Is access to banking a human right ?

[Astro14]

There are ONLY 3 inalienable Human Rights!
1) Right to Self Defense
2) Right to Nourishment
3) Right to Shelter
These one is born with!

All others are NOT human rights, they may be rights or boons bestowed by society upon an individual or group of individuals.
That's why I find befuddling that a University gives a degree in human rights with a 3 yr study.

Weren‘t the three enumerated as Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness?

 

[97K15004WD]

In the USA anyone can open a check and savings account, the do NOT check your credit score.

While this is somewhat true, there are hoops that are necessary to go through. If you don't have resources to get through the hoops, you won't be able to have a bank account.

I partially agree with you on the credit score thing though. In the case i mentioned, he did open a savings account.

The bank would not let him open a checking account though. There is a"special" bank credit reporting agency that comes into play, and they denied him a checking account.

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask...er-to-let-me-open-a-checking-account-en-2035/

 

[Pablo]

The minute any bank denies me as a client I will go to another bank.

The minute any bank denies my use of a card or creating an account for being a legal gun owner, then I start contacting my congress critters and look for a different bank and card.

It's not a right, and a bank should NOT be forced to do business with any person, nor should a bank be forced to loan to anyone. It works both ways.

 

[nomas]

I'll be the odd man out . I don't think we are born with any " rights " . Tell me who grants " rights " ? Your God ? Your government ? Society ? We are all born naked and screaming . Everything after that is either earned or given to you .

 

[alarmguy]

While this is somewhat true, there are hoops that are necessary to go through. If you don't have resources to get through the hoops, you won't be able to have a bank account.

I partially agree with you on the credit score thing though. In the case i mentioned, he did open a savings account.

The bank would not let him open a checking account though. There is a"special" bank credit reporting agency that comes into play, and they denied him a checking account.

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask...er-to-let-me-open-a-checking-account-en-2035/

Yes and remember we are talking about another country, not the USA.
But, for example what if the poster was a known criminal and the bank gave him a checking account so he could once again write bad checks to unsuspecting people. Use it to cheat elderly citizens out of savings through scams ect... those are the people based on banking history that get denied. Its a safety net for the public so a banks products can not be used for criminal behavior.

It will never be a human right to get a checking account or a criminal who seeks to hide funds in a savings account.
In fact it is required by bank tellers in the USA nations largest banks to report suspected suspicious transactions to corporate and ultimately to the Fed based on only the bank tellers feelings and never to be disclosed to the customer.

THE USA Federal government puts ENORMOUS pressure on banks to protect the public and also to stop criminal money laundering.
You cant have it both ways do you want grandma and grandpa swindled out of their life savings aided by a fraudster with a checking account? But again, its doesnt matter. Not a human right

 

[Hillbilly Deluxe]

This question was intended to be thought-provoking, and I assure anyone who doesn’t know the OP that it is not reflective of his personal situation.

No, his question was meant to stir stuff up.

It's funny how this site (as well as another "garage" forum) won't allow people to talk about subjects that affect them daily, but does allow people to poke and prod others, who finally get tired of the crap stirred up and do reply, then they get the subsequent PM from some Mod and another thread is locked.

This whole mess about not allowing politics is one-sided and only one side sees discipline.

 

[Pablo]

I'll be the odd man out . I don't think we are born with any " rights " . Tell me who grants " rights " ? Your God ? Your government ? Society ? We are all born naked and screaming . Everything after that is either earned or given to you .

I tend to agree.

We as humans decide.

The "right" to self defense is more of undeniable human nature than a right. You had better defend your personage and safety with every ounce in your body or you will be dead. The government seems to want to take this from people, but it never, ever works out fully.

The right to food and water? Those are not rights.

Health care as a right is a joke. Sadly it's forced upon us by the controlists.

 

[loneryder]

Weren‘t the three enumerated as Life, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness?

He's in Canada. And I don't believe they have a right to self defense.

 

[slo town]

Because of the importance of a bank account in modern society, I actually have multiple accounts with three different banks.

If one account has a problem, I can move money across banks and accounts to circumvent the problem.

For example, when a fraudulent check was presented, and cashed, on my wife’s NFCU checking account, taking her balance to zero - I moved an equal amount of money into her account until the fraud investigation was complete and the funds restored.

Back to the OP question.

He said that without an account he can’t do those things. Never said he didn’t have an account, merely talked about how access to a bank account enables all the rest.

His point: an individual must have a bank account to execute many of society’s requirements.

Since it’s a “must have” for those things, I think access to banking should be a human right.

The nature, and fees, of that banking are a separate discussion.

But access to banking is an essential part of success, so that access should be made available.

An example of the success that access to baking can bring is micro-loan programs in many third world countries.

Since a car is usually a must have "to execute many of society's requirements", should it be a human right to own one? Even if the driver is unable to drive sober, or is so unskilled it's virtually impossible for them to drive safely?

Scott

 

[Hall]

Who cant open a bank account? Go to a bank deposit money, done, account is open.

