3 ms·
It’s a risk mitigation measure being applied to what’s clearly a very risky business currently. The sword cuts hard but this exactly what it’s for. The underl
by CaveTech 6y ago
It’s a risk mitigation measure being applied to what’s clearly a very risky business currently.
The sword cuts hard but this exactly what it’s for. The underlying businesses are in trouble and payment processors don’t want to hold the bag while the business run away with premature profits. If the business cannot survive with these provisions in place it’s because they have not accurately priced in the risks and are now upset that their vendors are not interested in acts of capitalist charity.
- Silhouette 6y agoI'm not sure any business on earth has "accurately priced in the risks" of a once-in-a-generation financial apocalypse precipitated by a global pandemic. Again, if the measure is proportionate and justified, it's fair enough to impose it. Stripe has to protect itself too. But the idea that any business in the current unusual situation should be able to just casually take a disruption to 25% of its cash flow and if it can't then it's somehow been badly run doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Lots of otherwise viable and long-running businesses have been hit hard, sometimes terminally, by the virus situation.
- CaveTech 6y agoI never implied that they were badly run, merely that they’re not operating within the current boundaries of reality. If there’s any place for government intervention, this is it. But it’s a slippery slope to subsidize business that are acting like the world hasn’t changed. Unfortunately the world is complex and a business can fail due to no fault of its operators, but that has always been the case and businesses are risky endevors.