Live data from Hacker News

How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

library.hbs.edu

401–410 of 473 posts

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#401

Credit cards and cash have their place but the story being told doesn't track with experience. First, businesses are increasingly differentiating pricing between cash and credit card - this is most obvious in gas stations where the price you see on the big sign is the cash price and not what you practically end up paying. Or the various restaurants and other businesses that offer cash discounts. While this is relativ…

“Most people have had the experience of wanting to buy something unplanned and not having the cash on them, but buying it anyway via credit card.”

I believe you, but this experience is totally alien to me and I don’t know of anybody who has done this. I wonder if it’s a generational thing.

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#402

Credit cards and cash have their place but the story being told doesn't track with experience. First, businesses are increasingly differentiating pricing between cash and credit card - this is most obvious in gas stations where the price you see on the big sign is the cash price and not what you practically end up paying. Or the various restaurants and other businesses that offer cash discounts. While this is relativ…

“Most people have had the experience of wanting to buy something unplanned and not having the cash on them, but buying it anyway via credit card.” I believe you, but this experience is totally alien to me and I don’t know of anybody who has done this. I wonder if it’s a generational thing.

I am almost 50 years old and I struggle to imagine anyone younger than I am being any more familiar with what cash is than with what a landline is

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I make $250k CAD a year, my experiences must be representative of, and relevant to, the masses," is a wild thought to have. Well, maybe I spoke too soon, because my private American healthcare turns out to also be about 8% of my gross income (of $60k)(before copays and my deductible)(and also it's crap). Twinsies! But yes I agree that it would be awful to have my health needs taken care of and a mere ~160k USD left…

Oh I certainly don’t think it’s representative to that of the masses, I was sharing an anecdote. I think either way both of us are in really good shape. In my experience the quality of American care is better in nearly every regard (having experienced both pretty intimately), but the simplicity and the peace of mind of the Canadian system has its benefits too. In either case you end up paying. > But yes I agree that…

You're being disingenuous. You clearly meant your anecdote to be representative, at least for "Canadians like [yourself]". But I suspect that it was meant to be a broader statement, and you're only backtracking now because the ridiculousness of that notion is apparent.

>I think either way both of us are in really good shape.

I'm lying in bed with non-specific upper abdominal discomfort that I'm hoping isn't related to digestive issues (pancreatic) that I've had for years, but which I can't get treated for because my insurance-related circumstances have made it very difficult to get consistent access to, and then to be taken seriously by, relevant specialists. These issues have combined with chronic injuries that were poorly managed in their acute phase and poor access to quality nutrition to make it difficult for me to exercise consistently. Contrarily and consequently, I'm quite out-of-shape.

The best and most consistent care I've ever gotten was while I was on Medicaid (which was still yet hampered by the professional stigma against accepting Medicaid and treating Medicid patients well).

>In my experience the quality of American care is better in nearly every regard (having experienced both pretty intimately

You experienced the quality of care available to rich people. That quality of care is not widely available, not for lack of institutional capacity, but primarily due to lack of profit.

>I’m confused

I really don't think you are.

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#404
post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU doesn’t have the challenging scope and geography of the US, no?

The problem in the US is less of a geography problem and more of a regulatory one. Many towns and cities in the US gave the cable companies local monopolies back in the 50s and 60s. There are technical reasons why this worked ok (not well but perhaps better than the alternatives) for television, but now that the same rules have stretched to apply to delivery of internet access they no longer have any technical basis.…

> And because it’s a different technology it is not subject to the same local monopolies that cable is encumbered with.

Exclusive francise agreements between municipalities and cable operators have been outlawed since 1992. But it's generally uneconomic to overbuild a new network with the potential to touch every home unless a large portion will subscribe.

Fiber internet is typically much better than cable internet, but cable internet is good enough for most people, so they're unlikely to switch unless it's significantly cheaper, which it often isn't -- especially since local incumbents tend to lower prices or rollout better service when a new entrant is entering the market (or announces they will ... Google Fiber city selection announcements drove lots of competing rollouts even though Google didn't install anything in those cities).

Regulation requiring wholesale access / line sharing / or strict separation of first mile and service infrastructure would allow for competition in service and routing, without having to build a 3rd last mile network. Congress did this in 1996, but the FCC walked it back for cable, the courts said if it doesn't apply to cable, it doesn't apply to telephone, and the FCC said internet over power lines exists and provides competition despite the lack of providers. Congress never came back to make clear that it wanted line sharing, so it disappeared from the mainstream.

