5 ms·

No. If they are allowed, how is the criteria selected? Are you(payment industry) going to stop payments for the following: Atheist groups? Islamic non-terrori

by kefka 12y ago

No. If they are allowed, how is the criteria selected? Are you(payment industry) going to stop payments for the following: Atheist groups? Islamic non-terrorist groups? Foreign countries you don't 'like'? Libertarians/Greens/Socialists/Communists? Non profits you don't like? Church of Satan donations? They have a monopoly over the bulk of commerce, as does PayPal. And they act as a cartel, de-facto banning whatever they disapprove of. In other words, having them strongarm businesses is killing their connection to the market.

eli 12y ago
With the exception of discriminating against certain protected classes, American companies are generally free to decide who they want as a customer and who they don't. You don't have a right to credit card processing any more than you have a right to eat at a fancy restaurant or hire a developer -- imagine if contract developers weren't allowed to turn down clients.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  On the other hand, there is a legal obligation to process dollar bills for debts. In a world where everything is increasingly digital, it would be nice if there was a government-sanctioned option that doesn't discriminate against any [legal] services.
- nitrogen 12y ago
  There is the concept of legal tender, which creditors are required to accept as payment of debts (it's printed on US currency). We need some kind of electronic payment equivalent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - icebraining 12y ago
    How would this help? Visa, Mastercard and Paypal aren't the creditors here.
    - nitrogen 12y ago
      Obviously the rules and parties involved would be different for an electronic equivalent to the concept. I'm sure you can figure out the rest.
      - icebraining 12y ago
        It has nothing to do with electronic. Visa isn't the creditor, so legal tender laws wouldn't apply even if they were carrying physical bills.
        nitrogen 12y ago
        You are thinking too literally. An electronic legal tender must necessarily have an electronic means of conveying it. That may not be Visa, but the means of payment would be just as essential to the concept as acceptance of payment.
        kefka 12y ago
        I wouldn't put too much credence on the US government to figure this out in any sort of timely manner. There's plenty of areas in our country which are years behind in terms of governance, policy and societal effects. They're still playing the game "if it's an internet technology, the Constitution doesn't really apply".. So to see if they could wrap their heads around an internet based currency is pretty much a joke. And then I think, how did the FCC decision pass? Bureaucracy. It's not the Legislative/Executive/Judicial.

by kefka 12y ago

eli 12y ago

With the exception of discriminating against certain protected classes, American companies are generally free to decide who they want as a customer and who they don't. You don't have a right to credit card processing any more than you have a right to eat at a fancy restaurant or hire a developer -- imagine if contract developers weren't allowed to turn down clients.

Dylan16807 12y ago
On the other hand, there is a legal obligation to process dollar bills for debts. In a world where everything is increasingly digital, it would be nice if there was a government-sanctioned option that doesn't discriminate against any [legal] services.
nitrogen 12y ago
There is the concept of legal tender, which creditors are required to accept as payment of debts (it's printed on US currency). We need some kind of electronic payment equivalent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- icebraining 12y ago
  How would this help? Visa, Mastercard and Paypal aren't the creditors here.
  - nitrogen 12y ago
    Obviously the rules and parties involved would be different for an electronic equivalent to the concept. I'm sure you can figure out the rest.
    - icebraining 12y ago
      It has nothing to do with electronic. Visa isn't the creditor, so legal tender laws wouldn't apply even if they were carrying physical bills.
      - nitrogen 12y ago
        You are thinking too literally. An electronic legal tender must necessarily have an electronic means of conveying it. That may not be Visa, but the means of payment would be just as essential to the concept as acceptance of payment.
        kefka 12y ago
        I wouldn't put too much credence on the US government to figure this out in any sort of timely manner. There's plenty of areas in our country which are years behind in terms of governance, policy and societal effects. They're still playing the game "if it's an internet technology, the Constitution doesn't really apply".. So to see if they could wrap their heads around an internet based currency is pretty much a joke. And then I think, how did the FCC decision pass? Bureaucracy. It's not the Legislative/Executive/Judicial.