Honestly if simple banking is handled by automation, isn’t there room for differentiation for more “human” banking that empowers people to understand and use more complex financial instruments?
back
2 comments
I don't know. Maybe. I am just talking about the experience of seeing a person's face every day, looking them in the eye, making small talk, interacting with other customers in the bank. That kind of every day stuff has value.
I think we can mourn our losses while also looking forward to the new opportunities created. It doesn't have to be all good or all bad.
Anyway, I'm not sure I completely understand your comment. Are human bank tellers impeding people from using "more complex financial instruments"?
> I am just talking about the experience of seeing a person's face every day, looking them in the eye, making small talk, interacting with other customers in the bank. That kind of every day stuff has value.
Yes, but this value is clearly less than the value provided by automated convenience. Isn't this why you don't go to a physical bank at all?
It seems like the problem is that the people who are "automated away" should be able to get by somehow, even if that means entering retraining or adding a safety net for those unable to transition somehow.
I'm not sure how many viable solutions of substance we'll come us with, considering our day job is programming computers, not crunching intentionally complex economic policy.
Yes, that's called investment, financial advising and wealth management.
It is - but what you're describing isn't available from experts at "every grocery store" scale