoin and fiat currency should be allowed to exist and serve their purposes. They both have advantages and disadvantages and could still be used together in society to solve their peculiar purpose.

[mindrust]

Bitcoin doesn't care either way. The authorities might ban bitcoin completely and btc will still find a way to survive. Not on a corporate level however p2p transactions can't be banned completely.  I don't agree with your other points where you think bitcoin is the solution to your country's problems. Yes printing FIAT out of thin air is a big problem but switching to bitcoin won't solve the problems automatically. People should change first. Unless people stop being greedy and stupid, bitcoin can't help countries. Building a better education system is a great start.

[Amphenomenon]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it.

The fait currency can never be fixed, I don't think any currency can ever be entirely fixed and if this is done, bitcoin won't be highly affected by this but those trading currency pairs and the government and economist knows why this isn't feasible
The government can never ignore Bitcoin and even if they choose to attack it Bitcoin will continue to grow, while they  ignoring it will make its adoption faster, just like how it was when it was created in 2009, I believe they never thought it adoption rate would have grown this fast.
In as much that government are against Bitcoin is only from the fact that they want to control it because its bigger than them. Most government officials will never want to see bitcoin fall because they are also investing in bitcoin (nobody will ever turn down a sure means of making more money legitimately) and since some of them are in the position to cause FUD, they will do just that in order to make the market favour them more

[Kelward]

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

I really don't see how government ignoring bitcoin, in over regulating it or restricting its usage will keep it in a corner, so it won't be a threat to the financial  system. Are you saying that if everything that you mentioned are not in place then bitcoin will not have relevance in the country? Bitcoin is an alternative to fiat, and it's a matter of choice for an individual to adopt it, it is decentralized while fiat is centralized. People who seek privacy in their transactions, and wants a decentralized currency for it, will go for bitcoin, not because of it's government restrictions, but because it's an, asset that serves their purpose. Maybe I don't understand your topic well, because I don't see how the authorities not being smart enough to keep bitcoin in a corner will restrict it's adoption.

[stompix]

I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption .

hmmm

with 47 percent of the population owning or using digital currencies.

Let me call this bs, elephant shit, dinosaur shit!
You're telling me 110 millions people are holding and using crypto with about 3-4 million tx on the most used chains each day worldwide, and despite that they rank 10? Common! There are 40 million addresses with a balance worth more than 1$ on the whole Bitcoin chain and we're talking about 110 millions crypto users in one country?

For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions  and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

They don't care to enforce this!

Imagine NK would have the same problem with crypto, a few thousands shot live on the 8pm news, their bodies paraded though the streets with loudspeakers announcing the enemies of the nations and then for month every single citizen called to the police station to tell if he owns or not coins, do you think you would still deal with cryptos? No you won't!

It's just about their willing to do so, if they would want to it's pretty simple to make an account on Binance, trade with all users that posts sell or buy orders then simply arrest them based on their payment details and after 48 hours of waterboarding they will cough up every single of their clients. Then pick those guys up and start again with the waterboarding, see how simple that is? Besides, when you think that authorities can;t get you, remember Tor was developed by a government agency, SHA-2 was developed by the NSA, do you really think everyone there is just some old fart in their 90's who doesn't know how to use a smartphone?  Ross, Silkroad, Alphabay, even CM would have something to say about hard hard it's to track somebody!

As for fixing fiat, why do you need to fix it?
You say 47% of the country is owning and using crypto, so with half of the economy running on Bitcoin you should be the world leading economic growth pylon, right? Oh, wait!

[Gladitorcomeback]

In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin.

Authority will never want this. actually all fiat problem happened because of them.. The government persons going to rich everyday while poor people just living a normal life and there is no benefits for poor to adopt own country currency. Authority doesn't use our taxes properly in country building, devolpment and providing services which make our life easy. we are not given bright opportunity where we invest and we believe that our money will be save and we will earn like investing in btc.

high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

all devolping country facing same issue. Due to corrupt government, bad startegy our country currency is going down day by day and we are now 3x down in one year. How we can hold our currency in bank in this situation. Inflation rate is also down. The only solution is to convert all extra fiat to Bitcoin. It not just helping us to fight against inflation but also it is great investment for the future.

