13 ms·

Philadelphia Is First U.S. City to Ban Cashless Stores

69 points by eplanit 8y ago

vineyardmike 8y ago
Pretty sure all of MA banned cashless stores in the 70's. Guess this is the first _city_, but still not the "first" to make the move.
maerF0x0 8y ago
IMO the whole cashless/alt currency movement indicates to me that the Government failed to innovate to the benefit of it's citizens.
- jeffchien 8y ago
  Sorry, how is this relevant to this article? Banning pure cashless stores for the benefit of low-income or young customers seems reasonable to me. I think my takeaway is, what can the cashless movement do for low-income or young populations?
  - thegayngler 8y ago
    Their money is arguably safer and they have recourse if their card is stolen.
neonate 8y ago
https://outline.com/cFvdFF https://outline.com/cFvdFF
superkuh 8y ago
This is excellent news. I hope other municipalities and states follow. The exceptions for 'memberships' is a cop-out and hopefully this will be changed in the future as well. Cash must be accepted. It is the only form of payment (besides cryptocurrencies) where the individual does the payment. Other forms are merely large corporations/institutions using their financial clout to signal that they will pay for something in the future. And those corporations always have perverse incentives to both sell your purchasing history to anyone that wants it as well as enact financial embargoes against arbitrary people/companies whenever even slight political or social pressure is applied. Only accepting corporate or institutional payments is racism against non-corporate persons (humans).
- hndamien 8y ago
  Humanist?
- swiley 8y ago
  Most cryptocurrencies someone else is still doing the payment, they're just selected in pseudorandom way that's waited by their ability to complete a proof of work.
  - penagwin 8y ago
    Unless you're using an exchange (admittedly most are) for your trading then it's still your machine telling the network it'd like to do a transaction - somebody is selected via proof of work to confirm it - and then you're on your way. Only you can start the transaction, and it can only be received by the one you addressed it to. The way credit/debit cards work is far different IMO.
- vtange 8y ago
  This argument runs counter to all the articles saying China is ahead of the U.S. in cashless transactions and that we should catch up or be left behind.
  - rchaud 8y ago
    All those articles about "digitizing commerce" are pushed by parties (fintech startups, banks, you name it) that have a vested interest in getting between you and the vendor. That said, I won't be surprised if a growth sector of tomorrow's job market is in literally digitizing what didn't need to be digitized, so that Big Tech has an even bigger data pie to gorge upon.
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      This has already started happening judged by the proliferation of unnecessary IoT like kitchen appliances or your washer/dryer.
Scoundreller 8y ago
Some politicians work some deals cash-only by necessity.
valleyjo 8y ago
I enjoy cashless stores. A few bars in Seattle are card only and it’s a lot more efficient. I understand that there is potential impact to low income people who don’t have credit but isn’t it kind of up to the store owner to decide what they want to accept?
- rchaud 8y ago
  The store owner agrees to abide by the laws of the city at the time they sign their articles of incorporation, or their business license. If they want to do cashless, they're free to talk to their political representatives about it, or go online-only.
  - SilasX 8y ago
    I know it's cliche, what I'm about to do, but your comment is unhelpful enough to merit it. "The store owner agrees to adhere to the Jim Crow laws at the time they sign their articles of incorporation, or their business licenses. If they want to serve black and white people in the same space, they're free to talk their political representatives about it, or operate in a different jurisdiction." Repeating that the law is the law is not a productive contribution to a discussion about the merit of the laws.
    - rchaud 8y ago
      Interesting that you chose to reference Jim Crow to contextualize a law explicitly designed to not restrict access to services because of the form of legal tender you carry. In a city where 26pct live in poverty and may not have access to banking services, such a law is about as no-brainer as it gets. Laws attempt to balance the interests of the individual with those of the community, and can be influenced by the participation of the community. Jim Crow lasted as long as it did because the people that it harmed never got a vote. For such a law to be unjust, you'll have to show some evidence of people being negatively affected by it. The only counterpoints offered by the article are concerns from Amazon, about a store that does not even exist in Philly yet.
dsl 8y ago
Any establishment where you pay after you receive goods or services (post-pay gas stations, restaurants, etc) must accept cash by federal law. If you are paying for something you have not yet received (grocery store, movie tickets) the business can refuse cash, unless a state or local law requires it. Honestly, I'd like to see universal acceptance of cash extended into federal law.
