Because my bank account holds my actual money, not a line of credit. I have things that automatically deduct from my bank account, that I cannot use the CC to pay. No, it does not end up the same in the event of a hijacking for me.
That makes sense, at least in
your case. However, that just means
you personally can't take advantage of the better prices potentially available from sellers who request non-CC payments; it doesn't mean a rule should be made about it to prevent anyone else from taking advantage of them.
It is unreasonable to ask for non-CC paypal in my eyes. It leaves the buyer with a lot less protection. There is no valid reason to ask for it. Just raise your prices if you are worried about fees. I don't want to "take advantage" of the non-CC paypal sales. They can keep their stuff, and I'll keep my money.
How does it leave buyers with less protection? Both banks (Wells Fargo and a smaller local bank) and one of the credit card companies (Chase) with which I have accounts, have proven equally effective in resolving legal issues/scams I have had to deal with in the past. Banks can provide buyer protection equal to that offered by credit card companies.
There
is a valid reason to ask for non-CC payments—it makes lower prices possible. Saying "just raise your prices if you are worried about fees" is just a nice-sounding mask over a policy that would
force unnecessary fees on sellers and raise prices without valid reason. It's one more rule, one more thing mods have to enforce, one more layer of bureaucratic complexity and congestion.
Like you said,
you don't want to take advantage of the non-CC PayPal sales—and that's fine. But that isn't a valid reason to argue for making a rule against such sales for everyone else.
Edit to add: all the above is submitted for discussion with
sincere respect and zero animosity.
