←back to thread

329 points beeburrt | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
rwarfield ◴[] No.44002548[source]
We have normalized the treatment of the financial and payments systems as things that exist primarily to perform law enforcement surveillance functions. It's the same dynamic that leads to debanking of small accounts - payments firms exist on thin margins and the potential fines for inadvertently servicing a bad actor are stratospheric, so it's entirely logical to play it safe by refusing to service anyone whose profile looks even the slightest bit risky.
replies(8): >>44002574 #>>44002616 #>>44002858 #>>44002883 #>>44002926 #>>44003438 #>>44006920 #>>44009595 #
elric ◴[] No.44002858[source]
Debanking small accounts isn't something that I'd heard of before. But debanking "undesirables" is certainly a problem.

Over here (Belgium) we have legalized prostitution, but it's very hard for sex workers to open a bank account. There's some legislation that forces banks to offer them a basic bank account (at a steep fee) if they can prove that they've been rejected by N banks. Which is a start, I suppose.

Banks have basically become an extension of law enforcement, tax collectors, anti-terrorist operations, and morality police. Which is ironic, given how many banks brazenly break laws on the regular, how absolutely depraved parties with bankers are, etc. They're hardly paragons of virtue. Yet they get to gatekeep "virtue".

replies(7): >>44002984 #>>44003169 #>>44003339 #>>44005602 #>>44008125 #>>44008609 #>>44010737 #
roenxi ◴[] No.44002984[source]
I agree; but if we're bank-bashing I'd like it to be comprehensive:

What with all the attention they have to put into cooperating with the authoritarians they also aren't particularly good at their theoretical purpose, which is pooling people's money and investing it productively. We're watching an ongoing capital crisis in the West where we've been out-invested by nominal communists; it is absurd. The banking system has sticky fingers all over that mess. Then they get political protection through financial crisises where they should be taken out by bankruptcy but the powers that be prioritise having reliable people in what is effectively law enforcement rather then putting good capital managers in charge.

So, y'know. Upside is the banks do a great job of shutting down sex workers and political activism. 10/10 mark for reporting what everyone is doing to law enforcement. Downside is that turns out to be a big distraction from all the wealth creation banking can enable.

replies(6): >>44003115 #>>44003206 #>>44004033 #>>44005656 #>>44006844 #>>44009982 #
stephen_g ◴[] No.44005656[source]
Retail banks actually don’t ‘pool people’s money and invest it’, and for good reason. Investment banks are different from regular retail banks for a reason (which is that that creates way too much risk to deposits for everyday banking).

The main business of banking is actually leveraging the capital of their owners (shareholders) to lend. Deposits are not the main game, and are there for two reasons - firstly that lending produces deposits, so banks may as well be able to hold deposits just for that reason, but also because deposit inflows create the liquidity banks need to lever up their capital. This is the real reason why banks pay interest on deposits - to encourage people to transfer money in and not transfer as much out. Actually just having the deposits sitting there doesn’t do much for the bank, so the bank more wants you to transfer money in to increase your balance and not just hold it.

replies(3): >>44006026 #>>44007605 #>>44010394 #
gruez ◴[] No.44006026[source]
>Retail banks actually don’t ‘pool people’s money and invest it’,

>deposit inflows create the liquidity banks need to lever up their capital

Aren't these basically the same thing? There's complicated capital structure around how much tier 1 capital banks have to hold, and what deposits have to be backed by, but at the end of the day banks are taking money from depositors and investors, and using it to buy assets. More importantly if you deposit a dollar, that's not sitting around in a vault somewhere, it's used to buy treasuries or whatever. Most people would characterize that as "pool people’s money and invest it".

replies(1): >>44006471 #
roenxi ◴[] No.44006471{3}[source]
It seems like a reasonable objection, AFAIK the argument would boil down equivalently to money being a unit of measurement therefore the language is wrong - it is a bit like saying "pool people's meters" - meters are a unit of measurement as opposed to a thing. Can't pool meters, can pool meters of cloth. Especially since we don't hold the amount of wealth measured by a unit of currency steady it doesn't make sense to talk about "pooling money".

In this case though I said banking system, not retail banking system and I think the fairest reading given the ambiguity is just to treat it as "pool people's wealth" and shift to talking about the real economy.

replies(2): >>44006961 #>>44007892 #
Retric ◴[] No.44007892{4}[source]
Fiat money is a token of exchange backed up by the need for everyone in an economy to pay taxes using those tokens.

The idea it’s a measurement is appealing but incomplete, you can’t exchange abstract gallons or other measurements in the abstract only in terms of a measurement of something.

replies(1): >>44009998 #
1. roenxi ◴[] No.44009998{5}[source]
> you can’t exchange abstract gallons or other measurements in the abstract only in terms of a measurement of something.

I have an implement for doing exactly that on my desk - a cup. The people who made the cup don't know what I'm going to be filling it with but they have a very good idea of what volume it'll take up. I could go to the pub with friends and ask for a glass of something but I don't mind what. The point of a unit of measurement is it enables abstract handling of quantities. Otherwise we may as well have a unique system of measurement per thing.

And if you want a monetary example, there is barter. I can exchange $50 of work directly for $50 of food, abstracting out the money. That wouldn't be possible if the token itself were the important thing, because it isn't present anywhere in the example.

> Fiat money is a token of exchange backed up by the need for everyone in an economy to pay taxes using those tokens.

Obviously there is more than one type of money if you feel a need to add a prefix to explain what type of money you are discussing. The other types aren't backed up by a need for everyone to pay taxes, money can exist independently of a taxation system. Then it is called non-fiat money. You're focusing on the non-monetary aspects of the system, which is cool and all but missing the forest for the trees.

replies(1): >>44010846 #
2. Retric ◴[] No.44010846[source]
> I could go to the pub with friends and ask for a glass of something but ai don’t mind what

You’d very much mind you got a cup of bull sperm or diarrhea. That request is actually excluding the vast majority of possible liquids.

> if you feel the need to add a prefix

There’s only two types of money, fiat and barter.

If I’m exchanging a promissory note that I can exchange for 1 barrel of wheat or 1lb of gold or whatever that’s barter through an abstraction. If you’re using stamped gold coins people are just bartering precious metals of a known purity thus the need to weigh the coins not just count them.

replies(1): >>44012305 #
3. roenxi ◴[] No.44012305[source]
> You’d very much mind you got a cup of bull sperm or diarrhea.

Dear me. That got a good 5 minutes of chuckling out of me if you are aiming for humour. In the alternative I'm probably too far away to offer you a hug, but if you're having a bad day it might be a better bet to try going for a walk or some meditation rather than posting on HN.

> If I’m exchanging a promissory note that I can exchange for 1 barrel of wheat or 1lb of gold or whatever that’s barter through an abstraction.

The interesting implication of that is if you turn up at a foreign airport, change currency and buy a doughnut you couldn't be sure whether you're bartering or not until you've done some detailed analysis of the local legal system.

Either which way, if you want to call it barter through abstraction I can't stop you but we have a word for that - money. The reason most people use money is to abstract the bartering away whether they are in a fiat system or otherwise.