
Patrick Collison AMA on r/neoliberal - rpenm
https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/84so8j/patrick_collison_ama_stripe_ceo_technologist/
======
knuththetruth
>It reminds me in some ways of net neutrality: yes, fast lanes and slow lanes
have real downsides. But there's vast capex required to build the
infrastructure we need. How should that be paid for?

Defending credit card fees by criticizing net-neutrality. I guess at least
he’s being interviewed in the right subreddit...

~~~
objclxt
> These steep fees also fund (a) vast extension of consumer credit, (b)
> massive card distribution programs, and (c) the downsides of a generally
> frictionless payment method (occasional fraud losses), all of which together
> yields higher spending for merchants.

This is a bit disingenuous. He makes it sound like these fees are the primary
income for card companies, but that's not the case. Interchange and merchant
fees represent a _minority_ of revenue for card companies[1] - about 26%. The
bulk of actual revenue comes from cash advances, fees charged to the customer
(both annual and penalty fees), interest on balances, and ancillary products
like insurance.

Here's the rub: if the US regulated credit card fees like they do debit cards
(via the Durbin amendment) Visa would still be profitable - they happily
operate and makes money in countries where credit card fees are capped by law,
like Australia. They wouldn't be as profitable, sure. Neither would Stripe.

[1]: [https://www.fool.com/credit-cards/2017/04/13/this-is-how-
cre...](https://www.fool.com/credit-cards/2017/04/13/this-is-how-credit-card-
companies-hauled-in-163-bi.aspx)

~~~
pktgen
> They wouldn't be as profitable, sure. Neither would Stripe.

It shouldn't even affect Stripe all that much. The CC fees are just a pass-
through expense for them; their product is the infrastructure value-add, which
AFAIK nobody is suggesting needs to be price-regulated.

One of the reasons the Federal Reserve was created was to eliminate rent-
seeking by banks in check clearing. (The previous system was that banks would
clear checks directly among each other, leading to abuses where banks would
charge exorbitant fees to other banks.) I'd argue credit/debit cards are just
as important today as checks were in 1913. A functioning economy requires a
functioning payment system.

------
gt_
Interesting to see individuals show pride in the “neoliberal” label, which is
usually a stand-in for “complacent”.

~~~
adwhit
It is very peculiar.

Whether it is an attempt to "reclaim" the word or not, that subreddit's usage
of "neoliberal" bears little relation it's usage as defined in books such as
David Harvey's 'A Brief History of Neoliberalism', where it is most commonly
associated with privatization, financialisation, tax cuts, the retrenchment of
social welfare and rapid growth in inequality.

Critically, the neoliberal state is not 'smaller', it just prefers deficit
spending to tax and prefers to funnel money to private enterprises and the
military-industrial complex rather than spend it on it's citizens.

In contrast, /r/neoliberal seems to use the word to mean some sort of
libertarianism-lite?

~~~
abiox
perhaps i misunderstand, but these things you list seem to be compatible with
libertarianism (at least the right-libertarianism most commonly encountered in
the US)

> privatization, financialisation, tax cuts, the retrenchment of social
> welfare

~~~
gt_
Neoliberals want to use the state as an enforcement vehicle for private
interests, so neoliberalism leads to more corruption of the state while
libertarianism seeks to abandon it.

Also, neoliberalism is much more crafty with propaganda, by necessity.
Neoliberals use advertising and public relations to mask their alleged
conflicting agendas.

For example, Trump is a neoliberal in libertarian clothing, while Clinton is a
neoliberal in democrat clothing. They are both neoliberals. If they weren't,
they would lack the cooperation from private interests needed to run.

Libertarians lack cooperation from the private sector because their public
image is not "supportive, caring",

Democrats lack cooperation from the private sector because their actual
political interests (like defending the working class) are in conflict with
it.

So, neoliberalism makes the choice easy by combining the best of both worlds:
dystopic support for corporate takeover AND the public image of loving
kindness.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Neoliberals want to use the state as an enforcement vehicle for private
> interests

Which is exactly true of libertarianism, which sees the only role of
government as protecting it's model of property rights, which are precisely
private interests.

> For example, Trump is a neoliberal in libertarian clothing,

Trump is neither a neoliberal norte does he dress in libertarian clothing.
He's more a kleptocrat in authoritarian populist clothing, which is about as
far from a neoliberal in libertarian clothing as you can get.

> while Clinton is a neoliberal in democrat clothing.

Neoliberalism is overtly the dominant ideology of the Democratic Party;
Hillary Clinton is (and has for a long time been) a neoliberal in neoliberal
clothing; though in the 2016 campaign she did try to preempt Sanders by
adopting some progressive populist accessories.

~~~
gremlinsinc
I'd like to say, Trump is more of a nationalist/protectionist candidate, not
neoliberal, and he definitely didn't run on neoliberalism, Clinton and the
other Republicans (center/right and center/left) are two sides of a narrow
coin, but the coin being a neoliberal coin.

Sanders ran as a populist/egalitarian candidate. I feel that neoliberalism
will die, in fact the fact that Trump won, is the nail in the coffin, I lean
towards Sanders philosophy more, personally, -- but with technological
unemployment going to rise to more than 40% of existing jobs being gone by
2030, and income inequality only going to rise even more, there will
eventually be a revolution of sorts.

If not a bloody one, then one of ideals, you can see it already in red states
turning blue, or more people running for elections than normally would. In
Utah for example more people are running as democrats than ever have before
during an election cycle. Chances of winning are slim, for sure -- but more
people are getting involved because they're starting to realize it's the only
way to make a difference. Scientists are even jumping in, because for some
reason the 'right' seems to hate science and education.

~~~
gt_
Parent from 2 up here. For the record I agree with both of the comments under
me. All good points. I guess it’s not much help to call Trump a neoliberal.
I’ll take that back.

------
loeg
Title correction: "Patrick Collison AMA: Stripe CEO, technologist, builder of
economic infrastructure for the internet (on /r/neoliberal)."

(Providing the much needed context, "who is Patrick Collison?")

