Posts by Michelle Davis15

James Kern2 said:As far as I'm concerned... no. I always have my phone on me, but I don't bother with physical cards.

It really just comes down to habit, doesn't it? It's like how you can walk around in just swim trunks during the summer because it's hot—it's just what you do. Sure, you could have your Mastercard scanned into your phone, but at the end of the day, the point is the Mastercard and the service it provides, not the device you're holding. Besides, you can always just tuck a card into the same wallet where you keep your driver's license. Credit cards are a phenomenal invention; like any great invention, the core concept is actually quite simple.

Visa and Mastercard are still the undisputed kings when you look at their coverage and how easy they make everything. Honestly, if they decided to launch a digital bank tomorrow—handling everything from instant global payments to immediate credit lines—every single fintech startup out there would be left in the dust. No one is catching them given that massive, established network of ATMs and retail terminals they already control. I mean, what’s actually easier than just pulling out a sleek card and tapping it on a POS terminal? If you’re short on cash, you just hop into the app, request a loan, and boom, you've got credit instantly. Using a phone can feel clunky and awkward sometimes. If you've got those two cards in your wallet, you don't even really need Apple Pay or Google Pay.

Joseph Martin10 said:I'm not quite sure where to start, but for the most part, the perks are:
- zero account maintenance fees
- free money transfers
- fee-free ATM withdrawals everywhere

And so on.

Sent from my Android using Reddit

Those aren't exactly "strategic advantages" for a disruptive company, despite how much these banks love to market themselves. Any standard old-school bank could implement those features overnight with a simple policy change.

Until digital banks come up with an actual edge over traditional institutions, this whole thing is just a playground for tech geeks. One real advantage would be, say, getting approved for a loan instantly. I apply for credit right now, and a minute later, I’m already out there using the bank's card to buy things. This is technically possible today since there are services that track creditworthiness in real-time, but these supposedly "innovative" banks aren't actually doing much of anything new. They just slap together a colorful interface full of icons and convince themselves they've revolutionized the industry. Another real game-changer would be instant global money transfers. If they could nail just those two things, maybe then we could call them disruptive.

Personally, I’d be most interested in seeing a truly innovative digital bank launched by either Visa or Visa.

I honestly don't see the point of these so-called digital banks, including Chime, which I was looking into recently. They aren't offering anything particularly special that a standard big-name US bank doesn't already provide. Unless things change drastically, I feel like this whole digital banking trend is just a bunch of marketing gimmicks.

Richard Lewis16 said:Look, you were already told that they don't offer delivery service there...
And honestly, people in other countries are stuck standing in those same endless lines too, but I guess you’re just going to keep acting surprised by it all
So, how do you even manage your grocery shopping?
Do you just order everything online?

Look, I go to the store too—truth be told, except for right now because of this crisis—but would I actually choose to stand in a hundred-yard line instead of just ordering delivery? No way. What I was getting at is that in the United Kingdom, about 7.5% of people shop online, the average across the European Union is around 5%, but here in the States, it’s under 1%. That was my point: it seems like people here just don't care for it, unless they're forced to by circumstances. Who knows.

But when you really stop to think about it, you head to the store, lugging around heavy bags, picking out the exact same products every single time, staring at the exact same shelves. What kind of "pleasure" is there in that? Is it a social thing, or just a mindless habit, or something else entirely?

I was driving past a massive Kroger earlier today, and there was a line stretching out at least 50 or 100 yards down the sidewalk. I honestly can’t wrap my head around the masochism of it all. Why on earth would people willingly risk catching something just to stand in a queue for an hour when they could easily grab the exact same stuff at home for the same price? It’s almost like shopping around here has become some kind of grand social event, similar to going to a Broadway show, where people actually enjoy the spectacle of the crowd instead of just wanting to get things done.

Richard Lewis16 said:Well, obviously, because all you need for delivery is someone to carry 🤣

I was actually thinking about sending something to my parents, but I gave up on the idea... DoorDash is an option, but their service isn't exactly anything to write home about...

And Kroger doesn't even have full coverage here, they only recently opened up near Porec...
Why don't you just grab a van, start your own little LLC, and run your own deliveries? There's your big business idea right there...😉

Then again, things aren't exactly any better over in London when it comes to delivery services either...

