sieve
7 hours ago
Pennywise, pound foolish decision.
India is forced to subsidize farmers to the tune of $37B JUST for urea. Governments routinely offer free bus services to women, free cash handouts to women, free electricity to farmers (who then use the power to pump out groundwater and grow paddy in areas otherwise not suitable for it). The list goes on.
A $1B subsidy to eliminate friction on the payment front is peanuts.
nonethewiser
13 minutes ago
>India is forced to subsidize farmers to the tune of $37B JUST for urea. Governments routinely offer free bus services to women, free cash handouts to women, free electricity to farmers (who then use the power to pump out groundwater and grow paddy in areas otherwise not suitable for it). The list goes on.
>A $1B subsidy to eliminate friction on the payment front is peanuts.
These are entirely independent issues.
Should India subsidize farmers like this? IDK, maybe
Should India charge fees on UPI payments? IDK, maybe
sandeepkd
7 hours ago
One of the reasons why the fee is being considered is under the pressure of other payment providers who are loosing to UPI in Indian market. Its been believed to be one of the negotiation points by the US-India trade deals
asdfsa32
2 hours ago
I won't be surprised. In Australia, no public transport system accepts the national payment system (EFTPOS) and instead it is either a public transport specific card or one of the 3 American rails. In NSW, there was promise of a second phase to support EFTPOS but that is hasn't happened yet.
The American Empire is alive and well.
mikelitoris
an hour ago
these mfs have no shame do they?
toomuchtodo
7 hours ago
Same reason the US is going after Pix in Brazil. The world is decoupling from the US and the US is going to try to flex against it as it continues. Dollar dominance and the “exorbitant privilege” continue to erode (with the acceleration self inflicted). Also shrinks the TAM of these private US firms to only the US versus the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorbitant_privilege
icantevenhold
7 hours ago
Something like Pix is a great blueprint for the future imo.
I don’t want international private companies controlling payments, better have my own elected government manage it.
catlikesshrimp
6 hours ago
It goes both ways: What if the ONLY payment method was the one approved by your "elected" government. A balance where they can all exist is the best, and most difficult decision.
dpc050505
22 minutes ago
I'd have a very hard time spending other currencies than CAD to pay my bills.
senorrib
6 hours ago
Currency is already managed by the elected government, and every democracy in the world traces electronic transactions. Some (like Italy) forbid cash payments in large sums altogether. So what's the boogieman here?
asdfsa32
an hour ago
Currency is a barriers bond that affords a degree of decentralisation-in-operation and use that isn't afforded by digital payments, even crypto for practical purposes.
carlosjobim
30 minutes ago
The Italian government has no power over foreign cards, and will be careful to not hinder those transactions lest they want to lose their tourism income.
b112
6 hours ago
The boogyman is just what you described, and every democracy in the world absolutely does not trace electronic transactions.
Some have a more hands off approach, including size of transactions and flagged behaviour as indicators of when payment processors must report to the government.
The Goverment should absolutely have no idea who spends what, where. Warrants and court orders, check values should be required before anyone can know. The potential to suppress political opponents, to squelch legitimate protest, to interfere with elections, is too dangerous.
Simply because some countries, like the US after 9/11, decided to give up this aspect of a free people, does not make it right.
sneak
2 hours ago
They do trace and log them, though.
carlosjobim
29 minutes ago
They do not. They have to get a warrant to get such logs from a bank.
sneak
2 hours ago
Yes, and this is a bad thing, and free societies are impossible without the possibility of payments that the government doesn’t want you to be able to make.
Cryptocurrency solves that problem well, which is why governments have moved hard to effectively nerf it everywhere.
Nursie
29 minutes ago
> the possibility of payments that the government doesn’t want you to be able to make
The idea that visa and mastercard provide these ...
cyberax
6 hours ago
The government can already order VISA to not accept your payment and/or just make it too cost-prohibitive. Without any real recourse from your side.
Direct government services typically have a universal mandate. The government won't be able to stop doing business with you.
diego_moita
6 hours ago
> What if the ONLY payment method was the one approved by your "elected" government.
Yeah, what if?
You didn't provide any argument, didn't point to any real problem. You just hinted at a "terrible bad thing". Would we have monsters under our beds or bad guys in corners to ambush us?
This sounds like VISA/Mastercad/Apple Pay playing FUD[1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt
Ajedi32
6 hours ago
You realize you're arguing for a monopoly, right? One where competition is not only non-existent but also illegal, and which has complete control over how you're allowed to spend your money.
I think arguing "but it's a democratic monopoly" is little comfort in this situation. Maybe you trust your government not to ever be incompetent or to use the powers granted by this monopoly in a way you disapprove of. Maybe in the short term you'd even be right to do so. But I think history has proven that over the long term that's a very foolish assumption to make.
dbetteridge
5 hours ago
Which is completely irrelevant because as the government of the country they have the power to make laws, now and in the future which compel private entities to perform actions like AML (anti money laundering) and KYC (know your customers).
The end result is private entities taking money out of the system at some stage, and it doesn't shield you in any way from government incompetence or malice.
TitaRusell
6 hours ago
In my country they have to make laws to FORCE shops and restaurants to accept cash. Because it is a damn hassle.
moate
6 hours ago
You go far enough on fiscal tracking and you just wind up back where we've always been: barter. All currency is as useful as the regime backing it, and when that regime falls, barter always comes back in. Everything else is just rent seeking scaffolding to reduce barter friction (cash let's me store all the value I've created, but so could gold bars, or bitcoin, or vodka).
This is to say: All currency is about control and convenience (you trade "invisible transaction" for "easily able to resolve payment") because those in power want to know/control the money and everyone else wants convenience.
diego_moita
5 hours ago
> You realize you're arguing for a monopoly, right?
