Fair Access to Financial Services (OCC-2020-0042-0001)

[Jarolleon]

I love how absurd it is that one of the most important legislative proposals I've even seen crop up for the past four years is being juxtaposed alongside some bitch trying to regulate the size of pudding cups or some fucking shit. The ability for banks and payment processors to shut off access to a customer for absolutely no reason or for completely arbitrary reasons should have been address a long fucking time ago, so better late than never, but it's hilarious that it's prefaced by some goofy shit about unflavoured milk.

Have banks been doing this shit before the Trump era? I wonder if it's a sort of "Sleeping Giant Awakes" deal. Namely bankers acquiring TDS so strongly that they believe now is the time for extraordinary measures to save Our Democracy(tm), like they were the Ents of Fangorn Forest or some shit.

 

[Kosher Salt]

Name one time more government ever actually improved things for the citizenry.

Uh, let me think.

That time a brand-new government was created and told the King of England to go huff tea was pretty nice for the citizenry of the colonies. But that almost seems too easy, so let me think of a few more.

Government was responsible for forming the first transcontinental communications system, the Pony Express. It also built the transcontinental railroads. It built the Panama Canal (that had previously been attempted by a private company; it failed). The government funded a transcontinental telegraph system, and later, the Internet.

The government was responsible for surveying, mapping, and building interstate highway systems. It put satellites in orbit that can tell a hand-held device precisely where on earth it is, which enables things like Google Maps to even work at all. Those aren't privately owned satellites; the government put them there, and it invented most of the tech to get them there, too. Communications and transportation as we know them today would not be even remotely close to the same if government had not poured money and resources into them.

Science and engineering would not be the same either. The government sent men to space and either invented or paved the way to the invention of a whole new world of space-age materials and devices. Government programs for defense and wars have also heavily contributed to the fields of science, engineering, even biotech and medicine.

And there are so many other examples I could give. Public education. Public sanitation. Conservation. Occupational health and safety. Cleanup and disposal of millions of tons of hazardous waste that, prior to government regulation, had simply been left by private companies to poison our land, water, and ultimately us.

All of these things were made possible by acts of Congress (more laws), and/or by the government taxing and spending more money (bigger government). The idea that more government is never the solution is categorically wrong and stupid. It's rarely the solution, but sometimes, it is.

 

[muh_moobs]

It literally does make it better. Anarchy is a worse state than 99% of societies with a state. You add government to anarchy it gets better.

The government is simply me outsourcing the protection of my rights. If you don't consent to outsourcing the protection of your rights to the same government, thats great! You can immigrate to a different country with a government you like then. If you can't find a government you like, start your own country.

Your "outsourcing" is just laziness.

And demanding that your neighbors be forcibly stripped of the fruits of their labor so you can feel better doesn't make their lives better.

That is the most smooth-brained adoration of government I've ever witnessed.

 

[Trig.Point]

Name one time more government ever actually improved things for the citizenry.

How about when the US government forced the Dairy industry to stop putting formaldehyde into milk. I imagine that was helpful to people at the time.

 

[Null]

Government in modern times has been the counter balance to out of control private interests. Governments are at their best when they righteously destroy something that ruins lives and that no individual can actually combat. It's at its worse when it itself becomes a private interest. Specifically, monopoly busting has improved lives. Net neutrality improved lives.

It is ridiculous to say that banks can be brought low by simply deregulating banks. It's ridiculous to say that a private person can make a righteous bank which competes with the existing structure. You need something stronger than the banks to do this.

Your argument is shit and I would personally join the feds if I got to shoot bankers. I've been fucked over by banks a thousand fold more than governments. The US government has never impeded my operation of this site, they've only agitated me over criminals who've abused the site. The banks have impeded my speech and ability to live a comfortable life. I would sleep well after serving a term on the US federal banker execution squad.

 

[HumanHive]

How about when the US government forced the Dairy industry to stop putting formaldehyde into milk. I imagine that was helpful to people at the time.

And now we have to get our formaldehyde from meat products instead of a simple glass of milk. Once again the Federal government has denied us an essential preservative.

 

[Bob Barker]

Your "outsourcing" is just laziness.

I'm sorry but I don't want to personally fight off every single warlord looking to murder my family and rob me of everything. Maybe thats laziness but I want to do more with my life than become a super soldier so that no one has to pay taxes.

And demanding that your neighbors be forcibly stripped of the fruits of their labor so you can feel better doesn't make their lives better.

I'm not forcing them to do anything. If they don't like it they can move somewhere else and renounce their citizenship. The property they live on came with the caveat that they had to pay taxes to the sovereign ruling entity over it. They can just make their own country if they don't want to pay taxes.

