Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:30 pm
I’m unfamiliar with this terminology. I might know what it is, but by another name.
TexasCHLforum.com
The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Page 2 of 2
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:03 pm
The word "bitcoin" sends some people around here into conniptions, so I did not use it, but also because it's not accurate.
I installed the "Cash" app a couple of weeks ago. Could not get it to work, so I won't talk about that one, but things like that. Ultimately a bank is involved, but payments between entities need not be moderated by a bank, or a virtue signalling justice warrior. When things can be structured such that the risk of malfunction or fraud is guarded against, and still maintain the spirit of peer to peer interaction, banks have lost the ability to be the scold in the middle.
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:03 pm
Paypal is a very accurate example of this. P2P (Peer to peer) payments, fully electronic for a small fee.bbhack wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:03 pmThe word "bitcoin" sends some people around here into conniptions, so I did not use it, but also because it's not accurate.
I installed the "Cash" app a couple of weeks ago. Could not get it to work, so I won't talk about that one, but things like that. Ultimately a bank is involved, but payments between entities need not be moderated by a bank, or a virtue signalling justice warrior. When things can be structured such that the risk of malfunction or fraud is guarded against, and still maintain the spirit of peer to peer interaction, banks have lost the ability to be the scold in the middle.
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:58 pm
Banks used to pay you interest to use your deposits as capital. Now they merely defray SOME of your deposited money's losses to inflation.
Look into the assets that the FDIC uses to guarantee your deposits. They don't have a Scrooge McDuck vault of dubloons at the ready to pass out in the event of large bank failures; the DIF has a$100bn line of credit at the Fed and $50-100bn in assets (mostly treasuries). That sounds a lot like a Scrooge McDuck vault until you consider that their assets total between 0.5-1.5% of insured assets. The FDIC couldn't have saved WaMu depositors had JPMorganChase been unable to step up to absorb the bad paper; that was the FDIC both working as intended while doing so as a transiently insolvent institution and then succeeding only because the Fed was able to buy trillions of worthless paper at parin exchange for newly printed money (which, per Bernanke, were "reserves" and therefore not "money").
It's arcane and hard to decipher both because if sophisticated workings and deliberate obfuscation, but the story of what Western governments did to convince people that their large banks were solvent is terrifying if you keep your money in one. Money is a purely psychosocial phenomenon, and the illusion that it has substance works very well until it catastrophically fails, often with only obscure forewarnings.
Point being: whatever your political affiliation or thoughts on banks and the NRA, it's wise to be sure that your bank is well run and solvent. The huge ones aren't.
Look into the assets that the FDIC uses to guarantee your deposits. They don't have a Scrooge McDuck vault of dubloons at the ready to pass out in the event of large bank failures; the DIF has a$100bn line of credit at the Fed and $50-100bn in assets (mostly treasuries). That sounds a lot like a Scrooge McDuck vault until you consider that their assets total between 0.5-1.5% of insured assets. The FDIC couldn't have saved WaMu depositors had JPMorganChase been unable to step up to absorb the bad paper; that was the FDIC both working as intended while doing so as a transiently insolvent institution and then succeeding only because the Fed was able to buy trillions of worthless paper at parin exchange for newly printed money (which, per Bernanke, were "reserves" and therefore not "money").
It's arcane and hard to decipher both because if sophisticated workings and deliberate obfuscation, but the story of what Western governments did to convince people that their large banks were solvent is terrifying if you keep your money in one. Money is a purely psychosocial phenomenon, and the illusion that it has substance works very well until it catastrophically fails, often with only obscure forewarnings.
Point being: whatever your political affiliation or thoughts on banks and the NRA, it's wise to be sure that your bank is well run and solvent. The huge ones aren't.
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2018 12:07 am
Uhm, you might want to read this.PriestTheRunner wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:03 pmPaypal is a very accurate example of this. P2P (Peer to peer) payments, fully electronic for a small fee.bbhack wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:03 pmThe word "bitcoin" sends some people around here into conniptions, so I did not use it, but also because it's not accurate.
I installed the "Cash" app a couple of weeks ago. Could not get it to work, so I won't talk about that one, but things like that. Ultimately a bank is involved, but payments between entities need not be moderated by a bank, or a virtue signalling justice warrior. When things can be structured such that the risk of malfunction or fraud is guarded against, and still maintain the spirit of peer to peer interaction, banks have lost the ability to be the scold in the middle.
https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/FAQ585
Sorry to add to the companies you can't do business with. They are almost the definition of scold in the middle.
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2018 3:06 pm
bbhack wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 12:07 amUhm, you might want to read this.PriestTheRunner wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:03 pmPaypal is a very accurate example of this. P2P (Peer to peer) payments, fully electronic for a small fee.bbhack wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:03 pmThe word "bitcoin" sends some people around here into conniptions, so I did not use it, but also because it's not accurate.
I installed the "Cash" app a couple of weeks ago. Could not get it to work, so I won't talk about that one, but things like that. Ultimately a bank is involved, but payments between entities need not be moderated by a bank, or a virtue signalling justice warrior. When things can be structured such that the risk of malfunction or fraud is guarded against, and still maintain the spirit of peer to peer interaction, banks have lost the ability to be the scold in the middle.
https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/FAQ585
Sorry to add to the companies you can't do business with. They are almost the definition of scold in the middle.
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:47 pm
Not necessary to say anything about any item changing hands, person to person carries no fees. If both parties have paypal accounts connected to a bank account, just send money one way or the other...bbhack wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 12:07 amUhm, you might want to read this.PriestTheRunner wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:03 pmPaypal is a very accurate example of this. P2P (Peer to peer) payments, fully electronic for a small fee.bbhack wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:03 pmThe word "bitcoin" sends some people around here into conniptions, so I did not use it, but also because it's not accurate.
I installed the "Cash" app a couple of weeks ago. Could not get it to work, so I won't talk about that one, but things like that. Ultimately a bank is involved, but payments between entities need not be moderated by a bank, or a virtue signalling justice warrior. When things can be structured such that the risk of malfunction or fraud is guarded against, and still maintain the spirit of peer to peer interaction, banks have lost the ability to be the scold in the middle.
https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/FAQ585
Sorry to add to the companies you can't do business with. They are almost the definition of scold in the middle.
Re: Anti-Gun Corporate Trends
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:21 pm
Yes, but it doesn't help businesses.RogueUSMC wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:47 pmNot necessary to say anything about any item changing hands, person to person carries no fees. If both parties have paypal accounts connected to a bank account, just send money one way or the other...bbhack wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 12:07 amUhm, you might want to read this.PriestTheRunner wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:03 pmPaypal is a very accurate example of this. P2P (Peer to peer) payments, fully electronic for a small fee.bbhack wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:03 pmThe word "bitcoin" sends some people around here into conniptions, so I did not use it, but also because it's not accurate.
I installed the "Cash" app a couple of weeks ago. Could not get it to work, so I won't talk about that one, but things like that. Ultimately a bank is involved, but payments between entities need not be moderated by a bank, or a virtue signalling justice warrior. When things can be structured such that the risk of malfunction or fraud is guarded against, and still maintain the spirit of peer to peer interaction, banks have lost the ability to be the scold in the middle.
https://www.paypal.com/us/smarthelp/article/FAQ585
Sorry to add to the companies you can't do business with. They are almost the definition of scold in the middle.
And I have apparently broken this (hardly announced) policy on several occasions! lol