How can you say that isn't true? Isn't there a massive amount of delivery services and online grocery retailers there based on everything I've read? Actually, statistically speaking, they have one of the highest rates in the European Union—according to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 7.5% of people there shop for groceries online. From what I saw in the charts, we're sitting at the very bottom with 0.8%, just ahead of Mexico, and even North Mexico is doing better than us. It’s no wonder people would rather stand in line at a store risking infection. It's interesting that even Germany is "bad" at this with only 1.2%.

From that perspective, I get why Kroger wouldn't be expanding its delivery capacity; they won't know what to do with all those drivers once this crisis blows over.

Linda Lee4 said:Trying to get a delivery slot from Walmart for Washington, D.C. is basically impossible; some people claimed they managed to refresh the site at one in the morning just to snag a delivery window a week out, but that was a few weeks ago and I have no idea if it's any better now, though I've pretty much given up on it...

Does any other major retailer even have a functional web shop? I can't think of a single one... And I tend to steer clear of all those small local farms and artisanal producers because their prices are outrageously high this time of year, so no thanks...

Seriously, why don't they just hire more delivery drivers? I don't get it. There are more people looking for work now than there used to be. It feels like they just don't care. Maybe the new owners are just looking for a quick exit strategy rather than actually investing in the local market.

I honestly don't get why people insist on standing in these massive lines at the grocery store. Why not just order everything online? I really don't see the appeal in shuffling through the aisles every single day, touching the exact same products over and over—which is what some people claim is their big reason for going in person. I already know exactly how a can of tuna feels or what a milk carton looks like without having to grab it. Plus, let’s be real, most Walmarts aren't exactly designed to feel like a luxury hotel stay, so I don't understand that excuse either. Is it just that we aren't "advanced" enough yet? Are we all just voluntarily squeezing ourselves into crowds when a perfectly good solution exists?

ironcyclist58 said:I can't speak specifically about Chime since I don't actually use them, but generally speaking, digital banks tend to crush the traditional guys when it comes to better exchange rates, lower transfer fees, and cheaper ATM withdrawals at other banks. Plus, you get way more control over your cards—things like virtual or one-time use cards, being able to freeze everything instantly... plus having an account or card from a different country available right at your fingertips...

So, if the big legacy banks decide to slash their service fees, those digital banks lose most of their edge. I honestly thought they were supposed to offer something more revolutionary than what we already have. Maybe I'm just wrong, but it doesn't really feel like much of a disruption to me.

mellowhawk33 said:Well, you're covered up to $100k by the FDIC, and they’re pretty much the go-to because they offer both Chase Maestro and Mastercard options. From what I gather looking through various threads online, people don't seem to be tearing them apart like they do with the big traditional banks; it's mostly just minor details at that point. Honestly, most of the folks I know working across the States use it as their primary account for direct deposit.

Sent from my iPhone

Look, I work in tech, so I'm biased toward innovation, but I honestly can't wrap my head around what these digital banks actually offer that a standard bank doesn't. I have my debit card, I can make payments, use mobile banking, and hit up an ATM. I'm struggling to spot any actual advantage here, even though I'd love to find one since I'm a sucker for technological progress.

Does it really just boil down to looking at spending categories organized by fancy little icons? Seriously, what is the core benefit of some fintech startup that a more advanced, traditional American bank isn't already providing?

I remember reading somewhere that these new players are failing to actually disrupt the credit card industry because they aren't making things significantly easier to use. I mean, the physical card itself is already a pretty efficient concept for daily life. Beyond maybe adding the card to your phone or waving your device at an NFC reader, where is the revolution?

Can someone give me the lowdown in just two or three sentences on why anyone would bother opening an account with Chime? I mean, every bank out there offers payment processing, they all have cards, digital banking is standard now... so what's the actual draw? Is it just about lower fees, or is there something else to it? Basically, what’s the "hook" that makes it worth the effort to actually go through the process of opening an account? Thanks

Kevin Lee7 said:I did it for a couple of beers, really... but since it actually helped me, I figured why not share it with others... I paid for my own card delivery and didn't even use a referral code$17... so why shouldn't I offer it up to everyone else?

