It seems we are forced to agree on disagreement.

Where do you even live? Do you own your money? Does not seem like it.

A bank can not close an account here, unless the costumer actively requires it. There are banks that will close an empty account, with no movements to it for a determined time, but even then the institution is obligated to warn the client in advance. There is even a special, minimal bank services account, established by force of law, where it is established that no bank, acting in the country, can deny access to bank services and charge more than a established amount for it, per year.

Risk assement is done in a case by case system; there is no such thing as a credit score. The only thing it exists is a data base, at the central bank, for credit responsabilities, and if you default you are banned from accessing credit, not bank services. A client can have zero credit near a bank, use their services, and maintain their account as long as they live.

What you do with your account is your business. I should know: I worked for a company that owed money to state, suppliers and the bank itself and it only their account frozen after a judicial order was issued.

And yes, I am claiming to cut the middleman and have more money delivered to the creators. And I stand by those words.

I’m going to try my best to answer your concerns, point by point. This has been a really good exchange.

The threat model for a local sports club putting a bank account on their window is completely different than a popular content creator posting it on the internet. I can’t speak definitively about your country, but it’s probably safe to assume they have business accounts, which are different than personal accounts, incur fees for having them open, fees for deposits, fees for transfers etc - negating the monetary benefit you see from “cutting out the middle man”.

Yes, there are business accounts and personal accounts.

What distinguishes most business accounts from personal ones are connected automated paying terminals and facilitated overdraft, cash advance or factoring solutions.

I risk around 90% of all banks in my country charge for monthly account maintenance fees, transfer orders and other services. Most will try to offset that expense the customer has by offering a number of “free” services, like a number of free instant transfers or a couple of free or heavily reduced price for market orders.

Receiving money in an account is not something it has to be paid for.

Banks typically don’t like you running businesses on personal accounts and they will notice. The scenario this particular creator describes will result in lots of small irregular payments and few withdrawals from the account - that’s pretty much a textbook example of usage that will trigger a KYC red flag at a bank. Now your account is being investigated and has a chance of being closed/frozen.

I am fiscally declared as an independent professional, as is my partner. I receive small transfers in my account for payment of invoices I issue and my partner receives even more, as she has a used book store.

Both of us use our personal accounts to run our businesses. I have considered opening a second account, just to keep VAT and other values I receive from customers partitioned, and have called my bank questioning if there would be any issues in doing so and they did not care.

Even if my account was flagged for suspitious activities, it would be a matter for police and fiscal services to investigate, not the bank.

We’ve not even gotten into international transfers, malicious “fans” trying to reverse payments/reporting you for fraud etc which could end up with your account frozen, […]

All transfers are final, here. You can file a complaint but you have to go to the police first, then present that complaint to the bank and wait for legal procedures to take place. Have your evidences ready, too.

[…] the fact you now have to build and maintain your own infrastructure for web hosting, video sharing, customer service - which will eat time, money or both (and unless you’re particularly technical you’re likely to need several middlemen). You’ll likely also need to deal with a drop in users/income because you’ve now made paying you significantly more difficult for many users.

You’re describing a multinational. And I’m concerned with getting paid, alone. A creator should employ whatever services they see fit to forward their business, be it video editors, IT services, etc. Services from which they should be capable of detaching in favor of another, better, offer.

For some reason, Youtube came to mind as read that snippet of your text. That company should be starved tomorrow. There are several hosting services you can hire to upload and share your video - or any other, by extent - content and withold your work as yours. How many creators have had their work demonitized, for them, because what they do does not align with the platform morality yet the platform still loads adds on those videos for the people watching it?

Frankly, because you think there’s an easy alternative doesn’t mean there is one. There’s a reason these middlemen exist - because everything I’ve described up there is difficult, time consuming and not what these creators want to be doing. Like them or not, many creators wouldn’t be creators without them

Just because one solution exists, does not mean it has to be the one and only, and right now, the platforms that offer these services do not serve their customers better interests.

Good morning! I apologize for leaving this hanging yesterday.

