Here we go again. The sceptic in me sees a post that is designed to seek merits. A closer look at the account posting shows it is definitely not a newbie therefore has to be either an alt-account or part of a farm. If I had to make a choice, I would have to go with it being part of an account farm being operated by a puppeteer.

The OP has brought nothing new to the table by mentioning what Bitcoin does as a function but did manage to come to my attention.

Every country can start looking at BTC differently, poor or rich, it doesn't matter.

I don't think it's about "BTC-related" projects, in a meaning of something new, but about interacting with BTC on all the levels, from lower ones to the ones in charge.
And pushing the adoption further.

Bitcoin is just one opportunity from many opportunities for someone to change their life.

But, they need to have few criteria in order to access Bitcoin:
1. Understand and familiar with technology.
2. Have a cellphone, electricity and internet package.
3. Money.

If they don't even have one of them, they will not able to access Bitcoin.

Banks already offer lending services, those small businesses owners and entrepreneurs can go to banks instead of waiting for another centralized institutions.

If underserved and undeveloped countries where to even consider implementing BTC and the Blockchain technology, they would have to make remarkable commitment that will include investments in setting up digital infrastructures, providing the right education, and they may have to work on  the regulatory process that is needed to appropriately ensure everything goes fine in the long run.

Undeveloped countries can definitely benefit in terms of having a say in the financial framework of the country where there's financial services for the unbaked, lower transactions cost and lower fees, transactions across borders, faster and more direct transfer without third party interference and there's transparency which would enable innovation and acceptance.

 This is something we're all familiar with but the question you should ask yourself is that would those in the poor countries be willing to adapt Bitcoin. You mentioned that it can be accessible to countries with inadequate infrastructures and is it not possible that they may be not be able to access electricity and all the other basic amenities.
 In countries that are still developing, it's easier to pitch these sort of idea and have them buy it because they would be initially eager to try out anything that may help boost their economy and create a better living for them but eventually, their interest would move elsewhere due to the fact that Bitcoin is highly volatile and they may not have the resources to keep up.

Please be informed that Bitcoin fee is dependent on the network congestion.  Since Bitcoin confirmation queue is not first come first serve basis, but rather a competition of who will pay more, I am somehow hesitant to say that Bitcoin transaction or remitance is low cost especially when it will go through a centralized services since on top of the Bitcoin transaction fee, there is also this service fee.  With that in mind, I do not think that Bitcoin remittances will be a low cost one.

Aside from that, Bitcoin transaction is instant but confirmation takes 10 minutes in average, so centralized services is much faster when sending a transaction within the same application, and local bank transfers is also almost instant.  The only thing where Bitcoin shine is the international transaction but I believe there are also some services that offers instant transactions in global transfers.


Same goes with financing applications.  The best thing with Bitcoin is that we can transfer our funds without asking the third party approval if we do a blockchain transfer.


I have not seen such a thing in my country, because Bitcoin-related projects often falls under financial services, while internet connections falls under technology and communication.

There is no doubt that Bitcoin technology offers a variety of opportunities to everyone, the main concern would be the leaders of the government since they are the one who gives a go signal on which regulations and projects to implement.

Why do you always relate Bitcoin to poverty while in fact this is not the reason why this coin created.

Maybe read here what is the purpose on why Bitcoin created https://www.coinbase.com/learn/crypto-basics/what-is-bitcoin

Also poverty solution will depends on the action of government and people  since if rampant corruption is happening and less education plus effort done by people there's still nothing will happen even if Bitcoin will exist.

As we know government are the most difficult people to bend about Bitcoin especially that of poor countries which I can assumed to be poorly in their understanding towards the technology, as they have different scope of view about Bitcoin.

To me they still need proper sanitization about Bitcoin and even if they must legalized Bitcoin in that country let it be that they all understand how the volatility works and are able to accept the risk involved in Bitcoin before legalizing Bitcoin in such countries.

And of course you made a good point and if that country is so poor would they be able to accept all that comes from Bitcoin which you already outlined above and, country with poor economy could be hard to accept such from bitcoin except for those who are civilized or that are not based in those countries.

At one point, we might think that Bitcoin will help poor countries but I think it wasn't much of a help for El Salvador. Sure, it did a good job but it wasn't something spectacular. Btw on the other hand, to my mind, blockchain technologies have a good chance to help poor countries. For example, in my country we started early adoption and development of blockchain technologies, successfully implemented them in different sectors, and one of the most important adoption was done in land title registry.
The development and adoption of blockchain technologies brought some investors to our country and created an opportunity for local people, to become blockchain developers and get a high-paying jobs.

The interest may be there but let us admit the fact that to sustain the use of this market, they need stable source of income as well. Hence, their interest may not be sustained as they need to find a way how to make a living and provide their basic needs first. So in my opinion, the government should address first the basic necessities of its constituents. Otherwise, they won't patronize this market in the long run.
However, some poor countries already found this market to assist them in finding alternative income. But only for those people who have access with the net and of course electricity. Now, don't expect that a very poor family without access of net and electricity will actually discover and join this market. That's not gonna happen.