3 ms·
I'm probably more favorably inclined to cryptocurrency & bitcoin than 98% of commenters here but this is becoming a rather stale boast. Quoting @jgreco on Twit
by jraines 7y ago
I'm probably more favorably inclined to cryptocurrency & bitcoin than 98% of commenters here but this is becoming a rather stale boast.
Quoting @jgreco on Twitter:
"Why are crypto people so impressed by this? 1) Do they think wires cost more as the dollar amount increases? 2) Do they not understand that wires are free for corporations and HNW individuals?"
- conanbatt 7y agoYou have lots of police and regulation in the bank transfer. Lawyers galore, and the promise of the state to back it. They are very different finance operations.
- benj111 7y agoWouldn't that tend to push up the cost of the bank transfer though? With cash you wouldn't even need to do this kind of transfer anyway, partly because of all the things you mention.
- conanbatt 7y agoNot if you can offload those costs to the taxpayer. How much state money ends up as profits for the banks?
- benj111 7y agoTax payer subsidy would seem to be a feature from a consumer perspective. Surely its better for someone else to be paying the fees?
- conanbatt 7y agoThats one way to look at it. I would answer that what the tax payer pays is much higher than what the consumer gets, and both groups are large enough to not easily prioritize one over the other. Bitcoin was born on dissent on how governments bailed banks with tax-payer money.
- jraines 7y agoI'm very happy with the liberty/access aspect of it, but it's much more relevant for small transfers. People moving this amount of money already have access, unless they're a drug lord or from a sanctioned country (and ofc they have their ways, too, shoutout to HSBC, Wachovia, DB, etc)
- conanbatt 7y agoI think everyone wanted/expected bitcoin to serve for the distributed/small case, but reality has made it the other way around so far. The capacity to avoid sanctions and the enforcement of law are greatly valuable assets: anything that limits the power of the state is a step towards liberty. (Not towards crimeless-ness)
- cortesoft 7y agoIf I was moving over a billion dollars, I think I would want those police and regulations.
- conanbatt 7y agoBitcoin has created/revealed players that don't. (Binance, Bitfinex, exchanges and Tether).
- SilasX 7y agoI was going to say something similar, but I think that response is going too far. If it's only "free" by virtue of the bank absorbing the costs to suck up to big clients, that's not much of a boast either. What's the comparable internal cost borne to process such transactions? And I assume bigger transactions in the regular financial system do take more documentation and have to adhere to more safeguards, which, to correctly account for, you'd amortize over the cost of each transaction.
- beefield 7y ago> If it's only "free" by virtue of the bank absorbing the costs to suck up to big clients, that's not much of a boast either. Frankly, I first thought you were sarcastic given the massive subsidies by miners in the BTC and given that in my neck of woods ( Europe) bank transfers of all sizes are for all practical purposes free.
- SilasX 7y agoThe tweet specifically said, "Wires are free for corporations and HNW (high net worth) individuals", meaning they're not free for others. That implies there is some cost they have to absorb, and I was asking about the apples-to-apples comparison to those costs. And what miner subsidies are you talking about?
- xeeeeeeeeeeenu 7y ago> 2) Do they not understand that wires are free for corporations and HNW individuals?" They are also free for people living in countries with healthy banking systems (i.e. most EU countries)
- cortesoft 7y agoAlso, fees are probably the last concern you have when moving over a billion dollars. Safety and security is what you care about, and I am sure a person with a billion dollars would be happy to pay many thousands to keep it safe.