Live data from Hacker News

El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

bbc.com

721–730 of 732 posts

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#721
post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it won't! It's a potential disaster, not a guaranteed one. You can read Tim May's Crypto-Anarchist Manifesto for a slightly more detailed argument, and there are decades of cypherpunk stuff to read on the subject, mostly from the perspective that destroying the welfare state would be really super great . I don't agree, but the immediate and pressing problem for most people (especially in El Salvador) is not the…

Destroying the welfare state doesn't imply the end of governments. In my opinion, it would be good if we could focus on taxing the things that actually should be taxed: land property and pollution, and stop taxing transactions. And it would still be egalitarian, since people who own tons of land are not poor.

> Destroying the welfare state doesn't imply the end of governments.

You might be right (nobody knows what the future holds) but that was certainly the vision May had (his .sig ended with "collapse of governments"), and it may be the vision that Bitcoin was written to promote.

Certainly a shift to a land-value tax and a pollution tax will be at least a very large dislocation. I hope it's less traumatic than the Thirty Years' War.

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#722
post #208

There's disappointingly much heat and little light in this thread; lots of people in rich countries ripping on El Salvador (and bitcoin) with little more than stereotypes to go on. Let me try to displace some of the content-free flaming with real information. I'm not in El Salvador, but I do have some experience with how Bitcoin gets used in practice in low- and middle-income countries, despite the transaction fees s…

Did republicans (us) or conservatives (uk) actually succeed in making a bigger than party-typical dent to the social safety net system or popular support for it? Brexit was more aligned to defend the social safety net (from fictional threats, granted).

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#723
post #208

There's disappointingly much heat and little light in this thread; lots of people in rich countries ripping on El Salvador (and bitcoin) with little more than stereotypes to go on. Let me try to displace some of the content-free flaming with real information. I'm not in El Salvador, but I do have some experience with how Bitcoin gets used in practice in low- and middle-income countries, despite the transaction fees s…

Did republicans (us) or conservatives (uk) actually succeed in making a bigger than party-typical dent to the social safety net system or popular support for it? Brexit was more aligned to defend the social safety net (from fictional threats, granted).

I don't think so, no; just to the effective functioning of their states.

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#724
post #704

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand your situation correctly, you are working in Argentina, but not paying income tax because you are a non-resident, and the source of your income is outside Argentina. In that situation, I would look into setting up an offshore corporation with a bank account to hold the income, and then get a debit card that could be used in Argentina. This would be a hedge against the volatility of bitcoin (but maybe…

> If I understand your situation correctly, you are working in Argentina, but not paying income tax because you are a non-resident, and the source of your income is outside Argentina. Very nearly—I'm working in Argentina, and the source of my income is outside Argentina, but I am not paying income tax because AFIP refused to issue me a CUIT without a work visa, but I'm not a non-resident; I'm an illegal immigrant. >…

> [offshore corporation] I have no idea how to do this, particularly without being able to leave Argentina. Also I don't think it's really a practical solution for the vast majority of people in either Argentina or El Salvador

It’s fairly easy, but agree, it is not a practical solution for most people.

But then, most people do not get their income from abroad, so bitcoin isn’t practical either, for example you yourself exchange the bitcoins for cash, to use them locally (rather than use bitcoins to pay for your ice cream).

There is a market for “cash for bitcoin” (I think) because Argentina has capital controls, i.e. people making money in Argentina, that they want to get out of the country, and can’t go through the regulated system, are willing to buy your bitcoins, possible below market rate.

So bitcoin primarily solves the problem of getting money out of a country with capital controls, but most people living in a country with capital controls do not regularly face this problem.

You can say that for you, it solves the problem of getting money into the country, but there are plenty of alternatives, sure, some may have downsides, but bitcoin is not without downsides.

For spending money day-to-day, bitcoin does not solve that problem, the bitcoins have to be exchanged to cash first, as no-one wants to pay a 4 dollar fee to buy an ice cream, or have to wait up to an hour for reasonable assurance that the transaction is final.

> Any time you handle money, whether from a bank or anywhere else, you are accepting dirty money

While this may be true, I was alluding to specific anti-money laundering laws. For example, in the U.S. you have to report cash payments of $10,000 or above. So your ice cream shop, accepting a few dollars in cash, do not have to report this, and would not be liable if it turns out that these money were from selling drugs or what have you.

But if a car dealership accepts $25,000 in cash for a car, and they do not report it, then they are complicit in laundering money (to the best of my knowledge).

I don’t know if such laws exist in Argentina, but they exist in the U.S. and Europa, and I believe they would also apply to accepting cash for bitcoin (although the U.S. reporting threshold is quite high, in Denmark the reporting threshold was around $500, last I checked).

> I'm hesitant about getting cash from strangers for a different reason, which is what I thought you were going to say: they might shoot me or rob my house and take the cash back

My concern was twofold, the regulatory issue, as mentioned, but certainly also, that the people showing up to give you money for bitcoin may indeed be “gagsters”, but I was afraid that this would come off as prejudiced, as I don’t know Argentina, so I shouldn’t make assumptions, but I do know another developing country fairly well, where there is drug trafficking with foreigners involved, and capital controls makes it hard for them to take their profit out of the country, so they have turned to bitcoin, and I really would not want to get involved with these people (i.e. show up and accept their dirty cash for bitcoins).

