4 ms·

Lawful? That's up to the government to decide.

jcranmer 4y ago
Which government? If you're talking about something like paying for an abortion or marijuana, you're likely to get very different answers if you ask the US federal government versus certain state governments.
- krrrh 4y ago
  Yeah, subsidiarity or lack thereof can get messy, but it’s not that unusual to get different answers from different levels of government. It’s a totally different situation when a private duopoly or oligopoly supersedes democratic control.
- bryanrasmussen 4y ago
  so which side are you arguing here - credit card companies can decide who they want to provide services for even if they decide not to service legal companies or that they should be forced to service legal companies?
- PenguinCoder 4y ago
  Most specific law applies then. Not hard.
- pilif 4y ago
  I see two answers to this: 1) if something is legal wherever the purchase was made, then the credit card companies, as basic utilities, should be compelled to process the purchase. which would be the easiest for me to understand, but possibly more complicated to enforce than 2) if something is legal wherever the credit card company is incorporated in, then the credit card companies, as basic utilities, should be compelled to process the purchase. If laws or enforcement are unclear about the legality of a thing, handle it like it would be handled in case of a cash sale or have the credit card company be cautious and enforce the strictest rule.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    You have to define legal. In the case of pot, it's not actually legal - the feds simply choose not to enforce the law in states that have legalized it at the state level. There is substantial risk there as a payment processor. If it were actually up to the states, then it could be more like you describe.
- fipar 4y ago
  To expand your point, the impact can be international. Weed is legal in Uruguay (restrictions apply, but you can do some paperwork and you'll then be able to buy it) yet the Central Bank suggested pharmacies to only sell it in cash, out of fear that it would have negative consequences for other CC transactions in the country, or for the country as a whole I suppose. I can understand CC companies not wanting to accept payment for weed in another country if the card was issued in the US, but for local cards, that's basically enforcing one country's laws over another. And you could have local CC companies, which we do, but then those are only accepted here. So if someone local wants to have a CC that can be used abroad, they need to accept the fact that the CC company will enforce the laws of the US even if they do a transaction outside of that country.
  - philistine 4y ago
    And yet here in Québec, we pay for weed with credit cards all the time. What’s up with that dichotomy?
    - fipar 4y ago
      My guess is guess Canada is less afraid than Uruguay about the potential implications, the asymmetry between the US and Canada is a lot less than that between the US and Uruguay.
    - jfim 4y ago
      The SQDC is a government entity, not a private one. It would be much harder for Visa and MC to refuse to process payments for them.
    - vibrolax 4y ago
      The real irony is that SQDC doesn't accept cash for payment!

Which government? If you're talking about something like paying for an abortion or marijuana, you're likely to get very different answers if you ask the US federal government versus certain state governments.

krrrh 4y ago
Yeah, subsidiarity or lack thereof can get messy, but it’s not that unusual to get different answers from different levels of government. It’s a totally different situation when a private duopoly or oligopoly supersedes democratic control.
bryanrasmussen 4y ago
so which side are you arguing here - credit card companies can decide who they want to provide services for even if they decide not to service legal companies or that they should be forced to service legal companies?
PenguinCoder 4y ago
Most specific law applies then. Not hard.
pilif 4y ago
I see two answers to this: 1) if something is legal wherever the purchase was made, then the credit card companies, as basic utilities, should be compelled to process the purchase. which would be the easiest for me to understand, but possibly more complicated to enforce than 2) if something is legal wherever the credit card company is incorporated in, then the credit card companies, as basic utilities, should be compelled to process the purchase. If laws or enforcement are unclear about the legality of a thing, handle it like it would be handled in case of a cash sale or have the credit card company be cautious and enforce the strictest rule.
- giantg2 4y ago
  You have to define legal. In the case of pot, it's not actually legal - the feds simply choose not to enforce the law in states that have legalized it at the state level. There is substantial risk there as a payment processor. If it were actually up to the states, then it could be more like you describe.
fipar 4y ago
To expand your point, the impact can be international. Weed is legal in Uruguay (restrictions apply, but you can do some paperwork and you'll then be able to buy it) yet the Central Bank suggested pharmacies to only sell it in cash, out of fear that it would have negative consequences for other CC transactions in the country, or for the country as a whole I suppose. I can understand CC companies not wanting to accept payment for weed in another country if the card was issued in the US, but for local cards, that's basically enforcing one country's laws over another. And you could have local CC companies, which we do, but then those are only accepted here. So if someone local wants to have a CC that can be used abroad, they need to accept the fact that the CC company will enforce the laws of the US even if they do a transaction outside of that country.
- philistine 4y ago
  And yet here in Québec, we pay for weed with credit cards all the time. What’s up with that dichotomy?
  - fipar 4y ago
    My guess is guess Canada is less afraid than Uruguay about the potential implications, the asymmetry between the US and Canada is a lot less than that between the US and Uruguay.
  - jfim 4y ago
    The SQDC is a government entity, not a private one. It would be much harder for Visa and MC to refuse to process payments for them.
  - vibrolax 4y ago
    The real irony is that SQDC doesn't accept cash for payment!