Does cashless society discriminate against the poor and elderly? (2019)

https://blogs.ischool.berkeley.edu/w231/2019/10/14/does-cashless-society-discriminate-against-the-poor-and-elderly/

by maxwell • 4 years ago

232 472 4 years ago

blogs.ischool.berkeley.edu

jleyank• 4 years ago

Cashless, lessee:

- barter economy when the power or network or website goes down.

- all transactions tracked.

- can have your money disabled by a 3rd party.

- transaction fees, particularly when traveling internationally.

- magnetic fields suck. Plastic gets brittle.

LinuxBender4• 4 years ago

Adding to this:

- As more banks participate in ESG and experiment with what they can get away with, people may lose access to their funds if they hold the wrong beliefs or lack good social credit score. This is already in place in China and all the big banks are looking at dipping their toes into this game.

PayPal already experimented with this and back-peddled when their stock dipped as a result. A few dozen big banks in the US are now participating in ESG. Only time will tell what they dare to implement.

RichardCNormos• 4 years ago

You only have to look as far as Canada to see this in action. Canada leveraged banks for political revenge this year: https://yesithappened.substack.com/p/canada-froze-bank-accou...

version_five• 4 years ago

This is bang-on. We're seeing daily examples of companies forcing their "values" on users, and it's most acute in big monopolies. It's fine to debate whether people should be kicked off twitter (they can just build their own lol), but depriving people of money in retaliation is a whole other level, only seen in places like Canada

Ruthalas• 4 years ago

What is 'ESG' in this context?

TEP_Kim_Il_Sung• 4 years ago

Everything that was bad about Corporate Scrip, is bad about cashless.

anonporridge• 4 years ago

Cash is just nation state scrip.

And the nation state is just the corporation with the local monopoly on violence.

MikusR• 4 years ago

Money is made from plastic

DerekL• 4 years ago

- magnetic fields suck. Plastic gets brittle.

The chips in credit cards aren't damaged by magnetic fields. Mag stripes will eventually be discontinued. (For instance, cards from Mastercard won't have mag stripes after 2033.)

pb75• 4 years ago

Cash can get lost, stolen, or damaged. It is especially a risk when you’re bringing a bunch of cash for an international trip.

transaction fees, particularly when traveling internationally

Many banks offer no international transaction fee cards. Charles Schwab Checking is one such example.

magnetic fields suck. Plastic gets brittle

Cash is filthy disgusting and deteriorates. Also risk of receiving counterfeit bills.

mdp20216• 4 years ago

Details.

"Cash-less" society means loss of anonymity.

The matter is not with options, but with lack of options.

imtringued6• 4 years ago

I know someone who lost a lot of money because he kept it in cash.

influxmoment• 4 years ago

Happen to HK protesters. Antigovt democracy protests can be tracked participating in protests through credit card use

scarface7424• 4 years ago

Cash based: robberies

ghaff17• 4 years ago

You can probably tack on the fact that owning a smartphone in the US is increasingly, if not mandatory, hard to do without.

bombcar11• 4 years ago

The local grocery store now has their coupons in an app only which has for certain reduced some people’s ability to use them.

Another store has online only coupons and just killed using checks, too. They do have a free ATM at least.

LinuxBender4• 4 years ago

I've never witnessed this. I still do not own a smartphone. I am actually about to activate one for the first time but I have never needed a phone for anything other than calling or texting someone. I admit that texting on my T9 keypad is a PITA but I rarely text. I had a couple throw-away phones with keypads that were nice but they are hard to find sidekick, etc...

What specific services do you depend on that require a smart phone?

ghaff17• 4 years ago

Well, not something I use a lot but Uber/Lyft. I don't need to use my banking app but otherwise I'd have to drive to an ATM to deposit a check. Again, not essential, but there would be a lot more friction when traveling than otherwise.

(And certainly there are a lot of things on the web that are hard to go without and I assume the typical case where someone doesn't have a smartphone doesn't have easy access to a computer either.)

yerich• 4 years ago

Being able to call an Uber or Lyft when I need it has made it much easier to live without a vehicle. I have tried to call a cab company using the phone before, but even they have transitioned to using apps for dispatch now.

asdff6• 4 years ago

For me its two factor authentication at work. The building was constructed in such a way that there is somehow no cell service at all in the building. I had a smartphone all this time but not the actual two factor app, I would have it call my phone and do a keypress but that only worked when I was working from home. When I go into the office, those calls don't go through, neither does texting a list of codes.

There are other things in life that are certainly a lot more convenient with a smart phone. I rely on public transit, bussing and trains, and if I didn't have a smartphone that would make it a lot more difficult to navigate. Sure I could pull up a paper map of the bus routes and estimate what routing might be the most optimal to get to my destination by hand, and call up the transit agency operator line with my buss stop ID to ask when the next bus is slated to appear, but its infinitely easier to just use google maps and be done with it. When I am on the first bus and anticipating transferring to another bus, unless I knew that bus stop ID for the transfer point ahead of time I cannot call ahead and know when my transfer bus is arriving, for example.

soupfordummies• 4 years ago

Another example: parking.

There are numerous streets that dont have meters now and just a sign to "pay on this parking app"

tengbretson• 4 years ago

Obviously not essential, but NFL tickets no longer have a paper option. It is app-only.

intrepidhero• 4 years ago

Went to restaurant yesterday without paper menus. Just a QR code on the table that redirects to the website.

chordalkeyboard• 4 years ago

I succumbed to the smartphone in 2019 because my university expected it, both formally (2 factor authentication for student email/canvas/registration account) and informally (professor deciding to use an online quiz game as a fun way to review material and give extra points).

Additionally every bank has an app and some of them don't have branches in every city so they say "just deposit checks via mobile"

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

Ticketmaster requires e-tickets that de facto require a smartphone. No longer can buy tickets anonymously.

There were Sony hearing aids discussed here yesterday, requires an app to configure.

Aunt's hottub/pool requires an app to configure.

Many Universities require them.

grecy2• 4 years ago

I’ve avoided a phone for years, but now my bank won’t let me sign in without texting or calling me. I think I’m now forced to get a phone...

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

I have one but didn't want it be a barrier to my funds. So I called the bank and they hit a button that it is no longer required. Perhaps email for second factor?

bombcar11• 4 years ago

Cash is so simple a four year old can understand it.

Everything else may be more convenient in various ways, but it’s more complicated, too. And with unexpected things that can happen.

ghaff17• 4 years ago

And more brittle, in at least some ways, as well. When I travel, especially internationally, I try to be prepared so that I wouldn't be completely screwed if my phone decided to die on me. Of course, stuff can always happen like your bag being snatched but I try to be in a position at least to deal with an electronic device just crapping out.

asdff6• 4 years ago

A good way to always have cash while travelling is to get a belt wallet. You will get mugged for your phone and your bag and what they presume to be your actual wallet, but they aren't going to ask for your belt or even whatever you might have shoved into your sock.

tobias_smollett4• 4 years ago

My credit card had a fraud block put on it because I tried to make a large payment while out of the country (Thanks for nothing Capital One). Even after they accepted the payment a few days later I still had to jump through many hoops to get the card unblocked. I now think 3 credit cards plus a bunch of cash is the minimum when traveling out of the country.

pbhjpbhj• 4 years ago

[X] doubt

Inasmuch as they can understand a payment card equally well. They don't understand acquisition of [cash] money, but equally don't understand why the magic plastic rounded-rectangle works. They can use a payment card more easily than cash in my limited experience (as a parent and uncle).

bombcar11• 4 years ago

My kids at least understand that "a dollar" can be exchanged for "good or services" and that if they want more they have to find another dollar. They haven't quite grasped that a coin isn't as good as a dollar, or that a 1 and a 10 are different.