I am aware that making account numbers is highly unadvised by banks but I do know as well special accounts exist for public facing entities and professionals where withdrawing from it requires a very long and tedious process, with several security steps and verifications.

There is a local foundation that almost plasters their windows with poster with their IBAN. Local sports clubs do the same. The opportunities for malicious actors are plentiful, yet these entities do it, safely.

I don’t doubt you can point me to some security flaw or loop hole but, getting back to the where this conversation started, cutting the middle man out should be a priority.

Those same payment processors can unilaterally change their terms of service and deny creators of their income. Paypal has done it. I wonder who else.

In my country I already have a transfer subsystem where I can give you my phone number and you can use it to transfer money directly to me. All national banks are part of and own that system.

Fintechs are shady or have too many strings attached.

Nice to meet you.

If I was a creator of content, looking to have a direct way for people to support me, yes.

Are you interested in sponsoring my idiocy? Save your hard earned income; I wouldn’t pay myself.

What is this? Mafia? If you have my account number that is it. You can send me money but you can’t get anything out of it.

My bank number account is a string of numbers. Besides the country and bank entity code, no other information can be obtained and no movements can be ordered on it by a non titular.

Money can be transfered in but the account can’t be moved by anyone but the titular.

Direct bank transfers. Those are a thing.

p.s

They commented, I replied. Is it that exotheric of an idea? I can transfer money anywhere I want, to any bank account. You want to support someone, send them money directly.

There was a world before PayPal.

And this is why platforms are nice yet cutting the middle man is important. There was a time before walled gardens.

The dragon underneath is starting to stirr.

That would make the dollar plummet and instantly end the furious import market, with no need for tariffs. With a devalued currency, it would make the country appealing to install industry back, even if low value at first, to soak up the throngs of unemployed.

And the current administration would wave away ratings and anything relating to international entitities and gladly default on their creditors, to pull everyone down.

These guys are mad but their madness has a method.

You and your friend seem to not take yourselves too serious, which is a nice trait.

Your sister seems a bit too uptight.

I foresee a cave-in.

In a democratic country, you can think and say whatever you want from its government. At best, being there, you should expect some side eyeing: you’re there; if you don’t like it, go your own way.

In countries where you know such criticism can bring harm your way, just avoid going there altogether.

Intriguing, isn’t it?

Probably marked it as such inadvertently. Thank you for the warning.

I can do one class per semester and pay less than 100€ of tuition. I have a paid house and a source of income besides my salary.

Greed, plain and simple, and a complete absence of checks and balances.

There is no problem in creating an endeavour to achieve some goal and make money from it in the process but it is a problem when making a better life for oneself becomes a trip to hoard as much riches as possible just for the sake of it.

I’ve been lucky enough to know people with a lot of money, both old money and new money. Old money were down to earth people, still working on their family business, leading a very discreet life, with no show off. Polite, well spoken. New money - I prefer the french nouvelle riche - were insuferable twits, that liked to throw around their money as if it meant anything.

The old money people paid whoever worked for them well; I was told, in no uncertain terms, trust is a very high value commodity. They wanted to keep people around them loyal and reliable. The other lot paid pittance salaries.

There is only so much money needed and spendable. I don’t mind paying taxes, although I do say there is a lot of misuse of all the money collect from it, but I consider it the price of civilization. I have an NHS, good roads and somewhat well taken care infrastructure, free public education, subsidized medication, unemployement by the state, paid sick days, paid parental leave, etc. That is money well spent.

Meanwhile, I see companies paying pittances. Tax the blood out of them. Force them to pay higher salaries in order to have higher tax deductions. Throw out deductions for charity; that is white washing greed. Increase paid vacation days (we get paid 14 months here and only work 11, as we have 22 days of paid vacation, plus an extra month salary for holiday “bonus” and another for christmas) and pay higher per diem values.

A company can work to only break even and still produce a lot.

If a nation is signatary of the ICC and does not enforce its mandates, that nation is a rogue nation and its politians need to be presented to the ICC.

Predator is from 1987; that’s a classic.