Through an internet source came across the above details about El Salvador. This is completely getting better with time, and for a country with 7 million population it is placed at a good position. This change have happened after Bukele into the administration. On the support for business El Salvador ranks high close to the top 50 which is also a good thing. For different reasons it is into criticism, even at such situation it is growing rapidly.

Of course, many would like to be able to come to elsavador not only because the country is friendly by accepting bitcoin as a legal and recognized means of exchange, but we also know that before elsavador was famous for its bitcoin adoption, it is clear that the country is also famous for tourism that has been going well .
but tourism there will continue to be more passionate because it is supported by the use of bitcoin as a tool that can be used in addition to payment instruments that already exist and have been used so far.

That's right buddy, El Salvador has become an icon that really inspires many countries to also want to adopt bitcoin. as you attach in the link you provided, it is clear that many people have predicted that they will also start doing things like al savador.
clearly this is progress that must always be supported and given a very deep appreciation, hopefully it will make bitcoin more known and used to smooth things out.

we will wait in the future there will be more countries that will follow in his footsteps like el savador, welcome to join and make bitcoin more and more trusted.
if you look at your CMC link Fivestar4everMVP, it is clear that America is more dominant in main ranking.

I don't really disagree with anything that you said in your response to me - even though it seems to me that you are expressing different concerns than the ones that I thought that I was attempting to question.

It seems to me that we are not always going to be able to ascribe the goals and tactics of governments in the same ways across jurisdictions because some governments may well consider themselves to be more friendly to bitcoin and others might take a more hostile approach - with all kinds of variations in between, so I was not necessarily trying to categorize the various approaches that governments might take or if there might be some common parameters in which various governments might be treating bitcoin (and/or other crypto currencies when they might end up lumping bitcoin regulation in with the regulation of various other crypto currencies/assets, too).  

Nonetheless, on an individual level, we are likely going to be better off to attempt to assess how we might go forward in terms of how much we might use services that involve third-parties holding and/or controlling our own bitcoin private keys, maybe sharing information with the government and/or even possibly withholding value for taxes.

If we expect to transact and interact with bitcoin for a decently long period of time into the future, we are not necessarily going to know in which ways rules in the future might change (could become more hostile or more friendly towards bitcoin), and even if we do not know all of these factors, we still might want to figure out if there might be ways in which we are going to want to hold some of our bitcoin value away from third-party systems, even if we might still keep some of the value within some kinds of third party systems and we might even want to transact with and within such third-party systems.   

I would not even be attempting to assert that in these times that we might not have some advantages to attempting to maintain a foot in both worlds - but at the same time, there can be risks with how you hold your bitcoin and how you make your interactions in either system (and surely some folks believe that there should be goals to attempt to completely go into the bitcoin world, which could have its own risks and complications if questions might come up about how you are holding and transacting value and questions about whether you have obligations to report your transactions or your wealth.. which can also vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and the rules might change in the future too (in either more restrictive or more lenient ways).

It is not necessarily easy to attempt to invest in bitcoin and even to attempt to transact in bitcoin while at the same time trying to protect your finances and/or your privacy in various ways, and surely a decent number of bitcoiners are likely going take the easy way out and hold and transact with their bitcoin through third-party services that may well be leaking personal data or holding the coins of the person who thinks that they have bitcoin when they may ONLY have claims upon bitcoins that may well not even exist.  There is likely no one solution because there still are a decent number of complications in holding your own keys, even if that may well be amongst the most empowering of ways to hold and use bitcoin.

No and that's the truth about it all, no way a decentralized network can work inline with government and get controlled by them and still remain decentralized, which implies all the protocols about bitcoin and blockchain are going to be rendered less effective.


if they had thought about benefiting from bitcoin they would have adopted it long time ago, the tax you see they collected is like to instill labour on bitcoin entities but still yet it does not stop the progress and way forward over adoption, are there not much companies out there that does not pay tax regularly and are still running fine.


they can but you know what? they won't, let's be real hear when ee don't like something we try all possible means to always go against it, especially if not in our disposition, same is the case of bitcoin vs government.


all these does not work with a decentralized digital currency like bitcoin which has it own protocols that works against the standard of government, their lines can not meet at any point.

