Bitcoin becoming Legal tender

[Bravut]

Bitcoin becoming a legal tender doesn't mean that it's being forced down the throats of any citizen. However, lets assume that it is, like in a scenario where legal tender means that it's being forced to people, well the logic still stands correct, he said "it would increase adoptability" and to be fair, if the government forces everyone to use it, then how is that not adoption rate going up? That is why, if you are right and it's forced then it's still going up, if you are wrong and it's just an option to have, it still goes up.

As long as the legal tender situation happens, in more and more countries, then we have to realize that it's not going to end up being all that complicated for anyone, it's the normal life cycle to be fair.

Great, so you want to use the power of the central government to force people to buy into the same investment you've bought into, thereby making the value of your investment going up. Nice guy .

So if Bitcoin should be forced upon citizens, why by Ether? Why not DOGE? Why not Haypenny currencies?

And while we're at it, I'm very bullish on a stock right now (MRVL). Should I advocate the US government make that stock "legal tender" so everybody will have to buy it, and make it go through the roof?

Why should Bitcoin, of all things, be given this special treatment by the government?

Nobody or government is given special treatment  to Bitcoin, people only care about there investment which isn't your business about the way they recognise it. Bitcoin is an asset, so no one cares about your other asset, or stock and no one really cares if you advocate or not.

I don't understand the fact that you seem to misunderstand what the topic is about or didn't read the thread to assimilate.  Everyone is entitled to there opinion. Here is a Bitcoin Forum people share ideas about Bitcoin mainly, you haven't shared any reasonable thread on what you mean or the necessity of your point.

Whether Bitcoin becomes legal tender or not, we know the prospecting future of bitcoin though nothing is created or predictable in the financial market. You invest based on your decision, what suites you.
The Government you talk about can give Bitcoin special treatment because it a valuable asset worth investing. The rest you called are shitcoins and  asset, that ain't gotten the interest of investors the way Bitcoin does, that why Bitcoin is the subject of discussion.

It looks dumb to me as you  compare shitcoins to Bitcoin.

[legiteum]

The Government you talk about can give Bitcoin special treatment because it a valuable asset worth investing.

So every other cryptocurrency or digital currency in the world--and every other form of investment known to man--is a "shitcoin"? Is that what you think?

And you really think the government should be in the business of deciding which assets are "valuable" and which are "shitcoins"?

[Bravut]

The Government you talk about can give Bitcoin special treatment because it a valuable asset worth investing.

So every other cryptocurrency or digital currency in the world--and every other form of investment known to man--is a "shitcoin"? Is that what you think?

And you really think the government should be in the business of deciding which assets are "valuable" and which are "shitcoins"?

Nice one Mate.

What is a shitcoin?
A shitcoin simply Alternative Coin (Altcoin), is any cryptocurrency other than Bitcoin that has less value or purpose. Meaning any coin that isn't Bitcoin is a shitcoin.
Nobody is talking about investment mate, Investment is simply a proces we take to put (risk) our capital on an asset in order to have profit over a stipulated period of time.

Government decides nothing, investment decisions is a sole decision of any individual.

[legiteum]

What is a shitcoin?

A shitcoin simply Alternative Coin (Altcoin), is any cryptocurrency other than Bitcoin that has less value or purpose. Meaning any coin that isn't Bitcoin is a shitcoin.

Wow. Okay. That's... an opinion...

So by that logic, it sounds like you'd vote to make Ether, Monera, and thousands of other digital currencies, illegal?

Government decides nothing, investment decisions is a sole decision of any individual.

But by asking for a special law written to prop up your favorite investment, you are asking the government to decide everything. Your opinion is that every investment that is not Bitcoin is, "shit" (I guess).

It's fine to have that opinion, but it's quite another thing to ask for the government to enforce your investment opinion into law such that your opinion gets special rewards from the government to the detriment of other people's opinions.

When you involve the government in investments, you are taking decision making away from individuals.

