As far as I know, only a handful of banks in Stockholm still have safe deposit boxes. I even tried to start a safety deposit box business as a private non-bank related thing. I can´t even begin to describe to you what type of regulatory hurdles and red-tape I was faced with when trying to get that up and running. It´s pretty clear at this point that the entire system here is trying its hardest to reject everything of a non-digitalized and traceable nature.
For the longest time I used to believe that it is because Sweden is first to embrace new "technology". I have now come to understand now that it is something completely different and it will come back to bite this country in the ass in the not too distant future. I would be surprised if our economy even survives another decade without some serious restructuring.
> I have now come to understand now that it is something completely different and it will come back to bite this country in the ass in the not too distant future.
Do you have some additional thoughts on what this "something completely different" is? I'm a Norwegian and follow the political developments in Sweden with great interest, and sometimes a degree of morbid fascination.
I get the impression that, among other things, there is a push towards greater surveillance and tracking of everybody's spending behaviors, coupled with a political correctness craze that seems to divert the attention from more central issues. Would be curious if you had any thoughts on the powers that drive these developments, or whether there is anything related that's not too obvious.
> Do you have some additional thoughts on what this "something completely different" is?
Negative interest rates: https://www.forbes.com/sites/simonconstable/2019/01/31/the-u...
This has really just begun, things are going to become more and more nonsensical like people getting paid interest to take out a mortgage and paying the bank interest on their deposits. Both are already happening to a limited extent in Denmark:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-23/bankers-s...
> I can´t even begin to describe to you what type of regulatory hurdles and red-tape I was faced with when trying to get that up and running.
I can imagine how harder it is than in the USA. From the article: "The combination of lax regulations and customers not paying attention to the fine print of their box-leasing agreements allows many banks to deflect responsibility when valuables are damaged or go missing."
Consumer protection is usually is a hassle for business. But, it is needed if you expect companies to behave even close to what is the public expectation. I understand that for business the lax regulation in the USA and the complete lack of rights of consumers make easier to get profits, even if it's at the cost of your own customers.
> I have now come to understand now that it is something completely different ... I would be surprised if our economy even survives another decade without some serious restructuring.
These are very strong statements at the same time that quite vague. Did I miss something? Can you explain what do you mean?
The funny thing is that compared to most modern products a safe deposit box is pretty simple in terms of expectation. They offer a level of physical security that is genuinely useful. If that physical security is breached then all bets are off.
However, from the article it seems most cases are not traditional breaches of security, but just the bank fumbling things up and disposing of the material by mistake
> I even tried to start a safety deposit box business as a private non-bank related thing. I can´t even begin to describe to you what type of regulatory hurdles and red-tape I was faced with
I imagine that the self-storage business in the USA is a very low regulation business, much less than opening a restaurant for example. How is the regulation for a (non-bank) "safety deposit box" business in Sweden any different than a self-storage business?
According to Wikipedia[1], the USA has ~52,000 self-storage businesses whereas Sweden has only 112. So the USA has wildly more self-storage than Sweden on a per capita basis: one storage place for 6000 people vs 92000 in Sweden. Are regulations worse in Sweden because self-storage is not a thing?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_storage
I'd assume people just aren't as prone to collecting unnecessary stuff. My guess is that most of the things in self-storage are junk that people should not store, but have hard time letting go. It'd be less of a mental and financial burden to sell or dispose of all that.
Not saying that there aren't valid use cases, but I personally don't know a single person who is using one.
If you are really curious I can give you a few use cases I've seen that I think are valid.
1. There is a gap in housing between when someone moves out of their old place and when they can move into their new one. So they need to store all their stuff for a while.
2. Someone has a nice hardwood tree taken down in their yard and they want to keep the wood, but they don't want their garage /workshop to be full of drying wood.
3. Bulky outdoor sports equipment. Storing your kayak, etc. in your urban apartment may not be an efficient use of space.
4. If you are in business for yourself, you may need a small amount of warehouse space. The easiest way to get that in the US? Self storage.
Living somewhere else (say overseas) for a period of time.
5. Someone knows they're going to be moving soon, but they're going to have to do so in a hurry. So they put some of their stuff in storage ahead of time, thus making the actual move much easier.
6. Someone is going to be traveling/in the military/in the hospital/in jail/homeless for a while and can't or doesn't want to keep paying full rent just to store their stuff.
7. An older couple have houseful of truly nice furniture and/or tools but are moving to retirement home. Their kids/grandkids want the family heirlooms but don't have room for them - yet.
8. Have insurance that requires a car be stored in a locked garage, but live in an apartment without a garage.
I thought I was clear about there being also valid use cases? I'm not disputing your examples.
Have you really seen #2?
The specificity would imply so.
Specificity is a classic sign of a a lie. In fact the inclusion of "hardwood" is one of the things that made it seem unnatural. Anyone that has a passing familiarity with woodworking expects it's a hardwood.
They're first to embrace technology, because digital money is money that can be tracked. So the tax "take" will be higher with digital money than with cash. High tax countries have all the incentives to go digital as soon as possible.
Germany is a reasonably high-taxing country, but their obsession with using cash borders on the infuriating.
But it’s the citizens that are attached to cash. Not the government nor the businesses.
As a European living in the US, I fully appreciate the loose regulatory system here. Lots of businesses start by breaking some sort of existing norm, or even law. As you hinted in your comment, it's not enough for the government to want to embrace technology. France is another example that has been talking about this forever, but I don't see much come of it (maybe it made the govt itself more efficient?). They really have to internalize that rules need to be broken with impunity for innovation to happen.
Did you consider starting a self storage business that happened to have excellent security?