For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

Crypto dealing through bank is also banned in our country but the user is more than before and no one has stopped the use of crypto. Government cannot stop citizens to trade btc because alternative method (P2P) is available. Government can take profit by allowing users to freely trade crypto and put low tax. In this way not only citizens will be happy and use this technology properly but also government will get tax to use for country devolpment.

[Lorence.xD]

I think the authorities have been governing for a long time and they already know how to manipulate things and how literally beneficial for them to approach Bitcoin. We can notice that they would attack Bitcoin as they would have a negative reputation in the public so people would not prefer digital currencies to traditional fiat money which they can easily manipulate and control, it is literally the corruption and greed that hinders them from completely welcoming Bitcoin. I actually agree with your ideas but with Bitcoin's decentralized system, the only thing that the government could do is either ban them or approach them, but we know that it might take a long time for people to adopt BTC since it's still volatile.

[Mpamaegbu]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin.

Until we begin to realize that those who buy and hodl Bitcoin aren't doing that because they think Bitcoin is solely money. Nope, I don't think they truly believe that. They think of it as an asset, a property to be treasured. Otherwise, they won't be hodling it and then be spending fiat in its place to get their stuff. So, even if fiat is fixed (according to your word), people will still seek Bitcoin as much as they look at it as an asset to be hoarded and then sold off during a bull rally.

[moneystery]

if it's about the transparency and potential of bitcoin, maybe i will agree why bitcoin is chosen by people compared to fiat currency, but if we talk about the instability of the national currency, high inflation rate, etc., i don't really agree, because in europe itself now many young people have chosen bitcoin as their investment, do you think that the euro is not stable enough?

so even if the government overcomes problems such as instability, high inflation rate, etc., people will still choose bitcoin because they think that bitcoin is a digital asset that can give them freedom and convenience in their transactions. it also has the potential to provide higher profits to its holders and that is what makes many people choose bitcoin compared to fiat.

[Japinat]

We can't expect that the authorities will come to address the problem with fiat issues because they are actually the ones who are abusing the use of fiat for their own personal interest. The fact that they're on top, then they have all the freedom and means to do everything they want, even if it will decrease the credibility of fiat. But that is not their problem anymore, but the blame is always on the citizens, and as long fiat remains the legal currency, then they can't get rid on it 100%, the reason why they are seeking some alternatives in bitcoin that fiat fail to do.

However, despite of the negative issues thrown to fiat, this become a blessing for bitcoin. Although we are not happy to see fiat deteriorating, but we all know unless fiat remains strong, then we can't find positive chances for crypto adoption to grow and become mainstream.

[Mate2237]

Authorities are aware of all these things you said but they just don't want the younger ones to progress if not there is nothing to worry about on Bitcoin. Because if the authorities support Bitcoin they will even enjoy it more than the young ones because they, the authorities have the funds to invest in Bitcoin but the young ones are struggling to invest. Bitcoin would have favoured the authorities very well.

In Nigeria even the government asked the CBN to ban crypto related services, there are some governmental personalities that are seriously involved in Bitcoin. In last week one of the governorship candidates were caught in cryptocurrency related issues. They are smart but they just don't want to do it.

[Kelvinid]

Too sad that corruption and greed have really poisoned the minds of elected officials and don't let Bitcoin become a reason for not fulfilling their wants. Which is why they implement rules and regulations against Bitcoin. They will say it is for the benefit of the community and to stop scamming but I don't that is how we stop such incidents.
They are smart enough to encounter the adoption of Bitcoin but fortunately, people are still making their way to do it. The more they impose strict rules, the more it grows --perhaps, they are winning unless they totally ban crypto in their country.

