If Bitcoin was the currency of a country

[finaleshot2016]

~~~

This is not comparable because cash payments have a general payment structure made by most people and maybe this has mastered the payment pattern that has been so long.
Now there are some products that might offer fast payments such as credit cards, debit or qris but for cross -border payments are not proportional to the accuracy or speed with transactions using Bitcoin.

Bitcoin was created not to match anything but as an alternative, but no one knows how this concept can be imitated in terms of future payments.
Although currently it is not possible for most countries to implement bitcoin as a legal transaction tool because each country has regulations regarding transactions.

I agree about the idea that bitcoin is an alternative currency to fiat and other legal tender, but over time bitcoin may become the main currency in some countries that do not have their own currency. The real use case of bitcoin as a currency is basically not going to threaten the existing financial system, bitcoin is just an option if users need it.

I think that even if bitcoin is adopted as a legal tender, fiat transactions will still dominate. Not everyone wants to use bitcoin as a means of payment for various reasons, so only a few people will use it. I think the same thing happened in El Salvador, some people still use fiat even though bitcoin has been legalized as a legal tender.

True, even if we use Bitcoin and invest in it, I think no one will use it for daily transactions unless it becomes more stable and widely accepted by most digital payment systems. Fiat will still be around, and having many options makes the economy more flexible. Just because one asset is leading doesn't mean the others are useless, nah that’s not how it works.

People still need choices that fit different situations since we are a developing world, having a lot of options is really helpful. Not everyone wants to spend something that can double in value tomorrow. The more payment options we have, the better it is for everyday people.

[Cookdata]

True, even if we use Bitcoin and invest in it, I think no one will use it for daily transactions unless it becomes more stable and widely accepted by most digital payment systems. Fiat will still be around, and having many options makes the economy more flexible. Just because one asset is leading doesn't mean the others are useless, nah that’s not how it works.

People still need choices that fit different situations since we are a developing world, having a lot of options is really helpful. Not everyone wants to spend something that can double in value tomorrow. The more payment options we have, the better it is for everyday people.

I don't know why I often come across with this kind of topic and I wonder why perhaps we don't know the difference between currency and assets. Bitcoin in its earlier days whitepaper, it was for making transaction and no specific on whether it's a currency or an asset but over time, it's clear to be an asset that appreciate in value because of its intrinsic properties and such it can't be a currency to any country, it's going to be economical suicide.

Just imagine Gold becomes a currency, how does it going to looks like, when we are not in ancient days where things were done in barter system. Currencies are made to be stable, easy to exchange and no Volatility but thats why they can't be use as an asset as they don't appreciate in value that's why inflation is eaten it up each year goes by but an assets is meant to appreciate over time and that's why Bitcoin can't be suitable for currency in any country.

[JiiBs]

☞If Bitcoin was the currency of a country then what will happen?☜

Cryptocurrency is known as the fastest transaction medium for people around the world. Bitcoin is most commonly known and used token in cryptocurrency. Suppose a country began to use Bitcoin instead of their currency. Then, what will happen?

Your definition to a currency is somewhat unpopular, seems more like an aspect to a currency than its actual definition. Just to be certain, I went to the Wikipedia page and searched out the definition of currency and this is what came out:

A currency is a standardization of money in any form, in use or circulation as a medium of exchange, for example banknotes and coins. A more general definition is that a currency is a system of money in common use within a specific environment over time, especially for people in a nation state.

And that is word to word from Wikipedia.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be quick or the fastest to be a currency, it just has to be standardized within its operational jurisdiction and acceptable for means of exchange.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin is actually a currency to a nation. Although, it acts alongside its fiat counter part and that nation is El-Salvador.

[kawetsriyanto]

I agree about the idea that bitcoin is an alternative currency to fiat and other legal tender, but over time bitcoin may become the main currency in some countries that do not have their own currency. The real use case of bitcoin as a currency is basically not going to threaten the existing financial system, bitcoin is just an option if users need it.

