6 ms·

> The government, she assured, will continue buying bitcoin and having reserves in this cryptocurrency Sounds like the term "Failed Experiment" is the writer's

> The government, she assured, will continue buying bitcoin and having reserves in this cryptocurrency Sounds like the term "Failed Experiment" is the writer's assertion and not the government official position.

ggm 2y ago
Investment is not legal tender, its moved from a functional role to a high risk investment strategy, would be my take. They're different buckets of money/value and expectations.
sealeck 2y ago
[flagged]
a1371 2y ago
Imagine you have 6,050 bitcoins but they didn't work out for you the way that you hoped. The most reasonable thing to do is to still advertise a bullish position because otherwise you are devaluing your own asset. There is a strong sentiment around bitcoin in El Salvador and it can make them money; but the experiment around it being a legal tender, well, failed.
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  They only doubled and tripled in value. Gotta wonder what you think they expected
  - Torn 2y ago
    It to be a viable currency? Not a speculative asset?
- FollowingTheDao 2y ago
  That’s called a rug pull IRL.
do_not_redeem 2y ago
That's probably why OP chose a highly editorialized "Tico Times" article as the source for this. What's even funnier is it's a Costa Rican newspaper. So one Central American country publishes an article smearing another Central American country, and then HN sees the bias-confirming headline and tries to glean some economic lesson from it. Classic.
- wontondisregard 2y ago
  [flagged]
the_af 2y ago
From the article: > Salvadorans, with the exception of a few, never embraced Bukele’s initiative, who enjoys enormous popularity for his war against gangs, which dropped homicides to historic lows in El Salvador. A recent survey by the Central American University (UCA) revealed that 92% of Salvadorans did not use bitcoin in their transactions in 2024. I would say this points to an actual failed experiment, if true.
- yreg 2y ago
  8% is quite a lot though.
  - the_af 2y ago
    Depends for what. What were Bukele's stated goals? Only with this in mind can we decide whether 8% is high or low.
  - mvdtnz 2y ago
    8% of people used it at least one time in an entire year. In a place where people (who have on average very low incomes) were given $30 worth of bitcoin by their government just for signing up to a wallet app, so a very, very large proportion of the populous (compared to any other country on Earth) already had an app and wallet set up and ready to go. That's not a lot. That's a clear indication that the experiment simply didn't work.
  - throwaway314155 2y ago
    This "everything's going great as long as you squint hard enough" stuff is why people don't give cryptocurrency proponents the time of day. At some point admitting you've lost actually better preserves your ability to be heard at the next debate.
    - yreg 2y ago
      When I consider 8% to be high and you don't, that makes me more skeptical of mainstream adoption as a currency than you are.
cwillu 2y ago
“Another change makes using bitcoin entirely voluntary. (Previously, the law mandated that businesses accept bitcoin for any goods or services they provided.) Additionally, bitcoin can no longer be used to pay taxes or settle government debts.” --https://reason.com/2025/02/03/el-salvador-walks-back-its-bitcoin-law/ https://reason.com/2025/02/03/el-salvador-walks-back-its-bit... Sounds pretty failed to me.
- desumeku 2y ago
  They did this to receive a loan from the IMF. The IMF was withholding the loan because of BTC and would not disburse it until they got rid of its status as legal tender.
  - kjs3 2y ago
    'Withholding'...well how dare they. So how many IMF bailout loans must be dispersed, without condition of course, before this BTC economy will magically work?
  - sitkack 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - RabbiNoseberg 2y ago
      [dead]
    - addicted 2y ago
      Yeah, the all so powerful IMF that can be thwarted by the incredibly difficult task of…checks notes…. not taking loans from them… The IMF (or its donor nations) aren’t forcing anyone to take loans from them. Countries do that because the IMF offers much cheaper rates they can get anywhere else and is willing to forgive those loans far more easily than any other entity. In return it expects certain good governance changes that are stated upfront as conditions to receive the loans you could very well get from anywhere else in the world. Don’t like what they consider good governance? Don’t take a loan from them. Go get in the private market or the variety of nations willing to lend at far more onerous terms.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
iforgot22 2y ago
Better article: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/lawmakers-el-salvador-rush-new-bitcoin-reform-after-imf-deal-2025-01-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/lawmakers-el-salvador...
raincole 2y ago
The recurring theme is people will keep explaining why bitcoin has failed and will fail. And bitcoin will keep hitting all time high.
rsynnott 2y ago
It's no longer legal tender; merchants will no longer be forced to accept it. That's the key point; if the state wants to indulge in speculation, that's its business (though you'd question whether a state which needs to take IMF loans, which are kind of a last resort, should really be engaging in this...)

