A rent-seeking third party probably selling your financial transaction data is not what I’d call lucky.

It beats the alternative. It’s no secret I sent someone $10 for lunch. I posted it to hacker news.

I'm always amazed that US banks are so behind the curve with this.

It's clearly possible to create a bank transfer facility that works quickly for zero cost. How come they don't?

Checks have always been a major source of fraud. The rest of the world stopped using them and feels no need to go back. How come the US still uses them?

We all want to, but there's an inertia problem.

From some quick research there is approximately 6,799 banks in the US and 5,757 credit unions. That's over 12,500 entities that need to communicate with each other. It takes a massive political will (not to mention money) to update the legacy federal systems that tie it all together.

Here's some more information: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/01/10/576879734/epis...

The UK has "over 300 banks" by comparison.

It's not that hard, and the absolute number is not that important, just that a majority decide to use it, forcing the rest.

I'm guessing USicans just don't realize the world has moved on. Large countries tend to be isolating and the US is no exception.

I didn't say it was "hard," it's an inertia and funding problem.

We know how better it is in other parts of the world, we aren't dumb.

Most Americans don’t know anything about banking in other countries.

Its to do with the early history of the USA and its federal structure.

Some of the early presidents where totally against having any central bank at all