5 ms·

> She's a remote contractor who lives in a country where the banking industry imposes really unreasonable fees on international transfers. And she most likely

> She's a remote contractor who lives in a country where the banking industry imposes really unreasonable fees on international transfers. And she most likely converts her bitcoins into whatever local currency she needs to pay for her goods.

jabgrabdthrow 11y ago
I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a criticism of bitcoin's utility or not, but if it is I think you missed the point. The point is she has more currency units now than before, because she didn't have to pay the bid bad bank, even if she had to use local fiat to buy bananas.
- kbenson 11y ago
  No, I think the point is that her method of receiving payment is functionally no different than if they drop shipped gold bullion to her. She must convert it into a usable currency in most cases.
  - dpc_pw 11y ago
    So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? Interesting. What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. And the difference between them does not really matter all that much.
    - kbenson 11y ago
      > So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? Yes. It is a commodity. People trade in it every day. > I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? For your use at that location, apparently not. > What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. Yes, and I said as much in a separate reply. > And the difference between them does not really matter all that much. Except for when they are classified as one and not the other and taxed differently.
  - wstrange 11y ago
    Gold bullion is rather expensive to ship and insure. Bitcoin seems quite promising for foreign currency transactions.
    - s73v3r 11y ago
      Only if someone in the destination currency is willing to trade that currency for Bitcoin.
      - dasil003 11y ago
        Isn't that true for all (or at least most major) currencies at the moment?
      - VMG 11y ago
        It's certainly easier to sell Bitcoin locally than gold bullion.
        notahacker 11y ago
        I'm not convinced that's true in very many countries.
        ryanlol 11y ago
        You probably won't be getting too good prices for gold in such countries either.
    - TheCoelacanth 11y ago
      Yes, so it's an unprecedentedly easy to transport commodity, but that doesn't mean it's not a commodity.
  - xorcist 11y ago
    If that's your mindset, then look at it like this: Bitcoin is a technology for shipping gold buillion equivalents to any remote location in the world in under the hour, for the price of a tenth of a cent. Pretty nifty, is it not?
    - lmm 11y ago
      Nifty? Sure. Deserving different tax treatment from gold bullion? Nope.
    - kbenson 11y ago
      Mindset? I was simply providing a different, I think more accurate, interpretation of the anecdote presented upthread. The person was paid in bitcoin, but in this specific case, because of the circumstances, I think it's no different than if they were paid in some other easily fungible commodity, such as gold. I interpreted the usefulness in getting paid in bitcoin not that the worker now had an easily used currency, but that the worker now had a commodity that could be exchanged for a local currency to actually buy most things needed, and it was cheaper than dealing with the local currency exchange fees. Yes, it also points to the utility of bitcoin, but this specific example also points to it's use as a commodity, IMO. As it gains in popularity, I think it will gain more utility as a currency, but until then it's a currency of limited use (limited in that there are limited venues that accept it) except as a commodity.
- monochromatic 11y ago
  I'm curious how she does use it though. Is there a local exchange willing to trade bitcoin for the local currency? Because she can't exactly do it through Coinbase, or she's right back where she started...
  - aianus 11y ago
    Coinbase is available is 28 countries: https://www.coinbase.com/global https://www.coinbase.com/global (I work for Coinbase)
    - monochromatic 11y ago
      Did not realize that.
    - mikekchar 11y ago
      You might want to update your FAQ: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1826671-what-countries-us-states-are-supported-for-coinbase-exchange- https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/182... It only lists 4 countries.
      - aianus 11y ago
        According to our lawyers we're not allowed to advertise exchange services in certain jurisdictions but if users happen to stumble upon it we're allowed to offer them the service ;)
  - bdcravens 11y ago
    Not necessarily. Coinbase's fees are probably far less than it costs to wire money or PayPal's 3-4%.
    - arcticbull 11y ago
      But not less than Transferwise at 0.85%
  - 11y ago
- bdcravens 11y ago
  So it's a criticism of the bank's fees, not of Bitcoin's utility. How does she get her local currency? Volatility has to be factored in to determine the price savings. (I personally think the level of control is a much stronger argument than the cost, since savings can be wiped out by the market or the banks updating fee structures)
zanny 11y ago
Nobody can force anyone to adopt bitcoin. I regularly buy Subway with bitcoin at a local store that accepts it. The benefits of bitcoin are out there, its up to stores to offer it as an option. There should be a strong pressure to eliminate credit card processing fees though, since most companies are paying ~10% of revenue just to credit card companies, sometimes worse.
- pathy 11y ago
  10%? Perhaps a small Mom & Pop store that has tiny volume. Any company of decent size would be paying significantly less than that in practically all circumstances
mikekchar 11y ago
The main point I was trying to make is that Bitcoin opened up the transfers of money to operators other than banks. Of course this is both useful and scary :-). For my friend, she has to hope that the service she uses isn't going to turn into another MTGOX. Regulation of financial services == good. Monopolies on financial services == bad. ;-) I'm not privy to her financial transactions, but I believe she holds some BTC for online purchases and transferring money between her and her husband. Clearly the bulk of her money is converted to a fiat currency because that is the most useful at the moment (though I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that the fiat currency she most often chooses is not that of her home country).
exelius 11y ago
Which would likely convert at close to the same rate as USD -> local currency if BTC -> local currency is a liquid market. If it's not liquid, then Bitcoin is essentially unspendable locally -- she would have similar results if she opened up a US bank account and had her fees paid into that.