[Kelward]

For me, it is enough for Bitcoin to be legally accepted as a payment method. It doesn't have to be a legal tender to perform its function. If countries recognize Bitcoin as a currency, that would already be enough.

For Bitcoin to become a legal tender is a long shot, and could even just be considered as an extra mile. Bitcoin doesn't have to be a legal tender for businesses and customers to accept it as payment. I think it is enough catalyst for Bitcoin's adoption rate for a government to declare it as an acceptable currency.

I also think that Bitcoin don't have to be a legal tender of any country to achieve it's global currency aim, if it's accepted in any country as a payment option and it's business people will adopt it and accept it as a means of payment, then it'll still mentain it's function as a legally accepted payment method. I don't think that most governments will accept Bitcoin as a legal tender because they can't control it as a result of it being decentralized, the least they can do is regulate it. Bitcoin don't have to takeover fiat currencies, it can function perfectly well as an alternative digital currency, besides people are adopting it more as as an investment asset, because it's a store of value.

[kizlod]

For me, it is enough for Bitcoin to be legally accepted as a payment method. It doesn't have to be a legal tender to perform its function. If countries recognize Bitcoin as a currency, that would already be enough.

For Bitcoin to become a legal tender is a long shot, and could even just be considered as an extra mile. Bitcoin doesn't have to be a legal tender for businesses and customers to accept it as payment. I think it is enough catalyst for Bitcoin's adoption rate for a government to declare it as an acceptable currency.

I also think that Bitcoin don't have to be a legal tender of any country to achieve it's global currency aim, if it's accepted in any country as a payment option and it's business people will adopt it and accept it as a means of payment, then it'll still mentain it's function as a legally accepted payment method. I don't think that most governments will accept Bitcoin as a legal tender because they can't control it as a result of it being decentralized, the least they can do is regulate it. Bitcoin don't have to takeover fiat currencies, it can function perfectly well as an alternative digital currency, besides people are adopting it more as as an investment asset, because it's a store of value.

I never understood why a lot of people are trying to push the idea that BTC will replace fiat. It won't, and it doesn't need to. Perhaps it needs more adoption, but it truly a great alternative, it doesn't have to be the only available option.

[Taskford]

For me, it is enough for Bitcoin to be legally accepted as a payment method. It doesn't have to be a legal tender to perform its function. If countries recognize Bitcoin as a currency, that would already be enough.

For Bitcoin to become a legal tender is a long shot, and could even just be considered as an extra mile. Bitcoin doesn't have to be a legal tender for businesses and customers to accept it as payment. I think it is enough catalyst for Bitcoin's adoption rate for a government to declare it as an acceptable currency.

I also think that Bitcoin don't have to be a legal tender of any country to achieve it's global currency aim, if it's accepted in any country as a payment option and it's business people will adopt it and accept it as a means of payment, then it'll still mentain it's function as a legally accepted payment method. I don't think that most governments will accept Bitcoin as a legal tender because they can't control it as a result of it being decentralized, the least they can do is regulate it. Bitcoin don't have to takeover fiat currencies, it can function perfectly well as an alternative digital currency, besides people are adopting it more as as an investment asset, because it's a store of value.

I never understood why a lot of people are trying to push the idea that BTC will replace fiat. It won't, and it doesn't need to. Perhaps it needs more adoption, but it truly a great alternative, it doesn't have to be the only available option.

Maybe because decentralization will came in future and they think bitcoin will be the best option if that happen, but they forget to realize that government will create or launch their own digital currency so its still useless for overthinking that this might happen since government still all have the final say regarding on what trajectory they are going to adopt. Also its good that fiat and Bitcoin will exist together since all of us would have option to choose whether what currency we would like to use on certain aspects especially on other scenario that bitcoin could be useful also same with fiat. I don't want in future that government will think different on bitcoin and think about it as illegal currency since for this reasons maybe a restriction will happen and they would not let their people use bitcoin that's why we should careful on what we wish for since government is the most strongest entity that can implement all of this.