A payment card would seem to either be magic (it always works!) or confusingly not consumed in its use but still not work again later (gift card).

JoeAltmaier• 4 years ago

Some places in Africa, you get paid in 'minutes' on your phone. Some app lets you transfer this credit, and thus it's used as some sort of cashless payment.

If I remember it right.

So anyway it seems the article's question can be answered with a resounding No! if folks in Africa see this as cheaper than ordinary currency.

ghaff17• 4 years ago

The experience in Africa and Asia does seem to suggest that, like it or not, many people who are clearly poor appear able to deal with cashless transactions just fine. Of course, arguably it's become more the norm in some places (and maybe cash is more problematic) so people just deal with it.

powerapple• 4 years ago

The problem lies in credit card system, which discriminates against poor. As long as the cashless system is not built on top of a credit card, it does not have the problem. Look, a person with volatile currency can use bitcoin to protect himself, other financial instruments to do so normally only available for the very rich.

beambot• 4 years ago

Quite literally equating time & money...

jabroni_salad• 4 years ago

Africa had this running via SMS on flip phones over a decade ago, no app needed. You didn't have payment terminals much of anywhere outside the big cities, so that's just how electronic payments on the ground tended to work.

Spooky232• 4 years ago

Yes. The assault on cash is pretty awful in general.

holoduke• 4 years ago

I think there is a huge shadow economy with cash money only. If I look to some people running businesses. It's quite common to occasionally do something in cash without paying taxes on it. Used to buy things like gasoline for boats, car restoration, art and more. I think when this shadow economy is gone, some people will have a harder time living a luxury life. Maybe in the end it will be better to have this shadow world.

ghaff17• 4 years ago

I simultaneously rarely use cash and would hate to not be able to use cash.

asdff6• 4 years ago

Part of it is because visa and mastercard charge these big fees for their service that make it difficult for small businesses to cover costs and be competitive. A few restaurants by me that are legit brick and mortars (versus stands), have card service, still offer a cash discount of 4%. For stuff like food trucks or table setups on the sidewalks, I don't blame them for going all cash and flying under the radar from the IRS, considering how difficult it is to establish a small business in this county and maintain everything in order as far as the local/state/federal government are concerned. Its almost like the laws are designed to make it difficult unless you have a 'fixer' on your side telling you what forms to file and how to deal with things from the government, just based on people I know who run businesses here and have had to use fixers themselves to understand the byzantine tax process or other licensing issues.

Spooky232• 4 years ago

Another issue is places like ticketed venues making cash-free a term of sale. You can't buy anything with cash in places like Citi Field or Hershey Park.

creakingstairs• 4 years ago

I think there is a huge shadow economy with cash money only.

Oh yes absolutely. The number of $100 bills are more than $1 bills and less than 20% are in circulation inside US [1], meaning significant portion of that is being used for shadow economy. I am pro cash, but the US could probably print less $100 bills. Of course, there is also other currencies, financial instruments and crypto that can be used instead of $100 bills.

Maybe in the end it will be better to have this shadow world.

It's hard to tell, but we do know that forcibly trying to remove the shadow economy is extremely tough on normal people while bigger players are already diversified with alternatives (gold, crypto, other currency) to have much impact. See India for recent example [2].

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/04/there-are...

[2] https://money.cnn.com/2017/01/04/news/india/india-cash-crisi...

trylfthsk2• 4 years ago

I think there almost needs to be a "Reacher Law", in that there should be minimal friction to participating in society aside from maybe cash and an ID. I definitely find a default assumption of having a smartphone that's creeping in everywhere (android / iOS compatible & has an active data plan) to be increasingly cloying.

Currently, all I can do is politely decline and insist that I neither have the Play nor Apple store; I still find it uncomfortable even giving away my phone number. I couldn't even get into my gym the other day, since they'd transitioned to app sign-in only (phasing out barcode tags); I'm forced to beg the attendant to look me up by phone number every time.

*EDIT: I hope ranting about smartphones in a cashless-ness thread isn't too off topic

ghaff17• 4 years ago

I hope ranting about smartphones in a cashless-ness thread isn't too off topic

I don't think so. Certainly it's hard to argue that at least a feature phone that you're willing to give out the phone number for is well-nigh mandatory.

As you say, go back not that many years and cash/travelers checks and appropriate ID (drivers license and/or passport) were really all you needed in general. In addition to phone, it's really hard without a credit card today as well.

rkagerer2• 4 years ago

Completely on-topic. Phone-based identification is armed with too much capability inside the black box and limited means for the user to have a clue what is being leaked to whom.

hinkley10• 4 years ago

I think there was just a thread here last week about how homeless people get their stuff stolen or lost all the time. 2 Factor keeps people out when you can't reliably Bring Something.

I don't generally want to say that too loud though because some politician will point out that they still have their eyes and fingertips so why can't we use biometrics instead.

krolden3• 4 years ago

Ive been doing some IT work at a cell phone store in a very low income area. There is a large number of people coming in to buy new phones or get their old ones repaired and many of them (especially the older ones) HATE that they need to have a smartphone. I hear at least one person a day complain about how they cant just have a normal land line anymore and need to have a smartphone to participate in society.

Also they REALLY dont like hearing about how the phone they have now is obsolete and theres no way to get parts for it, or its just too far gone and they'll need to buy a new phone. I feel for all of these people as I totally agree with them.

hinkley10• 4 years ago

I wonder how they'd react if I started bitching about having to have a car to participate in society.

deltree72• 4 years ago

Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy in the ranter and general sympathy from HN code towards them.

"Normal Land Line" wasn't something that came from nature. It is a sophisticated technology invented by humans with the same User Interface flaws and Laggard-Ranting that every generation goes through.

When Mixed-Reality becomes popular, I'm sure there will be many complaining "why can't I just have simple smartphone" and there will probably some Gen Zers sympathizing with them and reminiscing about the simple days of smartphone.

Newsflash: Adaption and Evolution is the name of the game. I can understand if a disabled person complains inability to use gadgets(although smartphones have better accessibility features), but you can bet your bottom dollar, most of these people whine because they aren't curious about the world and stubbornly refuse to adapt and the rest of the world has to bend over backwards to accommodate them?

chrisseaton5• 4 years ago

That's because when they were young a 'normal land line' was the state of the art tech. Why were they fine using state of the art tech then? I guess older people at the time found it confusing and the people complaining to you probably thought they should get with the times.

It's the same stuff just in a cycle.

OJFord2• 4 years ago

Why do they need to have one? I dislike phone reliance (both in myself and others) and have spent periods without one. I think I've settled on having one for certain conveniences, but it's perfectly possible not to (especially if one 'HATE's it so much).

loceng• 4 years ago

I could see something reasonable being a surcharge for allowing access to an "archaic" system - however then that fee should be subsidized to the business, by the centralized organizations, as such "archaic" systems are necessary mechanisms to counter potential tyranny-captured of centralized systems by very bad actors.