[Rruchi man]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

The shortcomings only affect you and me, to the corrupt officials of the government, they are unaffected, hence do not care about making the situation of things too better and out of their control.

In their unconcern to remedy the shortcomings with our fiat, they indirectly promote bitcoins.

More mistake from them was to flaunt CBDC's, because that also has brought about comparison that finally ends with people seeing bitcoins as better.

[mirakal]

It's not that the authorities aren't smart, but they're just don't want to completely fight it.

If Nigeria is known as one of country which has a really high Bitcoin adoption, it means many of Nigerians aren't really protect their privacy. The authorities can just caught or threat their citizens, however this will give a bad effect to them and it's not that important to seize someone who don't have a lot coins.

To be honest, they're actually smart as they don't fight with fiat issues. Fiat is for the government, so they don't have to go against with it. And even if they start correcting the issues, that will not work anyway as people have already discovered that bitcoin is much better than fiat. Aside that it offers to the people the freedom from the use of fiat and from the controlling government, bitcoin price has also appreciating value while fiat value continue to depreciate.

So its better to leave the issues than to fight with it. For sure, the authorities have also their set of plans and bitcoin is not threatened by it.

[komisariatku]

In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin.

I think even if the Nigerian currency turns into a strong currency it will not change people's trust in Bitcoin because Bitcoin is still considered a valuable asset. In an investment context, investing in bitcoin is more profitable than other currencies in the world.

Apart from that, this option is also very difficult for the government to implement because creating fiat financial stability with a good exchange rate is difficult. The strength of currency exchange rates depends on world politics, world trade, national security stability, etc

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems.

I actually quite doubt whether the Nigerian government is really serious about banning Bitcoin or whether it is deliberately allowing its citizens to own Bitcoin even though the government has banned it. I am sure the government will not be able to stop bitcoin 100% because the Nigerian people are familiar and know how to hide bitcoin ownership, but if the government is serious about banning bitcoin then they can pressure the public and confiscate bitcoin ownership.

But I hope the Nigerian government can legalize bitcoin even if only as an asset. Like in my country, bitcoin is banned as a currency but legal to own as an asset and can be used in crypto trading and crypto exchanges

[serjent05]

I highly agree with Lucius on this, it is not the currency that is the problem in your country but the corrupt officials.  Every nation has an almost identical financial system but different countries have different output on their financial performance.  It is because some countries have incompetent and corrupt officials who take advantage of their authority.  The fiat currency had been in existence for many years and the system had been established together with that.  I believe fixing the system means changing the fiat system itself which I think will not be entertained by those who are in power because they will lose their authority if they follow the system Bitcoin wanted to implement.

Since Bitcoin is decentralized in nature, centralized institutions obviously will not ignore Bitcoin because it is the opposite of what it wanted to implement, centralization to have full authority on the finance system.  This centralized financial institution will surely make a move and will try to nullify the effect of Bitcoin decentralization by imposing regulations and laws that will limit the decentralized nature of Bitcoin through various centralized platforms.

[lombok]

It's not that the authorities aren't smart, but they're just don't want to completely fight it.

If Nigeria is known as one of country which has a really high Bitcoin adoption, it means many of Nigerians aren't really protect their privacy. The authorities can just caught or threat their citizens, however this will give a bad effect to them and it's not that important to seize someone who don't have a lot coins.

To be honest, they're actually smart as they don't fight with fiat issues. Fiat is for the government, so they don't have to go against with it. And even if they start correcting the issues, that will not work anyway as people have already discovered that bitcoin is much better than fiat. Aside that it offers to the people the freedom from the use of fiat and from the controlling government, bitcoin price has also appreciating value while fiat value continue to depreciate.

So its better to leave the issues than to fight with it. For sure, the authorities have also their set of plans and bitcoin is not threatened by it.

