If you are unbanked and work a W2 (paid in cash of course), you’re not on the hook for any of this!
It’s a coincidence that 99.99% of tax payers use the banking system.
The tax payers who voted for the politicians who drafted, voted for, and signed the legislation to relax banking (or any) regulations absolutely are responsible for this. But it's not like we can just send the bill to these people.
Perhaps one day we will get it through peoples' thick skulls that deregulation leads to tax payer bailouts - be that financial institution bail outs, the public paying to cleanup environmental disasters, or whatever. But I'm not hopeful. Most voters listen to the blatant lies and culture war BS being fed to them constantly.
Corporations are largely going to do whatever they can to make a buck. The best you can do to combat this is put laws in place to prevent bad behavior and have a strong enforcement arm to ensure that it's cheaper to follow the laws than it is to break them.
This comment I made recently might shed some light on what I'm talking about...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35918310
It is possible to lend wrapped bitcoin as collateral, borrow against it and then re-lend out that borrowed thing (or use it to provide liquidity). Essentially enabling one to use that bitcoin "investment" to work for you instead of just being a shiny pet rock that HN loves to hate on. This is part of 'being your own bank' and a way to move away from the traditional banking system into something more decentralized.
DeFi is also why I say that the biggest threat to bitcoin is wrapped bitcoin. =) I haven't touched the actual bitcoin chain, in years. Given that other chains, which support wrapped bitcoin, now use a fraction of the energy they did previously (proof of stake), it makes the ESG arguments around bitcoin itself, go out the window.
How is it a bad-faith argument to accurately state that using Bitcoin as a "bank" would be far too volatile for basically everyone.
The alternative -- which doesn't require fad technology and buzzwords -- is "narrow banking": deposit-only banks that don't loan money out, and therefore can easily survive a 100% run on themselves.
Hell, this doesn't even need to be a for-profit business. The Fed should just offer consumer accounts, free of charge. The USPS could offer banking services at their branches for people who need to do things in-person.
If you use bitcoin as collateralized lending and borrowing, it becomes a banking tool. Price becomes far less of an issue as long as you maintain your collateralization ratios. Volatility of the price is at least partially offset by the utility of earning interest on it. This also has the effect of making bitcoin more scarce as it becomes more and more locked up as debt. 21m max, it becomes deflationary if enough people become their own bank.
> The Fed should just offer consumer accounts, free of charge.
No. We have enough government control of finances as it is.
Ever have the state board of equalization empty your bank account without any warning because they thought you owed them money? I have. It has been two years and I still haven’t gotten my money back.