- superkuh 8y ago
  At my brother's wedding last year he had a food truck come in that would not even acknowledge your existence unless you used your credit card to enter your order in the computer terminal on the outside of the truck. There are definitely ways to get around the current 'must accept cash for debts' laws being widely exploited now.
- SilasX 8y ago
  That's what I've heard too, but the Federal Reserve site's statement doesn't make that distinction: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm
  - paulgb 8y ago
    It seems to be the same distinction to me, just worded differently. i.e. legal tender is valid for settling debts, such as the debt you have after eating a meal in a restaurant or filling your vehicle, whereas in the process of grocery shopping you do not incur and later settle a debt.
    - SilasX 8y ago
      Right, but it says specifically that businesses don't have to accept cash, no exception for "once the service is rendered" or whatnot.
      - paulgb 8y ago
        Ah, I see what you mean.
Animats 8y ago
Cash is so much faster. I'm frequently stuck behind someone who has card problems, or is using some affinity card, or mistypes their PIN, or is mucking with their phone to get it to interact with the reader. Cash and you're done in 15 seconds. Worst case is someone who actually accepted the clerk's sales pitch to sign up for an affinity card. That takes forever.
- SilasX 8y ago
  It can go either way TBH. I've been stuck behind people fishing for the right bills or change or whatnot, and I've seen CC purchases go really fast. And there are legions of time-wasting upsells regardless of how you're paying.
- skizm 8y ago
  In NYC I have had the exact opposite experience. Cashiers routinely process 2 or 3 card payments while they politely ask the odd person rummaging around their wallet for cash to step to the side. Plus they have to mess around with change once the person does finally get the correct bills together. In the morning when I'm in a rush I get anxious if I notice someone start reaching for cash and I'm behind them in the line.
  - ericd 8y ago
    Random idea, and I know this is unlikely to come to pass, but this could be largely mitigated if stores listed all-in prices (including tax) and made those relatively round figures so that people could figure out how much to get out while in line.
    - bobthepanda 8y ago
      The problem is that sales tax varies wildly according to your local jurisdiction, and prices, particularly for chains, are not set at that level.
      - ericd 8y ago
kbutler 8y ago
Ars Technica has a non-paywalled article: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/sorry-amazon-philadelphia-bans-cashless-stores/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/sorry-amazon-phi... And notes that Massachusetts has banned cashless stores since 1978
draz 8y ago
Is it just about purchasing access to certain consumer groups, or also a defensive move to preserve human cashiers jobs?
- maemilius 8y ago
  Unlikely. Self-checkout kiosks can process cash and give change just fine. My assumption is that this is to protect the buying power of the unbanked - which are predominantly low-income, as I understand it.
deuslovult 8y ago
A personal anecdote: At Joe & the Juice in Palo Alto (cashless), I was buying a drink with my friend, and a clearly homeless man in front of us was trying to buy a coffee with cash. They refused and he got upset, so my friend paid for his coffee to de-escalate. We were outside when the cashier ran up to us in the street, explaining "Please don't buy drinks for these guys, they come in here and get a drink and use that to stay all day. It's not the look we're going for, and it's one of the reasons why we have this cashless policy." Cashless stores are convenient and I understand the arguments for them (as well as the arguments for not buying homeless people free stuff), but as long as cashless can be used to disenfranchise lower income people, I'm opposed to it.
- rchaud 8y ago
  Wow, that is an absolutely disgusting justification for that policy. What's next, a button that raises spikes on cafe chairs if you pay with cash?
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    What is disgusting about it? I don’t know anyone who would want to patronize a business that reeks of body odor and full of possibly mentally ill people. We want private businesses to deal with the homeless and mentally ill, but I’d like to see all these white collar offices open themselves up so the homeless can come hang out. I went to Seattle’s downtown public library once, beautiful building and I would have loved to explore, but I had to leave due to the overwhelming stench of all the homeless people.
    - CharlesColeman 8y ago
      > What is disgusting about it? Because it subjects real people to petty indignities for no good reason. > I went to Seattle’s downtown public library once, beautiful building and I would have loved to explore, but I had to leave due to the overwhelming stench of all the homeless people. Some people used to think just like that about black people, so they wrote laws and put up signs to exclude them [1]. The people at Joe & the Juice that the GGP describe are the same, but they just have to be more subtle about it. [1] https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm
skizm 8y ago
This doesn't sit right with me. If someone comes in with thousands of pennies am I allowed to refuse that type of payment? As a business, if I don't want to deal with the overhead of handling cash, I shouldn't have to. It feels like a law where websites are required to render correctly on all browsers or something. The right to refuse service to people should also extend to the right to refuse types of payment.
- Simulacra 8y ago
  As a business, you can refuse service any time. Trying to pay with pennies is not a protected class. Any complaint or outrage would likely be met with public scorn. Pennies are legal tender, but you do not have a right to pay exclusively in pennies.
- noir_lord 8y ago
  > This doesn't sit right with me. If someone comes in with thousands of pennies am I allowed to refuse that type of payment? In the UK yes. There are rules about the maximum you can pay in different denominations. 1p – for any amount up to 20p 2p – for any amount up to 20p 5p – for any amount up to £5 10p – for any amount up to £5 20p – for any amount up to £10 25p (Crown) – for any amount up to £10 50p – for any amount up to £10 People where paying their council tax (think of them as state taxes) in 1's and 2's. If you wonder what 25p (Crown) is, the law dates from the early 70's which was the era we went over to decimal coinage.
- djsumdog 8y ago
  "This note is legal tender for ALL debts, public and private." A state must have a monopoly on its money. We don't let people print money and cards are an indirection, but they must still deal in US currency. The note is the most basic form of that currency. So yes, you should need to count 1,000 pennies. You might not like it .. it may be abused, but those are the rules of the system we currently have.
  - skizm 8y ago
    True, but that's why I'm saying it doesn't sit right with me. I'm not debating what the law is. I'm saying, in my opinion, businesses should be allowed to refuse types of payments.
basseq 8y ago
I'm conflicted in how I feel about this. On one hand, cash is legal tender. If you're a business charging money in that currency, not accepting that currency seems wrong. Even moreso given some of the socioeconomic impacts of people not able to have bank accounts / debit cards. On the other, this is capitalism. As a consumer, innovating towards a cashless society is a good thing, and I would be afraid that such legislation would have a chilling effect on innovation in this area. As a business, if eliminating the requirement to deal with cash makes business sense, go for it. If you're a consumer that wants to make cash transactions, or feels that others should have that ability, vote with your feet and take your business elsewhere. At the end of the day, I'm more concerned about businesses that only accept cash. That's annoying to me as a consumer, but I wouldn't suggest legislation: I might just vote with my feet. (I do think that public/government entities should be required to accept credit cards, though. Toll plazas, for instance. I don't always carry cash in this... increasingly cashless society.)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
upofadown 8y ago
Weirdly, the idea of an entirely cashless store strikes me as sort of last century. I do most stuff online now. There is no point in bothering with a special payment method for offline stuff. It is easier to just use cash for everything. Perhaps some day the government might come up with some sort of usable electronic cash system, but until that day I carry around bills and coins.
yingw787 8y ago
I don't get why there aren't any laws formulated at the federal level to ban cashless stores. Not accepting the U.S. dollar as direct payment is pretty much refuting the sovereignty of the U.S. government, no? It also concentrates financial leverage in a few payments companies rather than direct consumers, which may incentivize anti-consumer behavior like adding/raising credit card rates (what are you going to do, use cash in a cashless world?).
- icebraining 8y ago
  They still accept US dollars, just not in physical form. Most money created by the government is virtual.
diebeforei485 8y ago
Card payments are so much faster for everyone involved in my experience at bars, nightclubs, event venues (sports, music festivals, concerts), and coffeeshops. Other groups to consider (not mentioned in this article) are foreign visitors and kids. Foreign transaction fees on each transaction can add up, so it's often best to get local currency at an ATM or a bureau de change. As for kids, parents often give kids cash as a budgeting mechanism.
- derekp7 8y ago
  With chip based cards, cash has become faster. At least this is the case with the card reader at the cafeteria at work, where you can hum most of the Jeopardy theme while waiting for the machine to do its thing. Whereas cash customers move along in a few seconds.
zachguo 8y ago
Meanwhile, "Danish government wants to allow petrol stations, stores to refuse cash" https://www.thelocal.dk/20190227/danish-government-wants-to-allow-petrol-stations-stores-to-refuse-cash https://www.thelocal.dk/20190227/danish-government-wants-to-...
pariahHN 8y ago