We live in the kind of country we live in... but at least the internet gives us access to all sorts of tech

@Michelle Davis15
-it's free
-best exchange rates and basically the only way to get certain currencies easily
-fee-free withdrawals up to $250 (for instance, if someone comes from Mexico with Pesos into an account with $150, a major bank like Chase might charge them $30 in fees, whereas Revolut keeps the loss to maybe $10-$20)
-live tracking and the ability to auto-buy any supported currency
-virtual card option for online shopping... you can just delete it afterward so you don't have to worry about whether a site is legit
-setting card limits... you set a max spend of $10 and don't have to stress about someone overcharging you
-ability to freeze the card if it gets lost
-geolocation security features
-free PIN changes

But sure... go ahead and ignore all those advantages

It’s all just cosmetic fluff. There is nothing revolutionary or fundamentally better here. Lowering fees isn't a revolution; a major bank like Chase will do that eventually if they're forced to. And freezing your card? Please, how is that groundbreaking? 🙂

Also, the idea of getting a "better" exchange rate is just misinformation. The interbank mid-market rate is the same for everyone on the planet. The only difference is that Chime offers a better deal because they take a smaller cut, whereas a big bank won't offer it because they don't have to yet. It's not a revolution; it's just slightly cheaper. Once they actually face real competition, those big banks will roll out the exact same features within a month.

On the flip side, a massive bank can afford to be cheap because they have huge volume. Chime can't really compete there because their transaction volume is tiny by comparison. They have to make a living too, and that comes from those fees.

Look, even though I’m a fan of the whole digital banking concept, this gets zero points from me. If they offered just two things—instant payments to any account worldwide and ATM withdrawals at any Mastercard or Visa machine—I’d jump into that headfirst. But as things stand, it looks like all these fintech startups are going to get absolutely crushed by Facebook with their Libra project once they start offering those services. That’s why people were up in arms against it, and why the fintechs are letting them play; they aren't seen as a threat. You have a Facebook account, you have a digital bank. As simple as that.

What's more, Facebook could completely eliminate transaction fees and just charge a monthly subscription. A billion users times $5 a month equals $60 billion a year. Now that's impressive.

James Kern2 said:Out of all these fintech players, Chime feels like the most secure option to me... though I could be completely off base here.

The fact that they aren't expanding at breakneck speed actually works in their favor... it suggests they’re more meticulous, maybe even perfectionists about their rollout. They probably aren't just rushing headlong into chaos without thinking things through first.

Look, I’m all for tech advancements, I really am, but these digital banks don't actually offer any real advantage over traditional institutions right now—aside from maybe having icons that look a bit more modern. Take Chime, for example. What are they actually bringing to the table?

Offering some fancy little categorized breakdown of monthly expenses by type? Honestly, it’s laughable. It has absolutely nothing to do with actual banking.

There’s nothing revolutionary about this. Honestly, that’s the real reason why they’re dragging their feet on replacing those ancient plastic credit cards. They just aren't offering anything better or more efficient than what we already have. Why bother rushing the process if there's no actual upgrade?

What actually makes a digital bank worth your time? It’s pretty straightforward if you think about it. You want a platform that lets you send money to any account anywhere in the world instantly without jumping through hoops. You want rock-bottom transaction fees. You want access to quick credit with reasonable interest rates. And honestly, you should be able to hit just about any ATM on the planet to grab cash without getting gouged on fees. It’s as simple as that. But here’s the kicker: so far, not a single digital bank out there actually delivers on all of that.

Betty Sanchez10 said:I’ve been hunting for an answer to this myself, but I haven't come up with anything useful. It feels like we're stuck until there's actually a double taxation treaty in place; at this point, our only real options would be to relocate entirely or set up a business entity in a state that actually has one of those agreements. Honestly, I've just accepted that they're going to take their 30% cut of my American earnings. I suppose I should be grateful that there isn't withholding for the other countries with their own local Amazons, though I think India might be an exception.
If anyone happens to stumble upon a workaround, please post it here. It would be a massive relief if there were some way to handle this.

One option is setting up a company in a third country and presenting yourself to Amazon as a corporate entity. The company owns the revenue, and then the founder, living in America, pays their corporate taxes at the end of the year if they turn a profit. You'd want to pick a country with favorable laws for non-resident companies. Here is a list:

https://kindlepreneur.com/remove-30-...lf-publishers/

Another route is registering an offshore publishing company in Delaware, US, which wouldn't be subject to those specific withholdings. However, the owner—being a resident of America—would still be on the hook for taxes on the net profit.