What needs to be said in bold is that Bitcoin is different from fiat except for the issue of its value being pegged to fiat. Yes, as you said, Bitcoin and fiat are on different paths at best and no matter how bad the fiat system is, it will not dampen or sink the intention to use or invest in Bitcoin. Moreover, if Bitcoin itself did not exist, then investment in sectors other than fiat would still be number one (gold, property, shares and various other investment sectors). Someone investing does not only refer to the goodness of the system, but someone will invest because of their interest in the income % of investment for the next 1 - 5 or even 10 years.

[Darker45]

For the first strategy, fiat is not a problem to be solved. It can't be remedied. You simply can't give absolute power over money to human beings. It won't work. The only solution is to replace it. If you replace the ruling people, the performance of a certain fiat may improve, but it can't stay like that forever. It's only a matter of time before downfall ensues. Power corrupts. Money corrupts. Power over money corrupts even more.

For the second strategy, it's not actually how you treat Bitcoin. However you treat Bitcoin for as long as it remains relevant due to whatever factors, it will always attract. Like if fiat is performing so poorly that people's hard work is rendered useless because of hyperinflation, whether you completely ignore Bitcoin or declare a blanket ban on it, Bitcoin will always be interesting to many.

[Zlantann]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it.

The economic system of the world is complex and dynamic. The government don't know how to fix the fiat currency problems, if they had the solutions they would have solved all of them. Many politicians have lost elections because of inflation, currency loss of value, unemployment, etc, if they knew what to do, they would have done it to remain in power. In my country, they government copy economic policies from different countries without considering the peculiarity of our nation. They keep on applying different policies and it is now clear that they are confused. The economy is also dynamic because new economic problems are emerging. No country predicted the devastating effect of COVID-19 or the pressure the Ukraine-Russia war brought to the global economic space.

The government cannot also ignore Bitcoin because it is a threat to them. They want to control the financial life of everybody in the country. They want to know how much you own and how you are using the money. They also claim that it is difficult to carry out economic or financial plans because of the decentralized nature of Bitcoin. I have heard some government officials claim that allowing Bitcoin to flourish could affect the monetary policies of the government. There are also claims that cryptocurrencies are used to facilitate payment from criminal activities. Until the government can regulate the activities of cryptocurrencies through centralised platforms, I doubt if they will ever allow Bitcoin to be freely used.

[Litzki1990]

Even if your country's government bans the use of Bitcoin, I don't think people from African countries will stop using Bitcoin. There are many countries in the world where Bitcoin is banned outright but still people are using Bitcoin in different ways. Nigeria countries are generally much poorer than other countries and most of the people there do not eat, if the citizens can live well by using Bitcoin then why would the Nigerian government ban it. Your ban is appropriate when you can employ the unemployed and when the people of your country are financially well off. You cannot create employment for people through the government of the country but if people do something on their own, you are obstructing it, it is not called proper governance of the country.

[UmerIdrees]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

Do you think the authrotihries are concerned with issues realted to fiat currencies. If they were careful, there would have been no inflation in the first place. The point is that it is these government authorities , that are responibile for all this fiat inflation. They have printed excess paper notes only to fulfill thier own needs , making them more rich and the poor people more poorer.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

This approach may be sucessful in the short run where the people will be discourage to use bitcoin. Many will not use it simply because it is illegal and not everyone want to keep illegal things with them. Others who are more wise, will have to keep them hiddenly with them until the stance of the government changes regarding bitcoin and crypto currencies.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

Authorities  are more smarter than we think. They are not in the favor of the common man and also they do not want that people become finicial independent or they start using currecny such as bitcoin on which the government has no control. ( the government can't print and cannot control the supply).

I do not accept much from the  government and finincial authorities to work for the beneifit for the common public. They are here to keep thier control and rule over the people.

