In a case where we still have unbanked population!

[Pablo-wood]

Financial inclusion has long been a challenge in rural areas. Some countries still have rural areas with limited access to modern infrastructure or financial systems. Some have to travel between communities or to the nearest town around them before they can access formal banking services... While traditional infrastructure may be limited,  communities like this might increasingly have access to the internet and smartphones, creating new opportunities for digital financial tools like Bitcoin.

People living in rural areas with limited access to traditional banking services can  benefit from Bitcoin as an alternative peer-to-peer (P2P) payment method, offering greater ease and convenience. In order to push this adoption, more targeted social media campaigns and engaging Bitcoin related reels should be promoted across the platforms most used in these communities.

Campaigns targeting mostly Community/ethnic groups on big social media platforms can also be a big advantage to the Bitcoin community. Formal education will obviously not bring this sensitization to limelight but with exposed Bitcoin enthusiasts like you and me simple and organized social media campaigns can go a long way to keep this information fresh in the minds of people living in most rural areas.

[TEBTC]

Yeah I get your point as there is still a gap between those who are having access to financial institutions and with those living in rural areas which is cut off from the big cities you made a big point but you have to realize something that any who is not having access to financial institutions like having a bank account in the bank in this time will not accept adopt Bitcoin and make use of it , the reason is that there are parts of the each countries that is cut off from the cities which to me is lacking in basic amenities like network schools electricity etc , so it will be difficult for these set of people to accept Bitcoin because they don't know what it means the best thing will be providing these basic amenities to them by government and you will see that they will naturally align with the rest of the country by embracing the banks and crypto currency will follow suits

[coyhasmon]

With banks it is hard for many reasons. Often they ask too much information and make the process complicated. In other times, if you live somewhere rural you may need to go far away to open your account. Even when you open it, there is no branch close to you and maybe only an ATM at best. For someone who needs help from a bank worker in a branch, this is not useful. So why bother and lose some important money each month to pay for the account?

I think Bitcoin locked in LN is best for this purpose, lowest transfer speed and no monthly fees. But with this there are new problems. One is that there will be very limited acceptance of these payments. Another is having a very friendly application that could easily onboard new people. Most wallets are not really designed for people who don't know crypto. That is why those small community projects where they are trying to create Bitcoin circular economies are great. I am not sure that this problem can be tackled at big scale at once, maybe like that it is the best approach. With each community where this is done successfully, new experience can be gathered which will help with the next community.

[Fortify]

This is entirely the fault of the government in those regions and while they may the some of the poorest or highly populated, they are also some of the most religious - the correlation should be quite obvious. Unfortunately hard liners get into power and manage to keep it consolidated by suppressing the people, one way to do that is to keep them uneducated. The internet is one of the best education tools available in the modern world, so you have to wonder if their leaders are incompetent, corrupt or both. Even when the penetration in these regions goes up, bitcoin might be useful to a few of them but the vast majority will not have the funds to save anything or they need to pay people directly in their local currency - even tiny transaction fees can amount to a huge percentage of their income in this case.

[Stablexcoin]

It calls for circumstances, being poor and residing somewhere in a rural environment, instead of using banks you decided to hold little savings in Bitcoin, it is too risky because of Bitcoin volatility, your $100 used to save in Bitcoin will not remain exactly that amount, it will either go up or down it can never be stable no matter how consolidated it is.

Banks has made transactions simpler by giving out mobile banks, stay at home and carry out transactions, not minding Bitcoin can still be an option but not necessary for rural lifestyle.

[peter0425]

Good point but it’s just not about accessibility by distance. Some familiar are just really incapable of opening banks due to many and strict rules of banks about opening one. Some also decide that banks are not for them and opt to save their money elsewhere. Banks have huge fees that no normal citizen would be happy to pay for.

[mindrust]

Bitcoin is a good solution for the unbanked but they still need the infrastructure (payment processors) to be able to spend bitcoin. They’ll probably need bank accounts to purchase bitcoin on an exchange anyway. (That’s unless they use btc ATM’s or do P2P trading)

I can’t even imagine how hard it is to live without having a bank account. If these people can live like that, believe it or not, they probably won’t ever need bitcoin. On the paper it looks cool but btc and banking became way too connected at this point so it is unrealistic to expect these people to use btc right away.