Or, you could just go the simple route: get an Employer Identification Number from the IRS and enter it into the Amazon US tax Identification Number field.

urbanwalker72 said:A government cannot control Bitcoin; while a state might issue its own digital currency, it lacks the mechanism to govern existing decentralized cryptocurrencies.

If that happens, we are all in trouble, because state oversight of an individual would become terrifyingly absolute. Imagine if, through some error or malicious intent, your digital Blockchain account were frozen in a world without physical cash; it would be akin to a death sentence via starvation. Because of the inherent nature of the Blockchain, there is no way to hack your way out or bypass the freeze. The potential for state abuse is immeasurable.

I believe the situation is not quite so dire. To begin with, if a government truly desired that level of total oversight, they wouldn't even need cryptocurrency; simply abolishing cash would achieve their goal.

Furthermore, no one would face starvation due to a lockout, as people possess a natural tendency to establish parallel currencies—whether through stable foreign currencies, other cryptocurrencies, or similar means.

People advocate for the use of Blockchain in finance and other sectors, unaware that they are essentially working against their own interests.

The Blockchain possesses significant financial utility, yet it lacks true monetary application.

When considering the mechanics of money creation and destruction, monetary policy, and the fundamental operations of the clearing system, the Blockchain remains entirely redundant within a monetary framework.

Look, Blockchain technology might be great for things like notary services or public records, but when it comes to finance? It’s a disaster waiting to happen. Why? Because a government can just pass a single decree to ban it or twist it to their own advantage whenever they feel like it.

And let's be real—if they can't maintain an iron grip on money exchange, they'll absolutely outlaw it. All those other "revolutionary" uses for the tech? They're basically irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

Take PayPal, for example. They used to brag about being this independent alternative, but it only took a tiny bit of pressure from regulators for them to turn into just another controlled system, behaving exactly like any massive traditional bank.

Even here in the States, you can't just move PayPal funds around without the government catching wind of it immediately. And it isn't just PayPal; it's Airbnb, Booking.com, and everything else. Governments exist because they hold the reins over everything—including the very technology being built within their borders.

All this talk about independence and total freedom? Honestly, it's nothing but a giant joke.

urbanwalker72 said:Broadly speaking, Bitcoin and certain segments of the cryptocurrency market were conceived with the noble intention of forging parallel, decentralized currencies that operate without a central corporate entity; however, what we have witnessed thus far is primarily a financial innovation driven by speculative interests.

Let's be real: Bitcoin isn't going to see actual mass adoption until governments institutionalize it. We're talking about a scenario where the state finally gets its hands on it and establishes control.

And if that actually happens, we're all screwed. Because once the government has that kind of leverage over an individual, it becomes terrifying. Imagine if you get hit by a clerical error or some malicious bureaucratic move and your digital Blockchain account gets frozen—and there's no physical cash left in circulation to fall back on. That's a fast track to starvation. You can't hack your way out of it or find a loophole because of how the Blockchain works. The potential for state abuse is just immeasurable.

People keep preaching about the benefits of Blockchain in finance and everywhere else, completely oblivious to the fact that they might be advocating for their own downfall.

crimsonseal15 said:Thanks for the response,
So, you're saying it's impossible to have a legitimate corporation without an actual owner behind it.

I suppose it’s unlikely we'll see a total global shift toward Blockchain overnight, but I can definitely see certain sectors building out these specific economic models. Honestly, isn't that essentially the core mission behind almost every coin out there right now?

Actually, there are corporations that exist legally without any individual person acting as an owner. You have companies held by a trust, which functions as its own legal entity. A trustee manages the assets and operations, but they aren't technically the "owner" and they don't carry the same legal liabilities as one. A trust is this unique legal structure that essentially owns itself.

In the US, trusts are incredibly common—especially for major corporations, some of which are household names.

The perks are pretty obvious. If a trust is structured properly, it's extremely difficult—bordering on impossible—to sue the founder or claw money back from them in court. Historically, people have used this setup as a shield to protect the real owner from "greedy" spouses during a divorce, family disputes, or just malicious lawsuits.

