5 ms·
I wouldn't mind not caring about regulating banks, had we not made a deal: banks are given a monopoly to be a (quasi-) public service, which in effect, is a lic
by snotrockets 3y ago
I wouldn't mind not caring about regulating banks, had we not made a deal: banks are given a monopoly to be a (quasi-) public service, which in effect, is a license to print money. In return, we require them to provide that public service to most.
We could always nationalize banks (which may not be a bad idea,) but as long as they're a public service, they should behave like one. And if the easiest way to do it using privacy laws, so be it.
- pas 3y agothey are already public service-ing through KYC and SAR (suspicious activity report) I have brutal firsthand experience of how compliance cripples commerce (simple wire transfer between EU member states 2 months of oops wait a bit compliance).
- snotrockets 3y agoNo, the public service is having a banking system. KYC and SAR are part of the costs we ask the banks to pay for getting the almost-literal license to print money. Just like we can require them to use people's correct name.
- pas 3y agopardon my irony. what I wanted to point out is that the public service thing the current retail banking system does is surveillance, and it's very effective at it.