Findecanor• 4 years ago

Very on topic. Here in Sweden cashless payments using smartphones have largely replaced cash for person-to-person transactions.

The proprietary payment app in turn relies on a proprietary app for electronic ID which authorises bank transactions. And those demand a relatively recent version of iOS or Android and that the phone is not rooted. The e-ID is only available to citizens and residents, which means that people such as foreign students or guest workers can't get one. (And then the privacy and security issues of the e-ID system is a can of worms...)

azalemeth3• 4 years ago

It's the same in Denmark. I get charged extra by the bank for using cash and others look at me weird. I have a rooted Android phone and am privacy mad. Most Danes think I'm a weird foreigner (which, to be fair, I am!)

redavni• 4 years ago

I couldn't even get into my gym the other day, since they'd transitioned to app sign-in only (phasing out barcode tags)

If it is QR code based, take a screenshot or picture of the QR code. I just login with the photo app anymore lol.

1-more• 4 years ago

some things have those expire based on time. Off the top of my head NYC area passenger rail on Long Island Rail Road and Metro North have that for electronic tickets.

jedimastert• 4 years ago

aside from maybe cash and an ID

I get and fully support what you're going for, but friendly reminder that (in America) having an ID can actually be somewhat difficult in a variety of circumstances where people are most vulnerable to being left out. It's actually kind of a hot button issue

meinersbur• 4 years ago

Can you provide some details? The state where I am living (Illinois) goes through hoops to ensure that everyone can get an ID card, such as it being free if you are homeless.

sneak8• 4 years ago

I live in two countries, “I just got back to the country and don’t have a sim card with a US number yet” is a high status “I’m never giving you my fucking phone number”. For me it has the benefit of being true a lot of the time.

MandieD5• 4 years ago

I’m stealing this for use on both sides of the pond.

I’ve run into, for real, the issue of “essential” apps in Germany not being available in the US App Store, like public parking for the commuter lot in a town on the other side of the country.

sokoloff2• 4 years ago

I agree on the cash point, but I’m not even convinced that ID should be required for minimal, daily participation in society. Maybe a lack of ID prevents you driving, buying alcohol, or voting, but if you accept those consequences, you shouldn’t have to provide ID to anyone.

nine_zeros2• 4 years ago

You can't even get a bank account without an ID

ouid3• 4 years ago

And my god, should you want a paper menu.

trylfthsk2• 4 years ago

Thanks for reminding me of this little slice of hell.

I can't help but feel it wasn't so long ago it was widely considered a bad idea to open arbitrary PDFs of questionable provenance.

greggman33• 4 years ago

I agree with you. It's getting harder and harder. Went to a restaurant Friday night with friends. Inside there are no menus, only QR cords and the UX is some of the worst ever (toastlab). There is also no way to pay except through the website which wants you to register an account. I don't want to be a dick to my friends but I also don't want to eat at this restaurant. The waiters said "put in fake info" and they acknowledged everyone complains about the menus. In the end my friends paid and I didn't have to bring up the issue.

lxgr6• 4 years ago

I had a similar experience recently at one of my favorite restaurants. They do still have physical menus, but payment by default now works via scanning a QR code. This is especially frustrating, given that they only recently switched to a pretty cool POS handheld system that accepts contactless and allows tipping right at the touchscreen.

But it seems pretty clear why they are doing that: Besides saving some time for the waitstaff, I only now realized that by using Apple Pay, they get at least my name and email address… I wonder if I‘ll end up getting spam by either the restaurant or the POS vendor.

It also creates a completely new and entirely avoidable problem: I don‘t have strong signal in that restaurant, and they don‘t offer a wi-fi either. All in all, while the waiter probably saved 20-30 seconds (waiting for me to unlock my phone or get my card from my wallet, tap it, and select my tipping option), it took me almost 5 minutes to complete payment on my side.

balderdash2• 4 years ago

Totally agree. Would add that it’s comical how perturbed people get when you’re buying something in person and they start asking you for your phone number/email etc. and your tell them no. You get this “does not compute” look, and a response like “well the system needs your phone number”!

dragonwriter• 4 years ago

Well, yeah, they aren’t going to tell you “the performance metrics on which I am evaluated are based on this, and the level of employee surveillance is intense enough that I know people who have been dismissed for making up info for customers that don’t provide it”, but...

bombcar11• 4 years ago

Area code - 867-5309 usually gets the point across.

dumpHero2• 4 years ago

just curious, what prevents you from getting an extra phone number and a phone just to go about your day to day needs? You need not share that number with anyone else? Heck, you can even switch it off, or silence it all the time.

ironmagma• 4 years ago

I am a big believer in sticking it to these organizations that make these foolish assumptions. The burden of responsibility should be on them, since it is they who wants to get the money out of this transaction.

john_the_writer4• 4 years ago

Cost. I mean an extra phone number isn't free. 40$ a month just to get around people asking for your phone number.

FpUser• 4 years ago

These requirements to use smartphone for everything is a cancer.

pyuser5832• 4 years ago

I think there should be a “method of last resort” for essential services. Mail service, for example.

andirk• 4 years ago

The gym barcode keychain thingy worked perfect. It was indestructible! And now I have to have my phone in hand, on, bright, open app, click stupid button, line up phone.

Re: gym, when I signed up I didn't have a phone at all. After being asked twice, I finally lied and said yeah it's um at home.

nwah1• 4 years ago

There was an app called Stocard that I used at one point. I prefer to have minimal keychain items.

The problem with the app barcodes is simply that they are slow to load, nonstandard, and not open source.

I think a common standard, lightweight, open source app would be perfect. Stocard is proprietary, but at least it loads quick and organizes all of the cards in a uniform way.

I don't like these slow, buggy apps that bury their barcodes.

The brightness problem is real, and getting the angle right can also be a challenge, although that seems like an issue with the current quality of barcode/QR readers. I assume that could be solved if anyone cared.

Keychain barcodes are insecure, easy to damage, easy to lose, and provide zero real identity guarantee.

Phones at least can offer the level of identity guarantee that 2FA does, and largely solves those other problems.

ls154• 4 years ago

I'm forced to beg the attendant to look me up by phone number every time.

Don't feel bad about asking them for access to the service that you paid for. Here are some good reasons for not installing their app:

- I forgot my phone at home

- My phone is broken, I stepped on it when I got out of the bed

- I can't install any apps, the memory is full and I don't want to delete my family videos

- I don't know my Appstore password right now

- This is a work-provided phone, I cannot install any apps on it

- My phone contains confidential client data, I cannot install any apps on it

- I am an investigative journalist, is your app certified for high-security applications?

- My kids have the phone, I didn't want to interrupt them playing games

- Does your app run on Nokia?

- Does your app run on Windows phones?

- Is your app on f-droid, my phone only supports f-droid?

- I am sensitive to radiation and cannot use any radio device

- I am a minimalist and I live phone-free!

petre2• 4 years ago

I am a minimalist and I live phone-free!