[Sim_card]

The government is after controlling everything in their country so that they can have everyone wrapped in their arms. The rich politicians are even after the peanuts that the poor gets through taxes and this is why they will never take their minds of controlling the citizens in every aspect so that the citizens wouldn't have their own freedom which bitcoin offers. Greed and corruption has made the politicians not to see anything wrong in their actions of messing up with the fiat currency because that is where they get their power and wealth from through the manipulation of fiat currency. This makes bitcoin to be a problem to them because they see it as some kind of currency that is independent to the government. The reason why citizens will never ignore bitcoin is that they see it more of an asset than currency.

Nigeria countries are generally much poorer than other countries and most of the people there do not eat

LOL, you told you that majority of people here don't eat and how many times have you seen people dying on the street due to hunger strive. Nigeria is one of the country that is rich in natural resources but due to corruption and greed, the politicians and government are stealing our funds. Have you ever seen Nigerians protesting before due to the poverty in the country. The poorest man in Nigeria can afford one square meal per day. We are hustlers and we adapt to whatever situation or condition that we find ourselves and make a living out of it.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

The government can actually take some steps towards fulfilling what you are talking about; it's not them not being smart; it's them doing what they believe is the right thing to do. The government already knows that the rate of printed money is so high and that if they retract some of that money, it will add more value to the fiat currency, but the question is, how much have they retracted? No. IMO, Bitcoin and Fiat are not in any form of competition; even if Fiat is also fixed, like you said, people who still know about Bitcoin will continue to use it, and those who prefer Fiat will also use their fiat.

[CryptopreneurBrainboss]

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

The authorities in your country mightn't be smart but others are and that's why they haven't put a banned on Bitcoin yet because they know that'll only increase the adoption of the currency instead of reducing it. Third world countries are used to doing things with authority instead of being civil so it's no surprise they went through that approach but the US are doing things differently and I just hope it doesn't work because it seems they're succeeding by cracking down on services promoting Bitcoin and arguably the face of the industry but they too won't succeed.

The government doesn't see fiats as a failure yet or it needing any improvement because it's a perfect tool for control and they can print new note into existence whenever they want. Fiats is giving them too much power so the first option will never be what the government will do.The government ignoring Bitcoin won't stop the adoption of the currency either and the government knows this, they have tried that as well but it didn't work.

They ignored or I'll say underated Bitcoin power and that's why they didn't kill the currency when they had a better chance of doing so when it hasn't gained this much popularity and acceptance by the masses. The government has realized that ignoring Bitcoin won't chase it away so they're left with their last attempt of killing Bitcoin by fighting it but they won't succeed too and finally they'll be left with no option but to accept Bitcoin.

[LoyceV]

In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies.

Allow me to respond to only this part: why would you even believe fiat currency is "traditional"? If we skip the barter economy, the gold standard is much more traditional than fiat money:

The gold standard was a commitment by participating countries to fix the prices of their domestic currencies in terms of a specified amount of gold. National money and other forms of money (bank deposits and notes) were freely converted into gold at the fixed price. England adopted a de facto gold standard in 1717 after the master of the mint, Sir Isaac Newton, overvalued the guinea in terms of silver, and formally adopted the gold standard in 1819. The United States, though formally on a bimetallic (gold and silver) standard, switched to gold de facto in 1834 and de jure in 1900 when Congress passed the Gold Standard Act. In 1834, the United States fixed the price of gold at $20.67 per ounce, where it remained until 1933. Other major countries joined the gold standard in the 1870s. The period from 1880 to 1914 is known as the classical gold standard. During that time, the majority of countries adhered (in varying degrees) to gold. It was also a period of unprecedented economic growth with relatively free trade in goods, labor, and capital.

And a bit later:

Britain stopped using the gold standard in 1931, and the U.S. followed suit in 1933, finally abandoning the remnants of the system in 1973.
~
The appeal of a gold standard is that it arrests control of the issuance of money out of the hands of imperfect human beings. With the physical quantity of gold acting as a limit to that issuance, a society can follow a simple rule to avoid the evils of inflation.

