4 ms·

This is just fluff. Financial services and banks are not the same thing. The biggest problem with banks in the US is no free accounts, we need banks with physic

by zz865 5y ago

This is just fluff. Financial services and banks are not the same thing. The biggest problem with banks in the US is no free accounts, we need banks with physical branches to offer accounts for poor people to have. There is no money in this so a16z would not be interested. Everyone else is looked after already.

reaperducer 5y ago
we need banks with physical branches to offer accounts for poor people to have. Coming soon to a USPS near you. It'll be like 1965 again.
molsongolden 5y ago
There are free bank accounts at many banks? Also, lots of neobanks are offering free accounts and features because their revenue comes from interchange on spending + interest + future cross-sells or lending.
- zz865 5y ago
  Not with branches, which is what half the population wants.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
fijiaarone 5y ago
Why do people without money need to have bank accounts? If you answer is: To be able to make payments Then maybe a better question is -- Why should people need bank accounts to make payments. Note: Banks are not likely to ask this question
- hakfoo 5y ago
  As much as anything, people need bank accounts to receive payments to be part of a modern economy. Many retirees would fall well into the "people without money" category, but they still need to get their Social Security payment direct deposited. Many employers, especially in low-wage "people without money" sectors, aggressively push extortionate-fee prepaid-debit products on their workers if they can't accept a conventional direct deposit. Putting everyone on a single network, at the very least for this use case, reduces cost and complexity. Can you imagine the guaranteed confusion and error in a system where 40% of your employer's payroll was paid over ACH, 25% via crypto transfers split among a dozen blockchains, and the rest via paper cheques or prepaid debit cards mailed out? Yes, it's not the only possible solution to a payments ecosystem, but it's the closest thing to a universal one we have. People understand how it works and there are well-established risk and mitigation models for it. This is part of the reason I'm a bit hesitant about things like the "self banking" paradigm via cryptocurrency. Even once we solve the nuts-and-bolts problems of risk mitigation and seamless user experiences, it's likely to be a sharded market for the short term. I can easily imagine incurring fees and delays because my money is in a Dogecoin wallet but the water company only wants Monero to settle their bill.

by zz865 5y ago

reaperducer 5y ago

we need banks with physical branches to offer accounts for poor people to have. Coming soon to a USPS near you. It'll be like 1965 again.

molsongolden 5y ago

There are free bank accounts at many banks? Also, lots of neobanks are offering free accounts and features because their revenue comes from interchange on spending + interest + future cross-sells or lending.

zz865 5y ago
Not with branches, which is what half the population wants.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

fijiaarone 5y ago

Why do people without money need to have bank accounts? If you answer is: To be able to make payments Then maybe a better question is -- Why should people need bank accounts to make payments. Note: Banks are not likely to ask this question

hakfoo 5y ago
As much as anything, people need bank accounts to receive payments to be part of a modern economy. Many retirees would fall well into the "people without money" category, but they still need to get their Social Security payment direct deposited. Many employers, especially in low-wage "people without money" sectors, aggressively push extortionate-fee prepaid-debit products on their workers if they can't accept a conventional direct deposit. Putting everyone on a single network, at the very least for this use case, reduces cost and complexity. Can you imagine the guaranteed confusion and error in a system where 40% of your employer's payroll was paid over ACH, 25% via crypto transfers split among a dozen blockchains, and the rest via paper cheques or prepaid debit cards mailed out? Yes, it's not the only possible solution to a payments ecosystem, but it's the closest thing to a universal one we have. People understand how it works and there are well-established risk and mitigation models for it. This is part of the reason I'm a bit hesitant about things like the "self banking" paradigm via cryptocurrency. Even once we solve the nuts-and-bolts problems of risk mitigation and seamless user experiences, it's likely to be a sharded market for the short term. I can easily imagine incurring fees and delays because my money is in a Dogecoin wallet but the water company only wants Monero to settle their bill.