5 ms·

The government (FBI, HSI, DEA, Treasury) wants to do all of this but can't because of the great constitutional liberties we have in this country. So they decid

by from 4y ago

The government (FBI, HSI, DEA, Treasury) wants to do all of this but can't because of the great constitutional liberties we have in this country. So they decided to outsource all this enforcement to financial institutions (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/21.11#k https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/12/21.11#k). And when financial institutions in the past weren't as arbitrary and capricious in enforcing the vague government's vague rules as the government liked they fined them hundreds of millions of dollars. So now everyone is like Paypal and apparently this is supposed to be a good thing. Read enforcement actions by the government. There will be a financial institution with tens or hundreds of thousands of customers and the government will use them failing to find three suspicious customers as a basis for enormous fines (https://www.fincen.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement_action/2021-12-16/CBOT_Enf_Action_121621_508%20_FINAL.pdf https://www.fincen.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement_actio... is a good example). Another thing you'll find if you read enforcement actions is that the government barely even cares what was illegal or not - they fine institutions for not reporting "suspicious" activity (without themselves investigating whether it was legal or not).

csomar 4y ago
I think what comes to people as a surprise is that the government, by default, considers any activity that it, the government, is not doing to be suspicious. The government, as entity, functions to extend its reach and not to serve citizens. This is by design. The government could care less if you lost access to your money if it means they have more control over the financial system. The tiniest gain of control is worth it for the bureaucracy even if it means locking hundreds of thousands of people out of their savings.

by from 4y ago

csomar 4y ago

I think what comes to people as a surprise is that the government, by default, considers any activity that it, the government, is not doing to be suspicious. The government, as entity, functions to extend its reach and not to serve citizens. This is by design. The government could care less if you lost access to your money if it means they have more control over the financial system. The tiniest gain of control is worth it for the bureaucracy even if it means locking hundreds of thousands of people out of their savings.