That's probably true for any types of savings accounts but if I'm not mistaken, banks use a system to determine whether or not they'll allow someone to open a checking account. I haven't heard it used in 15+ years but it's basically like the credit reporting agencies except it shares information like bounced checks, writing checks on closed accounts, etc and banks will use it to allow or deny checking accounts.

 

[Owen Lucas]

People have been "de-banked" in the US depending on their personal and organizations political leanings. Happened with Chase IIRC, this made it into the news, and the account was reinstated. Activism is increasing in the financial sector especially in Europe, people ARE being de-banked based on opinions.

Is there a right to have a bank account? It's not in the Bill of Rights, it's not a law, but there are many people out there that probably shouldn't (fraudsters) and they still do. Unless you're trying to have investments at the Renaissance Fund (5MM minimum entry) then you shouldn't have a hard time at your local bank or FCU.

 

[slo town]

No, his question was meant to stir stuff up.

It's funny how this site (as well as another "garage" forum) won't allow people to talk about subjects that affect them daily, but does allow people to poke and prod others, who finally get tired of the crap stirred up and do reply, then they get the subsequent PM from some Mod and another thread is locked.

This whole mess about not allowing politics is one-sided and only one side sees discipline.

I think it should be forum policy that moderators confine their comments to BITOG's core subjects. In other words I don't think moderators should participate in "thought-provoking" threads such as this one.

Scott

 

[alarmguy]

That's probably true for any types of savings accounts but if I'm not mistaken, banks use a system to determine whether or not they'll allow someone to open a checking account. I haven't heard it used in 15+ years but it's basically like the credit reporting agencies except it shares information like bounced checks, writing checks on closed accounts, etc and banks will use it to allow or deny checking accounts.

Yes you are correct I posted a link in here I think someplace ... the Fed pretty much relies on banks to not allow criminals to use banking services to defraud people. Makes sense for sure

 

[GON]

Might be beneficial to restate the OP's question.

Should governments ensure there are not barriers to entry to promote the free market in the banking trade? Humans will always have access to banking if governments make sure there are not barriers to entry into the banking system, or unreasonable compliance requirements preventing smaller financial institutions from being able to operate

 

[Astro14]

I think it should be forum policy that moderators confine their comments to BITOG's core subjects. In other words I don't think moderators should participate in "thought-provoking" threads such as this one.

Scott

So, moderators are second class citizens? Unable to participate in discussions on the site?

Was there something I said that violated the rules?

Or do you actually think moderators should put in dozens of hours a week for your convenience, working, reading, for your benefit, while simultaneously being prohibited from full participation?

 

[PimTac]

Yes you are correct I posted a link in here I think someplace ... the Fed pretty much relies on banks to not allow criminals to use banking services to defraud people. Makes sense for sure

Yes but who determines what activity makes one a criminal? Remember the $10,000 transaction that gets you flagged. That was to prevent money laundering but that net is very wide.

 

[alarmguy]

Might be beneficial to restate the OP's question.

Should governments ensure there are not barriers to entry to promote the free market in the banking trade? Humans will always have access to banking if governments make sure there are not barriers to entry into the banking system, or unreasonable compliance requirements preventing smaller financial institutions from being able to operate

This currently exists in the USA, people can not be discriminated against (to an extreme no less) at the same time our government makes darn sure a bank is not facilitating criminals commit financial crimes or they get hit with penalties some HUGE.

 

[slo town]

Or do you actually think moderators should put in dozens of hours a week for your convenience, working, reading, for your benefit, while simultaneously being prohibited from full participation?

Yes.

Scott

 

[alarmguy]

Yes but who determines what activity makes one a criminal? Remember the $10,000 transaction that gets you flagged. That was to prevent money laundering but that net is very wide.

Your government is the only one who decides. Its just the banks job to report it.
Unknown to the public, much smaller dollar amounts get reported as well. It's up to the teller of banks to report anything they think is suspicious including suspicious conversations, the system will also flag the tellers computer if similar transactions took place at other branches. Such as splitting up deposits between branches over a period of time as one example.

A LOT goes on behind the scenes at your bank that the public doesnt know and even more so if they didnt read the Patriot Act after 9/11 and all the privacy transactions lost, there is a record of everything everywhere and everyday people leaving banks a certain percentage are being reported as suspicious and the transaction moved onto the next "agency" to be cleared or reported to the Fed.

I sure AI now has taken over most of these activities and behind the scenes surveillance of Americans banking needs online.

 

[GON]

This currently exists in the USA, people can not be discriminated against (to an extreme no less) at the same time our government makes darn sure a bank is not facilitating criminals commit financial crimes or they get hit with penalties.

AG, some research on the subject may show the big banks have spent multiple billions of USD over the past 25 years to include activities so smaller financial institutions can't comply with excessive regulations. A reasonable speculation is the big banks would like to be like cell phone carriers, only three or four real players.

I am fully fluent on things like the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and other mandatory programs that claim to support banking in under-served communities.