[Bobrox]

I also think that Bitcoin don't have to be a legal tender of any country to achieve it's global currency aim, if it's accepted in any country as a payment option and it's business people will adopt it and accept it as a means of payment, then it'll still mentain it's function as a legally accepted payment method. I don't think that most governments will accept Bitcoin as a legal tender because they can't control it as a result of it being decentralized, the least they can do is regulate it. Bitcoin don't have to takeover fiat currencies, it can function perfectly well as an alternative digital currency, besides people are adopting it more as as an investment asset, because it's a store of value.

Bitcoin have been popular as commodity assets for investing and trading, its difficult to make bitcoin acceptable for legal tender payment transaction because all countries have regulation by using fiat for transaction. Indeed bitcoin become more decentralized and has transparent when using for transaction, but can't control when bitcoin price dropping how many people get loss when accepting bitcoin as payment way without convert it as soon possible.
Actually bitcoin acceptable for legal tender payment transaction has advantage and disadvantage side, bitcoin increasing values could increasing profitable if accepted as payment transaction but in other side many time bitcoin transaction got congested and take more longer time payment completed.

[Bravut]

For me, it is enough for Bitcoin to be legally accepted as a payment method. It doesn't have to be a legal tender to perform its function. If countries recognize Bitcoin as a currency, that would already be enough.

For Bitcoin to become a legal tender is a long shot, and could even just be considered as an extra mile. Bitcoin doesn't have to be a legal tender for businesses and customers to accept it as payment. I think it is enough catalyst for Bitcoin's adoption rate for a government to declare it as an acceptable currency.

I also think that Bitcoin don't have to be a legal tender of any country to achieve it's global currency aim, if it's accepted in any country as a payment option and it's business people will adopt it and accept it as a means of payment, then it'll still mentain it's function as a legally accepted payment method. I don't think that most governments will accept Bitcoin as a legal tender because they can't control it as a result of it being decentralized, the least they can do is regulate it. Bitcoin don't have to takeover fiat currencies, it can function perfectly well as an alternative digital currency, besides people are adopting it more as as an investment asset, because it's a store of value.

I never understood why a lot of people are trying to push the idea that BTC will replace fiat. It won't, and it doesn't need to. Perhaps it needs more adoption, but it truly a great alternative, it doesn't have to be the only available option.

Maybe because decentralization will came in future and they think bitcoin will be the best option if that happen, but they forget to realize that government will create or launch their own digital currency so its still useless for overthinking that this might happen since government still all have the final say regarding on what trajectory they are going to adopt. Also its good that fiat and Bitcoin will exist together since all of us would have option to choose whether what currency we would like to use on certain aspects especially on other scenario that bitcoin could be useful also same with fiat. I don't want in future that government will think different on bitcoin and think about it as illegal currency since for this reasons maybe a restriction will happen and they would not let their people use bitcoin that's why we should careful on what we wish for since government is the most strongest entity that can implement all of this.

Bitcoin and Fait will keep existing together.  As the two will still be means of transactions, fait is currency which supercedes any other, which the Government can control, Bitcoin is entirely different and free from there control, so the government will only care about fait which they have control over and also control its supply.

[Onyeeze]

It will be difficult for this time for Bitcoin to be legalize to other nations because government is fighting for Bitcoin and for bitcoin to be a legal tender in any country it will be difficult for now unless Bitcoin existence have reached 20 years many people and their government is still against the development of Bitcoin and the existence of Bitcoin cause the things Bitcoin has one of the simplest way of committing a money laundering across another nation that is why many government or many nations is against the development of Bitcoin so from my own understanding of Bitcoin and the government and they also two legalize a bitcoin as a legal tender it is something that will happen in future time when people have understand fully the importance of Bitcoin

[Zanab247]

This is what is making some countries to be afraid, not to make BTC legal tender in their land because it will make their fiat money lose value, and BTC carry value that is making people to use it for payments than fiat money.

Despite BTC is not legal tender in my country, many people prefer to use BTC these days to buy international equipments by using BTC, even though they have fiat money in their account, and if our government make it legal tender many people will be happy in the country but our government will never allow such thing in the country.