jabgrabdthrow 11y ago

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a criticism of bitcoin's utility or not, but if it is I think you missed the point. The point is she has more currency units now than before, because she didn't have to pay the bid bad bank, even if she had to use local fiat to buy bananas.

kbenson 11y ago
No, I think the point is that her method of receiving payment is functionally no different than if they drop shipped gold bullion to her. She must convert it into a usable currency in most cases.
- dpc_pw 11y ago
  So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? Interesting. What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. And the difference between them does not really matter all that much.
  - kbenson 11y ago
    > So when I was getting paid in dollars, and converted it to my local currency right away, I was proving that USD is a commodity? Yes. It is a commodity. People trade in it every day. > I could not get anything with USD, so it is not a currency? For your use at that location, apparently not. > What people miss is that commodity and currency are not exclusive. Yes, and I said as much in a separate reply. > And the difference between them does not really matter all that much. Except for when they are classified as one and not the other and taxed differently.
- wstrange 11y ago
  Gold bullion is rather expensive to ship and insure. Bitcoin seems quite promising for foreign currency transactions.
  - s73v3r 11y ago
    Only if someone in the destination currency is willing to trade that currency for Bitcoin.
    - dasil003 11y ago
      Isn't that true for all (or at least most major) currencies at the moment?
    - VMG 11y ago
      It's certainly easier to sell Bitcoin locally than gold bullion.
      - notahacker 11y ago
        I'm not convinced that's true in very many countries.
        ryanlol 11y ago
        You probably won't be getting too good prices for gold in such countries either.
  - TheCoelacanth 11y ago
    Yes, so it's an unprecedentedly easy to transport commodity, but that doesn't mean it's not a commodity.
- xorcist 11y ago
  If that's your mindset, then look at it like this: Bitcoin is a technology for shipping gold buillion equivalents to any remote location in the world in under the hour, for the price of a tenth of a cent. Pretty nifty, is it not?
  - lmm 11y ago
    Nifty? Sure. Deserving different tax treatment from gold bullion? Nope.
  - kbenson 11y ago
    Mindset? I was simply providing a different, I think more accurate, interpretation of the anecdote presented upthread. The person was paid in bitcoin, but in this specific case, because of the circumstances, I think it's no different than if they were paid in some other easily fungible commodity, such as gold. I interpreted the usefulness in getting paid in bitcoin not that the worker now had an easily used currency, but that the worker now had a commodity that could be exchanged for a local currency to actually buy most things needed, and it was cheaper than dealing with the local currency exchange fees. Yes, it also points to the utility of bitcoin, but this specific example also points to it's use as a commodity, IMO. As it gains in popularity, I think it will gain more utility as a currency, but until then it's a currency of limited use (limited in that there are limited venues that accept it) except as a commodity.
monochromatic 11y ago
I'm curious how she does use it though. Is there a local exchange willing to trade bitcoin for the local currency? Because she can't exactly do it through Coinbase, or she's right back where she started...
- aianus 11y ago
  Coinbase is available is 28 countries: https://www.coinbase.com/global https://www.coinbase.com/global (I work for Coinbase)
  - monochromatic 11y ago
    Did not realize that.
  - mikekchar 11y ago
    You might want to update your FAQ: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1826671-what-countries-us-states-are-supported-for-coinbase-exchange- https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/182... It only lists 4 countries.
    - aianus 11y ago
      According to our lawyers we're not allowed to advertise exchange services in certain jurisdictions but if users happen to stumble upon it we're allowed to offer them the service ;)
- bdcravens 11y ago
  Not necessarily. Coinbase's fees are probably far less than it costs to wire money or PayPal's 3-4%.
  - arcticbull 11y ago
    But not less than Transferwise at 0.85%
- 11y ago
bdcravens 11y ago
So it's a criticism of the bank's fees, not of Bitcoin's utility. How does she get her local currency? Volatility has to be factored in to determine the price savings. (I personally think the level of control is a much stronger argument than the cost, since savings can be wiped out by the market or the banks updating fee structures)

zanny 11y ago

Nobody can force anyone to adopt bitcoin. I regularly buy Subway with bitcoin at a local store that accepts it. The benefits of bitcoin are out there, its up to stores to offer it as an option. There should be a strong pressure to eliminate credit card processing fees though, since most companies are paying ~10% of revenue just to credit card companies, sometimes worse.

pathy 11y ago
10%? Perhaps a small Mom & Pop store that has tiny volume. Any company of decent size would be paying significantly less than that in practically all circumstances

mikekchar 11y ago

The main point I was trying to make is that Bitcoin opened up the transfers of money to operators other than banks. Of course this is both useful and scary :-). For my friend, she has to hope that the service she uses isn't going to turn into another MTGOX. Regulation of financial services == good. Monopolies on financial services == bad. ;-) I'm not privy to her financial transactions, but I believe she holds some BTC for online purchases and transferring money between her and her husband. Clearly the bulk of her money is converted to a fiat currency because that is the most useful at the moment (though I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that the fiat currency she most often chooses is not that of her home country).

exelius 11y ago

Which would likely convert at close to the same rate as USD -> local currency if BTC -> local currency is a liquid market. If it's not liquid, then Bitcoin is essentially unspendable locally -- she would have similar results if she opened up a US bank account and had her fees paid into that.