Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree we are already exposed to this problem. Visa and Mastercard already make judgments about whom to support and whom to disallow. This is dangerous, especially because they are willing to succumb to the Internet outrage machine and pressure from loud activist groups to make these decisions. When a platform is large enough (or has to be inherently large due to network effects), we should ensure (through regulatio…
They isn't any neutrality, at least in the US. We've watched Visa/Mastercard/Paypal and others take down people they politically disagree with. Look at Paypal + Patreon for another example. What's currently in the pipes to help fix this? Sure you can always support someone by mailing them a money order or cryptocurrency, but that is a huge hindrance to most people. It can cripple groups that are political unpopular.…
The American finance and payment systems are a Rube Goldberg machine. Too many layers of middlemen adding cost and clunkiness; technology which was barely a good idea in the 1970s. But too many middlemen with a stake in it for anything but the state to blow it out.
I could imagine a system where everyone got a basic bank account for life-- each SSN and EIN is also an account number. The account is managed by the state as a public service, and you can assign it to a local brick-and-mortar bank to handle in-person banking. There would presumably be competition for the business.
That way, everyone would have guaranteed access to direct-deposit payroll and ACH-style-but-less-of-a-boondoggle electronic funds transfers. Push and pull payment APIs could be part of the state provided system, with enormous economies of scale driving the transaction price to essentially zero. Since the underlying service is state-run, it has to support any legal business purpose or the courts will shred it.
The financial tech sector is then freed from having to reinvent basic transfers and accounts again and again, and can focus on value-add services.