Right! Like all the other monopolies that governments already have: public security (police and courts of law), external security (armed forces), public healthcare in many civilized countries, inspection of health regulations and consumer safety, monetary policy, etc.
> you trust your government not to ever be incompetent
Oh, I don't. But Apple, Visa, Mastercard and Google Pay aren't very "competent" either.
> history has proven that over the long term
History has proven that privatization of many of government monopolies are disastrous: Roman generals making private armies and destroying the Republic, abuse of forced labor from inmates in private prisons, exorbitant fees from payment providers (Visa, Mastercard), food dangerous for public consumption because the governments didn't inspect them, etc.
usr1106
2 hours ago
> But Apple, Visa, Mastercard and Google Pay aren't very "competent" either.
The article doesn't say and I know nothing about India. I could guess consumers are oaying using their smartphones. So Google/Apple duopoly are still the gatekeepers to use UPI making huge profits. Of course using one of the American backends would make their control and profits orders of magnitudes bigger.
surgical_fire
4 hours ago
> approved by your elected government.
Fixed it for you. You had left some extraneous quotation marks there.
Either way, while governments should not get free pass and should be scrutinized by its citizens, we definitely should not allow corporations with ties to hostile governments (such as the case of Visa and Mastercard) any oversight of payment infrastructure.
bix6
6 hours ago
Payment rails are a natural monopoly so yeah I’m good with the gov owning it and as the article says, everyone is free to compete with the services they offer.
toomuchtodo
7 hours ago
I encourage you to loudly champion such a model in your nation state to whomever is in power and will listen.
missedthecue
5 hours ago
The interesting thing is that Visa's payment rails are cheaper than Pix. Pix charges businesses 0.22% to 0.33% while the Visa network rate is only 0.10% to 0.15% per transaction.
The main thing that makes card transactions more expensive is the merchant bank assuming chargeback risk, but that's because card payments are an entirely different transaction type. Pix is digital cash. You typically cannot get refunded for any reason. Cards are not digital cash. You can get refunded for fraud and unauthorized transactions.
decimalenough
5 hours ago
Visa debit, maybe, but they're way higher for Visa credit.
toomuchtodo
5 hours ago
> The interesting thing is that Visa's payment rails are cheaper than Pix. Pix charges businesses 0.22% to 0.33% while the Visa network rate is only 0.10% to 0.15% per transaction.
This is not factually accurate. Pix also has fraud controls built into the platform, and does fine doing far more volume than credit card rails in Brazil. It is an objective success, having avoided US financial service firms from skimming hundreds of basis points of total economic activity out of the Brazilian economy.
Brazil's Pix payment system faces pressure from Visa and Mastercard - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48052371 - May 2026 (383 comments)
Brazil's Pix ‘much cheaper' than card payments, paper by central bank economists shows - https://www.reuters.com/article/business/brazils-pix-much-ch... - March 23rd, 2022 ("Brazil’s Pix retail instant payment system is “much cheaper” than card payments for merchants, according to a paper published Wednesday by the umbrella body of the world’s central banks, highlighting its growth potential for businesses after its vertiginous rise among individuals. The paper, which was co-authored by economists at the Brazilian central bank for the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), says Pix costs an average of 0.22% of a transaction’s value for merchants, whereas debit cards cost slightly above 1% and credit cards reach 2.2% in Brazil.")
Payment technology complementarities and their consequences on the banking sector: evidence from Brazil’s Pix - https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap152_c.pdf - December 2024
> In this paper, we employ an instrument and individual-level banking data in Brazil to examine the effects of a novel payment technology, Pix, on the use of other payment technologies and its impact on the banking sector. We find evidence that Pix increases use of the four most common payment technologies in Brazil among individuals and firms. Furthermore, our empirical evidence suggests that Pix contributes to an increase in the number of bank accounts, their use and access to credit, benefiting different types of banks. The findings indicate that the implementation of new payment technologies yields advantages not only for firms and individuals but also for the broader banking and payment industry.
mlmonkey
5 hours ago
I don't think adding a 0.5% surcharge to transactions over Rupees 2000 is "pound foolish". Most transactions are smaller, and someone has to pay to maintain the infrastructure. :shrug:
Also: just because money is being wasted on cause $X does not mean that there's more of it lying around to be wasted on cause $Y! You've got to draw the line somewhere!
sieve
3 hours ago
> someone has to pay to maintain the infrastructure. :shrug:
Under Indian law, companies must spend 2pc of their net profit on CSR activities (corporate social responsibility). Ask banks to use that money. The Indian banking sector made a combined profit of $40B this year. 2pc of that is $800M. Close to the $1B number.
> You've got to draw the line somewhere!
Draw it in the farm sector! They do not have to pay income tax on their income, get subsidies on fertilizers, free electricity, guaranteed prices for their crops. Small farmers cannot take advantage due to average holding size, and large farmers laugh all the way to the bank!
ButlerianJihad
3 hours ago
Is "2pc" the same as 2%?
sieve
3 hours ago
Yes. Habit from typing on the phone where the % sign is hidden away somewhere on my keyboard!
mock-possum
4 hours ago
Why to women?
sieve
3 hours ago
India is a conservative society. Women are 50% of the vote bank. They actually vote in larger numbers compared to men in many constituencies. They manage households and are very quick to notice price increases etc. The free bus rides and cash handouts are basically a transparent attempt to buy their vote. It is what it is.
TitaRusell
2 hours ago
I wonder when Marx wrote "religion is opium for the masses" he had India in mind because goddamn it fits perfectly.
pessimizer
7 hours ago
It's a bargain and exactly what governments are for. It's 70¢ per Indian. It's a payment highway and commerce is good.
edit: replied to comment was rephrased during reply.