[Bitcoin Smith]

Bitcoin is a good solution for the unbanked but they still need the infrastructure (payment processors) to be able to spend bitcoin. They’ll probably need bank accounts to purchase bitcoin on an exchange anyway. (That’s unless they use btc ATM’s or do P2P trading)

I can’t even imagine how hard it is to live without having a bank account. If these people can live like that, believe it or not, they probably won’t ever need bitcoin. On the paper it looks cool but btc and banking became way too connected at this point so it is unrealistic to expect these people to use btc right away.

That's right, who is going to give them bitcoin if they don't even have access to banks.
Not sure the accuracy of data reported on the chart because in India banks exists almost everywhere and to know it's extend even post offices got banking services and post offices exists in villages if their population is less than 100 so India has more banking access than electricity if I am not wrong.

[EluguHcman]

Financial inclusion has long been a challenge in rural areas. Some countries still have rural areas with limited access to modern infrastructure or financial systems. Some have to travel between communities or to the nearest town around them before they can access formal banking services... While traditional infrastructure may be limited,  communities like this might increasingly have access to the internet and smartphones, creating new opportunities for digital financial tools like Bitcoin.

I doubt. Such advancement for the affected communities to be that friendly with the advanced technologies might even seem worse and they will even lack the knowledge of operating mobile or electronic devices.
This is why Bitcoin adoption rate had been so poor in those undeveloped countries or regions if I must say.

Only few in such situation can sort themselves in staying upright with the digital system while majority be in blackouts. That note is why Bitcoin Speculation could be limited to go viral because those in the rural areas are not living up to the standard to be friendly with digital or technical facilities.

Even if they do get accessible to the internets to me familiar with Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies, they will still find it difficult to process transactions because those using the digital currencies may only own it for resources to yield them profits and not like the traditional currencies that is using for daily payments because even in the urban and developed communities there are just few individuals accepting Bitcoin for payments and still not everyone users can afford to pay for their services with Bitcoin because it is more valued as asset than just currency for payments services.

[Stepstowealth]

People living in rural areas with limited access to traditional banking services can  benefit from Bitcoin as an alternative peer-to-peer (P2P) payment method, offering greater ease and convenience. In order to push this adoption, more targeted social media campaigns and engaging Bitcoin related reels should be promoted across the platforms most used in these communities.

I don't think it will be possible to have and properly use bitcoins without using traditional banks or banking. Every investor in bitcoin perhaps needs a bank at some point maybe for conversion of physical cash to bitcoins in exchanges. How are villagers and the people in these areas that you have described going to change their cash to crypto without any form of banking? i think that challenge will still be there.

[Alphakilo]

People living in rural areas with limited access to traditional banking services can  benefit from Bitcoin as an alternative peer-to-peer (P2P) payment method, offering greater ease and convenience. In order to push this adoption, more targeted social media campaigns and engaging Bitcoin related reels should be promoted across the platforms most used in these communities.

I do not believe that people in the rural areas can benefit from bitcoin as an alternative peer-to-peer payment method through just only social media campigns. Infact, social media campaigns will be one of the most ineffective ways for them to consider this option. You need boots on the ground. You need a well planned and organized door-to-door campaign in the rural areas.

They need real people to speak to them and people they can ask their questions to. But still you will have a hard time trying to convince them because they believe the traditional banking system more than these. And with the disproportionate number of old people to young people in the rural communities, learning new technologies for them will be difficult.

I am using the reality on ground based on expereince to answer the question.

[Coyster]

People who live in such conditions do not need bitcoin as a solution to their lack, what they need is actually the infrastructure and amenities they lack. Even if you introduce people like this to bitcoin, it does not help their case that much, it is not like they can directly spend bitcoin, they still need to exchange it for fiat, and except it is a face to face trade, they need a bank account.

