3 ms·

If you're going to claim to be speaking for an oppressed group I think you should be specific about which one, and what your relationship to that group is. My

If you're going to claim to be speaking for an oppressed group I think you should be specific about which one, and what your relationship to that group is. My experience with poverty in the US, having both experienced it myself and continuing to associate with many people experiencing it now, is that the main issue faced by poor people is having money, not having access to the money they do have. Even for the "unbanked" or people who use high fee check cashing and similar products, that is largely a way to avoid unpredictable fees charged by banks, or simply because banks aren't willing to provide the services they need unbundled from other services you need more resources to access. Plus the neobanks have really changed these dynamics in the last 5 or so years. If you're still working off pre-2018 conceptions of what the intersections of poverty and banking look like that can steer you way wrong here. But anyway these are policy choices and we could make them different if we decided to. A complex technical solution is a poor first choice for solving this problem.

koonsolo 5y ago
> poverty in the US Here is where you go in the wrong direction. It's not about poor people in a stable country, it's about rich people in an unstable country. So the use-case is actually the complete opposite.
- giraffe_lady 5y ago
  No that's pretty much the point I was making. The person I was responding to implies they have firsthand knowledge of the needs of the unbanked and "financially oppressed" globally. I don't think knowledge that broad is possible and so it's largely a rhetorical move ("WHAT SO YOU HATE THE POOR & OPPRESSED??"). I have firsthand knowledge of at least one group in this category that isn't helped by this technology so I shared it. The needs of the rich anywhere aren't an interest of mine so I don't know what their use case is. My point is that there are many use cases, and if you're going to assert one you should be specific about who it applies to.
  - buildbuildbuild 5y ago
    I have been unbanked and am not open to talking about it publicly at this time.

koonsolo 5y ago

> poverty in the US Here is where you go in the wrong direction. It's not about poor people in a stable country, it's about rich people in an unstable country. So the use-case is actually the complete opposite.

giraffe_lady 5y ago
No that's pretty much the point I was making. The person I was responding to implies they have firsthand knowledge of the needs of the unbanked and "financially oppressed" globally. I don't think knowledge that broad is possible and so it's largely a rhetorical move ("WHAT SO YOU HATE THE POOR & OPPRESSED??"). I have firsthand knowledge of at least one group in this category that isn't helped by this technology so I shared it. The needs of the rich anywhere aren't an interest of mine so I don't know what their use case is. My point is that there are many use cases, and if you're going to assert one you should be specific about who it applies to.
- buildbuildbuild 5y ago
  I have been unbanked and am not open to talking about it publicly at this time.