One of the important reasons why I think BTC's main value proposition is as a store of value and not as a payment system is that it's simply not needed for that.

I get it -- migrants sending money through Western Union paying fees through their asses. But BTC is not required to fix that.

I use Wise and can transfer instantly between actual bank accounts in different currencies at insignificant cost. I get paid by my US clients by ACH. Instant and free. I switch to my local currency for virtually nothing and transfer to my own Wise and non-Wise accounts for free.

Most important, the transaction costs are fixed and knowable. They don't change depending on whether some prick is minting PepeCumInADogsAss memecoin tokens or China banning BTC mining again.

If the transfer is to another Wise user all I need is their email address and it's also instant.

I have transferred to accounts using ACH, SEPA, whatever it is called in Singapore, Japan, Indonesia, Korea, Chile... and it's instant.

And traditional banks have caught up too. Instant and FREE transfers within the same bank have been a thing for many years now.

Now they're a thing between different banks too, at least where I am. I just paid a bill by instant SEPA to another bank. Instant and free -- under the "legal threshold" of €900 at least.

My point being, Bitcoin does NOT fix this particular thing, because that's just not what it does well.

What it does well is preserving the purchase power of my Argentinian family in a hyperinflationary context, and allowing me to move from country to country carrying (or really, not carrying) all my net worth with me without any predatory State thug being able to shake me down.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Bitcoin also helps do all those things in a adversarial environment

How do you get your wealth into BTC in such an environment?

The specifics would rely on the details of the environment. But I’d say generally: non-kyc buying/selling of bitcoin.

I mean this is until Wise become predatory or the interchanges that they have to deal with become increasingly more extractive over time.

LN transactions allow bitcoin to work very well as a payments network already.

If there is no State intervention to prevent it, in the event Wise got greedy and extractive, nothing would stop someone else from offering the same service, keeping Wise in check through competition.

I'm not saying that you can't use BTC as a payment system, it's just that it's not needed and it's inferior to what they are already doing right now in the legacy system.

I think to the extent that bitcoin adoption / circular economy is low, this is at least directionally correct.

However once / if / as people integrate into communities with bitcoin circular economy then the calculus changes as this obviates much / all of the need to convert back into fiat for spending use.

This is false. It is like saying if my local Starbuck or McDonalds or Walmart got greedy, someone else could just compete with them. Not so easy when then they dominate the market. Sure, I can open a coffee cart, or a vegetable stand -but am I really competing, or even able to compete?

Your point is taken, though - for you, the stronger use case is SoV, and I can agree that is true for many, now. But this may not always be the case, and some day Wise (or Strike) might not offer what you need, and lightning (or liquid) might.

Banking and money services are licensed in most jurisdictions, no? These licenses aren't always easy to get, for a competitor. Ask Elon. Thankfully Bitcoin doesn't need licensed entities to operate.

1.7 people are unbanked globally.

More than that don't have access to USD based accounts.

You're privileged.

1.7B

The chance may be small that these gatekeepers would refuse to honor your transaction request, but the possibility still exists. I understand today it isn’t necessary from your practical viewpoint. But, preserving the right to transact with another person without a trusted third party is a monumental feature wrapped up in privacy, sovereignty, etc. And, We already have used gold for thousands of years as a store of value. Bitcoin may be better, but again, that feature existed prior to BTC.

Excellent post ! Bravo !