I tried that in an interview. They never called back. /s

acidburnNSA• 4 years ago

I am sensitive to radiation and cannot use any radio device

Well to that one they could reply that you better not turn on a SDR to see what radio waves are passing through you at this and every moment. XD

_boffin_• 4 years ago

Or…. I’m not adding your app to my phone. My phone number is xxx-xxx-xxxx. Thank you and have a good day.

zajio1am• 4 years ago

- i install your app on my phone if you install my daemon on your servers

mindslight4• 4 years ago

The fundamental problem with this regressive "discrimination" framework is that it divides people into a dichotomy of "having agency" and "having no agency", and then focuses the analysis on those with no agency while ignoring the concerns of those with agency. Essentially it asks the wrong question, stands in for real discussion about societal problems from such things, and allows real issues to be handwaved away as those with agency just needing to choose to "get with the program".

I am 100% dead set against "cashless society", not because I am "unable" to use anything else, but because it is less private, less empowering, and outright less convenient. Sure, I'll sometimes give in to the financial surveillance industry to get money back, or to make returns easier, or to do online purchases, or to avoid trading fomites during Covid. But ideally I want to transact in cash. Make the decision to spend a given amount of money exactly once, and not suffer the same transaction multiple times as I see my agglomerated statements at the end of the month.

With friends, no fucking Paypal, Venmo, Zelle, or whatever fly by night crap is popular this week that undoubtably forces some nonconsentual "terms" at me. Never mind creating yet another insecure account that has to be checked every month lest I end up responsible for a company's negligence. Cash - we settle and then we forget about it. Sometimes it's higher, sometimes it's lower, most of the time it evens out, sometimes it doesn't but we assume it does and move on with our lives.

Like maaaaaybe in the far future if phones are ever personal computing devices that represent individuals, and we have the security properties granted by systems like Monero, and software designed for end users and not surveillance companies, then I'd be happy to settle with digital money. But it's foolish to jump the gun and pretend that any of the junk currently being pushed by surveillance companies represents that sort of idyllic future in any way.

asdff6• 4 years ago

I think another big problem with digital versus paper money is that you can't just transmute money from cash to cashless without you having an institution involved along the way. I can't take a picture of a dollar bill and add it to my venmo account, unless I go buy a venmo gift card from a merchant, or I open an account with a bank and deposit the cash through their physical bank branch or an ATM network they've partnered with. Even with crypto, you are relying on some other institution like the echange or the bitcoin ATM or whatever to turn that dollar bill into a digital currency.

mindslight4• 4 years ago

Well any conversion between different stores of value intrinsically requires a counterparty. Counterparties will tend towards centralization out of convenience - it's not like you're going to stand up in a bar and announce "Does anybody want to trade X for Y?" when you're trying to settle up with a friend. If your sets of preferred payment methods are incompatible, most likely you'll just split the bill and let the venue sort it out on the back end.

nonrandomstring• 4 years ago

Everyone here seems to get it so there doesn't seem to be any support for the clinical insanity that is a "cashless society" in this thread.

Probably preaching to the choir, but I briefly participated in a documentary of sorts which may be of interest [1].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtM6tud8n1I

davzie• 4 years ago

This was a great watch, thanks for posting! A book I read recently called "Cloud Money" also re-iterates the point perfectly.

isaacremuant• 4 years ago

Yes. Absolutely. It also is more error prone and a dangerously distopic way for governments or corporations to target an individual since governments only seem to get stronger through surveillance and the codification of emergency powers that become permanent.

I love the convenience but it needs to be an option, not an obligation.

samsquire• 4 years ago

If I could pay for something completely with something I know and not what I have. I would feel I could leave my house without keys and without a phone or bank card.

So need some form of secure identity that can scale and be secure even on insecure terminals.

Perhaps a combination of password, mobile phone number, PIN and email. Then you could verify the transaction with the email or phone. But you could also opt to not use phone and email for a less attestation that you transacted.

ghaff17• 4 years ago

You can often pay with something you wear (with Apple Pay). But I would never depend on it so I do carry a small wallet. And I need keys for my car (which is probably just as well).

kwhitefoot2• 4 years ago

In addition it discriminates against anyone who finds themselves even temporarily without power for their payment device whether they are a customer or a seller.

But as the technology gets better and more reliable this gets rarer and rarer so that in the end it discriminates against those who already lack a different kind of power: social and political power. That is, the poor, the elderly, the sick, the disabled, the poorly educated, the illiterate and innumerate, those whose grasp of the local language is poor. I'm sure the list could be expanded.

ncpa-cpl3• 4 years ago

In addition it discriminates against anyone who finds themselves even temporarily without power for their payment device whether they are a customer or a seller.

And makes it more difficult to anyone who is outside their country of origin. Many payment apps are limited to residents and nationals only, while others are avaialble on specific country app stores.

Like the migrant family fleeing from they country I met this evening. They told me they were stranded here while travelling to a better country.

Neither her or I have banking apps that can talk to each other. But I was able to gift him enough for dinner for his family today. Quick interaction,from my wallet to their hand, no QR code to be scanned, no database to be updated.

hinkley10• 4 years ago

There's a satire sketch in there somewhere about not being able to buy a phone charger because your phone is dead.

Smoosh• 4 years ago

Or if you broke/lost your phone and can't buy a replacement as the only way to pay was with your phone, and then you get a phone but to restore your data and apps you need the credentials app which was on your old phone. . .

ouid3• 4 years ago

I'm not going to reliably charge my phone. I dont care about my phone. They're terrible devices that do everything they do badly except call and text. I'd much rather have a wallet and keys and paper boarding passes.

dontbenebby• 4 years ago

In addition it discriminates against anyone who finds themselves even temporarily without power

They can scan your card with a thing that doesn't use power, but most places I saw that were at places like gun shows where they shouldn't have had an issue taking a check either, since either way there was gonna be some kind of background check.

For context, I sold stock out of my IRA a third(ish) time recently, because I had so many issues stemming from a set of phone scammers who hijacked calls at the carrier level in 412 around the time I got laid off from my last full time role.

I hope that the same folks doing that didn't also impersonate the IRS when I tried to call the last time -- I'd been told over and over if you have questions, call about how to declare income, and the person I got was super rude, even threatening. Made some smart ass comment about whether I was taking notes "my senator" in a sarcastic tone of voice when I tried to ask how to declare what little income I had.

Anyways TL;DR: lots of places don't handle loss of power well, or even just reverting to 90s era social Norms in an emergency ;-)

LtWorf8• 4 years ago

It will be real fun with the incoming widespread blackouts.

In Sweden a while ago an entire chain of supermarket had to close for a weekend because some hack that happened to a company in USA completely blocked their capability to process payments.

Also occasional downtime of debt card network does occur.

kwhitefoot2• 4 years ago

That's a bit strange because here in Norway if the payment terminal in my local supermarket loses contact with the payment processor the checkout operator just print two copies of the receipt and has you sign one that they keep. When the terminal regains contact it uploads the transactions and life carries on.

forgotmypw173• 4 years ago

It certainly discriminates against those without a bank account.

ncpa-cpl3• 4 years ago

Or those with bad credit. I have had two coworkers that couldn't deposit anything to their accounts because the banks would automatically charge their pending loans.