I'm not sure that Bitcoin will be the main currency some countries. It seems to be an alternative currency only. A country needs a currency that can be printed and it is owned by the country itself. And a country shouldn't expect to have a main currency with too high volatility. Also, I assume Satoshi never dreams to make Bitcoin to be the main currency, he only means to create an alternative currency.

CMIIW

I think that even if bitcoin is adopted as a legal tender, fiat transactions will still dominate. Not everyone wants to use bitcoin as a means of payment for various reasons, so only a few people will use it. I think the same thing happened in El Salvador, some people still use fiat even though bitcoin has been legalized as a legal tender.

Indeed. Even if Bitcoin is a legal tender, fiats will remain the most options for any transaction in a country. Sure, people keep using fiats in El Salvador even if Bitcoin is declared as a legal tender there. Using Bitcoin requires stable internet connection, it some areas this is still something impossible. Especially in remote rural areas.

Related information: A survey reported only 7.5% of Salvadorans use BTC for the transactions

[Orpichukwu]

It's not suited for such a task (yet).

So it's a dream that cannot come true as of now.

It's not just a dream that can't come true now; it's a dream that will never come true, not now and not even ever. Maybe some digital currency might be able to do that in the future, but Bitcoin was never built for such a thing as replacing the fiat system of any country. It lacks what it takes to be a country's currency.

No government will ever want to use something that they cannot manipulate to increase its supply to be what their economy will depend on. That's not possible.

[CryptoBuds]

I think the same thing happened in El Salvador, some people still use fiat even though bitcoin has been legalized as a legal tender.

As far as I know, up to 70% of El Salvadorans do not like to use bitcoin as currency, they still prefer to use traditional payment methods like USD in daily transactions. The reasons are believed to be due to the volatile price of bitcoin, the habit of using cash and poor technical infrastructure in El Salvador...According to many reports, the adoption rate of bitcoin as a currency there is very low, and Nayib Bukele admitted to TIME magazine in 2024 that “Bitcoin is not as widely adopted as we expected. That is why many say bitcoin adoption in El Salvador has failed, while some still try to defend it as it is still the official currency there and has not been eliminated.

[tottong]

I agree about the idea that bitcoin is an alternative currency to fiat and other legal tender, but over time bitcoin may become the main currency in some countries that do not have their own currency. The real use case of bitcoin as a currency is basically not going to threaten the existing financial system, bitcoin is just an option if users need it.

I think that even if bitcoin is adopted as a legal tender, fiat transactions will still dominate. Not everyone wants to use bitcoin as a means of payment for various reasons, so only a few people will use it. I think the same thing happened in El Salvador, some people still use fiat even though bitcoin has been legalized as a legal tender.

In contrast to countries that do not have official currencies so that the use of Bitcoin as a legal currency can be applied, but it is not possible for some countries that have their own currencies because they have to change the rules in advance for the application process and this is not easy to apply.
The idea of ​​an alternative currency is an instrument of the process of achieving Bitcoin because Bitcoin is made not to threaten the financial system, but as an option for convenience.

Bitcoin began to be seen as an instrument based on the accuracy of use and how the idea began to be applied by El Salvador who openly received Bitcoin as their official currency.
For the future process we never know how things that are impossible can happen, but more and more countries that apply bitcoin as an official currency will actually make limits with the amount of Bitcoin availability itself.

[madnessteat]

In my opinion if a country fully adopted Bitcoin as its national currency it would definitely be a historic move. The transparency and limited supply could help reduce corruption and inflation but the volatility is a big concern, Day to day prices could be hard to manage and people with no internet or tech skills might struggle. It would push financial systems forward but also expose the country to a lot of risk So yeah it could start a new economic age but only if done with strong infrastructure and education in place

If Bitcoin was the currency of a country, that country would have gone a long way economically. However, as you say a country as a currency, operating Bitcoin will reduce a lot of corruption. But I think corruption can increase a lot if no proper action is taken from the government. Suppose you have one lakh Fiat coins. You can easily transfer through Bitcoin elsewhere. That is why it can be said that a scammer or corruption person can make big transactions through Bitcoin. But yes it has many good aspects such as using Bitcoin of all will increase a lot of resources. And citizens have to have a high rate of education so that no complications are encountered.

