On one hand this move makes no sense. Poor countries have every motivation to print fiat currencies to fund operations. Heck, even "stable" currencies like the US dollar and euro are currently inflating to prop up spending in the issuer economies. Bitcoin can't be controlled in this way by the countries that adopt it as legal tender.
On the other, it could make sense. If a country is interested in accumulating bitcoin as a reserve asset, accepting bitcoin tax payments would be a way to do that. This hasn't been discussed much in the articles on this topic, though.
Also, both El Salvador and CAR effectively don't use their own currencies anyway. El Salvador uses the US dollar after a disastrous bout of inflation. CAR's currency is pegged to the euro. So adding another currency not controlled by the country doesn't exactly change the ability of the government to inflate its debts away.
Poorer countries have every motivation to move away from colonial currencies that are inherently inflationary and out of their control, into a deflationary currency like bitcoin that has a well-known limited supply and is controlled by no one.
They have everything to gain and nothing to lose from such an asymmetric bet.
> El Salvador uses the US dollar after a disastrous bout of inflation.
I don't recall El Salvador having a disastrous inflation. I believe Ecuador was the country that dollarized after a currency collapse, but not El Salvador.
The USD/Salvadoran Colón exchange rate was 2.50 from 1934 up to 1980. There was some devaluation during the civil war. And then it stabilized at around 8.75 since the mid 1990s. Then we got dollarized in 2001. '
The exchange rate is still pegged at 8.75 since then. As the Colón is still used in some older laws and banks still exchange old Colón banknotes in some branches.
if any entity - private or government - was interested in accumulating an asset, which sane and rational person would accumulate something as volatile as a cryptocurrency? As a store of value, it is pathetically bad and its vulnerabilities are very easy to exploit.
I'm really excited about these moves. Countries moving from a currency that can be printed by another to a currency with a cap is a major move for independence in those nations.
If your currency can be printed by another, you're a tributary nation.
> The currency was pegged to the French franc at 1 XOF = 2 French francs from 1948, becoming 1 XOF = 0.02 FRF after introduction of the new franc at 1 FRF = 100 old francs. In 1994 the currency was devalued by half to 1 XOF = 0.01 FRF. From 1999 it has since been pegged to the euro at €1 = 6.55957 FRF = 655.957 XOF.
Also, I miss when monetary inflation literally meant removing precious or even more expensive commodity metals from coinage. Was a bit more obvious when money printer go brrrr then.
> Following the war, rapid inflation caused denominations below 1 franc to be withdrawn from circulation while 10 francs in copper nickel were introduced, followed by reduced size 10-franc coins in aluminium-bronze in 1950, along with 20 and 50-franc coins of the same composition. In 1954, copper-nickel 100 francs were introduced.[citation needed]
> In the 1960s, 1 and 2 (old) franc aluminium coins were still circulating, used as "centimes".[citation needed]
New franc
> In 1960, the new franc (nouveau franc) was introduced,[29] worth 100 old francs. Stainless steel 1 and 5 centimes, aluminium-bronze 10, 20, and 50 centimes, nickel 1 franc and silver 5 francs were introduced. Silver 10-franc coins were introduced in 1965, followed by a new, smaller aluminium-bronze 5-centime and a smaller nickel 1⁄2-franc coin in 1966.[citation needed]
In this case they are pegged to the Euro. Since the Euro is almost certainly stronger than the CAR economy, we see it relegated to a cheap export country and making imports expensive for them. Also, making modernization more difficult.
The CAR seems to have far more challenges, but at least their 11% of citizens with internet access will have more freedom of choice of currencies.
Reminds me of people saying Bitcoin failed as an inflation hedge over the past 1-2 years while ignoring the success of the hedge over a 10 year period.
Went? It's a 6 month old project. It hasn't even started.
Does ycomb actually think these nations would be better off with colonial currencies that have maintained poverty and exploitation for centuries? Probably yes.
Whole lot of people here who don't seem to realize that CAR is one of the poorest countries in the world locked in a perpetual civil war that is currently being used as a weapons showroom for Russia. I have absolutely no idea what this change will possibly do, but I guess it'll make it a bit easier for Wagner mercenaries to move the money they receive from their kidnapping and extortion schemes.
This makes perfect sense to me, in a world where oligarchs are having their assets seized without due process. This de-risks any largesse the elites may accumulate through legitimate means or otherwise.
I doubt that the health of the country's economy was top of mind for this decision.
Is this actually legal tender as in every merchant in the country is legally required to transact in bitcoin? Or is this a marketing play where most merchants continue to not transact in bitcoin and the country calls bitcoin legal tender?
That's not what legal tender means. Legal tender is something which must be accepted for settlement of _debts_. For instance, in the UK, any coin with a face value of one pound or more is legal tender in unlimited amount, but no-one is going to allow you to buy a car with a big bag of pound coins.