Inflation is a terrible thing, and the main reason I'm into Bitcoin. No central bank will want to give up their power over BRRR.

“Give me control of a nation’s money supply, and I care not who makes its laws.” So said Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild banking dynasty.

[Questat]

It is very unfortunate that the government treated Bitcoin as the reason for increasing illegal activities - scams and fraud. I'd see they are finding ways to prevent the issues but making crypto a huge contributor to this is somewhat not really good. They instead help the community to understand how scam and fraud works in order not to fall into it rather than making crypto an excuse. But for sure, it was not the reason why they are against crypto, their greed seems to be making it as they can no longer make money if people are only using Bitcoin. They will still fail in the end.

[RioBlemz]

You cannot fix fiat currency and no government in the world has the capability to do such. I say this respectfully. Every technology was built to be improve on and it is the imperfection in it that creates innovation. Computers have evolved over time and also look there is a big difference between Iphone 5 is different from Iphone 12. What I am saying is that the Idea about Fiat has not been revisited and improved on. What The Central Banks does is that they just bring more policies and regulates their currency. Even in Stable economies inflation is still a problem this is because we are not paying attention to production with the need to manage human excesses.

Your second point is valid because persecution create resolve and build community. Is the fight against Bitcoin that also lead to the spread of BTC. On the issue of ignoring Bitcoin my take is that Bitcoin can no longer be ignored. It has grown beyond boarders and as long as people still buy into it, it will remain forever valuable. I believe I said something

[Dunamisx]

It is very unfortunate that the government treated Bitcoin as the reason for increasing illegal activities - scams and fraud.

I always frowned at seing this when the governments are making a repeated retereition on it that bitcoin is used to perpetrate scam, what about fiat the grandfather of scam, but because all of them in governments has the right to make use of fiat and control the financial authorities and regulations under this which also covers all their own financial scams, they wouldn't kicked against fiat or refer to it financial scam accusations since they are the masterminds, but why bitcoin, when the target is for the poor and masses, they are indirectly fighting us and not bitcoin because they don't want us to have financial freedom.

[wiss19]

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems.

I don't see how that would work. Their aim is to stop people from using Bitcoin since Bitcoin provides people the opportunity to be their own bank and keep their wealth with themselves instead of giving it to them in traditional financial institutions like banks, and if they simply ignore Bitcoin, don't ban it or put any sort of regulations, they know that the people within their countries will be free to use it however they want and that is what they don't want happen.

So, I don't think they are this dumb to not have thought of such a thing but they know this isn't going to work and in the long run, people will start getting attracted more towards Bitcoin than traditional currencies not only because of the existing problems of the financial systems but because of it's volatility which provides people the opportunity to grow their wealth.

[Silberman]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

...

“It is not a bug, that is a feature.”

The economy is working as intended, we often talk about how high inflation is bad for the people, but you know who benefits? The government of course, they get to spend all of that recently printed money and buy whatever they want with money they just created out of thin air, if a person does that then they call it counterfeiting, but if they do it then this is called monetary policy, so what government will give up the right to print as much money as they want? None, which is why they attack bitcoin instead.

[taufik123]

I always frowned at seing this when the governments are making a repeated retereition on it that bitcoin is used to perpetrate scam, what about fiat the grandfather of scam, but because all of them in governments has the right to make use of fiat and control the financial authorities and regulations under this which also covers all their own financial scams, they wouldn't kicked against fiat or refer to it financial scam accusations since they are the masterminds, but why bitcoin, when the target is for the poor and masses, they are indirectly fighting us and not bitcoin because they don't want us to have financial freedom.

There will be no financial freedom as long as it is still faced with the government, they want to have full control over the finances we have.
One of the real financial freedoms is with Bitcoin or crypto, which is not controlled by anyone, including the government.

Looking at the facts that have happened so far, financial freedom has always been taken away by the government.
They want to have complete control, otherwise they will fight back and say that anything that provides financial freedom without a government role is illegal and will be banned.
Like Bitcoin, which is the same as Fiat, but the treatment is certainly different.