I don't think that using Bitcoin at the state level can significantly reduce corruption in the country. Local officials will still be able to take bribes for helping politicians, businessmen, and others with certain issues. If there are currently schemes in place to misappropriate public funds, what difference does it make how the funds are transferred if they end up in the accounts of front companies? In order to reduce corruption, stricter penalties for corrupt officials must be introduced. China is an excellent example of the fight against corruption, and they have done so precisely by tightening penalties.

[melinoe]

It's not suited for such a task (yet).

So it's a dream that cannot come true as of now.

It's not just a dream that can't come true now; it's a dream that will never come true, not now and not even ever. Maybe some digital currency might be able to do that in the future, but Bitcoin was never built for such a thing as replacing the fiat system of any country. It lacks what it takes to be a country's currency.

No government will ever want to use something that they cannot manipulate to increase its supply to be what their economy will depend on. That's not possible.

Or only some country that is small enough to try it out with BTC - because clearly, what you say is much more relevant for those that see BTC as something not as viable as fiat, which is already going through the pipelines of becoming digital (through CBDCs..)

[DeathAngel]

If Bitcoin was the only currency of a country prices would be volatile, daily transactions could be slow & costly & the economy might struggle with stability. People without internet or tech access would be left out. But it could also attract crypto investment & innovation. Layer 1 Bitcoin is incompatible as a main currency. There is a future for Bitcoin with LN as a main use currency though. El Salvador has dipped their toe in, hopefully others follow.

[melinoe]

If Bitcoin was the only currency of a country prices would be volatile, daily transactions could be slow & costly & the economy might struggle with stability. People without internet or tech access would be left out. But it could also attract crypto investment & innovation. Layer 1 Bitcoin is incompatible as a main currency. There is a future for Bitcoin with LN as a main use currency though. El Salvador has dipped their toe in, hopefully others follow.

I think there will be a group of smaller countries going through Salvador's way, and only then - bigger ones would get what others already experienced and turn it into something new - their own way regarding BTC, these times are far far ahead, though..

[ruykeri]

As Bitcoin's popularity continues to grow, many are wondering what it would be like if Bitcoin became the official currency of a country.But I think there is no situation yet where a country would accept Bitcoin as its currency, but it is not unusual for it to happen in the future.

If Bitcoin is used as the common currency of a country, then some pictures can be observed, such as international transactions will be much easier.It will be easier to transact without the hassle of banks.And the most important thing I think is that inflation can be prevented because Bitcoin can only be mined up to a maximum of 21 million.

[john_egbert]

As Bitcoin's popularity continues to grow, many are wondering what it would be like if Bitcoin became the official currency of a country.But I think there is no situation yet where a country would accept Bitcoin as its currency, but it is not unusual for it to happen in the future.

If Bitcoin is used as the common currency of a country, then some pictures can be observed, such as international transactions will be much easier.It will be easier to transact without the hassle of banks.And the most important thing I think is that inflation can be prevented because Bitcoin can only be mined up to a maximum of 21 million.

You forget about what makes this idea obsolete: the suitability of BTC for such a task.

Would it be the same as going to a bank and asking a BTC loan? Or things like that? Was it envisioned for BTC to become such a thing? No.

But surely, BTC adapts to what happens around it and we may never know what would be with it in a decade or so

[shield132]

☞If Bitcoin was the currency of a country then what will happen?☜

Cryptocurrency is known as the fastest transaction medium for people around the world. Bitcoin is most commonly known and used token in cryptocurrency. Suppose a country began to use Bitcoin instead of their currency. Then, what will happen?

The price of Bitcoin is unstable. Its price may increase or decrease. If a country accepts Bitcoin as their currency, then there will be an economic revolution in that country.

Bitcoin will be operated without the control of the central bank or government of that country. It is capable of preventing inflation. Because it is not possible to print any additional bitcoin. For this, the people of that country can do their transaction easily, transparently & faster and will have the potential to reduce corruption rates. However, when all transactions are completely dependent on online, it will be mandatory for all of the country to gain skills in this regard. 