ggm 2y ago

Investment is not legal tender, its moved from a functional role to a high risk investment strategy, would be my take. They're different buckets of money/value and expectations.

sealeck 2y ago

[flagged]

a1371 2y ago

Imagine you have 6,050 bitcoins but they didn't work out for you the way that you hoped. The most reasonable thing to do is to still advertise a bullish position because otherwise you are devaluing your own asset. There is a strong sentiment around bitcoin in El Salvador and it can make them money; but the experiment around it being a legal tender, well, failed.

readthenotes1 2y ago
They only doubled and tripled in value. Gotta wonder what you think they expected
- Torn 2y ago
  It to be a viable currency? Not a speculative asset?
FollowingTheDao 2y ago
That’s called a rug pull IRL.

do_not_redeem 2y ago

That's probably why OP chose a highly editorialized "Tico Times" article as the source for this. What's even funnier is it's a Costa Rican newspaper. So one Central American country publishes an article smearing another Central American country, and then HN sees the bias-confirming headline and tries to glean some economic lesson from it. Classic.

wontondisregard 2y ago
[flagged]

the_af 2y ago

From the article: > Salvadorans, with the exception of a few, never embraced Bukele’s initiative, who enjoys enormous popularity for his war against gangs, which dropped homicides to historic lows in El Salvador. A recent survey by the Central American University (UCA) revealed that 92% of Salvadorans did not use bitcoin in their transactions in 2024. I would say this points to an actual failed experiment, if true.

yreg 2y ago
8% is quite a lot though.
- the_af 2y ago
  Depends for what. What were Bukele's stated goals? Only with this in mind can we decide whether 8% is high or low.
- mvdtnz 2y ago
  8% of people used it at least one time in an entire year. In a place where people (who have on average very low incomes) were given $30 worth of bitcoin by their government just for signing up to a wallet app, so a very, very large proportion of the populous (compared to any other country on Earth) already had an app and wallet set up and ready to go. That's not a lot. That's a clear indication that the experiment simply didn't work.
- throwaway314155 2y ago
  This "everything's going great as long as you squint hard enough" stuff is why people don't give cryptocurrency proponents the time of day. At some point admitting you've lost actually better preserves your ability to be heard at the next debate.
  - yreg 2y ago
    When I consider 8% to be high and you don't, that makes me more skeptical of mainstream adoption as a currency than you are.

cwillu 2y ago

“Another change makes using bitcoin entirely voluntary. (Previously, the law mandated that businesses accept bitcoin for any goods or services they provided.) Additionally, bitcoin can no longer be used to pay taxes or settle government debts.” --https://reason.com/2025/02/03/el-salvador-walks-back-its-bitcoin-law/ https://reason.com/2025/02/03/el-salvador-walks-back-its-bit... Sounds pretty failed to me.

desumeku 2y ago
They did this to receive a loan from the IMF. The IMF was withholding the loan because of BTC and would not disburse it until they got rid of its status as legal tender.
- kjs3 2y ago
  'Withholding'...well how dare they. So how many IMF bailout loans must be dispersed, without condition of course, before this BTC economy will magically work?
- sitkack 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - RabbiNoseberg 2y ago
    [dead]
  - addicted 2y ago
    Yeah, the all so powerful IMF that can be thwarted by the incredibly difficult task of…checks notes…. not taking loans from them… The IMF (or its donor nations) aren’t forcing anyone to take loans from them. Countries do that because the IMF offers much cheaper rates they can get anywhere else and is willing to forgive those loans far more easily than any other entity. In return it expects certain good governance changes that are stated upfront as conditions to receive the loans you could very well get from anywhere else in the world. Don’t like what they consider good governance? Don’t take a loan from them. Go get in the private market or the variety of nations willing to lend at far more onerous terms.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

iforgot22 2y ago

Better article: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/lawmakers-el-salvador-rush-new-bitcoin-reform-after-imf-deal-2025-01-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/lawmakers-el-salvador...

raincole 2y ago

The recurring theme is people will keep explaining why bitcoin has failed and will fail. And bitcoin will keep hitting all time high.

rsynnott 2y ago

It's no longer legal tender; merchants will no longer be forced to accept it. That's the key point; if the state wants to indulge in speculation, that's its business (though you'd question whether a state which needs to take IMF loans, which are kind of a last resort, should really be engaging in this...)