I think it's important for there to be options - if you are reliant on the payment network, what happens if it goes down? What if someone for whatever reason is unable to use their card? Having cash as a universally accepted backup is a good thing. That being said, I can see all the issues with the implementation - I've experienced some of them myself. But, why have we not seen any improvements? We already have mechanisms for processing cash and change automatically, vending machines do it all the time. Self-checkouts seem to manage cash just fine. Just a speculative idea, but why not an automatic cash processing machine on the side of the main line? Tell it what the amount owed is, person can move over there and take all the time they want digging through wallets without disrupting the main flow. Possible issues with employees having to take time out for fixing issues with the machine, but then you have that problem with card processing machines anyways. Some Walmarts have both cash/card machines and card only machines - seems like a reasonable compromise. There are clear benefits to being able to process both card and cash - why are we so fixated on getting rid of cash instead of bringing the process to the same level as card?
- mnm1 8y ago
  I bet these non cash businesses start taking cash right away of their card reader goes down. Either that or close for the day? No way. They will change their policy temporarily because keeping poor people out is less a priority than making money. Still a priority, just less of one.
classichasclass 8y ago
Going back to largely cash transactions not only reduced my paper trail, but it's much easier to keep to a weekly budget. And, hey, cash price at gas stations!
- hitpointdrew 8y ago
  > cash price at gas stations! I avoid all gas stations that have a "cash" price.
  - klodolph 8y ago
    On average, you're not saving money that way. The cash price reflects that you're not paying as much in bank fees.
    - cobbzilla 8y ago
      Sure, and if you pay cash anywhere that accepts cards but has no cash discount, then you are subsidizing the bank fees (gotta get those points!) for all card-paying customers.
UweSchmidt 8y ago
I'm impressed that such a move is even possible, considering the powerful interests that must be in favour of cashless. Cashless stores could be a stepping stone in the abolishment of cash. The main issue for me is that if society is cashless, we could get negative interest rates, and we would be at the mercy of banks. All kinds of offers and conditions could be tied to and bundled with an increasingly abstract concept of money, credit and income.
- dcplogic 8y ago
  Sweden is almost entirely cashless; cash is about to go extinct. :/ Just the last few months, however, the the powers to be (the elected government) have chosen to tell the population that this could be problematic if there was an extended power outage because of some vague reason. (We all know it would be Russians, though.) Incidentally, the Swedish Riksbank repo rate is -0.25%.
- mikeash 8y ago
  Is there much difference between a negative interest rate on a bank account, and holding cash in an economy that experiences inflation?
walterbell 8y ago
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/03/cashless-cash-free-ban-bill-new-york-retail-discrimination/584203/ https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/03/cashless-cash-free-ba... > In February, New York City Councilmember Ritchie Torres introduced legislation that would prohibit retail establishments from refusing to accept payments in cash. The council hasn’t made a decision on the bill yet, but Torres is confident that it will pass by mid-year. If it does, cashless businesses could face fines of up to $500 for every violation ... Also in February, both houses of New Jersey’s state legislature passed a similar bill and are only awaiting the governor’s signature. San Francisco has recently proposed a similar ordinance, and Washington D.C. and Chicago have also introduced legislation that would make it illegal to discriminate against cash as a form of payment.
ChrisArchitect 8y ago
I was thinking about this recently when news broke that Atlanta's Mercedez-Benz Stadium (home to MLS's Atlanta United, NFL Atlanta Falcons, recent superbowl host) was going cashless too. While technologically 'neat' or whatever, it always also feels just like a flashy move and definitely a slight against the poor. Sports entertainment doesn't have to be only for the rich, a trend that always creeps
- LanceH 8y ago
  My first move would be to eliminate the ability to write off tickets/boxes. I can't count the number of people I know that have corporate tickets that are 90% for personal use, but written off because they take the occasional client to a game/show.
ChrisArchitect 8y ago
I was thinking about this recently when news broke that Atlanta's Mercedez-Benz Stadium (home to MLS's Atlanta United, NFL Atlanta Falcons, recent superbowl host) was going cashless too. While technologically 'neat' or whatever, it always also feels just like a flashy move and definitely a slight against the poor. Sports entertainment doesn't have to be only for the rich, a trend that always creeps
novacole 8y ago
