> That’s fine as long as my job is willing to pay me in a constant amount of bitcoin and everything else I need to buy can be bought with bitcoin.

It also requires the goods and services you buy to be traded in dollars. If stores buy food, gas, etc. wholesale in dollars, for example, and sells it to you for bitcoin, there's going to be a problem.

Presumably, in El Salvador, salaries would be denominated in BTC. That's the only thing that'd make any sense. (And, barring external regulatory force, it's very likely to be what a free job market where employees mostly spend BTC would move to doing.)

I don't see why they would be denominated in BTC, given that BTC will be legal tender alongside USD, and USD is a much more stable currency.

Making it a legal currency won't even force anyone to accept it. As far as I understand, it will simply mean that the government will accept payments in BTC.

> the government will accept payments in BTC.

The telling thing would be what the gov't pays in (e.g., for tax returns). Do they pay you back in BTC? or fiat?

Seeing how not being able to print more money when you need it worked out for the government of e.g. Greece, I would be surprised if El Savlador chooses BTC for paying its debts.

El Salvador does not have its own currency; it has been using USD since 2001. It can't print money either way.

Imports and exports are not priced in BTC though, in the same way that there aren't really imports or exports priced in gold.

Given the massive volatility of BTC it presents a massive opportunity for arbitrage that mostly has downsides for consumers who want stable supplies of goods.

The real currency we all have is time