Government regulations discourage Bitcoin payments

[Zaka1221]

The more adoption there is, the easier the path becomes. It can't be integrated all at once, even though things with BTC have increased significantly since its inception. It has garnered a lot of attention from governments, from those stock market investors who hadn't yet made up their minds, and from institutional investors who are now buying heavily and absorbing market downturns.

We can't wait for that moment to arrive; the important thing now is to accumulate.

Now Bitcoin is at a level where governments are working to have legislation in the long run that allows them to have enough benefits from its features because now it's having enough depth to stay on top of the financial world with strong authority, big adoptions, and enough community doing good work without having any problem.

Taking tax and keeping things in check for fighting against AML is also helping out because now governments understand it's never been easy to stop flow of Bitcoin; it's working beyond boundaries and also giving good ways of fighting with many problems where they never think and have any strong way of fighting.

People need to understand its features and security, which always give good results and profit; never feel panic, and do things in emotions that always play fair and wisely.

[danadc]

Now Bitcoin is at a level where governments are working to have legislation in the long run that allows them to have enough benefits from its features because now it's having enough depth to stay on top of the financial world with strong authority, big adoptions, and enough community doing good work without having any problem.

Taking tax and keeping things in check for fighting against AML is also helping out because now governments understand it's never been easy to stop flow of Bitcoin; it's working beyond boundaries and also giving good ways of fighting with many problems where they never think and have any strong way of fighting.

People need to understand its features and security, which always give good results and profit; never feel panic, and do things in emotions that always play fair and wisely.

Governments will always look out for their own interests, not for the people who truly need the asset. The government and banks always want to keep the lion's share for themselves. Fortunately, Bitcoin doesn't belong to them, nor do they control it. It's free; you can have it, I can have it. As long as you have money and buy more, you can have it, and no one can take it away.

Regulations only benefit governments. I haven't seen a regulation that benefits anyone. Regulation = prohibition, phrased politely with sophisticated language and using the power of a government.

[Nwada001]

Giving the fact that Bitcoin has gone a long way from where it started, I'm talking base on adoption and price rate, I think Bitcoin is in a good place even if people spend there Bitcoin or not, and Satoshi won't be disappointed because given that he is a smart person he would've anticipated what is happening with the government now.

Bitcoin has come a long way; many people hold it and perform transactions on a daily basis, and that’s part of the things that are keeping the trend and growth alive. If everyone decides not to be transacting it and just holds it without anything being recorded on the blockchain, do you think Bitcoin will still seem the same way? Something that is not being used won’t have any value attached to it again to some extent.

[Sonia_123]

There is nothing to be unhappy with, instead Satoshi will be happy wherever he his because his dreams has come through to save the world from financial economy crisis, it is not see or being used as a store of value alone also for daily of those that are into  bitcoin, although  government rules and regulations may have caused  Bitcoin not spreading very fast but it is gradually taking it's way.

Government impact and payment success is being affected by banking and payment restrictions , tax and burden compliance, government regulations crackdown, underground phishing activities, since Bitcoin is decentralized which operates without a third party people does transact wallet to wallet even if you have official adoption payment is heavily restricted.

With time government policy that is trying to be rigid towards Bitcoin adoption will become flexible and adoption will continue to take place in those countries that have not yet adopted Bitcoin.

[danadc]

With time government policy that is trying to be rigid towards Bitcoin adoption will become flexible and adoption will continue to take place in those countries that have not yet adopted Bitcoin.

That's what catches my attention: adoption will be much higher, and with greater adoption, the price will legally have to rise because many more people will participate. As things become integrated into the global system of governments, those governments that initially refuse to accept BTC will eventually have to. You can't say no to money; a government can't be that obtuse.

Since all governments worldwide will accept BTC, they must be fighting against the tide. You can't do that, because everyone will buy BTC on their own, evading government regulations.

[ruykeri]

Giving the fact that Bitcoin has gone a long way from where it started, I'm talking base on adoption and price rate, I think Bitcoin is in a good place even if people spend there Bitcoin or not, and Satoshi won't be disappointed because given that he is a smart person he would've anticipated what is happening with the government now.

Bitcoin has come a long way; many people hold it and perform transactions on a daily basis, and that’s part of the things that are keeping the trend and growth alive. If everyone decides not to be transacting it and just holds it without anything being recorded on the blockchain, do you think Bitcoin will still seem the same way? Something that is not being used won’t have any value attached to it again to some extent.