[d5000]

It calls for circumstances, being poor and residing somewhere in a rural environment, instead of using banks you decided to hold little savings in Bitcoin, it is too risky because of Bitcoin volatility, your $100 used to save in Bitcoin will not remain exactly that amount, it will either go up or down it can never be stable no matter how consolidated it is.

Exactly. This problem must be addressed if Bitcoin really is meant to be a tool for the "unbanked".

Even if volatility is lowering, it's currently not realistic to bring it down to fiat currency levels. However, perhaps in a couple of years it could equal gold volatility. It would make a huge difference if bear markets didn't go that low. In the case of gold, rarely a bear market goes below 50% of the previous ATH. That would be at least useful for people who want to save money for a long time and can afford a little loss.

Until then, crypto firms however could be creative and offer hedging tools. For example, it would be nice if at my local Bitcoin exchange I could also buy Bitcoin options, which can be one of these tools. You could for example buy a put option to sell your Bitcoins to a price of 70% of the current value to be protected against a major loss. One could pay for these options using a part of the profit in bull markets. Another possible alternative is to design a kind of "insurance" against bear markets.

Doing hedging with additional financial instruments like options would enable you to hold your BTC in self-custodial wallets (Bitcoin Core, Electrum, Sparrow, Ginger ...). You would only have to manage the hedging contracts on a centralized platform.

It's even possible that the hedging / option contracts could also be decentralized, but you would then have to use stablecoins which have their own risks.

[STT]

Micro banking and finance was a big deal and trigger word spread about a few years back, the idea you can reach anywhere in theory if you can spread via setup local banking temporary branches and similar initiatives.
  Crypto is even more suited to that idea surely then FIAT might be, though the fractional banking that FIAT takes with it is a deceptively hard factor to beat.  The problem with FIAT is it demands some costs on those who use it, the interest charged and other claims on property can be harsh in pulling back value from those who utilize such services.   I somehow think crypto is more open with its costs to users and possibly less harmful to them long term.

The growth of India was something mentioned by somebody discussing the failure and breakdown that will occur during a debt crisis spreading across the world.  He was very negatively making the point that debt service costs even upon governments will become untenable yet India has growth that can outstrip such failures and be a good investment across decades.
  Demographically I think India overtakes China so I tend to agree, genuine growth because many in India have yet so much to gain is something to envy in real growth terms.  We can look down on people who are 'unbanked' or say how lucky they are in such a bright future with everything to gain and we hope to help them in a mutual way so I see it as a positive perspective personally.

your $100 used to save in Bitcoin will not remain exactly that amount

I hope we reach the point where the $ price doesnt matter, I will be properly bullish at that point.  Im not sure how or when we can reach that level, BTC just carries on in its trade high or low but I hope that idea becomes dominant.

[coyhasmon]

It calls for circumstances, being poor and residing somewhere in a rural environment, instead of using banks you decided to hold little savings in Bitcoin, it is too risky because of Bitcoin volatility, your $100 used to save in Bitcoin will not remain exactly that amount, it will either go up or down it can never be stable no matter how consolidated it is.

Exactly. This problem must be addressed if Bitcoin really is meant to be a tool for the "unbanked".

Even if volatility is lowering, it's currently not realistic to bring it down to fiat currency levels. However, perhaps in a couple of years it could equal gold volatility. It would make a huge difference if bear markets didn't go that low. In the case of gold, rarely a bear market goes below 50% of the previous ATH. That would be at least useful for people who want to save money for a long time and can afford a little loss.

I think that you are seriously overestimating the volatility of Bitcoin these days and underestimating the volatility of most currencies of the world. The fact is most people in particular poor people are forced to use the currency of their country. They have limited knowledge or possibilities to use anything else. Take a look at these sources.
https://bitbo.io/volatility/.
https://coinedition.com/lower-volatility-high-returns-ark-invests-big-ideas-2025-report-strengthens-btcs-digital-gold-case/
https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/BVOL/?timeframe=ALL

I'm not sure if these is a comparison website that shows many currencies but you get the idea here. Sure it could be better, but it is not as bad anymore. How many currencies have basically collapsed in the last 2 decades?