As a Philadelphian, I find this odd and backwards. It’s cash only stores (Chinese food stores, corner stores, etc) that are annoying to me since I almost never have cash on hand and prefer to pay with my card. Plus I’m sure the city is bringing in far less tax revenue from cash only stores than a cashless store since there’s no paper trail with cash.
- novacole 8y ago
  However, I am aware Philadelphia is a poor city, with around a 20% unemployment rate so, and many unbanked/underbanked ppl I can see the other side.
- gerbilly 8y ago
  > since there’s no paper trail with cash. Exactly this. This is why cash is good. Anonymity. Enjoy it while it still exists.
mnw21cam 8y ago
I'm not entirely sure why the article is conflating credit with this issue. Card != credit. There are debit cards too, and you don't need credit for one of those.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  The same factors that lead to being denied credit also result in being denied access to banking, so, sure, the problem is really for the unbanked and not those simply lacking credit, but those groups have a deep and fundamental link, not a mere casual correlation.
swasheck 8y ago
i thought that because cash was "legal tender" it was required by law to be accepted but the second paragraph disabused me of that.
deckar01 8y ago
> ... shall not: ... Charge a higher price to customers who pay cash than they would pay using any other form of payment. https://phila.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3710586&GUID=FD85947F-8151-4DB5-9949-AF6FEF14A9C9 https://phila.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3710586... Businesses are also prohibited from charging a cash processing fee higher than the processing fee of any other type of payment. Depending on how this is interpreted you could introduce an alternate form of payment that carries a high processing fee and charge the same amount to pay with cash. Edit: Replaced joke with the technical insight it was meant to suggest due to downvote.
- icebraining 8y ago
  "Any other" is not "some other". I don't think that's ambiguous, you can't charge more for cash than the cheapest alternative payment method.
  - deckar01 8y ago
    It sounds like it might also require a company to give cash purchases the same discount they offer to consumer credit card purchases.
gambler 8y ago
Good for them. Cashless stuff sound cool and progressive in the short run, but it's is a horrible idea in the long run. It's a privacy nightmare and gives disproportionate power to a few middlemen entities that usually have zero obligations to anyone. Also, it's a great stepping stone towards centralized control over all transactions.
danielfoster 8y ago
>Philadelphia City Councilman William Greenlee, a Democrat, >said he was inspired to introduce the bill after noticing >some Center City sandwich shops had gone cashless. >“Most of the people who don’t have credit tend to be lower >income, minority, immigrants. It just seemed to me, if not >intentional, at least a form of discrimination,” he said. >Now, he said, stores will be required “to do what businesses >have been doing since Ben Franklin was walking the streets of >Philadelphia.” Shame on Philadelphia for punishing innovation instead of helping low income families access banking and credit cards.
- dkhenry 8y ago
  There is no one in Philadelphia who does not have access to the banking system, or have the ability to pay cash for a prepaid debit card. After dealing with people in Philadelphia who are "unbanked" it was never because they couldn't get access, it was a choice they made to avoid having assets in the regulated banking system
goscots 8y ago
The whole argument for this doesn’t make sense. Cashless payment systems are ubiquitous across socioeconomic lines in China and other countries. The problem is specific to the US and can be solved in a less destructive manner to businesses. Instead of punishing retailers, the city should create an incentive system to help people from less privileged backgrounds obtain access to banking systems and electronic payment systems.
rospaya 8y ago
Good. I prefer paying with my phone/card, but cash should always be an option.
soulnothing 8y ago
I posted this in the article about NYC going cashless as well. The thing that I find interesting is the lack of septa key being mentioned. Septa key is their new transit card. But it can act as a debit card with money loaded via cash. No bank account required. Caveat that the kiosks aren't spread every where. But they are in enough locations. Despite that I have barely heard mention of it during this cashless discussion. The whole crux is allowing underprivileged to access stores. Which was one of the reasons for the Key card as well. https://billypenn.com/2018/08/28/your-septa-key-is-now-a-debit-card/ https://billypenn.com/2018/08/28/your-septa-key-is-now-a-deb...
- joekrill 8y ago
  It's not mentioned because SEPTA still accepts cash. You aren't required to buy a Septa Key card to ride.
  - soulnothing 8y ago
    I understand that. But the Key card can act as a debit card / electronic payment. Without a backing bank account. The whole complexity add of turning it into a debit card. Was so that people without banks could shop at card only stores.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