Finally, if Bitcoin is the currency of a country, it will start a new economic age of that country. This will improve the economy of that country and some damage. So these positive and negative aspects of that country should be noticed equally.

I can't imagine how Bitcoin can be the currency of a country when it's decentralised and mined worldwide. The country needs a centralised currency to have control on it, to do different monetary polices and have some level of control on it. Since Bitcoin is decentralised and worldwide, it's a very bad choice for any country. Also, Bitcoin doesn't have a cash version, which makes it very impractical and unusable. Using of Bitcoin is not one of the easiest thing, transactions are also slow and sometimes expensive, you need to wait for a few minutes and sometimes up to an hour or a little bit more to get your transaction confirmed and for 3 or six confirmations, sometimes you need to wait longer.

[fikrett]

I can't imagine how Bitcoin can be the currency of a country when it's decentralised and mined worldwide. The country needs a centralised currency to have control on it, to do different monetary polices and have some level of control on it. Since Bitcoin is decentralised and worldwide, it's a very bad choice for any country. Also, Bitcoin doesn't have a cash version, which makes it very impractical and unusable. Using of Bitcoin is not one of the easiest thing, transactions are also slow and sometimes expensive, you need to wait for a few minutes and sometimes up to an hour or a little bit more to get your transaction confirmed and for 3 or six confirmations, sometimes you need to wait longer.

And we talk about hundreds of thousands of people trying to do the same - we can imagine what it can lead to regarding the timing - pricing, without LN and stuff like that making things better.

[Orpichukwu]

…Or only some country that is small enough to try it out with BTC - because clearly, what you say is much more relevant for those that see BTC as something not as viable as fiat, which is already going through the pipelines of becoming digital (through CBDCs..)

How small do you think a county should be before they can practice that and it will work? Let's not forget the fact that the 21 million supply is not just going to be controlled by that country. Another thing too is, how much will they be willing to waste in every single transaction each time they want to make a little purchase? Aside from the limited supply, there are many limitations that I consider to be what makes Bitcoin unsuitable to become a country's only currency.

[Raflesia]

☞If Bitcoin was the currency of a country then what will happen?☜

Cryptocurrency is known as the fastest transaction medium for people around the world. Bitcoin is most commonly known and used token in cryptocurrency. Suppose a country began to use Bitcoin instead of their currency. Then, what will happen?

The price of Bitcoin is unstable. Its price may increase or decrease. If a country accepts Bitcoin as their currency, then there will be an economic revolution in that country.

Bitcoin will be operated without the control of the central bank or government of that country. It is capable of preventing inflation. Because it is not possible to print any additional bitcoin. For this, the people of that country can do their transaction easily, transparently & faster and will have the potential to reduce corruption rates. However, when all transactions are completely dependent on online, it will be mandatory for all of the country to gain skills in this regard. 

Finally, if Bitcoin is the currency of a country, it will start a new economic age of that country. This will improve the economy of that country and some damage. So these positive and negative aspects of that country should be noticed equally.

I can't imagine how Bitcoin can be the currency of a country when it's decentralised and mined worldwide. The country needs a centralised currency to have control on it, to do different monetary polices and have some level of control on it. Since Bitcoin is decentralised and worldwide, it's a very bad choice for any country. Also, Bitcoin doesn't have a cash version, which makes it very impractical and unusable. Using of Bitcoin is not one of the easiest thing, transactions are also slow and sometimes expensive, you need to wait for a few minutes and sometimes up to an hour or a little bit more to get your transaction confirmed and for 3 or six confirmations, sometimes you need to wait longer.

Therefore, it would be better if bitcoin functioned as something that Satoshi had intended from the start where its role was only an alternative option, not the core, so that some unexpected things including the worst possibilities would not happen.

Although bitcoin's progress is very good and their development is extraordinary, we must be aware that in the end the risk always remains for bitcoin and the main function of bitcoin is also not as a replacement but an alternative, so just focus there.