One of them was a victim of identity theft in which a five figure loan was made on her name, and the other had a legal order due to a debt from her ex-fiancee due to a cancelled wedding.

pb75• 4 years ago

the other had a legal order due to a debt from her ex-fiancee due to a cancelled wedding

Hmm, working as intended? Or do you think legal judgments should be easily avoidable?

tpxl• 4 years ago

One of them was a victim of identity theft

Reminder that identity theft doesn't exist. Someone stole something from the bank, and the bank stole back from your coworker.

messe10• 4 years ago

In the EU, bank accounts are considered a right. That's one solution to it.

mdp20216• 4 years ago

Given PSD2, its lackings and its bad implementations, some of us going towards the right of not having one - it is just the right of not being involved in lunacies.

annyeonghada3• 4 years ago

I would prefer to be able to pay without my name attached to every payment but it is becoming increasingly difficult to do. I do not want the right to a bank account, I want the right to pay anonimously in cash.

daveoc643• 4 years ago

I think we need to remove barriers to people getting access to the technology that's needed to function in a modern society.

In the UK, we have "basic bank accounts". These are aimed at people with bad credit history, and offer no line of credit, but do provide a debit card, which may also be used at an ATM.

How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?

I do wonder if these problems will eventually fizzle out, as more and more people have been exposed to technology throughout their lives and will be able to use it in their old age.

While there may be some arguments against a cashless society from a privacy point of view, it's hard to argue with the convenience and cost savings that you get from going cashless.

Nimitz14• 4 years ago

Not all jobs are office jobs.

prepend2• 4 years ago

My dad is 78. He retired in 95 and never used a computer. He owns lots of them but can’t use them for day to day activities, preferring to go in person to pay bills and whatnot.

He loves to argue about convenience or as he sees it, massive inconvenience.

pasttense01• 4 years ago

The traditional, non-computerized way to pay bills (utility for example) is to simply mail a check. That usually still works.

Robotbeat3• 4 years ago

One problem with cashless is it gives a ton of power to all intermediaries, which often are duopolies. Google and Apple. Credit card companies (Visa and Mastercard). These are able to extract a significant sales tax (“fee”) from users and shut down accounts with little recourse. And the fact that it gives the government power to both monitor all transactions and immediately halt all transactions with that individual is like a massive Big Brother capability combined with a digital shackle that can keep anyone they want from moving. Can’t use public transit, can’t use micromobility bikes, can’t use taxis, can’t use airplanes, can’t use your car (how do you get gas? Pay tolls?), can’t even walk far as you can’t buy food.

I remember, growing up in a more “End Times” focused evangelical denomination, they were always talking about how barcodes or credit cards are maybe like the “Mark of the Beast” number in the book of Revelation, without which you can’t make any transactions. That’s paranoia, of course, but it’s also kind of a good point. A fully cashless society using our typical methods puts a massive power into the hands of the government and a few very powerful corporations.

It also tilts the power differential in favor of employers of all sizes. a local small business coffee shop I frequent doesn’t pay super well, but they do tipping. The owner can easily keep track of how much tip money comes in and uses that as an excuse to employees that they can tolerate getting paid only $8/hour because they have tips. The employer also has control of the tip money that’s paid in cashless form, and it’s not unheard of for employers to take some of that money or withhold it. I prefer to use cash for more and more purchases, but for basically all tips, I tip in cash. (And I agree tipping in general is lame, but I don’t want to punish employees for that.)

awillen• 4 years ago

I think the best answer to this is postal banking - let people open up basic bank accounts and get other simple financial services at the post office. Do it as a public service, fee free (with charges for anything beyond basic accounts to help fund it).

Loughla• 4 years ago

How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?

Manufacturing, retail. Those are just two things that I can name where I personally know people in their 50's who have no real access to computers.

I do wonder if these problems will eventually fizzle out, as more and more people have been exposed to technology throughout their lives and will be able to use it in their old age.

I bet they don't fizzle out. Technology is always changing. At some point in their past, even the 99 year old who couldn't turn on a smartphone today was hip on the current technology of the day.

sneak8• 4 years ago

The cost savings are from cash, not cashless. Cashless systems have the rails studded with rentseekers every step along the way.

bugbuddy• 4 years ago

This is very true and those rent seekers are the ones pushing cashless. They stand to benefit from the resulting oligopoly.

scarface7424• 4 years ago

There are huge costs to cash - internal theft by employees, robberies, time it takes to go to the bank, etc

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

Computers are not the problem. Forced to become a customer of Apple, Google, and a mobile company is another story.

MandieD5• 4 years ago

“How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?”

Oh, they saw the clerks using them in the office when they came in each week for their paychecks, and later on, engineers and maybe even other contractors bringing laptops on-site, perhaps even helped support a kid doing a CS degree, but plenty of 70 year olds today never had a work-related reason to touch one.

My dad spent 50 years doing construction. His employer did attempt to teach him how to use the laptop they got him those last few years he worked in the early 2010s, but settled on basically providing him an on-site secretary (recent college grad) to use it for him.

psychlops• 4 years ago

While there may be some arguments against a cashless society from a privacy point of view, it's hard to argue with the convenience and cost savings that you get from going cashless.

I agree with your first sentence, but the summary doesn't necessarily follow.

The convenience and cost savings are not free. You are the product. Moving to a "modern society" doesn't need to involve enriching the marketing networks of the planet.

bombcar11• 4 years ago

Not everyone worked - it is quite possible to be a young adult without having ever used a computer or phone - rare, but possible.

And even more so in a generation where many women stayed home and didn’t enter the labor market at all, or all those who worked any of the various manual labor jobs. Some restaurants still don’t have digital records of orders, etc to this day.

motohagiography2• 4 years ago

It discriminates against everyone except the minority of public administrators it ensconces. It literally removes the discretion and ownership of money if you cannot physically possess it. It polarizes people involved in grey market transactions into a permanent underclass who cannot escape it, and just partial cashlessness has been used within the last several or so hours to disenfranchise political opposition. That it is being discussed seriously at all is an offensively false equivalence. The only people who are "cashless" in a cashless society are the citizens from whom the cash is taken.

The arguments back like, "I have nothing to hide," or, "cards are just convenient," aren't centerist or neutral, they are the banal nihilism of people suited to scheduling prison trains, imo.

post-it• 4 years ago

I agree. I personally prefer paying by card 100% of the time, but cash should always be an option. I think it's fine for cash to be a little less convenient - when paying for gas, for example, the pump might only take card, and if you want to pay by cash you have to go into the store. Or a store may not be able to provide exact change and that's fine.

sneak8• 4 years ago

I always like to remind people “when you pay with your card, you help finance the forever war”.

annyeonghada3• 4 years ago

The thing that I noticed, at least in Italy, is that young people seem believe all the propaganda about cashless society: they really think that it is about fighting tax evasion. I am sincerely afraid of an entity that can control all of your money if you're not "good" enough: how not-good I have to be before they forbid me from living.

TheFattestNinja• 4 years ago

But 2 things can both be true. I do believe that forcing cashless is the only way to tackle evasion, and that's by far the biggest problem in Italy imho. On the other hand I'm also terrified of the idea of preventing people to transact from the State. The solution would be to encode the "right to transact" as a constitutional right, and offer 0 interest free accounts to all (which iirc is a thing already in Italy since June 2018?). And then reduce cash threshold hard. (I know encoding things as a right wouldn't stop an evil state to prevent you from transact, but then the same argument applies to jailing you which also limits your transactions so it's a bit moot)

LtWorf8• 4 years ago

Well the previous generation that never paid taxes and never hired anyone legally did a lot to help to push this narrative.

imtringued6• 4 years ago

Money is a relationship. Private ownership of a relationship is slavery. The central bank must devalue the slave contract by 2% otherwise an accumulation of slave contracts will enslave the entire society. Our money is a time banking network and time on earth doesn't last forever, people age. The "owners of money" don't care, in fact, to them aging is the greatest sin that must be punished as it devalues their "private property". They expect the young and future born to give up their time to compensate through the time lost through aging.