69 points by eplanit 8y ago

Pretty sure all of MA banned cashless stores in the 70's. Guess this is the first _city_, but still not the "first" to make the move.

maerF0x0 8y ago

IMO the whole cashless/alt currency movement indicates to me that the Government failed to innovate to the benefit of it's citizens.

jeffchien 8y ago
Sorry, how is this relevant to this article? Banning pure cashless stores for the benefit of low-income or young customers seems reasonable to me. I think my takeaway is, what can the cashless movement do for low-income or young populations?
- thegayngler 8y ago
  Their money is arguably safer and they have recourse if their card is stolen.

neonate 8y ago

https://outline.com/cFvdFF https://outline.com/cFvdFF

superkuh 8y ago

This is excellent news. I hope other municipalities and states follow. The exceptions for 'memberships' is a cop-out and hopefully this will be changed in the future as well. Cash must be accepted. It is the only form of payment (besides cryptocurrencies) where the individual does the payment. Other forms are merely large corporations/institutions using their financial clout to signal that they will pay for something in the future. And those corporations always have perverse incentives to both sell your purchasing history to anyone that wants it as well as enact financial embargoes against arbitrary people/companies whenever even slight political or social pressure is applied. Only accepting corporate or institutional payments is racism against non-corporate persons (humans).

hndamien 8y ago
Humanist?
swiley 8y ago
Most cryptocurrencies someone else is still doing the payment, they're just selected in pseudorandom way that's waited by their ability to complete a proof of work.
- penagwin 8y ago
  Unless you're using an exchange (admittedly most are) for your trading then it's still your machine telling the network it'd like to do a transaction - somebody is selected via proof of work to confirm it - and then you're on your way. Only you can start the transaction, and it can only be received by the one you addressed it to. The way credit/debit cards work is far different IMO.
vtange 8y ago
This argument runs counter to all the articles saying China is ahead of the U.S. in cashless transactions and that we should catch up or be left behind.
- rchaud 8y ago
  All those articles about "digitizing commerce" are pushed by parties (fintech startups, banks, you name it) that have a vested interest in getting between you and the vendor. That said, I won't be surprised if a growth sector of tomorrow's job market is in literally digitizing what didn't need to be digitized, so that Big Tech has an even bigger data pie to gorge upon.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    This has already started happening judged by the proliferation of unnecessary IoT like kitchen appliances or your washer/dryer.

Scoundreller 8y ago

Some politicians work some deals cash-only by necessity.

valleyjo 8y ago

I enjoy cashless stores. A few bars in Seattle are card only and it’s a lot more efficient. I understand that there is potential impact to low income people who don’t have credit but isn’t it kind of up to the store owner to decide what they want to accept?

rchaud 8y ago
The store owner agrees to abide by the laws of the city at the time they sign their articles of incorporation, or their business license. If they want to do cashless, they're free to talk to their political representatives about it, or go online-only.
- SilasX 8y ago
  I know it's cliche, what I'm about to do, but your comment is unhelpful enough to merit it. "The store owner agrees to adhere to the Jim Crow laws at the time they sign their articles of incorporation, or their business licenses. If they want to serve black and white people in the same space, they're free to talk their political representatives about it, or operate in a different jurisdiction." Repeating that the law is the law is not a productive contribution to a discussion about the merit of the laws.
  - rchaud 8y ago
    Interesting that you chose to reference Jim Crow to contextualize a law explicitly designed to not restrict access to services because of the form of legal tender you carry. In a city where 26pct live in poverty and may not have access to banking services, such a law is about as no-brainer as it gets. Laws attempt to balance the interests of the individual with those of the community, and can be influenced by the participation of the community. Jim Crow lasted as long as it did because the people that it harmed never got a vote. For such a law to be unjust, you'll have to show some evidence of people being negatively affected by it. The only counterpoints offered by the article are concerns from Amazon, about a store that does not even exist in Philly yet.

dsl 8y ago

Any establishment where you pay after you receive goods or services (post-pay gas stations, restaurants, etc) must accept cash by federal law. If you are paying for something you have not yet received (grocery store, movie tickets) the business can refuse cash, unless a state or local law requires it. Honestly, I'd like to see universal acceptance of cash extended into federal law.

superkuh 8y ago
At my brother's wedding last year he had a food truck come in that would not even acknowledge your existence unless you used your credit card to enter your order in the computer terminal on the outside of the truck. There are definitely ways to get around the current 'must accept cash for debts' laws being widely exploited now.
SilasX 8y ago
That's what I've heard too, but the Federal Reserve site's statement doesn't make that distinction: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm
- paulgb 8y ago
  It seems to be the same distinction to me, just worded differently. i.e. legal tender is valid for settling debts, such as the debt you have after eating a meal in a restaurant or filling your vehicle, whereas in the process of grocery shopping you do not incur and later settle a debt.
  - SilasX 8y ago
    Right, but it says specifically that businesses don't have to accept cash, no exception for "once the service is rendered" or whatnot.
    - paulgb 8y ago
      Ah, I see what you mean.

Animats 8y ago

Cash is so much faster. I'm frequently stuck behind someone who has card problems, or is using some affinity card, or mistypes their PIN, or is mucking with their phone to get it to interact with the reader. Cash and you're done in 15 seconds. Worst case is someone who actually accepted the clerk's sales pitch to sign up for an affinity card. That takes forever.

