3 ms·
Bitcoin or its relatives is an excellent way to drive down the cost of sending remittances. The US poor do not depend on them, but in many areas they are a sub
by fiatmoney 11y ago
Bitcoin or its relatives is an excellent way to drive down the cost of sending remittances. The US poor do not depend on them, but in many areas they are a substantial part of the local economy. Initial retail liquidity isn't as much of a problem as you'd think if you have the equivalent of wholesalers making a market.
But yes, in general the existence of new cash-like asset classes isn't that helpful to people with ~no cash assets.
- joosters 11y agoBit coin simply doesn't help with remittances: https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer/ https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer/
- circlecrimson 11y agoBitcoin helped me with servicing my loan in my home country when I was earning in another currency. I escaped foreign exchange fees. Its a use case that a lot of people have but it's unfortunate that the most vocal people telling us bitcoin can't do something are those who don't seem to have that need for its use.
- CyberDildonics 11y agoThere is no truth to that and I'll tell you why - a bitcoin ATM in one country and a bitcoin ATM in another country are all you need. If the combined spread is less than a money transmitter, then you save money. It is very simple. Many exchanges have around a %1 spread. Many remittance services are 10% or more. This is not rocket science and the article you linked to is from a service threatened by cypto-currencies.