Bitcoin does have a high volatility risk compared to Fiat.
Bitcoin is decentralized, has a limited amount, while fiat can be printed any amount and is fully controlled by the government.

[Mauser]

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

Ignoring something never sounds like the what politicians would do. At least in my country the government would rather spend a few millions, creating a dozen working groups to overregulate a topic that should be better left alone. I think that it’s the fear politicians have, when the voters realise the country would also function and work well without all those regulations. Instead of doing nothing the government would always do much more than is necessary, only to seem important and to show how hard they are working. Regulations to a certain extent are fine, but once you limit your citizens too much, they will find other ways to solve their issues outside of the law. That is also why bans are not going to work forever. Some people might follow the rules of the government and not engage in crypto currencies anymore, but the black-market will grow over time, especially if the value of bitcoin and other crpyto coins is increasing.

[AmoreJaz]

It is very unfortunate that the government treated Bitcoin as the reason for increasing illegal activities - scams and fraud. I'd see they are finding ways to prevent the issues but making crypto a huge contributor to this is somewhat not really good. They instead help the community to understand how scam and fraud works in order not to fall into it rather than making crypto an excuse. But for sure, it was not the reason why they are against crypto, their greed seems to be making it as they can no longer make money if people are only using Bitcoin. They will still fail in the end.

in time, people will understand more about bitcoin and crypto market in general. even if the government is saying negative towards this market, they can't stop people from learning what is the truth behind this technology. do remember, almost everything can be found or asked now over the internet.
in my opinion, the better route is to educate its people and leave the decision for them on how they will manage their funds.

[philipma1957]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

In the second approach, by simply ignoring Bitcoin or avoiding direct confrontation through over-regulation or restriction of its use, Bitcoin would just remain in a corner and not emerge as a significant threat to the financial systems. For instance, the authorities in my country, through the Central Bank, placed a ban on Bitcoin transactions and ordered the banks to freeze the accounts of individuals transacting business with Bitcoin. Did this stop Bitcoin adoption and increase? No way.

But I doubt that the authorities are smart enough to do this. Please leave a comment.

most governments work on might makes right.

Oh they can wrap it with fancy words. My Country USA 🇺🇸 plays the role of freedom fighter for the world’s oppressed countries. Who the fuck believes that any more.
So smart is not the correct word but I am searching for a better way to say it.

I will post back later. If I can word it better.

[Mr.right85]

The two strategies, in my estimation, for dealing with Bitcoin are to fix fiat currency and, second, to promote an approach of ignoring Bitcoin rather than attacking it. In the first strategy, all the authorities need to do is to address the issues facing traditional fiat currencies. I bet if they can do this successfully, individuals will be less motivated to seek alternatives like investing in Bitcoin. I say this with utmost certainty because, in my country Nigeria, one of the major reasons why we are ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rate of crypto adoption is because of the instability of our national currency, high inflation rate, poor and deteriorating economic conditions, and lack of transparency in the financial systems leading to distrust in traditional financial institutions. If they can fix these shortcomings in traditional financial systems, Bitcoin will be less appealing to us. I know this is not exclusive to my country only.

While I might be in on your second option, I’m not so sure the first one isa case here.

I don’t think the issues with traditional currency being lack of transparency with financial institutions and inflation is much of the issues here to have lead to more and more crypto adoption.

I think cryptocurrency adoption has been about having an alternative to traditional means of finance, the privacy it provides, the ease of having to send funds across time and space in an instant, less fee and having little need to worry about the government. This is just but a few but yeah, it goes far beyond those reason as stated in the first instance.

Talking about Nigeria, I agree that the government have failed its people and you have everyone looking out for a means to survive, some of those means are found in Bitcoin but yeah, it’s by far means to transact and survive in a nation where majority of the population are below the middle class and not employed.