Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 1
Generated: 20:21:42
Don’t be John. In November 2025, John and Dave both sat in the same Barclays branch in Manchester. Same day, same adviser, same polite smile. The adviser slid two pieces of paper across the table. To John: a shiny new platinum credit card, pre-approved £15,000 limit. To Dave: the now-famous text on his phone: “From 2 December we’re restricting crypto transfers to protect you.” John laughed. “Crypto’s gambling, mate. I’ll take the card. Need a new telly and a holiday.” Dave asked quietly, “So you’ll let me borrow £10,000 at 39.9% to blow on anything I want, but you won’t let me send £10,001 of my own money to buy Bitcoin?” The adviser shrugged. “Rules are rules. We have to keep you safe.” Five winters later, November 2030. John is 42, divorced, living in a rented one-bed flat above a chicken shop. Every month for five years he has paid Barclays £250–£330, whatever he could scrape together after rent. Total sent to Barclays: £19,847. Still owes: £8,916. The holiday photos are long deleted. The telly broke two years ago. His credit score is 412. No lender will touch him. He is trapped. Dave is 42, mortgage-free on a three-bed house he bought in 2028 with part of his stack. That original £10,000 sent to Kraken in 2025 is now worth £215,000. He paid Barclays exactly £28 in Faster Payment fees, five years ago. That is all. John sees Barclays adverts on the bus: “Banking that looks after you.” Every time he reads those words, he feels something cold crawl across his chest. He realises the protection was never for him. It was protection for Barclays’ profit margins. Protection from customers like Dave who might stop feeding the debt machine. Protection from the terrifying idea that ordinary people could escape the slow grind of 39.9% interest and actually build wealth. John was the good customer. Dave was the threat. And the bank chose who to “protect” accordingly. Don’t be John. image
2025-11-24 15:25:04 from 1 relay(s) 1 replies ↓
Login to reply

Replies (1)