Russia might accept bitcoin as payment for gas & other ressources

[Risehigh]

What are your thoughts on this?

Source: Said by head of national committee for energy

https://www.coindesk.com/markets/20...aker-suggests-accepting-bitcoin-for-payments/

 

[JohnnyDoe]

Inevitable.

Toggle signature

@JohnnyDoe ”“ Your #1 Source for Guidance in Different Offshore Fields​

 

[backpacker]

Highly unlikely.
The capitalization of the entire crypto market‍ is too small for this. And it does not help them if they only accept⁠ crypto for 0.01% of their daily revenue.
Russia is not El Salvador. Consider the volume!⁤

Now, even if Russia would do that (despite it not making any sense due to⁣ lack of liquidity) it would be extremely counterproductive for the crypto market (i.e. BTC): Such⁢ a move will give the West a perfect argument to completely outlaw and ban crypto.︀ Nobody will want to deal with a "pariah currency" and all these exchanges like Binance,︁ FTX or Kraken will fail overnight. The crypto market would be destroyed. Western governments had︂ finally achieved with the help of Russia which they would have never achieved without the︃ Kremlin's help.
Always think twice what you wish for! eek¤%&

 

[backpacker]

I try to‌ keep a balanced view on this. I am not against crypto (HODL myself) but it‍ is important to see the reality.

We are currently not even at mid 5-figure levels⁠ for BTC. Building assumptions on a 7-figure level might even be too much for the⁤ Kremlin's fortune tellers.

 

[void]

this is exactly the situation BTC is designed for
I'm not that happy about it‌ coming so early and it brings more risk for BTC short-term but this is inevitable‍ to happen sooner or later

the capitalization is no issue obviously - this is free⁠ asset that is only driven by the market

 

[Golden Fleece]

So, the same people screaming about how the West should not not punish Russia with‌ sanctions because it sets a bad precedent by which the West can then punish private‍ persons the same way, do not see the significant danger, as noted by Bagpacker, of⁠ Russia's use of crypto as an excuse by the West to ban it?

So, the⁤ West is evil enough to use sanctions against dissidents but not evil enough to ban⁣ crypto? Nice logic.

In fact, I believe that it is far more likely that the⁢ West will ban crypto (e.g., on-ramps and off-ramps) than to employ widespread banking sanctions against︀ specific private actors. A continued government monopoly over the money supply is far more critical︁ (to them) than punishing some malcontents.

 

[void]

sanctions are just theater for voters⁢ - in fact one criminal organization (US or any other government) is "punishing" another criminal︀ organization (Russian government) in a way that doesn't harm the "good ones" and brings new︁ opportunities to make more

there is no rationality, justice or good in all that whatsoever︂

there are many ways and levels︆ how to ban crypto and some can happen
it's not very likely to happen since︇ those who decide are already in and under pressure of a lobby that represents many︈ more who are already in
also killing multi billion business makes no sense even if︉ it doesn't fit into current narrative - it's comparable to "let's ban unregulated webpages" as︊ a source of potentially any content

interesting times are coming for sure

 

[clemens]

If bitcoin isn't an option because of their limited number of coins, what about ethereum‌ or another coin?

 

[void]

BTC is infinitely divisible - there is‍ no such issue

 

[backpacker]

Limited number of coins is not the‍ problem. Liquidity is the problem.
Liquidity is even lower with Alt-Coins. Moreover, most of them⁠ are centralised - a complete "no go" for the Kremlin.

 

[clemens]

I see... we are into a multi billion situation where bitcoin and crypto‌ in general comes short!

 

[JackAlabama]

Well, if it can deliver what it promises, that is just the logical consequence. (Unconfiscatable,‌ non-state money). It is like Gold, but very easy to "ship" and even easier to‍ verify for both sides of a trade.

These two attributes are a helluva nightmare with⁠ Gold and are extremely costly and cumbersome (or even impossible).

 

[Risehigh]

I agree with some people here.
I see 2 situation:
1. Bitcoin does skyrocket and‌ other nations do follow
2. Western governments finally have a reason to ban/go hard against‍ crypto

Lets see and hope the best.

 

[JackAlabama]

2. I expect⁠ them to do so. The only exception might be the USA after the midterms (and⁤ if the dems got crashed). For the EU and the rest, I do not see⁣ much positive.

 

[Martin Everson]

Well didn't Bojo says he wants to go after Putin'g gold reserves to stop him‌ from using it. We all know what a crack down on physical gold will mean‍ for average person trying to buy/sell a decent amount of the physical 😕. Banks will⁠ just ban gold traders as it would be a time consuming KYC nightmare and is⁤ already considered a high risk activity by somne banks. The same will happen with BTC⁣ if Russia tries using it. All banks would just simply stop working with crypto clients.⁢

https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/uk-pm-says-west-could-go-after-russian-gold-reserves.943647
Now a BTC global clamp down in banking sector could be a good or︀ bad thing for BTC. It would mean BTC having to decouple from on/off ramps and︁ would have to sink or swim on its own merit. It could mean BTC goes︂ astronomically high as it becomes petrobtc..lol smi(&%. Usable in its own right without needing to︃ be tied to fiat conversion. However it could also mean it sinks as some holders︄ take the last opportunity to cash out into fiat believing the end is near.

 

[void]

I totally agree here.
Which scenario I believe in or what︀ are the odds is not that important. However it's worth noting that
1) BTC can︁ live without fiat and there are many use cases
2) in the latter case the︂ price can theoretically go to zero losing 40k EUR per 1 BTC but in the︃ other one there is no limit (especially considering current capitalization and comparing it for example︄ with useless physical gold) - the rest is just pure math

 

[void]

no doubt it's beyond acceptable limits

convertibility of BTC to fiat through⁤ banks is of course a good thing but less and less important - majority of⁣ those who hold BTC have sources of liquidity and having positive cash flow of fiat⁢ from the "old world" - they do it because there is NO alternative where to︀ conserve products of their work

 

[Martin Everson]

In a distant Orwellian future we will all be given a CDBC address tattooed to‍ our nut sacks or something. Then with CDBC's it will be the only "official" means⁠ of transacting as we go totally cashless 😕.

 

[void]

maybe not that distant looking at the private property and personal freedom violations in the past⁠ two doom and gloom years supported by "mostly peaceful democratic voters"

anyway there is also⁤ visible resistance that I wouldn't expect couple of years ago - so I'm optimistic

 

[Golden Fleece]

It is disconcerting how all the people who constantly whine about the increasing‍ "private property and personal freedom violations" in the West (which is no doubt true) are⁠ the biggest supporters of those societies that have evolved to become crueler and more totalitarian⁤ far more rapidly (e.g., Russia and China).

The wealthy from Russia and China have long⁣ sought passports and property in the West, but I do not see many wealthy Westerners⁢ immigrating to Russia and China to live.