SilasX 8y ago
It can go either way TBH. I've been stuck behind people fishing for the right bills or change or whatnot, and I've seen CC purchases go really fast. And there are legions of time-wasting upsells regardless of how you're paying.
skizm 8y ago
In NYC I have had the exact opposite experience. Cashiers routinely process 2 or 3 card payments while they politely ask the odd person rummaging around their wallet for cash to step to the side. Plus they have to mess around with change once the person does finally get the correct bills together. In the morning when I'm in a rush I get anxious if I notice someone start reaching for cash and I'm behind them in the line.
- ericd 8y ago
  Random idea, and I know this is unlikely to come to pass, but this could be largely mitigated if stores listed all-in prices (including tax) and made those relatively round figures so that people could figure out how much to get out while in line.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    The problem is that sales tax varies wildly according to your local jurisdiction, and prices, particularly for chains, are not set at that level.
    - ericd 8y ago

kbutler 8y ago

Ars Technica has a non-paywalled article: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/sorry-amazon-philadelphia-bans-cashless-stores/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/sorry-amazon-phi... And notes that Massachusetts has banned cashless stores since 1978

draz 8y ago

Is it just about purchasing access to certain consumer groups, or also a defensive move to preserve human cashiers jobs?

maemilius 8y ago
Unlikely. Self-checkout kiosks can process cash and give change just fine. My assumption is that this is to protect the buying power of the unbanked - which are predominantly low-income, as I understand it.

deuslovult 8y ago

A personal anecdote: At Joe & the Juice in Palo Alto (cashless), I was buying a drink with my friend, and a clearly homeless man in front of us was trying to buy a coffee with cash. They refused and he got upset, so my friend paid for his coffee to de-escalate. We were outside when the cashier ran up to us in the street, explaining "Please don't buy drinks for these guys, they come in here and get a drink and use that to stay all day. It's not the look we're going for, and it's one of the reasons why we have this cashless policy." Cashless stores are convenient and I understand the arguments for them (as well as the arguments for not buying homeless people free stuff), but as long as cashless can be used to disenfranchise lower income people, I'm opposed to it.

rchaud 8y ago
Wow, that is an absolutely disgusting justification for that policy. What's next, a button that raises spikes on cafe chairs if you pay with cash?
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  What is disgusting about it? I don’t know anyone who would want to patronize a business that reeks of body odor and full of possibly mentally ill people. We want private businesses to deal with the homeless and mentally ill, but I’d like to see all these white collar offices open themselves up so the homeless can come hang out. I went to Seattle’s downtown public library once, beautiful building and I would have loved to explore, but I had to leave due to the overwhelming stench of all the homeless people.
  - CharlesColeman 8y ago
    > What is disgusting about it? Because it subjects real people to petty indignities for no good reason. > I went to Seattle’s downtown public library once, beautiful building and I would have loved to explore, but I had to leave due to the overwhelming stench of all the homeless people. Some people used to think just like that about black people, so they wrote laws and put up signs to exclude them [1]. The people at Joe & the Juice that the GGP describe are the same, but they just have to be more subtle about it. [1] https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/what.htm

skizm 8y ago

This doesn't sit right with me. If someone comes in with thousands of pennies am I allowed to refuse that type of payment? As a business, if I don't want to deal with the overhead of handling cash, I shouldn't have to. It feels like a law where websites are required to render correctly on all browsers or something. The right to refuse service to people should also extend to the right to refuse types of payment.

Simulacra 8y ago
As a business, you can refuse service any time. Trying to pay with pennies is not a protected class. Any complaint or outrage would likely be met with public scorn. Pennies are legal tender, but you do not have a right to pay exclusively in pennies.
noir_lord 8y ago
> This doesn't sit right with me. If someone comes in with thousands of pennies am I allowed to refuse that type of payment? In the UK yes. There are rules about the maximum you can pay in different denominations. 1p – for any amount up to 20p 2p – for any amount up to 20p 5p – for any amount up to £5 10p – for any amount up to £5 20p – for any amount up to £10 25p (Crown) – for any amount up to £10 50p – for any amount up to £10 People where paying their council tax (think of them as state taxes) in 1's and 2's. If you wonder what 25p (Crown) is, the law dates from the early 70's which was the era we went over to decimal coinage.
djsumdog 8y ago
"This note is legal tender for ALL debts, public and private." A state must have a monopoly on its money. We don't let people print money and cards are an indirection, but they must still deal in US currency. The note is the most basic form of that currency. So yes, you should need to count 1,000 pennies. You might not like it .. it may be abused, but those are the rules of the system we currently have.
- skizm 8y ago
  True, but that's why I'm saying it doesn't sit right with me. I'm not debating what the law is. I'm saying, in my opinion, businesses should be allowed to refuse types of payments.

