Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts • Hacker News Board

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#771

Post by jstarfish » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 6:54 PM UTC

teddyh wrote: post #585

pjc50 wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised we haven't heard more lawsuits about this in notoriously litigious America. I find it hard to believe that "we can ruin you at any time" is a sustainably fair contract term.

In order to sue anyone, you need money. To have money, you need a bank account. Therefore, if the bank takes your account, you can’t sue the bank.

I've had surprisingly decent luck with bankruptcy attorneys being willing to do small favors like unfucking these types of disputes (or at least telling you the right incantation and process to do it yourself) for free.

(Maybe it has to do with being used to dealing with clients that literally have no money.)

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#772

Post by FatalLogic » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:02 PM UTC

Quindecillion wrote: post #596

FatalLogic wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"has this chain ever broken it's own rules and rolled back transactions at the behest of its benevolent dictator?" Bitcoin has also done this. You're referring to the $50m DAO smart contract bug (or "hack") early in 2016, when Ethereum had been running for about a year. The Ethereum blockchain was swiftly rolled back. This was achieved by the majority of Ethereum developers agreeing to create an update to Ethereum s…

> But neither currency has ever done a roll back of this nature again. Maybe not a rollback, but Ethereum has proven it is malleable time and time again. As one example, compare the issuance of ether to Bitcoin. Eth's issuance is a dog's breakfast, indicative of changing opinions by those who call the shots... just like a central bank. Bitcoin's issuance? Predictable and steady as a rock for 15 years. Another example…

I don't know why you're replying to my comment, because I wasn't talking about any of those other issues you've said here. I did not confirm or deny them.

I quoted the single issue that I was disputing. I wrote as clearly as possible to only refute one point, about the implication that Bitcoin had never done a roll back.

If you want to talk about all those other things, then make a separate thread or post,. Please don't use my comment as a vehicle for your arguments, because it's confusing and few people will understand what you're talking about.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#773

Post by unhammer » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:19 PM UTC

advael wrote: post #162

I'm somewhat surprised no one here views this as an automated decisionmaking problem It's increasingly clear that automating important decisions like this is causing a lot of harm while removing most forms of recourse available to those affected. Coupled with the way automated decisions are used to perform and then launder fraud on a massive scale, maybe we should target laws at the automation itself: Require decisio…

    > human oversight policies provide a false sense of security in
    > adopting algorithms and enable vendors and agencies to shirk
    > accountability for algorithmic harms.

    > propose a shift from human oversight to institutional oversight as
    > the central mechanism for regulating government algorithms.
    > First, agencies must justify that it is appropriate to incorporate
    > an algorithm into decision-making and that any proposed forms of
    > human oversight are supported by empirical evidence. Second, these
    > justifications must receive democratic review and approval before
    > the agency can adopt the algorithm.

Also https://predictive-optimization.cs.princeton.edu/

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#774

Post by Night_Thastus » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:37 PM UTC

These kinds of experiences are exactly why I stay with a small, local credit union.

No bullshit fees. I can get to a real person quickly. No stupid algorithm running in the background ready to banish me the moment something unusual happens.

There are legitimate reasons to use a bigger bank, but I'd wager that for 90% or more of people, a credit union would be a net improvement.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#775

Post by ceejayoz » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:51 PM UTC

phpisthebest wrote: post #699

ceejayoz wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you are in the US, express the desire to violently "decolonize" the US or chant "from the river to the sea" then maybe you should be investigated. The original founding document of Netanyahu’s Likud party: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform... “between the Sea and the Jordan [River] there will only be Israeli sovereignty”

The moral equivalency you are attempting to draw between those 2 statements is both ignorant and asinine. When the terrorist organizations chant "From the river to the sea" they are clearly calling for the forced removal (at best) of all Jews from the land. A political party that calls for "Israeli sovereignty between the Sea and the Jordan" it is clearly a rejection of the "2 state solution" but that is not a call f…

> When the terrorist organizations chant "From the river to the sea" they are clearly calling for the forced removal (at best) of all Jews from the land.

Hamas members chanting "from the river to the sea" most certainly have genocidal intent, yes. Saying "from the river to the sea" alone - as the Likud document pretty clearly shows - doesn't make you a Hamas member nor a terrorist. There are a lot of attempts to conflate "Palestinian === Hamas", but that's sleight of hand.

I'm all for wiping out Hamas. I'm quite dubious about the possibility of doing so via armed conflict.

