Boycotting?
You want to boycott "using money on the internet?"
The opponent here is an effective monopoly, they control the majority of payment processing. You cannot boycott without abstaining from the modern world.
This is the same nonsense as trying to boycott ISPs, Cell Providers, or Insurance Companies.
Sure, you technically CAN by abstaining from society, but can you REALLY expect someone to abstain from society.
Visa and Mastercard are not the only credit cards out there, or the only ways of transferring funds. Also, they are not a monopoly. They aren't even a trust. To be a monopoly the entire infrastructure would have to be owned by just one company. To be a trust it would have to be run by multiple companies partnering. But as I said, Visa and Mastercard are only two of many such entities, which makes them neither. Monopolies are illegal here in the states. If they were a monopoly, they wouldn't be allowed to exist. The problem is that they AREN'T a monopoly as it means they aren't under the scrutiny of the government as they should be regardless.
Haha, you sweet summer child. "Monopolies are illegal here in the united states"
I have 3 options for internet service provider in my area. All 3 are owned by comcast.
Not only is that a monopoly, it's a government enforced monopoly because it is illegal for someone to make an ISP without government permission.
Additionally, simply because these 2 companies are owned by different entities does not suddenly make the monopolistic business they do disappear. They clearly collude, when one raises rates, the other does too. When one decides to go on a random censorship crusade, the other one does too.
Laws are only as useful as they are willing to be enforced, and the US government is not interested in enforcing its laws against billionaires, only peasants.
Here's another example, a year ago or so, every single US Cellular provider was caught illegally selling user data, estimated to be billions of dollars in profit. The largest fine that was given out was a percent of that. Imagine being allowed to steal 1 billion dollars, and the "penalty" for stealing 1 billion dollars was paying government officials 0.01% of the money you stole. This is how our government works now. This is how laws are enforced.
"Laws are for thee and not for me" is the motto of corporate america.
Actually, about Comcast, you are mistaken. The reason it appears as a monoply for you is because you are not a large business. If you check your area's sources depe enough, you'll find that you actually could get a different provider if you were a large business. Because it counts as having two opposing companies as an option in the same area, even if one is inaccessable to the average person, it is allowed. It is a stupid BS clause, and I found out about it dealing with exactly what you said when I lived in Florida and was only offered Bright House. Apparently, Verizon existed for corporations in the area, such as Wal-Mart.
And again, you appear to not know what a 'trust' is. The collusion you described would be a perfect description of one such trust. However, as they are only two of many card companies, it is not a monopoly or a trust. If you wish to insult me by talking down to me and calling me a child, at least do your research first and look like you know what you are talking about.
