7 ms·

Horrible. I've heard similar stories but this one's the worst by far. This shouldn't be allowed to ever happen again, such sudden closures without warning need

Horrible. I've heard similar stories but this one's the worst by far. This shouldn't be allowed to ever happen again, such sudden closures without warning need to be illegal. The issue is banking is highly regulated but a lot of the regulation is about AML, terrorism screening and such. Not actually protecting customers from abuse but rather the other way around - banks are taking precautions to protect themselves from customers. Some of the regulation is also the result of decades of lobbying efforts by major players, making it extremely hard for new ones to compete. Banks are rarely held accountable because for some reason most regular people are fine with this or don't understand it. There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance. Good luck to a bank trying to shut down your self-hosted Ethereum wallet. Banks provide important services and will continue to exist, but giving them full unchecked control over our life savings and finance is mad. There are a lot of other issues with the current system, and many people don't really understand the contracts they're signing, including that they don't legally own "their money" in the bank account in most cases (they're creditors). But the question of effective control over ones own funds is the most crucial one to me.

mcny 3y ago
> There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance. I want the pendulum to swing the other way. Everybody gets and gets to keep forever an account at the Reserve Bank. > self-hosted Ethereum wallet I'm sorry. The technology might be fine But I simply do not trust the people involved with cryptocurrency. Not just the scammers such as SBF, I don't trust the "victims" to make wise choices. They see this as a get rich quick scheme. They are not "victims". They are money hungry speculators. Most don't even host a full node. Even people who have a means to do so Such as this guy tech deals on YouTube. The miners want to turn a good profit when they should be happy to just break even. The transaction costs are still too high. It should be very close to if not exactly zero dollars. The block chain should not be a place to make huge profits. The prices should not go "to the moon". In fact, you shouldn't even be thinking of the price of your cryptocurrency with respect to the US Dollar. This already means we lose if we constantly compare Bitcoin oh sorry ethereum and the dollar.
- fragmede 3y ago
  A crypto currency pegged to the dollar won't "go to the moon". If you're looking for that, there's USDT. Unfortunately, when trying to pick a coin, it's like trying to choose the best programming language. Each coin has its own ins and outs, there isn't one that is the best. They have their own time and place. A lot of people see this and want to use them in inappropriate places, but doesn't mean there aren't appropriate reasons for them, even if they're few and far between.
  - Quindecillion 3y ago
    > Each coin has its own ins and outs, there isn't one that is the best. They have their own time and place. This is just wishy washy rubbish trying to appear "diplomatic" and "balanced". Oh sure, you can mint some monkey jpegs or construct a needlessly complex and public smart contract for some esoteric "use case", but the truth is the majority of people in the world don't want or need those things. People just want a money that works. You can send or receive it instantly across international borders, that no one can stop, and it doesn't lose it's value over the years. Bitcoin is the only game in town, the "crypto bros" just don't realise it yet because they can make obscene amounts of money from pump and dump schemes with flashy marketing about "use cases" and "yield". Wake up or get burned, again and again.
    - kylebenzle 3y ago
      Agree, but BTC stopped being "Bitcoin" as defined as "peer tomorrow digital cash" long ago. Now BCH is closer to Bitcoin and still works great. BTC is just a ponzi scheme for morons at this point
    - politician 3y ago
      > People just want a money that works. You can send or receive it instantly across international borders, that no one can stop, and it doesn't lose its value over the years. Pure fantasy. On cross-border trade that cannot be interdicted: There is no reason for any state to deny itself from sanctioning its adversaries. On currency valuation: An economic zone has many many actors making independent decisions which in aggregate affects the value of the zone’s currency. The ability to debase a currency by over issuing it is identical to the ability to expand the supply to provide liquidity to a growing economy.
robertlagrant 3y ago
> There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance Carrying some emergency cash is also a solution for this sort of thing.
- fsflover 3y ago
  It wouldn't solve the OP's problem.
  - ta1243 3y ago
    $200 emergency cash would have allowed him to fill up with gas, and pay for a motel or wherever he was going over the weekend. Having multiple cards would too (I have a debit card and two credit cards, kept at home, but I don't want to be stuck with no money if my wallet/phone gets stolen) I have no idea why a university which had received multiple on time payments would suddenly drop someone off the role for paying a few days late (especially with a reasonable excuse like "my bank put my account on hold")
    - ArabicBaklava 3y ago