 

[hundredpercent]

Government in modern times has been the counter balance to out of control private interests. Governments are at their best when they righteously destroy something that ruins lives and that no individual can actually combat. It's at its worse when it itself becomes a private interest. Specifically, monopoly busting has improved lives. Net neutrality improved lives.

It is ridiculous to say that banks can be brought low by simply deregulating banks. It's ridiculous to say that a private person can make a righteous bank which competes with the existing structure. You need something stronger than the banks to do this.

Your argument is shit and I would personally join the feds if I got to shoot bankers. I've been fucked over by banks a thousand fold more than governments.

If you abolished all bank regulations, innovation would be extremely cheap, and you would thus have instant worldwide payments, like the thing that will be done "by 2024" in the U.S.

If you had instant worldwide bank transfers, and none of the Patriot Act/KYC regulation, then anyone would be able to have a bank account.

If you could instantly transfer money to anyone directly, there would be no need for payment processors.

This is not realistic, because the banks will never be sufficiently deregulated, but if they were, it would also solve the problems. The banks are at a hellish middle ground where simultaneously have too much and too little regulation.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Have banks been doing this shit before the Trump era? I wonder if it's a sort of "Sleeping Giant Awakes" deal. Namely bankers acquiring TDS so strongly that they believe now is the time for extraordinary measures to save Our Democracy(tm), like they were the Ents of Fangorn Forest or some shit.

IIRC they mostly did this shit on behalf of the government like banning the literal Nazis or Imperial Japan from using their services. I'd think they would've banned communist groups/prominent communists in the 50s/60s or disagreeable groups like NAMBLA but I've never heard about that. Did they?

 

[Null]

If you abolished all bank regulations, innovation would be extremely cheap, and you would thus have instant worldwide payments, like the thing that will be done "by 2024" in the U.S.

This is literally you. Fuck yourself kike.

 

[Bob Barker]

If you abolished all bank regulations, innovation would be extremely cheap, and you would thus have instant worldwide payments, like the thing that will be done "by 2024" in the U.S.

If you had instant worldwide bank transfers, and none of the Patriot Act/KYC regulation, then anyone would be able to have a bank account.

This is not realistic, because the banks will never be sufficiently deregulated, but if they were, it would also solve the problems. The banks are in a hellscape middle ground where they are simultaneously too regulated and not regulated enough.

If you abolished all regulations other issues would arise. Banks would keep 0 reserves, invent their own currencies, make money out of thin air (thats where most of our money comes from rn anyway, but we have regulations in place to keep banks from exploiting this to no end just for profit) and in general just seek profit with no checks or balances other than "don't be significantly worse than other established institutes". Truly unregulated banks would be a fucking disaster.

 

[hundredpercent]

This is literally you. Fuck yourself kike.

View attachment 1822012

I'm not the other guy. Explain this: if you didn't have the Patriot Act, or any of the other banking regulation passed since 1863, and banks would work exactly like Bitcoin but in USD, why would you need to regulate the payment processors?

 

[Null]

I'm not the other guy. Explain this: if you didn't have the Patriot Act, or any of the other banking regulation passed since 1863, and banks would work exactly like Bitcoin but in USD, why would you need to regulate the payment processors?

WE WILL NEVER HAVE THAT.

This fucking fantasy you have does not exist, has not existed, and will never exist. The reality is that things suck and we have lords and owners and it's best to use one lord to fight the other owner so we can enjoy life a little bit more.

You abandon all pragmatism to live in this fucking cyberpunk bitcoin fantasy world and it's so fucking pathetic. These banking institutions you're shooting yourself (and me) to protect do not give a fuck about you and will round your mixed race babies up and drink their fucking blood

Regulate the fucking banks, retard

 

[muh_moobs]

Uh, let me think.

That time a brand-new government was created and told the King of England to go huff tea was pretty nice for the citizenry of the colonies. But that almost seems too easy, so let me think of a few more.

Government was responsible for forming the first transcontinental communications system, the Pony Express. It also built the transcontinental railroads. It built the Panama Canal (that had previously been attempted by a private company; it failed). The government funded a transcontinental telegraph system, and later, the Internet.

The government was responsible for surveying, mapping, and building interstate highway systems. It put satellites in orbit that can tell a hand-held device precisely where on earth it is, which enables things like Google Maps to even work at all. Those aren't privately owned satellites; the government put them there, and it invented most of the tech to get them there, too. Communications and transportation as we know them today would not be even remotely close to the same if government had not poured money and resources into them.

Science and engineering would not be the same either. The government sent men to space and either invented or paved the way to the invention of a whole new world of space-age materials and devices. Government programs for defense and wars have also heavily contributed to the fields of science, engineering, even biotech and medicine.

