I happily use reversible transactions and pay the premium when I wish to deal with a person or company that I have not used before and nothing to base their rep

I happily use reversible transactions and pay the premium when I wish to deal with a person or company that I have not used before and nothing to base their reputation on. On the Internet, I only use credit cards for these types of transactions since I enjoy strong protection in my jurisdiction. And I am happy to pay the premium. Note that nothing about irreversible transactions stops you from verifying the identity of the other party and suing over failure to perform on a contract. I accept that this is tedious and difficult over multiple jurisdictions. In society we seem to prefer giving the money sender arbitrary control instead. But this just makes it difficult for money receivers who do not deal with bulk volumes, and allows money senders to abuse money receivers. I think it's important not to conflate reversible transactions with other forms of contract enforcement, such as the courts. But I'd still like the option of executing an irreversible transaction when I choose to do so. In the physical world, I use cash for this, and it works well. I'd like an online equivalent. Otherwise, the increased cost just becomes a tax on online transactions. There are many transactions which aren't tied to a contract where performance can be measured. Take crowdfunding, for example. What does a reversible transaction even mean? Paypal's stance is just to ban or freeze accounts performing these kinds of activities. So by banning irreversible transactions, you stop certain activities from taking place, since there exist legitimate transactions which do not correspond to contracts that can be measured. I think we harm society as a result. Reversible transactions: good. No option of irreversible transactions: bad.