Until then, crypto firms however could be creative and offer hedging tools. For example, it would be nice if at my local Bitcoin exchange I could also buy Bitcoin options, which can be one of these tools. You could for example buy a put option to sell your Bitcoins to a price of 70% of the current value to be protected against a major loss. One could pay for these options using a part of the profit in bull markets. Another possible alternative is to design a kind of "insurance" against bear markets.

Doing hedging with additional financial instruments like options would enable you to hold your BTC in self-custodial wallets (Bitcoin Core, Electrum, Sparrow, Ginger ...). You would only have to manage the hedging contracts on a centralized platform.

It's even possible that the hedging / option contracts could also be decentralized, but you would then have to use stablecoins which have their own risks.

I strongly think that the primary problems are accessibility, usability and the availability of options. Take a look at one financial example. You can use BTC to get a collateral but typically for a LTV of 50% and an interest rate of more than 10% per year. This is still quite bad compared to traditional financial options and there is added risk as now a third party holds your Bitcoin.

[reagansimms]

This kind of situation is very common, not only in some of the countries listed in the table, rural areas in other countries are also isolated from various services even though they live in an increasingly sophisticated era. I actually see a very profitable business opportunity, especially in rural areas where access to modern infrastructure such as banking is still limited. Opening a mini ATM service is one of the most promising businesses because access to banks or ATM is still far away, people in rural areas can carry out transactions such as cash withdrawals, money transfers and filling balances to Exchange (for those who want to accumulate Bitcoin periodically).

Business owners will earn commissions on each transaction (depending on the nominal amount specified), in addition, this business also does not require large costs because it can be run anytime and anywhere as long as you have the necessary equipment. Rural communities also need to broaden their horizons so they can interact with technological developments. Bitcoin is also an alternative for conducting various transactions, perhaps due to the limited number of users, using a mini ATM service is the best step for them.

[coyhasmon]

This kind of situation is very common, not only in some of the countries listed in the table, rural areas in other countries are also isolated from various services even though they live in an increasingly sophisticated era. I actually see a very profitable business opportunity, especially in rural areas where access to modern infrastructure such as banking is still limited. Opening a mini ATM service is one of the most promising businesses because access to banks or ATM is still far away, people in rural areas can carry out transactions such as cash withdrawals, money transfers and filling balances to Exchange (for those who want to accumulate Bitcoin periodically).

Business owners will earn commissions on each transaction (depending on the nominal amount specified), in addition, this business also does not require large costs because it can be run anytime and anywhere as long as you have the necessary equipment. Rural communities also need to broaden their horizons so they can interact with technological developments. Bitcoin is also an alternative for conducting various transactions, perhaps due to the limited number of users, using a mini ATM service is the best step for them.

I don't think that is a good idea at all. First the interest in such a thing would be very low as the knowledge and need for Bitcoin is low. Second, are you even aware how high ATM fees are on average? 5-10% which for poor people is very expensive.

[d5000]

I think that you are seriously overestimating the volatility of Bitcoin these days and underestimating the volatility of most currencies of the world.

I'm actually monitoring the Bitbo volatility chart quite closely as I'm very interested in that topic. In this post in another thread I've compared Bitcoin's volatility with the Brazilian Real and gold. Bitcoin's 30 and 60-day volatility is actually about 2 times the gold and BRL volatility (both are surprisingly close). I chose the BRL because it's a larger currency but not as stable as the USD or the EUR which do indeed represent the "stability extreme" when we talk about currencies, but the BRL is also not a notoriously inflationary currency like the Argentine Peso or the Venezuelan Bolívar which are also extreme cases. So it's very much an "average" currency.