You get to pick negative rates or inflation. There is no other option.

motohagiography2• 4 years ago

Why the scare quotes around private property? Every species in nature acquires, accumulates, and defends assets and territory, evolves means to do so, or it dies out sometime before the ones who do. The opening syllogism is a non-sequitur.

kepler12• 4 years ago

Does cashless society discriminate against the poor and elderly?

Of course it does. But so did society that started adopting the telephone, or automobiles, for people who didn't have money to buy telephones or cars, or didn't want to get on board the technological change. And what doesn't discriminate against poor people, by the way? The poor are always getting the short end of the stick. You come up with ways to help them, but railing against a new technology because it disadvantages some has never worked.

I'm not saying I'm in favor of cashless, but whatever the technology is, life adopts it and moves on. People have to deal. Or they die and get replaced with people who do. You will never get 100.000% of the people on something that takes away what you used to rely on.

mdp20216• 4 years ago

society that started adopting the telephone, or automobiles

Personal telephony and mechanized personal transportation have been empowering assets, extras, while transactions in the market are basics - you live and could live without cars and phones, while living without money is a completely different enterprise.

railing against a new technology because it [has] disadvantages

That is not what the article is doing. And the real disadvantages are beyond «the discrimination of the poor and the elderly».

People have to deal

A circular assumption in which "history justifies history" and explicitly poses nothing.

ip26• 4 years ago

Ever since I read all the hand wringing about how higher gas & energy prices are regressive & hurt the poor I’ve come to the same viewpoint as you. It’s not like I prefer high energy prices, but in a capitalist system that’s pretty much the system working as designed.

kepler12• 4 years ago

I mean yes, I'm not trying to be cruel or unsympathetic. We should help and minimize the harm to people who are being left behind.

But equally, gasoline used to cost $1/gallon. People used to communicate by mail and have to use pay phones.

Then people came to be expected to buy more efficient cars, pay more for gasoline, and communicate electronically. And by the way, many people who aren't dealing successfully with things getting more expensive are because they're being very inefficient. Think of all the houses and cars that were totally inefficient before higher energy prices caused them to upgrade?

Life moves on. People are forced to adapt.

jaclaz• 4 years ago

People have to deal.

And if they cannot, bad for them?

My mom has developed an eye problem, that - while not making her totally blind - makes impossible for her to use Pos' and ATM's, let alone the (crappy) bank website or app. (with a lot of difficulties, in the "right" lighting, in the comfort or her house, she can still read the screen and type on her devices).

She is "technologically advanced" (within limits, she has an iPad and Facebook and e-mail, and a smartphone and Whatsapp and can use them).

Since a couple of years she doesn't use anymore her card(s) simply because she cannot see the Pos or ATM display or keypad, and she has switched (back) to cash-only for the small day-to-day payments, while I manage all the other ones.

If shops started to implement cashless only she would be severely affected, and deprived of the little things she now still enjoys doing, like going out to get a coffee, buy some groceries, etc.

bern4444• 4 years ago

There's a difference between cashless and technology/smartphone only.

You can have a cashless society that still uses checks, debit cards, credit cards, money orders, cashiers checks, wire transfers etc. All these can be managed or used by visiting a local branch or with a phone call.

Plenty of people still pay their rent with checks and I've never been at a sit down restaurant in the US where I could pay with Apple/Google Pay but I can of course use my CC/Debit Card.

All of the methods listed above work without power as one commenter suggested would be an issue. Its really not...

Overdraft fees are egregious but they're also something you can opt out of and is just another form of credit.

All you need to participate to this degree is a bank account that offers a debit card which is accessible and possible to the vast majority of the population including the elderly - they're not hoarding all their cash under their mattress. In the US to open an account at any major bank is an ID and maybe an initial deposit whether that be a cash/check/incoming transfer etc.

It has never been easier to go to a library/school/friend's place and sign up for a free bank account that will ship you a debit card that will also reimburse you for ATM withdrawal fees.

The group that should really be the focus is the underbanked - often those less fortunate.

Including seniors in this category of 'discrimination' feels odd - I know of some who have no problem paying their bills, shopping, living life etc without a smart phone or computer.

Society can't be beholden to the past forever - progress is made and individuals have to choose to participate if they want to use new things that are accessible only through certain tools.

This isn't any different from when we moved from the telegraph to the telephone - you had to go and buy a landline to participate. The same is true of getting a passport to fly/sail to different countries as countries also further add requirements for updated passports and IDs (a la Real ID requirements in the US).

mdp20216• 4 years ago

progress

Loss of anonymity in transactions is not «progress». It is the opposite.

if they want to use new things that are accessible only through certain tools

The issue is with "things being from some point on accessible only through certain tools*.

ouid3• 4 years ago

Calling something elderly discrimination is the most universal way to gain support, everyone either is, or plans to be, old.

imtringued6• 4 years ago

The worst part is that very often you can introduce solutions for special circumstances but instead some remote edgecase is holding everyone back.

When you talk about less parking spots people will shout you are taking away the parking spots for the disabled.

Ok then only get rid of normal parking lots and add more parking lots for people with special needs and make it easier for them to apply for access.

I'm not against cash I just think that it is standing in the way of negative interest rate policy. The IMF suggested an exchange rate Vs cash and that the central bank should pick it's interest rate policy to minimize inflation to exactly zero and only cash will keep inflating.

balderdash2• 4 years ago

Change != progress

jjslocum3• 4 years ago

It definitely discriminates against the Salvation Army, Buskers, and Panhandlers.

codelord• 4 years ago

I can't imagine we'll have banknotes and coins in 100 years from now. Cash is neither efficient nor environmentally friendly. The efforts around helping the marginalized groups should be focused on getting them a debit card not keeping cash around.

sneak8• 4 years ago

Giving the state and large corporations an unelected veto power (without due process!) over your ability to transact is an express train to a society without anyone having the ability to meaningfully dissent.

i.e. a dystopia

polygamous_bat• 4 years ago

I am curious, shouldn't our thought process be more aligned with "how can we create checks and balances so that government doesn't get to use this whenever they please?" Like, what's stopping "the government" to call a swat/missile strike to your house because they don't like you, except for these checks and balances? Surely they have all other ingredients necessary? As far as I understand government already has other ways of making your life incredibly inconvenient, so why should we try to halt what most people see as technological progress instead of trying to legislate responsible uses of governmental power?