Samuel Nguyen2 said:So, here I am—smoking a cigarette and wondering how on earth to save this clueless American populace. How do we stop the brain drain, crush inflation, dismantle the cronyism, spark a demographic rebirth, and generally just bring some actual justice and virtue to American society? The answer is always the same: $2.00/dollar...

I’m laying out my plan right here; if anyone has a grievance, speak up so we can fine-tune it.

Here’s the deal:

Back in December, the Federal Reserve bought another 750 million dollars at an unrealistically high exchange rate—meaning the dollar was artificially weak against the euro.

Every single purchase made at that ridiculous rate just digs the hole deeper.

I haven't checked the latest numbers, but the Federal Reserve is sitting on about 14 billion dollars right now, yielding less than 1% annually. The Fed can only make real money on the spread between the buying and selling rates, but instead of profiting, they might actually be hemorrhaging cash.

In a year or two, when interest rates on the dollar hit near zero (depending on how much more the Fed prints), and Jerome Powell starts hiking rates, we’re going to see depreciation pressures that could rapidly melt away the Fed's euro-denominated assets. If they don't pull out of bonds in time, we could see a nasty 1-2% loss on those bonds. We could offset that through currency depreciation during inflationary periods, or even without it. So, dear Americans, where have you been? Nowhere. You've done nothing. We see billions in balance of payments surpluses, budget surpluses, and massive deleveraging by both public and private sectors, yet the standard of living hasn't budged. And GDP growth will stall (in euros, which is the debt we actually hold), even if it looks like it's growing in dollars.

Now, let's look at the option of $2.00/dollar... This should have started already. Last year, the dollar should have been at $2.25 per euro. But it wasn't, so let's start from this year.

Picture this: next summer, the dollar hits $2.00/euro. That creates a book loss on euro assets of 2.6 billion dollars—a 20% hit (but in euros, nobody notices). I don't know how much of a headache that would be for the Fed's balance sheet, but it’s easily fixed with a cheap accounting trick. Basically, the Government issues 2.6 billion dollars worth of dollar-denominated bonds, which the Fed buys (at zero interest), totaling 15.6 billion dollars. Then, the Government recapitalizes the Fed using those same dollars. Suddenly, the Fed has 5.2 billion dollars more in assets. Honestly, we could even go halfway and do it with 7-8 billion. The Fed stays level, the balance of payments surplus hits zero, GDP stays steady or grows, and the standard of living jumps by 20%. Dollar-denominated debts drop by 20%. You get a frenzy of spending and deleveraging, creating depreciation pressures that allow the Fed to hike a minimum 5% spread... And when recession hits, we have plenty of room for further depreciation. Boom—GDP explosion.

It’s as simple as pie.

And let's not forget "trimming" those who would rush to stash their money in dollars without realizing the Fed set the floor at $2.00. You know that $30 billion in savings held by a few thousand people? Well... that’s what I call activating savings and social justice 🙂

What about exports? Exporters probably have loans denominated in euros (point number one). Second, if they can't export with a 20% currency shift, they need to find a new line of work—I mean, VW exports to the US, and their currency fluctuations are over 30%. Third, cheap dollar-denominated loans would help them weather the storm and invest in new equipment, for instance.

Fourth, the pressure to raise wages denominated in dollars would stall. The Government could easily slash income taxes and healthcare levies (since all meds are imported anyway), etc.

Et cetera, et cetera. It could play out however you want. If a bank sneezes, we recapitalize it with more dollars, giving the Fed even more assets. The Government can refinance the Fed's debt as much as it wants, at whatever interest rate, for as long as it likes... and then the Fed just pays that money back into the Treasury, just like the FED 😁

Does anyone have an objection? 😁?

Personally, I think growing potatoes is just safer, easier, and honestly more profitable.

Most of the old-timers around here would tell you straight up: we just aren't built for business. You need a solid work ethic, brains, actual skill, and a spark of creativity. But more than anything, you need grit. And around here? That kind of drive is nowhere to be found. It gets lost in the first coffee shop you stumble into on your way to work.

Out of all the local family farms and small businesses I’ve dealt with, not a single one has actually blown me away with their ingenuity or talent. On the flip side, there are plenty that have left a pretty sour impression on me—and some of them are even big names in the area. It's unbelievable.

The bottom line is that we're heading toward a massive struggle when it comes to building a high-tech, intelligent economy for the 21st century. We might as well start bracing ourselves for the crash.