Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

FSU is going to try to get the law changed so PayPal and other financial services companies can’t deplatform other people for expressing political views they disapprove of. I feel like saying to PayPal, “You messed with the wrong guy.”

:#marseysal:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Everyone's been pissed off at Paypal for years for this kind of shit and nothing has changed or will change. No one is going to pass a law like that. What even is the law? You have to let whoever use your service if it's money related?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I mean that's pretty much how common carrier works, wouldn't surprise me if PayPal is considered one by the courts eventually.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I would be. Paypal isn't a bank and processes all their transactions through other credit card companies and banks and whatever. What you're suggesting would be like making Netflix a common carrier. It'll never happen.

I'm not saying I agree with Paypal, I think they're scumbags, but they're going to get away with everything they're doing, except maybe seizing people's money when they cancel them for no reason, since that is pretty obviously illegal.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

PayPal may not be a considered a bank on paper, but they sure do almost everything a bank does. Loans, long term money storage, merchant services, are all things a bank does. Also PayPal does indeed do account to account transfers, which are a vital part of the services they offer. Most of PayPal's actions that would classify them as a common carrier are the services for businesses, not the everyday stuff an everyday customer sees. Also PayPal is working on decoupling it's existing card from MasterCard which would make it even more likely to be classed as a common carrier.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I guess if they become more like what visa and mastercard are, I could see future laws being targeted at them in theory. The way it is right now, I'd see them as more analogous to someone like square, and if you suggested that square for example was a common carrier, I wouldn't be able to agree, I just see them as a regular services company.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think it's definitely one of those grey areas for sure. Phone companies are considered common carrier, and I think both payment processors and phone companies are equal in terms of importance in running a business.

The main reason I believe they should be is because they offer loans, and that should 100% be common carrier. If square and PayPal spun off the loan section of the business I don't think they should be restricted to common carrier regulations. A business can always use another payment processor, but micro business loan companies are few and far between.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm curious about what you mean by this. If you offer loans, are you saying who you are willing to loan money to is subject to regulation, like in some cases you have to loan someone money even if you would rather not?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As a general loan company? Absolutely.

As a credit union, or similar closed organization that doesn't operate as a common lender? No.

My stance is that if you are a company that offers loans to the general public or to businesses (i.e. the commons), you should be subject to common carrier laws forcing you to do business with them. This does not mean I think they should be forced to loan out to companies that are a credit liability (otherwise every loan company would have sky high interest rates), but that they cannot reject doing any form of business with them whatsoever. For example, if a company meets every credit standard a bank has for loans (good cashflow, enough assets for collateral, solid credit) they should not be able to deny a loan for a reason outside of credit factors, such as being a politically motivated company, poor esg score, or being a part of one of the sin industries.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

Payment gateways refusing services to things that are totally legal but politically or socially controversial (weed, guns, porn, abortions, casinos, etc) is an actual problem that's been raised to the federal level. Fricked if I know what the solution is.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

PayPal is controlled by the ADL and other Jewish powers. It’s hopeless.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.