PayPal Bans YouTube Competitor Bitchute Without Explanation

[Swordsmyth]

Do you realize what compliance costs will be if everyone is a protected class? I imagine the only businesses that could shoulder them would be the big guys. What you're proposing would kill small business owners.

You're willing to make bad laws worse?

I am betwixt and between, we are in a situation where none of the right options are available and to use the metaphor I used above we must decide whether to cut off circulation to one of our legs or not, I posted the only other options I can think of just before you posted this, I would be interested to know what you think of them.

What happens when your bank refuses to continue serving your business because you are registered as a republican or libertarian or because you post here?
Can small businesses survive that?

 

[Suzanimal]

I am betwixt and between, we are in a situation where none of the right options are available and to use the metaphor I used above we must decide whether to cut off circulation to one of our legs or not, I posted the only other options I can think of just before you posted this, I would be interested to know what you think of them.

What happens when your bank refuses to continue serving your business because you are registered as a republican or libertarian or because you post here?
Can small businesses survive that?

Yes. It wouldn't be easy but marijuana retailers seem to be doing okay.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Yes. It wouldn't be easy but marijuana retailers seem to be doing okay.

Are they surviving by using personal bank accounts?
What if your bank won't let you have one of those either?
What do you think of option two as a least of all evils tourniquet?

2 the public option, create a money storage/transfer system run by the Post Office or the Treasury Department that is required to serve everyone.

This would leave the "private" corporations to do as they pleased while preventing the left from creating a Neo-Feudal mark of the beast system where anyone they don't like is unpersoned BUT it is expanding the role of government.

 

[dannno]

I dunno, it seems like if the government heavily regulates money, demands you pay taxes in dollars and has heavy handed control over the whole banking and monetary industry, allowing that industry to discriminate against political parties seems a bit scary.

I don't know what the answer is within our monetary paradigm. Obviously we would like to extricate ourselves from the current monetary paradigm, but when your political enemies use the force of government to create an economic system you can't participate in, that they have power over, that is kind of a bad spot to be in. Womp womp.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I dunno, it seems like if the government heavily regulates money, demands you pay taxes in dollars and has heavy handed control over the whole banking and monetary industry, allowing that industry to discriminate against political parties seems a bit scary.

I don't know what the answer is within our monetary paradigm. Obviously we would like to extricate ourselves from the current monetary paradigm, but when your political enemies use the force of government to create an economic system you can't participate in, that they have power over, that is kind of a bad spot to be in. Womp womp.

What do you think of option 2?

2 the public option, create a money storage/transfer system run by the Post Office or the Treasury Department that is required to serve everyone.

This would leave the "private" corporations to do as they pleased while preventing the left from creating a Neo-Feudal mark of the beast system where anyone they don't like is unpersoned BUT it is expanding the role of government.

 

[Suzanimal]

Are they surviving by using personal bank accounts?
What if your bank won't let you have one of those either?
What do you think of option two as a least of all evils tourniquet?

2 the public option, create a money storage/transfer system run by the Post Office or the Treasury Department that is required to serve everyone.

This would leave the "private" corporations to do as they pleased while preventing the left from creating a Neo-Feudal mark of the beast system where anyone they don't like is unpersoned BUT it is expanding the role of government.

I'm not sure if they're running any of it through a bank. I wouldn't. It's drug money and could be seized.

If I could afford a vault...

I'd most likely pay in cash and put some on those bullshit visas at the CVS.

I have a big problem with required to serve.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I'm not sure if they're running any of it through a bank. I wouldn't. It's drug money and could be seized.

If I could afford a vault...

I'd most likely pay in cash and put some on those bull$#@! visas at the CVS.

I have a big problem with required to serve.

I'm not sure many businesses could survive without a bank account/check cashing etc., some could but many couldn't.

I would REALLY like somebody's opinion on option 2.

 

[Suzanimal]

I'm not sure many businesses could survive without a bank account/check cashing etc., some could but many couldn't.

I would REALLY like somebody's opinion on option 2.

I gave you my opinion.

My copy-n-paste is sketchy so I'll say it again.

You lost me at required.

And you trust the Post Office and the Treasury to safeguard and be responsible with that money?

 

[Origanalist]

I'm not sure many businesses could survive without a bank account/check cashing etc., some could but many couldn't.

I would REALLY like somebody's opinion on option 2.

I think that's moving in entirely the wrong direction and it would only be a matter of time until it was mandatory.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I gave you my opinion.

My copy-n-paste is sketchy so I'll say it again.

You lost me at required.

I didn't understand that you meant that as a response to option 2, I thought you were referring to your business being required to serve any customer.
The government should be required to serve all law abiding citizens.

