The lender will always determine the conditions for loans, hence El Salvador has to concede to these anti+Bitcoin terms. With this move, the IMF has shown its destain for Bitcoin. However, the conditions for the loan don't include the halting of Bitcoin investment.
Why didn't they sell some of their Bitcoin and reject a loan from the IMF?
Why are some people so retarded to consider that the most extreme solution of selling some bitcoin would be a feasible remedy, including that if you think about it:
1) El Salvador's bitcoin stash is likely slightly ONLY over 100% in profits which means that it is barely entering into the bare minimum of compounding.. .. compounding at the first level which is the first doubling
2) El Salvador seems to still be in fairly regular, persistent and consistent accumulation of BTC, so they are not in a position to sell any BTC - including where they are at and how outrageous it would be to go from buying to selling without any pause in between which sounds like a trader rather than investor approach to bitcoin and even similar to how Elon (Tesla) had approached bitcoin in 2021 by selling a good chunk of the BTC that Tesla had bought the same year (like BTC they had bought only a few months earlier). Surely El Salvador has been buying bitcoin for nearly four years, with a bit of front loading in 2021 and 2022.. but then they went into their 1 BTC per day practice starting in late 2022.. and surely it takes a while to build up a stash, especially using DCA and also including that anyone likely knows that absent some special circumstances, any bitcoin bought should be held for 4 years or longer so they don't have any of their bitcoin that have even a 4 year maturity since they had been bought. Surely someone could argue that getting a large loan from the IMF could be grounds for special circumstances, yet I don't consider it safe to presume that getting a loan from the IMF would be such special circumstances as to sell any BTC, including that in recent times, we have seen several occasions El Salvador announcing that they were buying larger quantities of BTC that involved at least a few occasions that they bought 11 BTC rather than just 1 daily BTC. I am not sure if those purchases of 11 BTC were just symbolic or if they might be considering increasing their regular purchase amounts beyond the seemingly ongoing 1 BTC per day purchases.
3) Related to 2), it is likely that El Salvador would have to get to a status of "overaccumulation" before selling some coin would be even feasible.. which I would think that at their fairly whimpy rate of BTC accumulation, might take at least a couple of cycles, and they are barely getting to a timeline of having one full cycle in bitcoin (this year).
I personally don't see any problem with the various chosen compromises that they made, even though maybe they could have had negotiated slightly better compromises.... It is difficult to know if maybe they had considered that was as good of a deal as they were going to be able to get.
It seems that this decision will be a little favorable. But I think Bukele has thought long and hard about the decision taken. The proof is that they are still accumulating the amount of Bitcoin.
I don't think the legislation made with the IMF will have much of an effect on the development of Crypto. In addition, its tenure is still long enough to continue making decisions about better Bitcoin adoption.
There don't seem to be any major hinderances, even though they do seem to be slight symbolic set backs - especially for me the part about tax payments not being able to be accepted in bitcoin.. which that seems problematic and would have had been better to be optional for bitcoin or fiat.