And there are so many other examples I could give. Public education. Public sanitation. Conservation. Occupational health and safety. Cleanup and disposal of millions of tons of hazardous waste that, prior to government regulation, had simply been left by private companies to poison our land, water, and ultimately us.

All of these things were made possible by acts of Congress (more laws), and/or by the government taxing and spending more money (bigger government). The idea that more government is never the solution is categorically wrong and stupid. It's rarely the solution, but sometimes, it is.

And after telling the English to fuck off, the North turned around and enacted the same policies of taxation against the South, triggering the civil war.

The pony express was a private organization funded by the government, it wasn't state owned. Same for the railroads. The wealth of the public was extracted by the state and transferred to a handful of private corporations. Your space fantasies are equally invalid here; during the Guilded and Early Modern ages people navigated the globe just as well as they do today prior to the establishment of GPS. It isn't that had to read a map. Your government owned satellites weren't built by the government, either. The research was completed by private groups receiving government bursaries, the construction was completed by a private company receiving subsidies, and then the satellite was purchased by the government from private industry.

And you're really defending public education? The same public education that teaches children that boys are girls and crime is good? You think common core math is a good thing? Public sanitation systems that routinely don't function and are never repaired properly as a means of raising taxes every year? Conservation also doesn't actually accomplish anything except allowing the government to extract even more wealth. You get to pay for the privilege of entering a park that you already own by virtue of being a tax-paying citizen. The water therein will still be sold to Nestle if the government so chooses, the animals culled or shipped elsewhere on a whim, and the land used for whatever the government wants without public consultation. All conservation does is allow the government to consolidate the ownership of natural resources into it's own hands for it's own profits at the expense of the citizenry.

OHSA was only enacted as a means to extract wealth from industry directly rather than via taxation. Hazardous waste disposal? That doesn't make anyone's lives better, either. The government offers subsidies to private enterprise to remove the garbage, and to foreign governments to take the garbage. All it does is move the problem elsewhere, not resolve it. And then, when people in other countries become sick, they get to come to western nations and claim refugee status, burdening the healthcare systems and making things even worse.

Government NEVER helps. It only slows down the pace at which things get worse while demanding that you make ever greater sacrifices to maintain the government. Government is the same as having a NEET child: it's not ever going anywhere, and all it will ever do is consume your resources until the day you die.

 

[hundredpercent]

If you abolished all regulations other issues would arise. Banks would keep 0 reserves,

Banking works like this:
1) I give the bank $X
2) The bank lends out $X-(reserve req.) to some other guy
3) That guy pays them Y% interest
4) The bank takes a cut and pay me Y-n% interest

If I give them $100, it's in my best interest that as much of this is lent out. Why do I, as a customer, want excessive reserve requirements?

invent their own currencies, make money out of thin air (thats where most of our money comes from rn anyway, but we have regulations in place to keep banks from exploiting this to no end just for profit) and in general just seek profit with no checks or balances other than "don't be significantly worse than other established institutes". Truly unregulated banks would be a fucking disaster.

You could still have minimum standards to be FDIC insured. There are some Mickey Mouse banks that aren't FDIC insured today, and the basic system then is "you know what you're getting, they might go tits-up at any time". Some people will take the risk to get higher interest, some people don't, everyone's happy.

Deregulating correspondent accounts and letting everyone start up shell banks in the Bahamas might be a good middle ground.

WE WILL NEVER HAVE THAT.

Agreed. Again, I am not the other guy, and I agree that it's a much better solution in the short term to regulate the banks. But this did use to be the way it was, a few centuries ago.

 

[Null]

Government NEVER helps

if the government threw you and your retard friend into a hole it'd help me out because I wouldn't have two retards advocating against the interests of this community on this community

 

[muh_moobs]

The US government has never impeded my operation of this site

Who's been crying about section 230 for over a month?

 

[Null]

Who's been crying about section 230 for over a month?

Uh, you mean the repeal of section 230? Spurred on by a single manchild?

The government (Section 230) enables this site to exist.
The government (US sovereignty) enables this site to resist foreign influence.

 

[HumanHive]

invent their own currencies

To be fair that's happening right now.

 

[muh_moobs]

If you abolished all regulations other issues would arise. Banks would keep 0 reserves, invent their own currencies, make money out of thin air (thats where most of our money comes from rn anyway, but we have regulations in place to keep banks from exploiting this to no end just for profit) and in general just seek profit with no checks or balances other than "don't be significantly worse than other established institutes". Truly unregulated banks would be a fucking disaster.

Why is it only an issue when private organizations do these things? The government already does all of that, and as you say, government makes everything better!