      Not to deviate with the original issue, which is banks suddenly freezing funds, with no warning. The $200 would've helped guarantee food and gas, it wouldn't cover shelter, i was studying in California, the cheapest hotel was $130~ a night. I also tried explaining the situation to the university, but unfortunately you are considered a current student only if you paid your tuition. There were also programs to help students in crisis (provide them with place to stay, food) but its only available to students who paid the tuition. PS: As of that situation happening, now i have 6+ accounts with different banks, emergency cash, I do not want it ever happening to me again.
    - manojlds 3y ago
      Yeah the story doesn't check out.
      - ArabicBaklava 3y ago
zkid18 3y ago
Yeah, but most people opt for exchanges and VC-backed wallets instead of dealing with custody. The reality has become even more regulated than banks. I've lost access to my Coinbase account, which I used to facilitate some fiat/crypto transactions, simply because of my nationality (I'm Russian but have been living outside of Russia for a decade). It was right after the 22/02 and the massive sanctions. I wouldn't say fintech or neobanks are very trustworthy. Wise, a fintech platform, blocked my company's account for four weeks for "further investigation" right after the war as well. This caused me to miss bill payments. I think the only way to mitigate the risk of a bank taking over your funds is to not store all your money in one account. Now, I have over 20 different accounts.
j-a-a-p 3y ago
We simply should not blindly rely on services like banks. You can invent any other new system, but you will never avoid this to happen. The lesson to be learned here is never let yourself get cornered.
QuantumGood 3y ago
It's not the bank you need to worry about in DeFi , e.g. https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ https://web3isgoinggreat.com/
- trompetenaccoun 3y ago
  Much of "Web3" is either a scam or vaporware, that's not really disputed even by cryptocurrency proponents. There also isn't good regulation in most countries currently, in the US for example regulators are dragging their feet, so it's a 'Wild West' type situation like the early internet. The point is more about banking specifically though, and about taking back control. Grandpa should obviously not swap his life savings for BuzzwordCoin, it's not ready for him. But for someone tech literate like I presume the other user is, holding some emergency funds in a way they have full control could have saved them. Hopefully there will be more integration with the established financial system and easier and safer ways people can move in and out of self custody.
mpalczewski 3y ago
A big centralized government bank is not somehow going to be magically better than multiple commercial banks. At best it would be equally bad but more likely it will be worse than the dmv and irs put together. Going to the bank will be like doing your taxes. Maybe it would be so bad that it would solve this problem because people would have cash.
- bombcar 3y ago
  At least if the DMV or the IRS goes insane, you can take them to real court. A government bank of last resort is probably something we need.
  - BobaFloutist 3y ago
    Yeah the point of government services like a central bank or a public healthcare option or what have you is that they provide a floor of "this is the worst service/bargain you can possibly get", and then the private sector needs to compete against it (sometimes by dishonestly implying they have a better product when their product is worse, but that's its own can of worms). For basic necessities to modern life, there needs to be a state provided minimum quantity of access, so that you can't be screwed over by corporations just deciding you aren't profitable enough, or cornering the market and price gouging, etc.
    - MrDrMcCoy 3y ago
      I think the state ought to fund such minimum services, but should under no circumstances be permitted to provide them directly. Quality has a hard time competing with free, especially for the poor. If you can only afford the government free solution and they wrong you, your options for seeking redress will be much more limited than if the government gave you a voucher for a privately provided service.
janandonly 3y ago
Having cash counts as “decentralized” finance just as well, no?
bombcar 3y ago
The problem is the government deputized the banks, yet the banks are not held to the same standard that government agents are. Until that’s fixed, this will only get worse.
toss1 3y ago
You're on the right track, but cryptocurrency has unfortunately shown repeatedly that it is not the solution (nevermind the ubiquitous fraud, scammers, but nearly 2 decades in, there is no good easy-to-use and secure system, the UX sucks). It does appear necessary to spread your risk across multiple unrelated financial institutions. Make multiple bank & ccard accounts, and do not link them. Far less convenient, but should improve your safety.
rbanffy 3y ago
> There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance. Another good option is to have checking accounts in more than one bank. Whatever triggers bank A to close your account is unlikely to also trigger the same action by bank B. It requires more funds, but you decentralise your finances within the classic financial system. If something triggers a close of your accounts on multiple banks at the same time, odds are you have much worse problems than access to liquidity.
- TwoHeadedBeast 3y ago
  Really just a credit card with a different institution is enough to see you through something like this.

