[const_cast]

> You write a lot but you still have not gotten over the fact that what your solution is not a solution because there is simply no way for it to happen.

Okay but why isn't it possible? You can't just say thing and then pretend they're true.

You've had like 3 comments now to explain why you think it isn't possible and you've decided not to, presumably because you can't.

I think it's possible. We've done it before. I've already explained the benefits.

Okay, so what now? I have an argument, you don't. Feel free to provide one, or don't, I don't really care because I'm starting to think you're not acting in good faith.

[infecto]

You’re asking why it’s not possible like it’s some big mystery, but it’s not ideology. It’s basic political and economic reality. You’re proposing nationalizing a private financial network in a country that can’t even pass basic data privacy laws or agree on net neutrality.

Visa and Mastercard aren’t some low-friction government acquisition target. They’re entrenched public companies with deep lobbying arms, international dependencies, and systemic importance. This isn’t turning the post office into USPS. It’s unpicking decades of privatized infrastructure and assuming the government can suddenly become a nimble tech operator. That’s the fairy tale.

And yes, laws exist, but enforcement is uneven, regulators are captured, and the ambiguity around “obscenity,” “adult,” and “high-risk” content is exactly why these companies over-police. You keep asserting benefits of a public solution as if that’s evidence it could happen. It’s not. It just shows you’re imagining a world that doesn’t resemble the one we live in.

You’re free to dream. I’m just pointing out the bridge you’re missing between vision and implementation.