I'm not following crypto too closely, but I'm interested. Reading this, I wondered whether this would increase demand of BTC, in turn raising its price. El Salvador adopted BTC as legal tender in September 2021, which is also the start of a big rise in BTC price from around 40k to almost 60k, but this then dropped back again to pre-September 2021 levels.
Does anyone know whether this rise was related to El Salvador adopted BTC, and can we expect to see the same thing happening here?
>>Reading this, I wondered whether this would increase demand of BTC [...]
Very unlikely, given that CAR's population is less than 5M, and only a small (read: negligible) portion of the population will even attempt to use bitcoin more than they were already were due to this legislation.
The more interesting question is how the other independent African states that use the CFA franc[1] and the Bank of Central African States[2] will respond over time, especially with regards to the development and adoption of the Eco[3].
No one in El Salvador is using BTC for transactions, so there was not increased use of the currency that caused the spike in prices. Most likely the spike to 60k was just speculation.
Cryptocurrencies won't help the average person in cash economies where most citizens are unbanked and ATMs don't have any cash in them for years if their country restricts internet or electricity access or the average person is far too poor to afford a way to store and transact cryptocurrencies.
Sad that Africa is going to effectively get exploited again by westerners. Let’s be honest those who got in early, that is, westerners, are those who win the most, not Africa.
They will learn, like the USA, why you don’t back your currency on things like gold, and coming soon, Bitcoin. This is a completely unnecessary move.
If the concerns are inflation they simply could write into their constitution that they cannot print additional money.
> We must create more and better jobs; we must stop the rise in the cost of living; we must protect the dollar from the attacks of international money speculators.” To achieve the first two goals, he proposed tax cuts and a 90-day freeze on prices and wages; to achieve the third, Nixon directed the suspension of the dollar’s convertibility into gold.
Particularly
> we must protect the dollar from the attacks of international money speculators
In this case the "speculators" speculated that the US didn't have the gold it said it did to back the dollars it had been printing.
Protecting the dollar meant we will no longer trade the dollar for gold to protect it, but why would it need protecting if we had the gold to exchange?
Sounds to me like gold as a standard wasn't the issue, but printing of dollars without backing.
I'm personally convinced (by no evidence other than game theory, which is what trust in block validators to be honest as a group is based on as well) in cases like these, that there must be people with a huge stake in btc who are essentially bribing legislators to adopt crypto. Why else would they accept as legal tender a currency their government and people don't hold except if the people who do hold it convinced them in some way? Looking forward to the documovies in 15 years of these crypto "investors" flying to CAF and El Salvador and bribing their government officials.
Not only westerners even China is interested this time. Central Africa has so many minerals that they don't have any hope of being left alone in the coming future.
[+] [-] 323|3 years ago|reply
> Civil war since 2012. The civil war perpetuated the country's poor human rights record.
> Among the ten poorest countries in the world, with the lowest GDP per capita at purchasing power parity in the world as of 2017.
> The second-lowest level of human development (only ahead of Niger), ranking 188 out of 189 countries.
> The lowest inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI), ranking 150th out of 150 countries.
> The unhealthiest country as well as the worst country in which to be young.
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] divs1210|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] notch656a|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Barrera|3 years ago|reply
On the other, it could make sense. If a country is interested in accumulating bitcoin as a reserve asset, accepting bitcoin tax payments would be a way to do that. This hasn't been discussed much in the articles on this topic, though.
Also, both El Salvador and CAR effectively don't use their own currencies anyway. El Salvador uses the US dollar after a disastrous bout of inflation. CAR's currency is pegged to the euro. So adding another currency not controlled by the country doesn't exactly change the ability of the government to inflate its debts away.
[+] [-] yuvadam|3 years ago|reply
They have everything to gain and nothing to lose from such an asymmetric bet.
[+] [-] el-salvador|3 years ago|reply
I don't recall El Salvador having a disastrous inflation. I believe Ecuador was the country that dollarized after a currency collapse, but not El Salvador.
The USD/Salvadoran Colón exchange rate was 2.50 from 1934 up to 1980. There was some devaluation during the civil war. And then it stabilized at around 8.75 since the mid 1990s. Then we got dollarized in 2001. '
The exchange rate is still pegged at 8.75 since then. As the Colón is still used in some older laws and banks still exchange old Colón banknotes in some branches.
[+] [-] weberer|3 years ago|reply
Like Zimbabwe?
[+] [-] nisegami|3 years ago|reply
According to this framework, giving up that ability to have an independent monetary policy affords some other opportunities.
[+] [-] eldaisfish|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reedjosh|3 years ago|reply
If your currency can be printed by another, you're a tributary nation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_African_CFA_franc
> The currency was pegged to the French franc at 1 XOF = 2 French francs from 1948, becoming 1 XOF = 0.02 FRF after introduction of the new franc at 1 FRF = 100 old francs. In 1994 the currency was devalued by half to 1 XOF = 0.01 FRF. From 1999 it has since been pegged to the euro at €1 = 6.55957 FRF = 655.957 XOF.