mcny 3y ago

> There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance. I want the pendulum to swing the other way. Everybody gets and gets to keep forever an account at the Reserve Bank. > self-hosted Ethereum wallet I'm sorry. The technology might be fine But I simply do not trust the people involved with cryptocurrency. Not just the scammers such as SBF, I don't trust the "victims" to make wise choices. They see this as a get rich quick scheme. They are not "victims". They are money hungry speculators. Most don't even host a full node. Even people who have a means to do so Such as this guy tech deals on YouTube. The miners want to turn a good profit when they should be happy to just break even. The transaction costs are still too high. It should be very close to if not exactly zero dollars. The block chain should not be a place to make huge profits. The prices should not go "to the moon". In fact, you shouldn't even be thinking of the price of your cryptocurrency with respect to the US Dollar. This already means we lose if we constantly compare Bitcoin oh sorry ethereum and the dollar.

fragmede 3y ago
A crypto currency pegged to the dollar won't "go to the moon". If you're looking for that, there's USDT. Unfortunately, when trying to pick a coin, it's like trying to choose the best programming language. Each coin has its own ins and outs, there isn't one that is the best. They have their own time and place. A lot of people see this and want to use them in inappropriate places, but doesn't mean there aren't appropriate reasons for them, even if they're few and far between.
- Quindecillion 3y ago
  > Each coin has its own ins and outs, there isn't one that is the best. They have their own time and place. This is just wishy washy rubbish trying to appear "diplomatic" and "balanced". Oh sure, you can mint some monkey jpegs or construct a needlessly complex and public smart contract for some esoteric "use case", but the truth is the majority of people in the world don't want or need those things. People just want a money that works. You can send or receive it instantly across international borders, that no one can stop, and it doesn't lose it's value over the years. Bitcoin is the only game in town, the "crypto bros" just don't realise it yet because they can make obscene amounts of money from pump and dump schemes with flashy marketing about "use cases" and "yield". Wake up or get burned, again and again.
  - kylebenzle 3y ago
    Agree, but BTC stopped being "Bitcoin" as defined as "peer tomorrow digital cash" long ago. Now BCH is closer to Bitcoin and still works great. BTC is just a ponzi scheme for morons at this point
  - politician 3y ago
    > People just want a money that works. You can send or receive it instantly across international borders, that no one can stop, and it doesn't lose its value over the years. Pure fantasy. On cross-border trade that cannot be interdicted: There is no reason for any state to deny itself from sanctioning its adversaries. On currency valuation: An economic zone has many many actors making independent decisions which in aggregate affects the value of the zone’s currency. The ability to debase a currency by over issuing it is identical to the ability to expand the supply to provide liquidity to a growing economy.

robertlagrant 3y ago

> There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance Carrying some emergency cash is also a solution for this sort of thing.

fsflover 3y ago
It wouldn't solve the OP's problem.
- ta1243 3y ago
  $200 emergency cash would have allowed him to fill up with gas, and pay for a motel or wherever he was going over the weekend. Having multiple cards would too (I have a debit card and two credit cards, kept at home, but I don't want to be stuck with no money if my wallet/phone gets stolen) I have no idea why a university which had received multiple on time payments would suddenly drop someone off the role for paying a few days late (especially with a reasonable excuse like "my bank put my account on hold")
  - ArabicBaklava 3y ago
    Not to deviate with the original issue, which is banks suddenly freezing funds, with no warning. The $200 would've helped guarantee food and gas, it wouldn't cover shelter, i was studying in California, the cheapest hotel was $130~ a night. I also tried explaining the situation to the university, but unfortunately you are considered a current student only if you paid your tuition. There were also programs to help students in crisis (provide them with place to stay, food) but its only available to students who paid the tuition. PS: As of that situation happening, now i have 6+ accounts with different banks, emergency cash, I do not want it ever happening to me again.
  - manojlds 3y ago
    Yeah the story doesn't check out.
    - ArabicBaklava 3y ago

