logoalt Hacker News

collabstoday at 6:37 PM3 repliesview on HN

In my opinion, the only solution is everyone (individuals as well as corporations) gets a direct account with the federal reserve as long as you can associate a taxpayer identification with the account. Using it is voluntary but it is free of cost, paid for by taxes, and moving money to and from accounts is free of cost. Depositors would get the same overnight interest rate that banks do, and this interest is added every day. I think if we could make this happen, the chokehold of Mastercard and Visa can be greatly diminished. The disintermediation of commercial banks, the loss of credit card perks, and the added cost of customer service should be an acceptable cost of removing the parasites visa and master card from our economy.

most importantly, this opens up a lot of money that the federal reserve can hold directly, something that will become more and more important as bond yields go sky high.


Replies

diegocgtoday at 6:52 PM

So the article shows how visa and mastercard are, by far, not the ones taking the largest fee, and the solution is to get rid of them?

Where are you going to do the transactions in your scheme? Because credit card transactions are not the same as sending money from one bank account to another. There are settlements, disputes, chargebacks, etc.

How is the central bank going to offer the same variety of products described in the article? I.e..

> Interchange fees vary dramatically based on the kind of card, category of spend, and even the metadata attached to a transaction. The network’s goal is to set fees that incentivize desired behaviors on their network, including using more secure payment methods (lowering interchange fees for merchants), or for companies to do more business spending (higher interchange fees on commercial credit cards).

Your scheme sounds like all these crypto guys who think they can replace credit cards with bitcoin transactions, as if they were the same thing

show 1 reply
Bratmontoday at 6:38 PM

How are chargebacks resolved in this situation?

This is an important question- most of the costs of a credit card providers come from dealing with fraud and chargebacks. That's partially because, under US law, credit card companies have to eat fraudulent charges if they can't get the person or company that did the fraud to do so. (Funnily enough, this is one of two places where protections for average people in the US are significantly better than protections for average people in Europe).

But credit card companies can keep their costs low by making a business decision not to renew the accounts of frequent chargeback-ers or chargeback-ees (even if they never officially found those individuals at fault). If the government had to make a payment system for everyone and take on all responsibility for all fraud, that would create an incentive with massive second-order effects.

show 2 replies
mlefertoday at 7:20 PM

A few years ago congress had a nice solution via a market mechanisms, have sufficiently large banks be required to have their cards support at least 2 card networks, via which the merchant may at at swipe time decide which network to run against. Unfortunately like any good idea, it died in congress.