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#725
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you make it sound like there's a limited number of dollar notes and the bank will refuse your deposit/loan if they don't have enough notes lying around to make the fractional requirements. In reality, they will accept your deposit/loan (as long as it makes business sense) with no regard for how many notes they have lying around. If that puts them over the edge of the fractional requirements, they'll just go to…

This simply isn't how the financial system works. The bank will only loan out amounts based on what they hold in reserve. Asking the Fed/Treasury to "swing their wand around" isn't really close to what happens. Also, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury are different entities. They don't just "print money" for banks arbitrarily.

Banks literally create money by lending, here's a good overview from the Bank of England:

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-...

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are the only financial service for a large population, why not take them for all they're worth?

Because you push the government to legislate an alternative on an immediate country-wide level. At their scale they could've been taking smaller profit for many years without poking the bear.

I think you misunderstand. I was rephrasing your statement "Why not take profits" to reflect the reality of WU's role in El Salvador.

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#727

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but would you really rather your dollars "lose value" as in they can purchase less and less goods and services over time? Yes. Mostly, because of systemic effects on the broader economy I need to have functioning to earn a living, but also because of more direct personal benefits. > How does that benefit you personally? Because other than a small share in cash and the bank for liquidity, my assets aren’t doll…

I agree that it's nice if you have assets, but I believe for most people we can't have nearly as many assets and or connections as the wealthy. And for young people, they're basically priced out of assets by this system. _This_ literally is the reason owning a home is next to impossible for millennials and gen-zs. Further, this encourages a debt based society that may encourage growth in the short run (debt giveth fi…

> I agree that it's nice if you have assets

Most people have nonfinancial assets (e.g., durable items of personal property.)

> _This_ literally is the reason owning a home is next to impossible for millennials and gen-zs.

No, its not, because its been true (and inflation higher) for preceding generations, so it can’t possible explain why Millenials and beyond have it worse than Gen X who had it worse than Boomers. Tax and spending policy shifts (Reagan's being the biggest single one nationally, but there have been several subsequent national ones, and CA Prop 13 and its — mostly much weaker — copycats play a role, too) are a much bigger factor

> Typically this looks like the 2008 crash

The 2008 crash wasn't a regularly occurring event. (And as bad as it was, wasn't nearly as bad in and of itself as it is widely perceived; it gets magnified because — again for reasons that trace directly back to fiscal policy choices — the expansion after the brief and shallow 2001 recession was, up to that point, pretty much the most hollow expansion in modern US history, with, IIRC, every income quintile but the top doing worse, and even the top being mostly flat except for the top couple percent.)

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Printing money does not always cause inflation. The purpose of the Fed is to keep the dollar's value stable. If demand for the dollar rises, the Fed has to print money to avoid deflation.

The fed itself says we've already had 4.2% CPI the last year, and that's trusting the fed not to manipulate it's own metric. https://www.bls.gov/cpi/latest-numbers.htm The common mantra "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a measure." applies here too, but many HN peeps seem to think it doesn't for some reason. If you remove the constant adjustments to the CPI you get a _much_ higher rate of inflation th…

> 4.2% CPI the last year,

One year ago the dollar was deflating, so this is cherrypicking data. If inflation was above 4% for multiple years then that would be a problem, but a month or two is not anything to be worried about.

I'm also not sure why you think adjustments to the CPI should not be allowed. Individual goods get cheaper or more expensive relative to other goods, and consumers change their behavior. It would be asinine to have the government subsidize certain goods (via economic policy) such that all consumers purchase the same basket today as they were in 1990!

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#729
post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I live ordinary bank transactions are free for ordinary consumers. I never pay a transaction fee or any annual fees. My bank used to charge an annual fee for a credit card but they have stopped charging now. In fact in my whole life (I'm 65 so about 50 years of having bank accounts) I have never paid transaction fees for ordinary transactions (in the UK and Norway).

> I have never paid transaction fees for ordinary transactions You have, just not in a way that’s obvious to you.

It's still not obvious after your comment. Can you enlighten me?

Re: El Salvador makes Bitcoin legal tender

#730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much money do you have in dollars? I have an emergency fund — 6 months of expenses. Everything else is in other assets that store value after inflation (e.g. stocks, bonds, housing). > How does that benefit you personally? A little bit of inflation means more economic growth in the long run. That benefits me because services and goods will get cheaper and/or better.

> How much money do you have in dollars? Not much, in fact I try to remain leveraged via debts to hedge against inflation. But my salary is measured in dollars. I fought hard to get the salary I have today, but I must continue to ratchet up as my employment deal looks worse every year. I believe the Cantillion effect is largely why the average peasant's wages have not kept up with asset prices. https://www.adamsmith.…

Your salary is measured in dollars, but inflation affects your salary as well. When companies charge more for products, where do you think (some of) that extra money goes?

The rest of your comment has some interesting hypotheses (Cantillon effect, inflation encouraging bad investment) but in practice, you have to make measurements to see whether those effects actually happen. I haven't seen any empirical evidence for the Cantillon effect, and empirically we have evidence that a small amount of inflation does not decrease output (and can increase output in some cases).

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304-3932(9...

> It's no big deal for those involved in fed policy making as they are usually the first to see it coming

Even if this is true, the amount of money owned by the people controlling the Fed is miniscule.

Post reply on HN