3 ms·

> I think the reason is just inertia. It is not just inertia; it is government malice. The government loves that there are effectively only two payment process

• skybrian 4y ago
  Yes, financial companies mostly regulate themselves. They have lawyers telling them what regulators are likely to approve of, and make rules based on that for themselves and their customers. If they do something sufficiently bad, regulators go after them. That’s how banks get regulated, too. That’s how most law works, actually. There’s a question of how detailed the regulations are, but mostly you don’t go to court, and if you do, whether it looks bad to the judge or jury is going to make a difference. I’m wondering what you’re expecting from democracy? More oversight from a bitterly divided and dysfunctional Congress? People voting on financial propositions?
  • Karrot_Kream 4y ago
    If entire classes of financial transactions can be blocked through backroom conversations between financial companies and regulators, don't you think that's bad for democracy? We have laws which allow the US to tackle money laundering issues and it's understandable that regulators would create regulations along those laws; they have a clear mandate to. It's not clear to me that other classes of transaction should be blocked based on amorphous dealings with regulators and companies.
  • barrkel 4y ago
    Part of the issue is that it's usually American regulators setting these rules, but they're applied globally due to the more-or-less duopoly of credit card companies.