Cryptocurrencies aren't anonymous. They also don't eliminate payment processor risk: fraudulent exchanges, hackers, and your own mistakes can all lose or lock you out of your money. And generally there's far less legal recourse when that happens with crypto.
I'm skeptical how many people in Venezuela saved their fortunes via Bitcoin et al, but if you have some data on that, I'd be curious to hear about it. In particular I'm curious why cryptocurrencies were a better means of rescuing your bolívar-denominated wealth than any other currency or investment vehicle such as real estate, gold, dollars, etc.
> They also don't eliminate payment processor risk
Of course they don't magically solve all problems, but that doesn't make them useless.
> I'm skeptical how many people in Venezuela saved their fortunes via Bitcoin et al
I've read some article from people who did it, but I don't think it's common.
The problem with leaving the country is, how do you take your assets with you? You cannot easily move a house, and you will get searched at the border and your gold, dollars, jewelry etc will get confiscated if found. With cryptocurrencies you can theoretically move any amount, by just memorizing 12 or 24 words, by hiding a piece of paper or by encrypting it and placing it online somewhere.
Monero is unfortunately not really anonymous either in many common scenario's, like repeatedly sending payments to or from the same address. [0] It's definitely better than Bitcoin though, but far from anonymous.
Overall I think that cryptocurrencies (and the internet overall) could use some better privacy strategies. Tor-like routing, no possibility of finger printing, etc.
> Many, including Satoshi, believed cryptocurrencies provided privacy for payments.
(emphasis mine)
Satoshi's writings indicated that he understood the public ledger he was creating was not anonymous. He even talked about ring signatures as a possible method to add obfuscation.
(Ring signatures is one aspect combined with others that Monero uses to achieve financial privacy. Anonymity requires extra steps taken by the user. Financial privacy ≠ anonymity.)
You don't, as a best practice, repeatedly send payments to or from the same address in Bitcoin. So if you continue not doing so in Monero, you end up with much more anonymity.
This is of course anecdata, but I've personally used BTC to send remittances in Venezuela.
I'm not sure how many people here use BTC as a means of preserving the value of their money since most people would rather hold USD, but for sending remittances, it cannot be beat.
As another interesting anecdote, my sister is in Argentina and a bunch of friends started asking her how to buy BTC before the election yesterday. Seems that those that managed to move their Argentine pesos to BTC did so just in time:
https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/argentina-central-bank-cu...
Yes there is, sometimes they don't even remit but rather use btc. I send $10 a month to ~5 people in Venezuela and it's one of the only ways now to help out and/or live there
Can you provide more detail on how they actually use the bitcoin? Genuinely curious as in most countries the use cases are very limited, and there is a large cut when converting into/out of bitcoin that doesn't make it worth it.
There are also a few shops (even one very large shop) accepting some cryptos now, like BTC and Dash. I'm not sure what volume they are seeing in sales though.
A more common case for preserving wealth on emigration is actually South Africa. Many reasonably prosperous South Africans that emigrated used Bitcoin to bypass SA's strict capital flight restrictions.
I deal with SARS pretty regularly and I'd like to know where you heard that since you're describing tax evasion. The kind of tax evasion that is covered by extradition treaties in most countries....
Yes, they are, zcash, bitcoin/ethereum mixers etc. and intense research around zero-knowledge proofs will yield first-class, easy to use anonymity relatively quickly.
> there's far less legal recourse when that happens with crypto
cryptocurrencies are cash, not credit cards or banks. It's a category that is completely missing from the internet. hence all the drawbacks, but they have their also many uses, most of them hitherto unimplemented (because we never had cash on the net)
> why cryptocurrencies were a better means of rescuing your bolívar
I presume because bitcoin was available where all other currencies weren't
I'm skeptical how many people in Venezuela saved their fortunes via Bitcoin et al, but if you have some data on that, I'd be curious to hear about it. In particular I'm curious why cryptocurrencies were a better means of rescuing your bolívar-denominated wealth than any other currency or investment vehicle such as real estate, gold, dollars, etc.