It's federally required to exist, and services all Americans already. Basic banking services should be one of the things it is expanded to provide in a minimal, safe fashion (i.e. no loans or lending, but guaranteed electronic banking and funds transfer services).
Not having a physical address is a huge problem.
However the postal offices are now being closed.
I expect the same problem would occur with The US Postal Service shutting down branches?
Specifically, what problem do post office banks have that private banks do not?
Private banks close branches all the time.
New Zealand Post wants to shut its last 79 shops, but will not say when the last branch will close its doors
New Zealand Post said the move from stand-alone stores was old news and 801 of its 880 stores were already franchised.
Kiwibank originally had branches at the Post Offices.
Kiwibank is left with much less branches than there were Post Offices - branches often replaced by ATMs in the wall: it has "325 Kiwibank Limited Branch and ATM Locations" https://kiwibank.banklocationmaps.co.nz/en/nzl
I presume it will take much longer in the USA for the Post Offices to close. There is no reason something similar won't happen there - the same economic forces occur in the USA.
Note that most franchises are an in-store counter or small area set aside for the Post Office supplies. I can think of franchises in book-stores, stationery shops, pharmacies, and even a public library. I know of one Post Office branch of that 79 that remains open, however it is mostly run by unpaid volunteers including a friend of mine (no banking counter).
That alone exceeds the requirement of “minimal” as there’s now a need to hire staff for fraud monitoring, handle disputed transactions, chase fraudulent transfers, deal with those who forgot their passwords to electronic banking, had their passwords stolen, etc.
What are the new revenue channels that will pay for all that extra staff (and considering it’s USPS, their pensions)?
The federal government, unlike most other entities, does not need to match new revenue to new spending. It can and does create new money for any spending it deems worth it.
Funding basic banking for all through the USPS is worth it.
Yes, that is called inflation.... how is that working out for everyone that needs food, housing and energy?
Government spending on useful services, or helping their constituents get by on two one-time $600 payments did not create the current economic climate.
So you believe government only ever spends on Useful services? Some how I bet you can point to more than a few things government spends money on you disapprove of and consider to be less than useful
>>helping their constituents get by on two one-time $600 payments did not create the current economic climate.
Nice gas lighting, the reality is the 2 $600 payments make up something on the order of like 1% of covid spending, and I have a problem with all of it. Not just the direct payments.
That said it my be a shock to you that in some ways, to some people, I dont believe the government paid enough, not because I have this false narrative that somehow it is government job to help people "get by" it is not. However it is their responsibility under the 5th and other amendments to the US Constitution to compensate people when they take property. Shutting down the entire economy, barring people from working, and barring people from engaging in "non-essential" commerce should be viewed as a taking and thus require the government to make everyone whole from which they took.
now of course I also believe the government massively over stepped its authority and should have never shut down the economy, and does not have the power to do any of the things it did...
>>collusion, and government loan fraud,
Those are illegal activities, where is your government in prosecuting them? Ohh that is right they do not prosecute crimes anymore I forgot. How is that defund the police movement working out....
Things would have gone better if the PPP loan money was spent on keeping the working public solvent. People who weren't allowed to work shouldn't have been forced into unemployment, more or less, without adequate compensation.
But I also see the whole thing as evidence that our viral protocols and our ability to deliver clear, accurate information that won't be politicized, is essentially moot.
If it were rabies that was this airborne, we'd all be dead.
Does a car with 4 wheels exceed requirements of minimal? Who operates a payment service without handling fraud? Can you operste a postal service without handling fraud?
> pay for all that extra staff?
Do roads create revenue?
Like you are fee to argue that its not worth it, but government services do not need to charge fees, rhey can create economic growth and get the money back through taxes
I mean, yes? 3 should be enough without too many design changes. 2 with a kick stand. Even 1 with tech that absolutely cannot fail or else catastrophic failure.
This comes across as a bait and switch - clearly no-one calls vehicles with less than 3 wheels cars.
There is no requirement that the service be revenue-neutral.
Hell, they're even surprisingly used to keeping large amounts of valuable paper safe. It wasn't that long ago that you could make a lot of money stealing stamp sheets.
Walmart or 7-11 or so? Jokes aside, giving banking licenses to retailers might be a sensible thing to do. (Or removing the whole system of banks requiring licenses altogether would be even better.)
https://www.consumerreports.org/banks/is-banking-at-walmart-...
"At its more than 4,600 in-store MoneyCenters, as well as online, millions of customers have access to basic, low-cost banking services, including the ability to withdraw cash, make deposits, and pay bills."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_S...
Before the FDIC was created to cover bank runs & closures, the USPS was proposed to expand into being a postal savings system, a system that was already done by the UK beforehand & had proven to work.
Back in the States, it's interesting that the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, explicitly gives Congress the power "To establish Post Offices and post Roads." A few lines earlier the same article grants Congress the power "To borrow Money on the credit of the United States." Would it then seem odd for the Congress to be assumed to have the power to create postal bonds, so common in much of the world?
[Addendum]
Might not be such a stretch then to imagine a Postal Savings System or something similar with great reach in the US, potentially encompassing much of what commercial banks handle today. The advantages including stability and availability, and perhaps even efficiency. Perhaps Hyman Minsky might have wished for things to... go postal?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_savings_system
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_S...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Post_Bank
[4] https://www.lapostegroupe.com/en/banking-accessibility-la-po...
Are you talking about a specific law, or about the clause in your constitution?
If the latter: the postal clause merely gives congress some powers, but does not require them to do anything.
The documents they need to open a bank account (plastic residence permit, address registration certificate) are not available to them, sometimes for up to a year.
The ways around it are poorly documented and change often as German banks tighten their KYC requirements.
I find the money transfer system created in Malaysia to be interesting. It started as a transfer system between banks, then an e-wallet that you can use to pay in stores, then they added a Visa card, then they integrated with Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand where you can pay locally with your MYR wallet. Now they added a remittance service that basically acts as a SWIFT transfer (though it looks expensive). It seems like they have found a way around the KYC rules. I wonder how long they can keep at it before they get hammered and if they can increase their Fx integrations to more countries.
But there are also other requirements that are not related. The most effective workaround at the moment is to choose a EU bank outside of Germany. This skips the requirement for a residence permit or a registered address, so people can land in Germany with a functional bank account.
Another workaround is to rely on branch employees to be a little pragmatic and let immigrants open an account. These exceptions are naturally impossible to document, but they are a normal part of German bureaucracy.
A third and last workaround a symbiotic relationship between a relocation consultant and a bank employee. They expedite the process and in return they get a steady stream of high-income customers.
For the record, I am far from a "crypto bro." I understand all of their limitations, including high volatility. I am arguing that their value is quickly growing in relation to their risks.
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.
I'm not claiming crypto is better or more convenient today than banks. At least not for most people. My premise is that they will become more valuable over time relative to their risks and limitations.