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.

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

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.

There are many factors which contribute to Bitcoin value: Scarcity, blockchain security, decentralization, censorship resistance, utility, trust and adoption. With time, there are many bullish things converge together.

Like scarcity becomes more clearly and more people realize about it, so scarcity effects become bigger with time.
Blockchain security becomes better and stronger with bigger network hash rate and more Bitcoin nodes globally as well as hash rate distribution becomes more decentralized in more countries.
Utility, trust and adoption become better too.

How does Bitcoin have value?
The bullish case for Bitcoin.
Bitcoin is an accounting revolution.
Why Bitcoin is not that stupid?

[2stout]

This is working as designed- those payment processor lobbying dollars are paying off since Bitcoin isn't offering payola as it's not centralized.  However, Bitcoin payments will grow in spite of the discouragement just as Bitcoin has grown as a medium of exchange, unit of account, and storage of value.

[Lontor]

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?

Deep down I am still using Bitcoin to make some payments online but you have a point, some many stores and merchants aren't accepting Bitcoin, the most popular thing I use Bitcoin as payment for is buying digital codes.

Like gift cards, eSIM, refilling internet data subscriptions and some others that are similar to what I made mentioned, I think it's not on the government to make such decisions, any store owners or merchants can still decide to accept Bitcoin.

There is fear of volatility and that will never get erased since Bitcoin is created in such a way, many businesses don't want to use Bitcoin because of it's volatility and that's where the problem is, not even the government.

[iBaba]

~~~

Honestly when people have the belief that their bitcoin can worth much more in the next few years, it use to be difficult to convince them to use it for everyday purchases, that volatility plays a bigger role than regulation in making bitcoin something people prefer to hold than spend. So that is why most people would rather spend their normal currency and keep bitcoin for the future.

I don’t think Saving bitcoin or it being a digital gold goes against the original idea of it and people should be free to use it however they want. The important thing here is that bitcoin remains decentralized and allow people to do their transactions without needing any permission from a third party. In short it can serve both purposes at the same time

[Samlucky O]

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.

That is already in place, Bitcoin has already make wave and everybody already knows that Bitcoin does not only end in peer to peer but also an asset. It's only a person that lacks information that will not know what Bitcoin is an asset and also money.

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.

Well that was the initial plan, for it to be used for peer to peer but now as demand keep rising and adoption keep increasing, it is no longer only for peer to peer but an asset. And I don't buy the idea of saying that government has ruined Bitcoin because people with the highest Bitcoin adoption are not only the government. Some individual and group of people are involved in holding a huge amount of Bitcoin. So Bitcoin is decentralized and not centralized. If it was government that is in control of Bitcoin it means that Bitcoin is no longer decentralized but centralized.

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?

Even if Satoshi was here, he would have done nothing because even him can not stop people from using Bitcoin as an asset instead of peer to peer. Satoshi knew a day like this will come, but maybe he didn't feel it would be anytime soon.

[Awaklara]

In short it can serve both purposes at the same time

In the end, everything depends on the person who owns Bitcoin. Whether it is used as a means of payment or as an investment, it all becomes the choice of those who hold Bitcoin. 
Regulations indeed do not allow the use of Bitcoin as a substitute currency for transactions. But the government also cannot monitor who uses Bitcoin for any transactions. We as users have the freedom for that.

[cxtreenal]

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.

Is there any possibility of a catastrophe in the world where no block is added to the blockchain? I think it may not happen now. Countless people in the world are trading and investing in Bitcoin and many are holding it for the long term. Although everyone's goals and objectives are different, countless avenues will open up for transactions in the future. People are accumulation Bitcoin as an alternative to fiat because the value of fiat decreases due to inflation.

The government is discouraging but many people prefer to follow the opposite policy of the government because the government is caught in corruption and then adopts wrong financial policies that go against the people.