You have said a important concept. But will everyone just hold bitcoin instead of trading it? I don't think it's possible. Bitcoin gives people freedom. So people hold it according to their convenience, sell it when needed. And the transaction is completed when bitcoin is being sold and someone else buys it. So since everyone's intention is different, everyone's opinions and decisions also differ. This is exactly why bitcoin will never be in a holding state. short-term trading, hold it,  selling it after long time is normal activity and it will be in long run . Some may have held it for many years and now regularly sell a certain amount and live the rest of their life, without thinking about making any kind of income. So I personally think that bitcoin will always be in transaction . The volatility of bitcoin's price will always be there. And this is the characteristic of bitcoin, which has increased its acceptance among people even more.

[Asuspawer09]

Because Bitcoin was originally designed for peer-to-peer transactions I think that as more people use Bitcoin for payments demand will grow and Bitcoins value will rise and eventually people will see Bitcoin as a store of value.

Now it seems that we are focusing more on Bitcoin as a store of value than on Bitcoin as a payment method. I feel that governments have ruined Bitcoins transaction side with their regulations.

For example capital gains tax in some countries says that even if Bitcoin is used for payments Bitcoin can be taxed if Bitcoins value has gone up. So of encouraging people to spend Bitcoin these regulations seem to encourage people to hold Bitcoin. Do you think Satoshi would be happy with Bitcoin today or would Satoshi be disappointed that Bitcoins original purpose as peer-, to-peer electronic cash is no longer the focus?

Bitcoin started to be adopted in many countries. Back in the day, there were probably only a few people who knew Bitcoin in my country, and even the local board only had a few members. I remember the time when Bitcoin was kinda of an enemy of the banks, probably, it was a topic here most of the time that Bitcoin was going to kill the banks. Now it is already adopted by centralized platforms in the banks, where you can already buy Bitcoin in the bank's platform.

There are a lot of conflicts with the regulations, for sure, and I don't like that it is getting centralized because it is defeating its purpose. We don't want it to get regulated because it should not be regulated, but I guess the government wants to regulate everything because they are going to earn on it, they are taking advantage of it because they know that they can't touch it.

[Etranger]

Bitcoin started to be adopted in many countries. Back in the day, there were probably only a few people who knew Bitcoin in my country, and even the local board only had a few members. I remember the time when Bitcoin was kinda of an enemy of the banks, probably, it was a topic here most of the time that Bitcoin was going to kill the banks. Now it is already adopted by centralized platforms in the banks, where you can already buy Bitcoin in the bank's platform.

There are a lot of conflicts with the regulations, for sure, and I don't like that it is getting centralized because it is defeating its purpose. We don't want it to get regulated because it should not be regulated, but I guess the government wants to regulate everything because they are going to earn on it, they are taking advantage of it because they know that they can't touch it.

The regulation of Bitcoin is simply a matter of time. More advanced countries have been working on it for a long time, and others are now starting to follow their lead. Basic rules for exchanges and exchangers are turning into laws. Cryptocurrencies have grown so large that they simply can’t be ignored, no matter how hidebound and conformist a government may be. Only a fool pretends they don’t exist. That’s why countries are starting to decide exactly how they will deal with them.

[DKeller]

I’m not sure regulation is the main reason tho. Even in countries with no capital gains tax on crypto most people still hold instead of spending, mostly because nobody wants to pay with something they think will be worth more next year.
Fees and slow confirmations when the network is busy don’t help either. Tax rules add some friction for sure but I’d say volatility and the “number go up” mindset pushed the store of value idea way more than any government did. As for Satoshi, yeah the whitepaper says electronic cash but he seemed pretty practical so I doubt he’d mind people saving in it as long as you can still send it peer-to-peer without asking anyone’s permission.

[Chilwell]

Giving the fact that Bitcoin has gone a long way from where it started, I'm talking base on adoption and price rate, I think Bitcoin is in a good place even if people spend there Bitcoin or not, and Satoshi won't be disappointed because given that he is a smart person he would've anticipated what is happening with the government now.

Bitcoin has come a long way; many people hold it and perform transactions on a daily basis, and that’s part of the things that are keeping the trend and growth alive. If everyone decides not to be transacting it and just holds it without anything being recorded on the blockchain, do you think Bitcoin will still seem the same way? Something that is not being used won’t have any value attached to it again to some extent.

It is going to look so obvious if everyone is hold it, but as a lot of people are making transactions it will continue to gain more value. For everyone to be holding then what do we expect, just as you said, I absolutely agree with what you have said, because it will not make any sense for blockchain to have no record, but transacting with it will continue to bring it more closer to the people and also more record will be taken down. Bitcoin as come a long way and it still have a long way to go, because the adoption is increasing everyday which I expected to grow more faster.