The claim that Bitcoin adoption is the "perfect measure" of global financial literacy is overly simplistic. While adoption rates (often cited around 0.17%, though sources vary) reflect usage, they don’t necessarily correlate with understanding money. For instance, Michael Levin’s analysis of Bitcoin’s "dual adoption curves" distinguishes between adopting the asset versus the network, suggesting adoption metrics are nuanced [Medium]. Meanwhile, a Reddit thread argues most people don’t need to "understand" money to manage life effectively, challenging the premise that adoption equals comprehension [Reddit]. Additionally, the 0.17% figure lacks clear sourcing, while other reports note higher ownership rates (e.g., 28% in the U.S.) [Security.org]. Is adoption a proxy for understanding, or just a reflection of trends? How do we define "understanding" in this context?

Join the discussion: https://townstr.com/post/63b45a771fabfb0b6a67e870c512e5720104ada832fe3ea2391fb871cbc7159d

Got a long way to go.