I have municipal fiber where the municipality handles last mile only and I have a choice of IP service providers. But installation was very expensive and monthly service is also expensive relative to the ILEC and the cable company, although the cable company service on my street ends before it reaches me.

The cable and telephone companies have a major cost advantage that they can rebuild their networks with a good expectation of customer uptake; and they're allowed to manage the finances of build out however they see fit. The muni fiber (in my state anyway) has to bill customers for the costs of install and even if it could self-finance a build out to service all homes, wouldn't see a lot of uptake because most people find their current service to be good enough.

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#405
post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU doesn’t have the challenging scope and geography of the US, no?

The problem in the US is less of a geography problem and more of a regulatory one. Many towns and cities in the US gave the cable companies local monopolies back in the 50s and 60s. There are technical reasons why this worked ok (not well but perhaps better than the alternatives) for television, but now that the same rules have stretched to apply to delivery of internet access they no longer have any technical basis.…

The federal government subsidized a planned, massive fiber build-out almost 3 decades ago. The telcos pocketed the money and then refused to complete the build-out, complaining that the last mile was too expensive. Municipalities pull teeth and the telcos have slowly rolled out to-home fiber piecemeal in the intervening years, as the local capacity to handle their extortionate rates appears. Alternatively, they will lay cable to your unconnected house/neighborhood for payments in the six- and seven-figure range.

Where we are is very much not a function of the free market.

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#406
post #7

Important context: this is US thing. EU capped interchange fees at 0.2% for debit and 0.3% for credit cards. So in US card processing is x5-x10 more expensive.

It's partly true: this only applies to consumer cards. That's why many EU banks still offer corporate credit cards with huge cashback etc. For example, revolut offers no cashback in France on their metal cards if you have a consumer account, but up to 1% cashback on the same card if you have a "freelance" account. https://www.revolut.com/fr-FR/metal/ Second thing: interchange fees are not the only fees that your typi…

> That's why many EU banks still offer corporate credit cards with huge cashback etc. For example, revolut offers no cashback in France on their metal cards if you have a consumer account, but up to 1% cashback on the same card if you have a "freelance" account.

If 1% is huge, that's a lot better. 2% cashback is my baseline for normal in the US and I currently use a 4% on everything card (no longer available for new customers).

I don't like the cashback system, but the economics insist I use it while it's available.

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#407

Credit cards and cash have their place but the story being told doesn't track with experience. First, businesses are increasingly differentiating pricing between cash and credit card - this is most obvious in gas stations where the price you see on the big sign is the cash price and not what you practically end up paying. Or the various restaurants and other businesses that offer cash discounts. While this is relativ…

“Most people have had the experience of wanting to buy something unplanned and not having the cash on them, but buying it anyway via credit card.” I believe you, but this experience is totally alien to me and I don’t know of anybody who has done this. I wonder if it’s a generational thing.

how much cash do you walk around with?

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Most people have had the experience of wanting to buy something unplanned and not having the cash on them, but buying it anyway via credit card.” I believe you, but this experience is totally alien to me and I don’t know of anybody who has done this. I wonder if it’s a generational thing.

how much cash do you walk around with?

I just use debit cards and Venmo for everything. I’ve never understood why I’d use a credit card when I can just use the debit card and pay no fee. I’ll never afford a house anyways so the credit score argument is meaningless to me.

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how much cash do you walk around with?

I just use debit cards and Venmo for everything. I’ve never understood why I’d use a credit card when I can just use the debit card and pay no fee. I’ll never afford a house anyways so the credit score argument is meaningless to me.

fwiw there is still a fee involved, usually just much lower so the merchant eats it

Re: How credit card rewards became a $9.2B wealth transfer

#410
post #329

The only way to solve this is to have the user of the credit/debit card pay the fee. Sure, you can do an EU thing of 0.2-0.3% or whatever it is, but this might still be 0.2-0.3% more than it could be in a competitive market.

Australia tried this, but it led to a different problem of payment processors being able to gouge card payers because merchants were allowed to pass on whatever their costs were, and consumers didn't really have a real choice of paying the fee or not. Also since the fee had to be stated before the card was presented for tap and go payments, it didn't solve the OP problem: debit cards and premium cards all got hit wit…

Interesting. I guess one would then ask why was it not the case that the merchants were not also behaving in a similar way and looking for the cheapest payment processors (as long as they were also asked to eat their own side of the fees).

Perhaps forcing everyone to just implement free payments between any bank accounts, like pix, is actually the only viable solution here (and i just accept that this is one of those market failure things).

Post reply on HN