El Salvador hopes to becomes the world’s first country to adopt bitcoin as legal tender

Tether? With Tether you don't need the utter stupidity of LN or the volatility of BTC. I could have said Bitcoin Cash too, but that is still volatile.

And no, tx fees are not even close to free with BTC.

Government $100M Trust Fund in a government owned development bank to allow anyone to convert to US $ without btc volatility risk

Lightning Network
 
Last edited:
They may be hoping people would move all that crypto mining from China to their country.

President of El Salvador
emoji_u1f601.png



 
Invite significant electricity demand to a country with a spotty electric sector to start with where the marginal generators depend on imported LNG. Sounds like a great idea!

Seriously, you can't just create a couple GW (China uses about 4GW of capacity on Bitcoin mining now) of generation out of thin air in a third world country with barely a GW of existing capacity, let alone build distribution for it. These are 5 year minimum projects from first setting up the deal to electrons flowing to where they're needed. Worst case they build a 3 GW generation and distribution system and the crypto industry moves on leaving the poor folks there to socialize the cost in their rate base for decades for a system much bigger than they need. And imported LNG electricity is never going to be nearly as cheap as the coal power from a plant adjacent to a mine like they have in China, so the whole thing makes little sense. It smacks of third world leadership wanting to sound sophisticated by chasing a shiny object they don't actually understand. And as I mentioned before, a solution that makes everything appreciably worse compared to their already dollar denominated economy.
mine other low energy shit coins through simple mining and get paid in btc>>profit

though given El Salvador's gang/drug problem this is likely a money laundering lobby
 
Yeah, you still didn't explain why they wouldn't use:

1. A stable coin.
2. Their own stable coin, that they can control and tie to whatever they want to.
3. An actually working crypto.

Either one is a better choice than BTC. El Presidente of Tropico island chose Tropicoin, a stable coin tied to the EU.

https://tropico.fandom.com/wiki/El_Presidente

Your opinions do not matter. You hate btc because you missed out, that is your personal problem that you will never resolve

The President of El Salvador proposed it and it was voted in last night. End of story
 
Your opinions do not matter. You hate btc because you missed out, that is your personal problem that you will never resolve

The President of El Salvador proposed it and it was voted in last night. End of story
China loans to get that geothermal mining on china made bitmain equipment?
 
I'm pretty familiar with El Salvador's electrical grid, this is my business and I've done some work in an adjacent country. I'm not at all familiar with where this "wasted 644 MW" of geothermal energy is unless they're saying it's heat in the ground that hasn't yet been exploited by drilling the wells and building a geothermal plant? I mean it's gotta be because there is only about 150 MW of geothermal in existence there. If that's it, then refer to my previous 5 year timeline to actually plan, finance, and build a geothermal plant. Also, if they're using that logic, there is also a few GW of "wasted" solar and wind energy there as well.

And while we're at it, the country has about 675 MW of fossil fuel generation fueled by pretty expensive imported LNG. Why in the world would you continue to import LNG to power those while simultaneously using about the same amount for BTC mining? From an opportunity cost perspective, that's the same as mining for bitcoin with imported LNG generated power. Doesn't make any sense from a economic or development perspective.
 
Well, you dont represent the planet. Read around about how many people in 3rd world countries are taken advantage by remittance companies
https://voxeu.org/article/stubbornly-high-cost-remittances

"Cross-border remittances are far from costless. On average, the charge for sending $200 – the benchmark used by authorities to evaluate cost – is $14. That is, the combination of fees (including charges from both the sender and recipient intermediaries) and the exchange rate margin typically eats up fully 7% of the amount sent. It is less expensive to send larger amounts, with the global average cost of sending $500 at just under 5% (World Bank 2017b). Even so, the aggregate cost of sending remittances in 2017 was about $30 billion, roughly equivalent to the total non-military foreign aid budget of the US!"

I will take free over this any day, especially with no BTC risk
I think it's vital you take your own advice, "you dont represent the planet." You've fallen into the very trap you warn of in assuming everyone has the same level of education, sophistication, and access to internet and hardware you do. Your average 40 year old mom in El Salvador isn't even close to being in a position to understand and use BTC that comes from her son in the U.S. That's not being condescending, that's reality. Heck even my mom with a college degree is a good deal away from being able to use it and lightyears away from being willing to learn. Once you take the time to provide them everything they need to use BTC, you could have just as easily provided them everything they needed to use Transferwise or any of the dozen other services that operate at far below 7%. The 7% number is born of ignorance and lack of access. If you take the time and effort to fix both of those, you no longer need BTC. And if you don't take the time and effort to fix both of those, they can't use BTC.

I don't doubt that you "will take free over this any day, especially with no BTC risk", but they're not you. You seem to have forgotten this despite your own warnings. Highly recommend you take a trip down there, hit the neighborhoods where the vast majority of people live, and pick 10 random people to explain BTC to and let us know how it goes.
 
Back
Top