I don’t disagree with you, but this conclusion derives only because of the history and that we can see that history from today’s vantage point. Paypal has been used for quadrillions of transactions, massively over 99.999% successfully. And I have been able to reverse about $3000 in fraudulent transactions using their protections. Nobody likes paying their fees, but if you were to accept a credit card for payment of merch you sold, you would have to pay the CC servicer a similar fee. So, people accept/get over that piece of irritation, myself included.
For many years, or at least several years, if you wished to sell stuff on ebay, you HAD TO accept PP for payment and if you wished to BUY stuff on ebay you had to have a PP account, which could be fueled by being linked to your bank account or a credit card.
So up until this new announcement, “unlimited access to [his] bank account subject only to PayPal’s discretion” is a completely new and radical re-definition of the terms of service, nothing I ever agreed to in 20+ years of using PP.
I don't know what "derived conclusion" you are referring to; perhaps my comment (about giving the delivery boy my safe combination)? That was intentionally polemic and not stringently Aristotelian.
I'm sure that operating an enormous payment platform requires all kinds of weird strictures, regulations, conditions, and exceptions which at first glance don't seem commonsensical to laymen.
However, I won't countenance a financial institution passing moral judgement on how I spend my money (as long as it is in a lawful manner).
And I certainly wouldn't stand for them promoting "woke" policies at my expense.
Regards,