When forcing to replace fiat in a country, it is clearly very risky for the country itself. It does not mean that in this context, confidence in bitcoin is fading, but we also cannot force it too much as if everything can be done by bitcoin and we certainly know that when Satoshi said that bitcoin was only an alternative, of course this was in very good consideration and had been thought out very carefully.

[Abiky]

If Bitcoin was the only currency of a country prices would be volatile, daily transactions could be slow & costly & the economy might struggle with stability. People without internet or tech access would be left out. But it could also attract crypto investment & innovation. Layer 1 Bitcoin is incompatible as a main currency. There is a future for Bitcoin with LN as a main use currency though. El Salvador has dipped their toe in, hopefully others follow.

You're thinking in Fiat terms. But volatility is non-existent when you use BTC as cash. 1 BTC = 1 BTC, right? Volatility becomes an issue when people consider Bitcoin to be an investment. The world still hasn't ditched Fiat as the standard unit of account, so I wouldn't expect things to change anytime soon.

As for the LN, don't count on it magically solving BTC's scaling issues. The L2 network is still limited to the main chain's transaction capacity (opening/closing channels). Developers need to scale the main Bitcoin blockchain at some point, allowing the LN to operate without constraints. So far, only El Salvador has BTC as its main currency. But it's not the only legal tender in the country. El Salvador still relies on USD transactions. Other countries are interested in adding BTC to their national reserves as some sort of Gold alternative. But as a currency? Good luck with that. I guess Satoshi's original vision for Bitcoin won't come true. But I could be wrong...

[shield132]

Therefore, it would be better if bitcoin functioned as something that Satoshi had intended from the start where its role was only an alternative option, not the core, so that some unexpected things including the worst possibilities would not happen.

Although bitcoin's progress is very good and their development is extraordinary, we must be aware that in the end the risk always remains for bitcoin and the main function of bitcoin is also not as a replacement but an alternative, so just focus there.
When forcing to replace fiat in a country, it is clearly very risky for the country itself. It does not mean that in this context, confidence in bitcoin is fading, but we also cannot force it too much as if everything can be done by bitcoin and we certainly know that when Satoshi said that bitcoin was only an alternative, of course this was in very good consideration and had been thought out very carefully.

I believe that Bitcoin's fate is already destined. It's going to be the digital gold, a form of asset which will regularly be used for reserves. If you see, governments are slowly making Bitcoin part of their strategic reserves and every day, new companies are following this trend.

Believe me, no country will try to replace fiat with Bitcoin. Even El Salvador didn't do that. Bitcoin, as a currency is very unusable for the country and its population but it's also very dangerous because of its volatility. It usually goes up but it also goes down sometimes and this creates a very unstable environment for people. Imagine that you are about to pay for a heart surgery, which costs $10,000 and tomorrow Bitcoin's price fell by 10%, that's a huge drop for a citizen. The country and people needs a stable currency and an easy payment method.

[Abiky]

I believe that Bitcoin's fate is already destined. It's going to be the digital gold, a form of asset which will regularly be used for reserves. If you see, governments are slowly making Bitcoin part of their strategic reserves and every day, new companies are following this trend.

Believe me, no country will try to replace fiat with Bitcoin. Even El Salvador didn't do that. Bitcoin, as a currency is very unusable for the country and its population but it's also very dangerous because of its volatility. It usually goes up but it also goes down sometimes and this creates a very unstable environment for people. Imagine that you are about to pay for a heart surgery, which costs $10,000 and tomorrow Bitcoin's price fell by 10%, that's a huge drop for a citizen. The country and people needs a stable currency and an easy payment method.

I seem to recall governments using Gold to back their currencies a long time ago. If they didit before, they can do it again with Bitcoin. Of course, there's a slight chance BTC will replace Fiat in its entirety. Especially when Bitcoin is decentralized. Governments are always striving for control/power over the economy, so they will keep Fiat alive forever.

Since many governments are considering adding BTC to their reserves, the pioneer cryptocurrency will ultimately be used as a hedge against inflation (store of value). Backing Fiat with BTC would be ideal, but not necessary. With many players in the game, BTC will continue to grow in value over the long term. It feels good to have greater purchasing power "hodling" BTC. Doesn't it?