I am not defending existing monetary systems. The cost and difficulty of transfers is in no small measure the result of cartels that the official system is quite happy to let fester because they haven't seen an oligopoly they didn't like.
I'm sorry, it has nothing to do with cartels and everything to do with an incredibly complex banking infrastructure running mostly on fortran and cobol.
Did you read your link because it says nothing about high fees due to cartels or kyc or anything else. In fact it say big old banks are the most expensive while new internet services are the cheapest. Remittance is already paid for with crypto and increasing. It’s a perfect application for it.
"It Is Difficult to Get a Man to Understand Something When His Perceived Crypto Wealth Depends Upon His Not Understanding It"
This is an article by mainstream economists in official positions who would in general not name names - yet the situation is so egregious they actually do. They state in no clear terms in the abstract and section header that lack of competition (and lack of education) are the reasons.
Increasing competition does not lead us one-to-one to adopting crypto except to tunnel vision minds.
In any case, I have given you the benefit of the doubt for the sake of discussion. There is no report that crypto has made any difference in remittances or any other disadvantaged economic group. If there is such evidence please inform us.
