Once at the entrance of Western Union in Dubai, watching the long queue of Filipino workers, I finally understood what institutional costs are.
Each person sends back 2000 dirhams home every month, but after layers of intermediary fees, exchange rate differences, and fees from intermediary banks, the actual amount received is often nearly 20% less (about 400). The remaining hard-earned money is often stuck in anti-money laundering reviews because their passports come from "sensitive areas," unable to move.
This is not normal financial service loss; it is structural squeezing of lower-level workers. Traditional banks refuse to serve them for a simple reason: the compliance cost of verifying "who is a good person" is too high. They would rather mistakenly refuse than verify.
Meanwhile, @SignOfficial 's $SIGN is constructing a DID (Decentralized Identity), which is expected to become a breakthrough point for this old logic in the future.
The logic is extremely simple:
• Self-evident credit: employer verification, work hour records, and income proof are directly put on the chain.
• Compliance cost reduction: banks no longer need layers of political review, only need to verify immutable on-chain certificates, allowing for instant clearance.
• Sovereignty return: identity is no longer a nationality label but your real contributions.
According to World Bank data, global foreign workers remit over 800 billion dollars each year, with hundreds of billions flowing out from the Middle East, long being eaten away by 7%-15% "friction costs." Sign is not just a token game; it provides banks with tools to trust vulnerable groups.
Local geopolitical conflicts exacerbate financial exclusion; this agreement that looks only at contributions, regardless of background, is true digital equality.
When making cross-border transfers, have you ever been troubled by the phrase "identity sensitive"?