3 ms·

I'm with you 100%. Makes me feel more connected to local businesses. Also, I know they get more when I pay cash. I've carried thousands of dollars around and n

I'm with you 100%. Makes me feel more connected to local businesses. Also, I know they get more when I pay cash. I've carried thousands of dollars around and no one was none the wiser. So while the security argument is true. It's overblown. At most someone will probably steal $100 from me. And that's never happened, thankfully. (I live in a dodgy part of SF)

Symbiote 8y ago
> Also, I know they get more when I pay cash. Maybe, maybe not. I've been asked to pay by card by a street food vendor in Copenhagen, after I offered cash. I don't think he wanted the increased expense of going to a bank to deposit the money, getting change, or having the (small in Denmark) risk of theft. For a larger business, there is also the risk of theft by employees.
pdkl95 8y ago
> while the security argument is true The security argument is mostly orthogonal to the benefits of carrying cash. Obviously there is wisdom in having multiple options for moving money, which will inevitably have different strengths and weaknesses. Cash is important to have because the other methods occasionally fail in very problematic ways[1], while the security (and bookkeeping) advantages of electronic payments become more attractive when the transactions size is large. [1] Cash works when the power/internet/banking-infrastructure isn't available. Cash also has inherently limited risk: you can only lose what you are carrying. Credit cards, debit, and any other method where someone else controls your access to the money carry a risk of losing access to the entire account if the controlling bank decides (possibly in error) to freeze your account.
bostik 8y ago
> I've carried thousands of dollars around and no one was none the wiser. With reasonably good probability you are (or were) exhibiting outlier behaviour. I do not have much faith in humanity, so if a high proportion of people routinely carried that much cash with them, the incentives for random muggings would be also higher. In essence, it's because people don't generally carry that much cash with them, that you could do it without having to consider your safety. Before anyone claims that carrying large amounts of cash around is not a problem, think about this: The people who fill ATMs go around armed[ß]. Either personally or they have a guard with them. It isn't that different from herd immunity. I like cash, but I make a point of carrying only small amounts with me. Moreover, I also make sure that the bank account linked to my card has only limited funds on it, and move the money around between accounts as needed. ß: A good proportion do, at least.
lotsofpulp 8y ago
Similarly, when I pay electronically, I know the business owners have one less option for tax fraud.
- ken 8y ago
  I've been told that the unwritten rule of small businesses is that nobody pays all the taxes they owe. Nobody would be able to afford to stay in business if they did. They depend on cash for this. There's a small business (owner and 1-2 employees) here in Seattle that regularly gives me a huge cash discount. He'll print an exact price on the bill, to the penny, and when I pull out cash, he'll notice and just make up a much smaller number, rounded to the $10. On a $50-$150 purchase, it's usually a 30-50% discount. They've been in business for many years so I assume he knows what he's doing. (I wonder if this comment will get people to start offering cash at Seattle area small businesses, in the hopes of getting a discount!)
- pteredactyl 8y ago
  Yes, the government is definitely better at spending money than the small business owner. I'd rather have my money spent on bombs and failing, corrupt infrastructure projects...

Symbiote 8y ago

> Also, I know they get more when I pay cash. Maybe, maybe not. I've been asked to pay by card by a street food vendor in Copenhagen, after I offered cash. I don't think he wanted the increased expense of going to a bank to deposit the money, getting change, or having the (small in Denmark) risk of theft. For a larger business, there is also the risk of theft by employees.

pdkl95 8y ago

> while the security argument is true The security argument is mostly orthogonal to the benefits of carrying cash. Obviously there is wisdom in having multiple options for moving money, which will inevitably have different strengths and weaknesses. Cash is important to have because the other methods occasionally fail in very problematic ways[1], while the security (and bookkeeping) advantages of electronic payments become more attractive when the transactions size is large. [1] Cash works when the power/internet/banking-infrastructure isn't available. Cash also has inherently limited risk: you can only lose what you are carrying. Credit cards, debit, and any other method where someone else controls your access to the money carry a risk of losing access to the entire account if the controlling bank decides (possibly in error) to freeze your account.

bostik 8y ago

> I've carried thousands of dollars around and no one was none the wiser. With reasonably good probability you are (or were) exhibiting outlier behaviour. I do not have much faith in humanity, so if a high proportion of people routinely carried that much cash with them, the incentives for random muggings would be also higher. In essence, it's because people don't generally carry that much cash with them, that you could do it without having to consider your safety. Before anyone claims that carrying large amounts of cash around is not a problem, think about this: The people who fill ATMs go around armed[ß]. Either personally or they have a guard with them. It isn't that different from herd immunity. I like cash, but I make a point of carrying only small amounts with me. Moreover, I also make sure that the bank account linked to my card has only limited funds on it, and move the money around between accounts as needed. ß: A good proportion do, at least.

lotsofpulp 8y ago

Similarly, when I pay electronically, I know the business owners have one less option for tax fraud.

ken 8y ago
I've been told that the unwritten rule of small businesses is that nobody pays all the taxes they owe. Nobody would be able to afford to stay in business if they did. They depend on cash for this. There's a small business (owner and 1-2 employees) here in Seattle that regularly gives me a huge cash discount. He'll print an exact price on the bill, to the penny, and when I pull out cash, he'll notice and just make up a much smaller number, rounded to the $10. On a $50-$150 purchase, it's usually a 30-50% discount. They've been in business for many years so I assume he knows what he's doing. (I wonder if this comment will get people to start offering cash at Seattle area small businesses, in the hopes of getting a discount!)
pteredactyl 8y ago
Yes, the government is definitely better at spending money than the small business owner. I'd rather have my money spent on bombs and failing, corrupt infrastructure projects...