 The reason why many countries will not allow BTC to become legal tender global, is because they will not be able to control BTC and it will not add anything into the account of the government like the way fiat money is adding value and profit into the government account.

[legiteum]

This is what is making some countries to be afraid, not to make BTC legal tender in their land because it will make their fiat money lose value, and BTC carry value that is making people to use it for payments than fiat money.

Despite BTC is not legal tender in my country, many people prefer to use BTC these days to buy international equipments by using BTC, even though they have fiat money in their account, and if our government make it legal tender many people will be happy in the country but our government will never allow such thing in the country.

 The reason why many countries will not allow BTC to become legal tender global, is because they will not be able to control BTC and it will not add anything into the account of the government like the way fiat money is adding value and profit into the government account.

That's nonsense. Bitcoin doesn't make sovereign currencies drop in price per se, and no serious person believes that.

And if they did, they'd make Bitcoin illegal, which almost all countries do not do.

You seem to think "legal tender" means the same thing as "legal". It doesn't. The law passed in El Salvador has been a boondoggle and didn't do anything to increase retail adoption there. It was just a pump-and-dump scheme for the country's elites.

[Cookdata]

The Government you talk about can give Bitcoin special treatment because it a valuable asset worth investing.

So every other cryptocurrency or digital currency in the world--and every other form of investment known to man--is a "shitcoin"? Is that what you think?

He is not wrong completely, if the government want to used Bitcoin to make a beat, we the holders will dance to it because their conclusions is what gives some people confidence to invest. Look at this way, you think that if the government doesn't want to see Bitcoin around and tackle it, you think the institutional investors will come closers or you think the ETF that were approves will be here today. The government has never been friendly about Bitcoin from beginning else the likes of Blackrock that are here today would have bought Bitcoin when it was cheaper back then, the government lack of transparency made them not to do buy back to then.

About shitcoins, we can both agree that plenty of altcoins that result to shitty has done more harm than good compare to what Bitcoin has done. Bitcoin don't just crash unless something terrible must have happened and the last I checked most of the Bitcoin down fall were as a result of altcoins negligence, 2018 bull run crash was a result of ICO scams, 2020 bull run was a result of Terra Luna and FTX collapse and not just Bitcoin collapse on it own.

And you really think the government should be in the business of deciding which assets are "valuable" and which are "shitcoins"?

The government can't but decision on any market can influence such market, if today they don't want any asset to remain on the space of Ethereum blockchain, trust me man they have the resources because it's more centralized but Bitcoin isn't possible but can affect the price movement, that's what government power can do.

[GeorgeJohn]

Bitcoin is aid decentralized currency in which everybody know very well and before it will become a legal tender I think many people from different countries have to adopt bitcoin massively before can become a legal tender, there's something I know quite well in relative with Bitcoin before government to will approve a bitcoin as a legal tender, the top countries who is control of the nation have to accept Bitcoin as a legal tender, such as USA and Russia even China before other countries can make a bitcoin a legal tender

[legiteum]

He is not wrong completely, if the government want to used Bitcoin to make a beat, we the holders will dance to it because their conclusions is what gives some people confidence to invest.

Wow. Okay. How about I lobby the government to make my current favorite investment, NVDA, have these special privileges instead of Bitcoin? Does that sound fair to you? Why not have the government pump GOLD instead? Or APPL? Or Soybean futures? Or some other stock?

Bitcoin investors begging the government for free handouts so their investment will increase in value--like what you are asking for here--is... quite the evolution from Bitcoin's origins, that's for sure .

All I have to say is that the old adage about "live by the sword, die by the sword" applies here: if you want to use the power of the government in order to make your investment increase in value, be prepared for that same government to want something in return. People don't vote to make a certain part of the population rich without wanting something back from them--and they often take back twice as much as they gave.

And I must say, after Bitcoin has gone up 500% during the Biden presidency, it's amazing to me that for some people it's still not enough and they want Bitcoin to go up even more and want the government to force people to buy it. This is the textbook definition of greed on display here.