Also, I miss when monetary inflation literally meant removing precious or even more expensive commodity metals from coinage. Was a bit more obvious when money printer go brrrr then.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_franc
> Following the war, rapid inflation caused denominations below 1 franc to be withdrawn from circulation while 10 francs in copper nickel were introduced, followed by reduced size 10-franc coins in aluminium-bronze in 1950, along with 20 and 50-franc coins of the same composition. In 1954, copper-nickel 100 francs were introduced.[citation needed]
> In the 1960s, 1 and 2 (old) franc aluminium coins were still circulating, used as "centimes".[citation needed] New franc
> In 1960, the new franc (nouveau franc) was introduced,[29] worth 100 old francs. Stainless steel 1 and 5 centimes, aluminium-bronze 10, 20, and 50 centimes, nickel 1 franc and silver 5 francs were introduced. Silver 10-franc coins were introduced in 1965, followed by a new, smaller aluminium-bronze 5-centime and a smaller nickel 1⁄2-franc coin in 1966.[citation needed]
[+] [-] psychlops|3 years ago|reply
The CAR seems to have far more challenges, but at least their 11% of citizens with internet access will have more freedom of choice of currencies.
[+] [-] VHRanger|3 years ago|reply
https://www.nber.org/papers/w29968
(not well)
[+] [-] 2pEXgD0fZ5cF|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] imapeopleperson|3 years ago|reply
Reminds me of people saying Bitcoin failed as an inflation hedge over the past 1-2 years while ignoring the success of the hedge over a 10 year period.
[+] [-] Fidelix|3 years ago|reply
Unless your definition of "well" is that everyone would just up and stop using fiat overnight.
[+] [-] bannedbybros|3 years ago|reply
Does ycomb actually think these nations would be better off with colonial currencies that have maintained poverty and exploitation for centuries? Probably yes.
[+] [-] some_random|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] psychlops|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] el-salvador|3 years ago|reply
[1] https://tradingeconomics.com/central-african-republic/export...
[+] [-] kurthr|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jrochkind1|3 years ago|reply
> Legal tender is a form of money that courts of law are required to recognize as satisfactory payment for any monetary debt.
Not sure if I understand the actual implications of this in the CAR.
[+] [-] andi999|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] schmookeeg|3 years ago|reply
I doubt that the health of the country's economy was top of mind for this decision.
[+] [-] vmception|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TimPC|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rsynnott|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] cseleborg|3 years ago|reply
Does anyone know whether this rise was related to El Salvador adopted BTC, and can we expect to see the same thing happening here?
[+] [-] otoburb|3 years ago|reply
Very unlikely, given that CAR's population is less than 5M, and only a small (read: negligible) portion of the population will even attempt to use bitcoin more than they were already were due to this legislation.
The more interesting question is how the other independent African states that use the CFA franc[1] and the Bank of Central African States[2] will respond over time, especially with regards to the development and adoption of the Eco[3].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_African_CFA_franc
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Central_African_States
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco_(currency)
[+] [-] oblio|3 years ago|reply
Its GDP per day is about $1.3.
Its citizens care more about not starving, than Bitcoin.
And they can barely afford 0.0001% of a Bitcoin, if they would even have easy access to tech allowing them to use it.
[+] [-] danielfoster|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] orangepurple|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ilaksh|3 years ago|reply
And maybe also includes more practical cryptocurrencies like Algorand.
[+] [-] twirlock|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] endisneigh|3 years ago|reply
They will learn, like the USA, why you don’t back your currency on things like gold, and coming soon, Bitcoin. This is a completely unnecessary move.
If the concerns are inflation they simply could write into their constitution that they cannot print additional money.
[+] [-] reedjosh|3 years ago|reply
How did the West learn this lesson?
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1969-1976/nixon-shock
> We must create more and better jobs; we must stop the rise in the cost of living; we must protect the dollar from the attacks of international money speculators.” To achieve the first two goals, he proposed tax cuts and a 90-day freeze on prices and wages; to achieve the third, Nixon directed the suspension of the dollar’s convertibility into gold.
Particularly
> we must protect the dollar from the attacks of international money speculators
In this case the "speculators" speculated that the US didn't have the gold it said it did to back the dollars it had been printing.
Protecting the dollar meant we will no longer trade the dollar for gold to protect it, but why would it need protecting if we had the gold to exchange?
Sounds to me like gold as a standard wasn't the issue, but printing of dollars without backing.
[+] [-] MathYouF|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mistrial9|3 years ago|reply
Robert Mugabe, your publicist needs a raise, again
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mugabe
[+] [-] frontman1988|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] landemva|3 years ago|reply
Bitcoin allows for choice.
[+] [-] psychlops|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BlueMatter5|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]