And you trust the Post Office and the Treasury to safeguard and be responsible with that money?

The government would be required to fork over the money even if they had to print more and at least they wouldn't be able to unperson conservatives.
They already handle uncountable sums so a money storage and transfer service wouldn't really be any different.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I think that's moving in entirely the wrong direction and it would only be a matter of time until it was mandatory.

I understand but the current system is already flirting with mark of the beast territory without an option that is required to serve you without bias and could just as easily become mandatory.

 

[Origanalist]

I didn't understand that you meant that as a response to option 2, I thought you were referring to your business being required to serve any customer.
The government should be required to serve all law abiding citizens.


The government would be required to fork over the money even if they had to print more and at least they wouldn't be able to unperson conservatives.
They already handle uncountable sums so a money storage and transfer service wouldn't really be any different.

In case you haven't noticed, the government does pretty much whatever it wants to. Sometimes it takes a little longer for certain things, sometimes not.

 

[Suzanimal]

I didn't understand that you meant that as a response to option 2, I thought you were referring to your business being required to serve any customer.
The government should be required to serve all law abiding citizens.


The government would be required to fork over the money even if they had to print more and at least they wouldn't be able to unperson conservatives.
They already handle uncountable sums so a money storage and transfer service wouldn't really be any different.

My highlighter is screwed up so I can't really break up your post.

1. The government does serves all citizens - good and hard. No more service for me thanks.

2. I realize that. Hows it working out for us?

 

[Swordsmyth]

In case you haven't noticed, the government does pretty much whatever it wants to. Sometimes it takes a little longer for certain things, sometimes not.

But it is somewhat restrained by the vestiges of our Constitution, the Neo-Feudal crony corporations aren't.

 

[CCTelander]

I think that's moving in entirely the wrong direction and it would only be a matter of time until it was mandatory.

The only thing his "option 2" lacks to be in total compliance with the fifth plank from the Communist Manifesto is an exclusive monopoly which, as you note, wouldn't be long in coming.

So basically he's advocating communism to prevent communism.

Welcome to Bizzarro RPFs.

 

[Swordsmyth]

My highlighter is screwed up so I can't really break up your post.

1. The government does serves all citizens - good and hard. No more service for me thanks.

The Neo-Feudal crony corporations will be happy to take over and they will make government look like a libertarian's utopia.

2. I realize that. Hows it working out for us?

Better than Corporate Feudalism will.

 

[Swordsmyth]

The only thing his "option 2" lacks to be in total compliance with the fifth plank from the Communist Manifesto is an exclusive monopoly which, as you note, wouldn't be long in coming.

So basically he's advocating communism to prevent communism.

Welcome to Bizzarro RPFs.

I specifically made it not a monopoly to avoid the communism, the Neo-Feudal corporations will gladly use government to create a leftist monopoly and corporate communism.

What option do you suggest to solve the problem? (That actually has a chance of happening)

 

[Origanalist]

But it is somewhat restrained by the vestiges of our Constitution, the Neo-Feudal crony corporations aren't.

I understand what you're saying, but again it's moving in the wrong direction. The only cure is for people to avail themselves of the free market in whatever form necessary to make these pricks irrelevant. Unfortunately to many "muricans are too fat, lazy and stupid to care. I just don't see option 2 ending well at all, it never does.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I understand what you're saying, but again it's moving in the wrong direction. The only cure is for people to avail themselves of the free market in whatever form necessary to make these pricks irrelevant. Unfortunately to many "muricans are too fat, lazy and stupid to care. I just don't see option 2 ending well at all, it never does.

We are already speeding in the wrong direction, do you think that option 2 will end worse than the Neo-Feudalism will?
Might it buy us enough time to actually start moving things in the right direction?

 

[dannno]

I don't want to create another government agency, I would prefer the private market is involved as much as possible..

I would consider something along the lines of, if you provide money or banking services denominated in dollars - since we are required to use dollars - the CRA could be invoked not to discriminate based on political beliefs (as well as race, religion, etc..)

If you bake wedding cakes, you could still discriminate based on political beliefs. This is because the government doesn't require people who get married to have cakes, and anybody has the right to bake a cake. So if TheCount owned a bakery, they could deny his services to Trump supporters to their heart's content.

Not a fan of the private business part of the CRA, but even Ron and Rand Paul agree with the parts of the act that require government to not discriminate. Is that part bad? I don't think the government should discriminate. So should banking and money services that denominate in dollars be under the same umbrella? Can we provide protection to political beliefs under that umbrella? That might not be as horrible as TheCount and some others might make it out to be.