Am sure this is also one of the fear stirring the minds of those in government, they think bitcoin in a long term if successful could render their power and influence less effective of which is true, but despite this fact i don't think it will be an eliminator to government for live, why because bitcoin only controls the major financial aspect of individuals away from the negative influence of banks and government as centralized body against user's privacy, but a decentralized digital currency like bitcoin wouldn't cover up some other roles in which the government serve such as community planning, conflict resolution, health care services, law enforcement, weather forecast, natural epidemics and control, population control and many other physical obligations in which are the areas where the government has been in control of with the engagement of service to humanity, what bitcoin has majorly targeted is in giving a lasting solution in the area of our finances from centralized bodies and i think that is achieved already.


thank you for your response here, but what i meant here is that government cannot bend to comply with a decentralized network like bitcoin in the sense that even if majority were to adopt bitcoin they still feels insecure since it's not within their system of control, that's why you discover a country like Central African Republic introducing Sango coin aside bitcoin as project which they can have dominion over it affairs still under the coverage of bitcoin adoption which is totally wrong, it's not that governments all over the world can't adopt bitcoin as a legal tender, their fear is the decentralization which they have nothing to manipulate about because Satoshi has already made a done deal for us in that with the protocols of blockchain technology.

Precisely the uniqueness of bitcoin lies here, we do not need to agree or otherwise with the views of others, but the rhetoric that we convey still boils down to the actual reality, where bitcoin is always in the same function and dimension (Unlike those who don't like bitcoins)

If they want to be honest (Third Party), it's not that they don't like bitcoin, but that they don't know where to start with the desired approach. The proof is that there is not a single third party that actually prohibits bitcoin and crypto from circulating under their leadership. Even though if you study it, they can limit and block every site related to bitcoin or crypto, they only make dictions that don't like or are not friendly with bitcoin, but at some point they also don't close these two things, or who can guarantee, that they don't invest in bitcoin, aren't all forms of identity well preserved in the current investment system.
Then the question arises, blocking sites or those related to bitcoin is not a solution, because it can still be accessed via a VPN, there is another, more extreme way, third party banks do not accept remittances of any kind related to digital currencies.

In this case I am quite agree, it is certain that the rules in the future will change, when everyone is more aware and a third party will see potential problems that can be solved with bitcoin, I am sure and optimistic that it will be better In the future, because of awareness to accept something new, it must require the right time, so people do not abuse new things.

Everyone must have the aim to enter the investment room, if not the same as carrying money in the wrong place, because in investing there must be advantages and losses experienced, depending on people who take steps and strategies.
For me personally, this is not a problem in terms of reporting wealth and tax obligations, as long as the rules made can protect and bring benefits to those who report. Their task is to guarantee and protect, while we provide obligations (balance)

I think bitcoin is simple, the highest authority that controls any risks that arise is ourselves, both protecting finances and leakage of identity (privacy), of course when people know how to protect and maintain security, they will be more careful, this reflects the someone's ability to put things right, not to be careless and not to do anything dangerous.

Hopefully our discussion will not be widen and thank you for serving me, in this long discussion.
Respect to you master

I think it is very important to reecho this hard truth that Bitcoin has no political agenda. Although most economic decisions have some political undertone, Bitcoin has no intention of unsettling political officeholders and filling their positions with Bitcoiners. Just like we have cash payment and online payments, Bitcoin and fiat would continue to be alternative means of payment or investment. There are people in my locality that would never use the ATM or online payment channels, they prefer to go to the banking hall to pay in or withdraw fiat. Hence, there would always be both fiat supporters and Bitcoin believers.    

Bitcoin is still Bitcoin forever, but the decentralized system "may" threaten the economic factors managed by the government so that it is associated with political tone or whatever to reduce public interest in cryptocurrencies, the government oversees the growth of bitcoin in its country and releases regulations on the use of cryptocurrencies are limited and even prohibits it for activities any. Bitcoin has grown naturally as people get used to decentralized systems and comparing government economic systems but both are necessary for the economy, so I don't think there's anything to argue about.

Bloomberg published an article dedicated to the anniversary of the announcement by President Bukele of bitcoin as a means of payment in El Salvador. And although this step, according to experts and opinion polls, did not become a panacea for the country, and according to the IMF (where without it) worsened the situation in El Salvador, in my opinion, the main result has been achieved, which is that now every Salvadoran knows about bitcoin and sooner or later it will bring positive results.
The article indicates an interesting fact that when trying to offer a settlement in bitcoin when buying on any market in El Salvador, the buyer faces insults rather than a desire to sell something to you for bitcoin, well, apparently this is the fate of all pioneers at which stage of adoption bitcoin is now in El Salvador, rather at the stage from bargaining to depression and most likely not far from acceptance.

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-03/el-salvador-had-a-bitcoin-btc-revolution-hardly-anybody-showed-up
Archive: https://archive.ph/BXhr0

agreed, it is not the main problem of this country presently.
main is fight against insecurity and violent crime in the country, and good points are done.