zkid18 3y ago

Yeah, but most people opt for exchanges and VC-backed wallets instead of dealing with custody. The reality has become even more regulated than banks. I've lost access to my Coinbase account, which I used to facilitate some fiat/crypto transactions, simply because of my nationality (I'm Russian but have been living outside of Russia for a decade). It was right after the 22/02 and the massive sanctions. I wouldn't say fintech or neobanks are very trustworthy. Wise, a fintech platform, blocked my company's account for four weeks for "further investigation" right after the war as well. This caused me to miss bill payments. I think the only way to mitigate the risk of a bank taking over your funds is to not store all your money in one account. Now, I have over 20 different accounts.

j-a-a-p 3y ago

We simply should not blindly rely on services like banks. You can invent any other new system, but you will never avoid this to happen. The lesson to be learned here is never let yourself get cornered.

QuantumGood 3y ago

It's not the bank you need to worry about in DeFi , e.g. https://web3isgoinggreat.com/ https://web3isgoinggreat.com/

trompetenaccoun 3y ago
Much of "Web3" is either a scam or vaporware, that's not really disputed even by cryptocurrency proponents. There also isn't good regulation in most countries currently, in the US for example regulators are dragging their feet, so it's a 'Wild West' type situation like the early internet. The point is more about banking specifically though, and about taking back control. Grandpa should obviously not swap his life savings for BuzzwordCoin, it's not ready for him. But for someone tech literate like I presume the other user is, holding some emergency funds in a way they have full control could have saved them. Hopefully there will be more integration with the established financial system and easier and safer ways people can move in and out of self custody.

mpalczewski 3y ago

A big centralized government bank is not somehow going to be magically better than multiple commercial banks. At best it would be equally bad but more likely it will be worse than the dmv and irs put together. Going to the bank will be like doing your taxes. Maybe it would be so bad that it would solve this problem because people would have cash.

bombcar 3y ago
At least if the DMV or the IRS goes insane, you can take them to real court. A government bank of last resort is probably something we need.
- BobaFloutist 3y ago
  Yeah the point of government services like a central bank or a public healthcare option or what have you is that they provide a floor of "this is the worst service/bargain you can possibly get", and then the private sector needs to compete against it (sometimes by dishonestly implying they have a better product when their product is worse, but that's its own can of worms). For basic necessities to modern life, there needs to be a state provided minimum quantity of access, so that you can't be screwed over by corporations just deciding you aren't profitable enough, or cornering the market and price gouging, etc.
  - MrDrMcCoy 3y ago
    I think the state ought to fund such minimum services, but should under no circumstances be permitted to provide them directly. Quality has a hard time competing with free, especially for the poor. If you can only afford the government free solution and they wrong you, your options for seeking redress will be much more limited than if the government gave you a voucher for a privately provided service.

janandonly 3y ago

Having cash counts as “decentralized” finance just as well, no?

bombcar 3y ago

The problem is the government deputized the banks, yet the banks are not held to the same standard that government agents are. Until that’s fixed, this will only get worse.

toss1 3y ago

You're on the right track, but cryptocurrency has unfortunately shown repeatedly that it is not the solution (nevermind the ubiquitous fraud, scammers, but nearly 2 decades in, there is no good easy-to-use and secure system, the UX sucks). It does appear necessary to spread your risk across multiple unrelated financial institutions. Make multiple bank & ccard accounts, and do not link them. Far less convenient, but should improve your safety.

rbanffy 3y ago

> There is a solution - not sure if everyone's ready to hear it yet: Decentralized finance. Another good option is to have checking accounts in more than one bank. Whatever triggers bank A to close your account is unlikely to also trigger the same action by bank B. It requires more funds, but you decentralise your finances within the classic financial system. If something triggers a close of your accounts on multiple banks at the same time, odds are you have much worse problems than access to liquidity.

TwoHeadedBeast 3y ago
Really just a credit card with a different institution is enough to see you through something like this.