Here I'm re-posting the same image but with recent data and additionally with the Thailandese Baht:

30 day volatility:


60 day volatility:


So we're actually quite well "on track" towards lower volatility, but it's still some way to go until we reach average currencies' values. And the problem are the >20%-30% crashes we see every now and then. Most of the time these are dips which recover fastly (like the ~30% August dip in 2024), but we don't have really bearish conditions since late 2022, so we don't know what will happen if the market comes to the conclusion that "the top of this bull market is in". Unfortunately, it's still too early to really be sure that Bitcoin won't dip again 50% or more in this case, in less than a year.

For savings, and for a small part of a typical middle class families' fortune (even in average/"emerging" countries), Bitcoin is already quite good. It's still a bit risky though.

My dream would be merchants with Bitcoin-specific promotions and discounts which could work a bit like a "backing", for example if during a little dip they could offer goods "for yesterday's Bitcoin price" (see this old thread) but there was not much interest in that topic, even if I'm quite sure they could actually benefit from such marketing actions.

[philipma1957]

Financial inclusion has long been a challenge in rural areas. Some countries still have rural areas with limited access to modern infrastructure or financial systems. Some have to travel between communities or to the nearest town around them before they can access formal banking services... While traditional infrastructure may be limited,  communities like this might increasingly have access to the internet and smartphones, creating new opportunities for digital financial tools like Bitcoin.

People living in rural areas with limited access to traditional banking services can  benefit from Bitcoin as an alternative peer-to-peer (P2P) payment method, offering greater ease and convenience. In order to push this adoption, more targeted social media campaigns and engaging Bitcoin related reels should be promoted across the platforms most used in these communities.



Campaigns targeting mostly Community/ethnic groups on big social media platforms can also be a big advantage to the Bitcoin community. Formal education will obviously not bring this sensitization to limelight but with exposed Bitcoin enthusiasts like you and me simple and organized social media campaigns can go a long way to keep this information fresh in the minds of people living in most rural areas.

and with no banking how do they buy the btc?

and if they have a cell phone why wouldn’t they have banking?

[coyhasmon]

I think that you are seriously overestimating the volatility of Bitcoin these days and underestimating the volatility of most currencies of the world.

I'm actually monitoring the Bitbo volatility chart quite closely as I'm very interested in that topic. In this post in another thread I've compared Bitcoin's volatility with the Brazilian Real and gold. Bitcoin's 30 and 60-day volatility is actually about 2 times the gold and BRL volatility (both are surprisingly close). I chose the BRL because it's a larger currency but not as stable as the USD or the EUR which do indeed represent the "stability extreme" when we talk about currencies, but the BRL is also not a notoriously inflationary currency like the Argentine Peso or the Venezuelan Bolívar which are also extreme cases. So it's very much an "average" currency.

Excellent, thanks for sharing that and I'll watch the thread!

So we're actually quite well "on track" towards lower volatility, but it's still some way to go until we reach average currencies' values. And the problem are the >20%-30% crashes we see every now and then. Most of the time these are dips which recover fastly (like the ~30% August dip in 2024),

I think that what we also forget to mention is the moving trend when we talk about volatility. Two different things can have the same rates of volatility, but one can have a positive (appreciating) and the other a negative (depreciating) trend. An asset such as Bitcoin can't possibly have volatility as low as the best currencies because it is still in its value discovering phase. I believe this phase will continue for a few more cycles. At the point where we are now, it must either go to the million range or it will go bust.

but we don't have really bearish conditions since late 2022, so we don't know what will happen if the market comes to the conclusion that "the top of this bull market is in". Unfortunately, it's still too early to really be sure that Bitcoin won't dip again 50% or more in this case, in less than a year.

I strongly disagree with this. All the bullishness comes only from two activities the ETFs and Bitcoin treasuries, nothing else. The macro environment is terrible. There are wars everywhere, interest rates are high and quantitative tightening is still going on.

For savings, and for a small part of a typical middle class families' fortune (even in average/"emerging" countries), Bitcoin is already quite good. It's still a bit risky though.

I would like to pose another question as a counter. Assuming the USD is the strongest currency, how much have savings been devalued in real terms in just the last 5 years? I'm not talking about officially fabricated numbers, but the real market value of the dollar. I think these days we can safely consider saving in other currencies more risky.