Once again, genuinely confused about why one of these approaches are being talked about a lot more on this thread. If I am missing something very obvious, I would appreciate a pointer.

thfuran4• 4 years ago

What do you mean? Any corporation you're trying to transact with can already tell you to get lost, regardless of how you try to pay them.

imtringued6• 4 years ago

We already live in that world. Try paying your taxes in anything that isn't USD. Why is that relevant? Because you need to pay sales tax or VAT or income tax on almost every transaction which means even if you barter you are going to need dollars to pay the taxes. If the economic system does not provide you enough currency to pay your taxes then nothing else gets done even if you introduce your own superior currency.

throwawaaarrgh• 4 years ago

How will people pay for anything when the power goes out in their city for a week? Happens every year in a decent chunk of the world.

clord• 4 years ago

I'm running into this. A family member is in the hospital, but she took care of all the bills and whatnot. Her husband is having a very hard time figuring out how to pay bills, etc. I've been helping him out but the situation is teaching me how hard it is to do things for someone outside of technology these days.

coldtea2• 4 years ago

It also discriminates across the middle class - it enables to nickel and dime them like never before (never mind the privacy implication and total government control of your wallet and purchases aspects)...

miki123211• 4 years ago

It's not cashless society that discriminates, in a large part, it's the government and it's post 9/11 KYC/AML (over) regulations that do.

If not for those, you could trivially purchase a Visa/Mastercard prepaid card at every convenience store, shrink-wrapped, no signup / personal details necessary, and then top it up with cash.

adrr• 4 years ago

You can buy non-reloadable cards at most super markets or drug stores.

You can get a reloadable if you provide SSN and DOB. You don’t need to pass a credit check.

Do elderly and poor people not have SSN and DOBs?

crazygringo3• 4 years ago

The poor, I can understand, when they don't have bank accounts.

But the elderly? If you're receiving social security checks and paying utility bills, surely you have a bank account and a debit card?

The elderly are less able to manage cashless payment methods, especially without transition support. If local authorities or utility companies do not support cash...

Since when have utility companies ever accepted cash? The elderly have spent their whole lives paying utilities by check. And they've been using ATM cards for decades. If they can use an ATM card they can use a debit card, since they're the same card.

This article throws "elderly" into the headline but gives zero actual evidence for that group.

lofatdairy• 4 years ago

Actually this is a pretty interesting question. I ended up looking this up, per Brookings [^1]:

check-cashing outlets provide a range of convenient payment services in one location. They cash paychecks, sell low-cost money orders with stamped envelopes for making long-distance payments, and serve as agents for utility bill payments and electronic money transfer services, such as Western Union

So unbanked people have to use (often high-cost) proxies to participate in these sorts of economies. Probably contributes to their unbanked status since it's hard to save enough to open a checking account when fees constantly eat into savings.

As to the point about elderly, according to the FDIC survey [^2], the under/un-banked rates among older age groups is actually lower than, say, the 25-34 year old age group. However, I think OP's post still stands because 1. If your retired being unbanked is arguably worse, as if you have to use the previously mentioned check-cashing outlets, you're going to eat through any savings you have a lot faster, and 2. there's a technological argument as well, and if smartphone adoption becomes more and more a requirement towards accessing finances, then technical literacy rates become a new barrier and that tends to be associated with younger populations.

[^1]: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/bringing-unbanked-househo... [^2]: https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf

P5fRxh5kUvp2th2• 4 years ago

This is exactly correct, and there are companies out there that prey on this.

Many companies will set kiosks in areas with a large number of unbanked so they'll go to these kiosks at the local 7/11 or whathaveyou and then charge anywhere from $3-$5 fees.

But it gets worse. If someone has a $100 bill and they put in $3, that kiosk will take that $3 as a payment fee and apply $0 towards the bill itself. Not only that, it happens more than you'd think.

People flat don't understand the predatory nature of many of these companies.

MichaelCollins4• 4 years ago

Since when have utility companies ever accepted cash?

Did you actually check? Mine do accept cash.

crazygringo3• 4 years ago

How?

I've never lived anywhere where any utility company had a branch you could just drop by and pay your bill in cash.

And mailing cash through the USPS is obviously insecure and high-risk. The USPS goes expressly out of their way to not recommend it.

ideamotor• 4 years ago

Harms small businesses for obvious reasons.

scarface7424• 4 years ago

I know plenty of small businesses who would love to get rid of cash because of employee theft and robberies.

allenrb• 4 years ago

I can’t help but feel like some responders here have confused “progress” with “change”.

The former always implies the latter, but the reverse is not necessarily true: not all change is progress.

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

Also discriminates against folks that would like a semblance of privacy as well. Been trying to get rid of my smartphone while every service and product around is trying to make it the only option.

Related, last night I started watching this B-movie on Netflix, called "Johnny Mnemonic." (Had never seen it despite being a Bill and Ted fan.) From the 90s but set in 2021. In it there is a criminal underbelly consisting of folks who reject oppressive technology called the "Lo-Teks" ... and I thought wait a minute, that's me! That's my gang. Even get to hang out with Ice-T. :-D

scarface7424• 4 years ago

You want to protect your privacy yet you watch Netflix that tracks everything you watch….

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

Ahh the gotcha fallacy, touche.

I've decided it's fine for now, they already have my payment details. At least I made a conscious decision and don't believe they are selling it.

I'm looking to quit in the near future, as the product has been going down hill. But I have a few things to watch first.

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

Reminded me of this thread, took me a while to find it:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33142972

pjkundert2• 4 years ago

Digital currencies that are functionally equivalent to cash are now possible, using agent-based systems. The zero-knowledge proofs and homomorphic encryption is scalable, if only a pseudo-random subset of the nodes need to prove the transfers are correct.

Anything less privacy- and liberty-conserving is a strict downgrade from cash.

Why should anyone prefer some band of zealots controlling their financial lives?

Perhaps the elderly are just … wiser?

trevyn• 4 years ago

if only a pseudo-random subset of the nodes need to prove the transfers are correct

How is the pseudo-random subset selected, assuming the presence of an adversary controlling part of the transaction data and a significant percentage of nodes?

pjkundert2• 4 years ago

In the implementations I’ve designed - both parties to the transaction control the content of the transaction payload,so it’s hash is not determined by either party (the attacker, in particular).

The subset of hosts is determined by the hash of the transaction.

georgeplusplus• 4 years ago

The people arguing for a cashless society should come to China. A rare protest happened during the party Congress here and hundreds of thousands of WeChat users who shared the photos were banned from the platform. For those who dont know, Wechat is an essential app and service in China used for everything from identification and payments. This is what you are promoting.

dgoldstein0• 4 years ago

Every time I read something like this I'm surprised to hear about businesses preferencing credit card users. While I can understand it happens (in flight purchases being the most obvious I've seen), my experience has mostly been either cash & card are both taken, or cash is preferenced - sometimes via a minimum order to run a credit card, sometimes via a small fee, or in the extreme, some businesses only take cash.

And I'm talking about in San Francisco. Where we are far too proud of our tech & tech literacy. I don't think I've seen a single credit card only business in town... Though maybe I'm just oblivious.

grandmczeb• 4 years ago

Card only brick-and-mortar stores are banned in SF[1], although it’s not strictly enforced. There’s definitely a lot of places that are card preferred though, especially post Covid.

[1] https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/o0100-19.pdf

mixmastamyk8• 4 years ago

While I'm a proponent of cash, it isn't without its costs. Storing it, counting it, reconciling it, traveling to the bank with it, etc.

csomar• 4 years ago

I've started to reduce my card usage as of late. This is not because I am annoyed by banks (though I am pretty annoyed of some banks) but because I think the root of all evils is MasterCard/Visa. They have a tight grip over the international/internet payments market.

