But after thinking about it a while I realized that I've probably paid more in this hidden premium than I've recovered from reimbursement. Until COVID hit and I had to refute multi thousand dollar plane tickets that were never able to be used. Will I have paid more for the premium or less by the end of my life? No idea.
What it ultimately comes down to is the value, role, and scope of insurance. That's a massive debate of its own.
I've used a 2% cash back credit card for the last 5+ years. If the CC Company offered to make it 3% in exchange for reduced or inhibited fraud insurance I would seriously consider it.
I've also foregone health and home insurance in some instances.
But I appreciate that risk assessment is absolutely not for everyone.
Why do you bother with either? Just try harder to not get sick and try harder to not have your house burn down. Are you not actively trying as hard as you can to prevent your house from getting destroyed? Are you not trying to stay healthy?
With bitcoin you have both: high fees and no fraud protection.
> Credit card companies most likely write fraud reimbursement off when filing taxes. So taxes that they would otherwise pay vanish. If the taxing entity wants a minimum tax revenue, that means increased rates elsewhere (and quite possibly for individuals).
So what you saying this is better, because when fraud happens you (an individual) can't deduct it from your taxes?
I think the arguments are very weak, much stronger would be that government can't supposedly stop you from paying or receiving payments, but they still can do it in other ways (like prevent converting the money or physically get you).
I think though that (at least for me) ability to reverse charge to stop fraud is more valuable than the above.