4 ms·

The government isn’t penalizing you for not spending money. The bank is providing services (safeguarding and transferring money, primarily) and that costs mone

The government isn’t penalizing you for not spending money. The bank is providing services (safeguarding and transferring money, primarily) and that costs money. The difference is that for the first time in a long time they can’t make enough from deposits to cover that cost.

tharne 5y ago
> The difference is that for the first time in a long time they can’t make enough from deposits to cover that cost. Yes, and the reason they can't make enough is because central banks are pushing down interest rates in order to nudge people into spending vs. saving. If central banks were not acting as a lender of last resort (at record low interest rates no less), the cost to borrow would be higher, and savers would likely be seeing higher interest rates.
- Armisael16 5y ago
  That isn’t penalizing savers; that just isn’t actively subsidizing them (and by extension the rest of the investing world, since that would easily be the most attractive place to have your money in the world). Also, central banks have a mandate to be the lender of last resort. It’s one of their most fundamental duties and they’ve been doing it for as long as they’ve existed.
- lottin 5y ago
  > the cost to borrow would be higher We don't know that, do we? It depends on the supply and demand for savings.
selfhoster11 5y ago
It's not like they have physical cash to guard these days. Most of these accounts and money is "just digits in a mainframe somewhere". Kind of similar to what happened with traditional vs ebook publishing - there are still some costs, but no longer shifting physical things from place too place should save the customer some costs.
- Armisael16 5y ago
  That doesn't make maintaining it free, just cheaper. There's a lot of money out there looking for investments, driving up prices and hence driving down returns.
- scotu 5y ago
  you are saying that like cybercrime was easier to fight than physical heists. That seems like a bad assumption? And I'm in no way a "banks" fan...
Freestyler_3 5y ago
You pay for that as well, about 100 a year if you do not touch your money.
entropyneur 5y ago
The government will also penalize you for not using those services however. For instance, in many places it's impossible to purchase real estate with cash.

tharne 5y ago

> The difference is that for the first time in a long time they can’t make enough from deposits to cover that cost. Yes, and the reason they can't make enough is because central banks are pushing down interest rates in order to nudge people into spending vs. saving. If central banks were not acting as a lender of last resort (at record low interest rates no less), the cost to borrow would be higher, and savers would likely be seeing higher interest rates.

Armisael16 5y ago
That isn’t penalizing savers; that just isn’t actively subsidizing them (and by extension the rest of the investing world, since that would easily be the most attractive place to have your money in the world). Also, central banks have a mandate to be the lender of last resort. It’s one of their most fundamental duties and they’ve been doing it for as long as they’ve existed.
lottin 5y ago
> the cost to borrow would be higher We don't know that, do we? It depends on the supply and demand for savings.

selfhoster11 5y ago

It's not like they have physical cash to guard these days. Most of these accounts and money is "just digits in a mainframe somewhere". Kind of similar to what happened with traditional vs ebook publishing - there are still some costs, but no longer shifting physical things from place too place should save the customer some costs.

Armisael16 5y ago
That doesn't make maintaining it free, just cheaper. There's a lot of money out there looking for investments, driving up prices and hence driving down returns.
scotu 5y ago
you are saying that like cybercrime was easier to fight than physical heists. That seems like a bad assumption? And I'm in no way a "banks" fan...

Freestyler_3 5y ago

You pay for that as well, about 100 a year if you do not touch your money.

entropyneur 5y ago

The government will also penalize you for not using those services however. For instance, in many places it's impossible to purchase real estate with cash.