I'm currently in Malaysia. They have a mobile ewallet/payment system (tng). It accepts foreigners with fairly large monthly limits (around $5500/month). I can buy TnG balance with Bitcoin/Crypto/Cash/Barter, and it's accepted almost everywhere (even more than MC/Visa).

I'm happy with this being an alternative to cash. The way I see it, companies can only be evil once they have leverage. But using multiple different systems, you take that leverage away from them. Cards have leverage on the day-to-day payments, online and international market. To take it away, use services that bypass them.

Banks still have leverage on the large transfer, wealth holding market. I'm yet to find an alternative to that (There is USDT/USDC but it's banks with extra steps. Crypto is an alternative but the volatility is too high).

alwayslikethis• 4 years ago

I think only a permissionless system could be an acceptable alternative to cash. Bitcoin and most other cryptocurrencies satisfies this. However, being traceable is a major downside. Monero is not practically traceable and has much lower fees compared to Bitcoin. I hope to see it being used more in real life transactions.

superkuh• 4 years ago

A cashless society discriminates against whomever that society wishes to discriminate against. That's the point: total central control of all exchanges of value between humans. Nothing outside of the state. It's an intensely authoritarian goal with obvious and inevitable results. It's just a matter of time before some bad* group gets in power and turns the system against you.

satellites2• 4 years ago

Capital and the Capital-owned State work in tandem to make things like this happen. They are one and the same.

thekingofrome• 4 years ago

I completely agree with what you say, but I hardly see it as better now. Big payment services (from traditional banks to PayPal) lock "high-risk" (meaning anyone who has ideas they don't like) customers out of their services completely independent of the justice system and state apparatus.

undersuit• 4 years ago

And it's not like the poor and elderly aren't already discriminated against in cash based societies of today and in modern history.

john_the_writer4• 4 years ago

I remember when the credit cards blocked wiki-leaks. People become beholden to the organisations that own the cards.

In Australia the gov doesn't give the first nations people assistance, they give them cards that denote how they can spend the money. It's nanny state in the highest.

msravi• 4 years ago

many restaurants refuse to accept cash due to combination of incentives from credit card networks like Visa and Mastercard and desire to create a frictionless experience for high-value customers

This is puzzling... How does refusal to accept cash from X create a frictionless experience for Y?

daveoc643• 4 years ago

Not sure about a restaurant, but being stuck behind someone using cash in a shop is a nuisance.

It can be very slow for both the customer and the employee to deal with the transaction.

mvineetmenon2• 4 years ago

India, has during the covid lockdown silently developed and implemented world's largest National digital payment system called ['UPI'](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Payments_Interface). Although, India is far from cashless, but this year the amount of money transacted through UPI crossed 1 billion USD for the first time, even though most of the transactions through UPI are low value transactions. Now-a-days, it's really common to see your typical vegetable vendor (basically a single person establishment, selling his goods in a mobile platform with 4 wheels) display a UPI QR code for payment. Google Pay in India has integrated their systems with UPI and are among one of the biggest payment services.

mikymoothrowa• 4 years ago

UPI has been in widespread use since 2017. It surely wasn’t developed “silently” during the covid lockdown

Vegetable vendors have been using this QR code payments thing even pre-UPI (2016) with paytm (that works only with paytm)

mvineetmenon2• 4 years ago

That's right.. but the use wasn't widespread. The demonetization exercise and in quick succession to it, the covid lockdown helped UPI up the scale, exponentially.

jeswin• 4 years ago

but this year the amount of money transacted through UPI crossed 1 billion USD for the first time

You're off by a few zeroes. UPI transactions totalled 1 trillion USD last year. Figures from last month can be seen on their website - nearly $135 billion for September 2022.[1]

[1] https://www.npci.org.in/what-we-do/upi/upi-ecosystem-statist...

rhacker• 4 years ago

I think we need a law that states cashless (in-person) PoS systems may only exist iff the cashless "currency" used is void of any fees (both for buyer and seller). Not to be confused with current systems that are cash or card.

nicbou3• 4 years ago

And the immigrants too!

There's a period when you don't have all the required paperwork, and it's really hard to open a bank account, or sign up for payment services.

Many banks in Germany use the same ID verification tool, and it does not recognise all passport types. Some banks require a residence permit or registration certificate, both of which can be hard to get.

If you have a bank account, it can still be shut down or restricted because of your government back home. This happened to Americans in 2019 and to Russians recently.

It's also a pain for visitors who need to join the system.

At last, phones get lost or break. When I lost mine, it took me two weeks to regain access to everything, in part because of 2FA catch-22s. At least I had money to replace it.

yardstick• 4 years ago

For those not in the know, what happened in 2019 with Americans? A quick search showed something about N26 bank leaving the US but not much else about it.

nicbou3• 4 years ago

https://www.thelocal.de/20210914/why-are-americans-being-tur...

American regulation made it too much work for certain banks to keep American customers. From what I've heard it's still an issue.

lowbloodsugar• 4 years ago

Yes

personjerry• 4 years ago

Does progress discriminate against those who don't adopt new practices?

satellites2• 4 years ago

Answer: yes.

karussell• 4 years ago

It also discriminates against children. Or should they also use cards?

daveoc643• 4 years ago

Why shouldn't they use cards?

I think it's a good idea for children to have a bank account and to manage their own money.

Here in the UK, debit cards with contactless are available from age 11.

Apple Pay's minimum age is 13, and Google Pay's minimum age is 16.

qwerty456127• 4 years ago

It does but even if it didn't, it shouldn't discriminate against anybody. Cash is an essential thing, almost like the air you use to speak and breathe, food and basic hygiene. Even known criminals, even terrorists as long as they are allowed to live, should have an unconditional right to exchange some basic amounts of money to take care of themselves and be capable of productive interactions with the surrounding world.

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK2• 4 years ago

Cashless society discriminates against common population by allowing those in power complete surveillance and control.

alex-ant• 4 years ago

LOL, we still use bank cheques in Malta

badpun2• 4 years ago

Reality discriminates against the poor and elderly.

imwillofficial• 4 years ago

I don’t see discussed how the processing fees act as a de facto tax on every single financial operation we perform.

imtringued6• 4 years ago

Pretty much. It is basically a second layer of government.

hakfoo• 4 years ago

Another interesting question: what does it to to youth?

If you grow up with the idea of "money" as a stack of coins and notes that disappear as they're consumed, does it create a different perspective on spending and saving than seeing it primarily as a score on a screen?

I can recall a bit of a parenting crisis back in the '80s, where there was concern that children wouldn't learn to read an analog clock face; there's probably some knock-on factors about understanding fractions and modulo arithmetic. I'd expect similar needs for physical money; change making is fast mental math.

woodpanel• 4 years ago

Many immigrants form vast-spanning yet tight social networks in their host nations. I know religious immigrant leaders who easily get mutiple times the road mileage I used to get in my peak >1-hour-commute years. These in promptu institutions provide an immense benefit to their community by organzing activities, giving assistance in their dealings with the broader society and maintaining a sense of home. Organizing this costs money and it is entirely funded by donations from the community. Put frankly, a cashless society would mean these communities would be taxed out of existence.

Does cashless society discriminate against the poor and elderly? (2019)

Related Stories