> A political party that calls for "Israeli sovereignty between the Sea and the Jordan" it is clearly a rejection of the "2 state solution" but that is not a call for the removal of an ethnic population from the region.

Maybe, but it's certainly a call for an un-free Palestine.

(Palestinians are rightly a bit leery of removal here; recent events have seen proposals to relocate them to the Sinai (https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-30/ty-article/.p... / https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/05/world/middleeast/israel-e...) and a government minister suggesting nuking Gaza (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/netanyahu-discipli...).)

"Free Palestine",as with other short slogans (see: BLM, Defund), encompasses a range of opinions. Both genocide and the two-state solution fall squarely within it.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#776

Post by delfinom » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:53 PM UTC

Gareth321 wrote: post #538

Ajay-p wrote: post #58

Debanking is deeply unfair but more so in our society that is moving increasingly towards a cash-less society. A person can be debanked for no fault of their own and that causes them to be unable to pay rent, bills, etc. Like being arrested - there is little recourse without great expense or effort.

This was and remains an important USP for cryptocurrencies. Security in one's ability to pay for goods and services is incredibly important for any currency. In Canada, the government effectively de-banked hundreds of people and froze their funds for participating in and donating to the trucker protest. As more and more people experience this loss of liberty, the need for free and secure transaction methods will grow…

>I see cryptocurrencies as inevitable. Eventually cash will be eliminated, and this will only leave cryptocurrencies.

Except, unless cryptocurrencies are tied to some brain implant so you cant lose the keys. There will be a need for a custodian for the average joe's key...and banks 2.0 here we come.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#777

Post by WalterBright » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:53 PM UTC

Madmallard wrote: post #532

WalterBright wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No worries, you'll be mugged by reality sooner or later, I'm sorry to say.

No one I know on disability is gaming the system or doing well. It is not enough money. No one I know wants to be on it either, they just would die otherwise. Some kind of ultra ignorant rock you’re under.

All the people I mentioned were able-bodied people.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#778

Post by closeparen » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 7:57 PM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #490

I didn't get de-banked, but I had a similar wacky experience last year with Wells Fargo. I was buying a car from a guy in Salt Lake City. Not a terribly expensive car. I live in Montana but at the time I was physically in Northern California on a trip. I'd driven to SLC and looked at the car, met the seller, and done various things to ensure I knew his identity (e.g. he used his work email and he had a medium profile…

Wires are just not practically available as P2P payments for normal people unless you are closing on a house.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#779

Post by elzbardico » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 8:18 PM UTC

Banks should close accounts for administrative reasons only, with ample notice period, and give full disclosure of the reason. Balance should be made available as soon as possible once the customer present an alternative account, or he should be able to get a check.

For regulatory reasons, only the government should be able to mandate closure and for that it should be backed by a judicial order.

I don't fucking care about idiots mumbling about "muh, terrorism! money laundering", fuck you and your safetyism. We live in a democracy, and nobody should be punished except after a judicial procedure with ample defense rights.

Banks regulatory requirements should stop at making sure they collect all the required information and report suspicious activity to the government. They are not in the business of policing people, investigating, judging and punishing people. They don't have this mandate.

Re: Why banks are suddenly closing down customer accounts

#780

Post by chx » Mon, Nov 06, 2023, 8:29 PM UTC

krupan wrote: post #92

chx wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We just discussed this on the occasion of SBF being convicted as a fraudster: all crypto is a scam. Them being negative sum games makes them so. Whether the scam is a ponzi, a pyramid scheme or something novel is a matter of debate. That it's a scam is not in debate, that's a plain mathematical fact. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/08/bitco... https://prestonbyrne.com/2017/12/08/bitcoin_ponzi/ htt…

Fine, I clicked and read a couple of those. I like the 3rd one that defines a ponzi scheme: "A Ponzi scheme, or "ponzi" for short, is a type of investment fraud with these five features: 1 People invest into it because they expect good profits, and 2. that expectation is sustained by such profits being paid to those who choose to cash out. However, 3. there is no external source of revenue for those payoffs. Instead,…

> This is great because points 3 and 5 are trivially proved false for Bitcoin

#3 is trivially proven true. If there were no transaction fees and you rolled back all Bitcoin transactions ever made , you would end up with a zero. This is in stark contrast to a stock where you'd end up with the dividends.

#5 is perhaps better put as "operators take away some portion of this money" and that's what transaction fees are. Calling it large indeed weakens the argument -- but doesn't prove it false.