This is what happens when banks don’t need your deposits anymore. You are an annoyance to them. They don’t care if you pull your money out. They no longer need it.
Things won’t be pretty once we go cashless.
Things won’t be pretty once we go cashless.
Another element is that many banks effectively centralise virtually all decision authority within computer systems. Patio11's recently submitted essay on branch banking addresses this in part. See <https://bam.kalzumeus.com/archive/branch-banking/> <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32679233>
Most banks, even quite large ones (though Citi might be an exception) no only centralise operations to software but use the same very small number of vendors for that software. Brian Krebs wrote an essay in 2018 giving some details on just how consolidated that market is: <https://krebsonsecurity.com/2018/03/what-is-your-banks-secur...>
Discussed on HN at the time: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16534820>
The fact that the banks have tied their own hands doesn't excuse them, though this may in part explain what's going on, and how you might choose to calibrate your expectations, risk models, and mitigations.
Twitter on the Android app works well for reading a thread, but on the webpage it is frustratingly cluttered. Admittedly I do have an adblocker so don't see the ads on thread reader.
Twitter is annoying, invasive, naggy, and surveillance tech. I've disabled JS on the site which both nudges me to alternatives and adds significant friction to reading using it.
Those same folks could easily wind up homeless if this happened to them.
Overdraft services have been opt-in only for over a decade: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/rules-policy/regulations/100...
I would line up with the other poor people who were too stupid not to have multiple bank accounts, even though like me they may have had a bank branch a block from their apartment (that had already turned them down.)
You can be poor without debt, btw: I do not include debt in with poverty. Debt amount doesn't reflect your quality of life (though garnished wages sometimes might hint at it).
But I figure some fringe cases would absolutely make someone be both poor and that much in debt, generally stemming from things like a family losing an income after buying a home and to a lesser extent, things like student loans and medical debt - though I*m not sure either go as high.
Having $10 in your checking account, OK yeah that is weird. Considering just your liquid cash vs. your debt doesn't make sense. You have to take into account monthly post-tax income, monthly expenses, and the time it would take to pay off said debt using your remaining income.
The truth is I should of never of been given the loan as my parents had very little income and no significant assets. It was ridiculous. But I was lucky enough to finish my degree in CS so eventually I was not poor and paid off the loan. But even with the CS degree and diligent saving it took almost a decade.
Also congratulations on getting out of debt and having a career.
The only account that is legally restricted that I can think of is the ISA which offers good tax incentives for saving but with a limit to how much can be contributed in a year, and I think you can only open with one provider in a given tax year.
If that's anything like the truth, absolutely nobody here knows about it. In an effort to get customers, banks will often give you "introductory" rates which are better than the market, but only for a fixed amount of time (6 months or a year). I know people who have accounts at basically every major bank.
Without the deal, there's no restrictions.
They are not. When you come back from work after a 12-hour night shift the last thing you want to do is managing your bank accounts. You just want one account to work, and to work well, if possible without the bank screwing you too much.
We're not money savvy people particularly, however my girlfriend and I both have 3-4 bank accounts (UK based, it takes <1 hour to setup a brand new bank, from start to finish).
We have a couple of traditional banks, and then also some more modern "internet" only banking (great for travel with their zero conversion fees, and more granular tracking of spending).
This seems to be the norm between all my friends also.
I have 3 accounts, one for salary deposits, one for bills and one for spending so that I always know bills are covered every month without thinking about it and my "fun money" being pre-allocated each month helps me be mindful of my spending.
Since moving to that system I've been able to save significantly more each month.
I have an online centered account and a local one, they serve different purposes.
Multiple accounts in use greatly increases the chance that you have the money but it’s in the wrong place.
Have we gotten so deeply nested that we've forgotten the title of the thread?
I too have multiple bank accounts, mainly because in the case of bank failure your deposits are only guaranteed up to something like £80k.
Also, in the UK basic current accounts are free, I doubt this is the case everywhere.
I still have one main account that my wages go into, and all bills come out of. The other account is just a backup.