basseq 8y ago

I'm conflicted in how I feel about this. On one hand, cash is legal tender. If you're a business charging money in that currency, not accepting that currency seems wrong. Even moreso given some of the socioeconomic impacts of people not able to have bank accounts / debit cards. On the other, this is capitalism. As a consumer, innovating towards a cashless society is a good thing, and I would be afraid that such legislation would have a chilling effect on innovation in this area. As a business, if eliminating the requirement to deal with cash makes business sense, go for it. If you're a consumer that wants to make cash transactions, or feels that others should have that ability, vote with your feet and take your business elsewhere. At the end of the day, I'm more concerned about businesses that only accept cash. That's annoying to me as a consumer, but I wouldn't suggest legislation: I might just vote with my feet. (I do think that public/government entities should be required to accept credit cards, though. Toll plazas, for instance. I don't always carry cash in this... increasingly cashless society.)

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

upofadown 8y ago

Weirdly, the idea of an entirely cashless store strikes me as sort of last century. I do most stuff online now. There is no point in bothering with a special payment method for offline stuff. It is easier to just use cash for everything. Perhaps some day the government might come up with some sort of usable electronic cash system, but until that day I carry around bills and coins.

yingw787 8y ago

I don't get why there aren't any laws formulated at the federal level to ban cashless stores. Not accepting the U.S. dollar as direct payment is pretty much refuting the sovereignty of the U.S. government, no? It also concentrates financial leverage in a few payments companies rather than direct consumers, which may incentivize anti-consumer behavior like adding/raising credit card rates (what are you going to do, use cash in a cashless world?).

icebraining 8y ago
They still accept US dollars, just not in physical form. Most money created by the government is virtual.

diebeforei485 8y ago

Card payments are so much faster for everyone involved in my experience at bars, nightclubs, event venues (sports, music festivals, concerts), and coffeeshops. Other groups to consider (not mentioned in this article) are foreign visitors and kids. Foreign transaction fees on each transaction can add up, so it's often best to get local currency at an ATM or a bureau de change. As for kids, parents often give kids cash as a budgeting mechanism.

derekp7 8y ago
With chip based cards, cash has become faster. At least this is the case with the card reader at the cafeteria at work, where you can hum most of the Jeopardy theme while waiting for the machine to do its thing. Whereas cash customers move along in a few seconds.

zachguo 8y ago

Meanwhile, "Danish government wants to allow petrol stations, stores to refuse cash" https://www.thelocal.dk/20190227/danish-government-wants-to-allow-petrol-stations-stores-to-refuse-cash https://www.thelocal.dk/20190227/danish-government-wants-to-...

pariahHN 8y ago

I think it's important for there to be options - if you are reliant on the payment network, what happens if it goes down? What if someone for whatever reason is unable to use their card? Having cash as a universally accepted backup is a good thing. That being said, I can see all the issues with the implementation - I've experienced some of them myself. But, why have we not seen any improvements? We already have mechanisms for processing cash and change automatically, vending machines do it all the time. Self-checkouts seem to manage cash just fine. Just a speculative idea, but why not an automatic cash processing machine on the side of the main line? Tell it what the amount owed is, person can move over there and take all the time they want digging through wallets without disrupting the main flow. Possible issues with employees having to take time out for fixing issues with the machine, but then you have that problem with card processing machines anyways. Some Walmarts have both cash/card machines and card only machines - seems like a reasonable compromise. There are clear benefits to being able to process both card and cash - why are we so fixated on getting rid of cash instead of bringing the process to the same level as card?

mnm1 8y ago
I bet these non cash businesses start taking cash right away of their card reader goes down. Either that or close for the day? No way. They will change their policy temporarily because keeping poor people out is less a priority than making money. Still a priority, just less of one.

classichasclass 8y ago

Going back to largely cash transactions not only reduced my paper trail, but it's much easier to keep to a weekly budget. And, hey, cash price at gas stations!

hitpointdrew 8y ago
> cash price at gas stations! I avoid all gas stations that have a "cash" price.
- klodolph 8y ago
  On average, you're not saving money that way. The cash price reflects that you're not paying as much in bank fees.
  - cobbzilla 8y ago
    Sure, and if you pay cash anywhere that accepts cards but has no cash discount, then you are subsidizing the bank fees (gotta get those points!) for all card-paying customers.

UweSchmidt 8y ago

I'm impressed that such a move is even possible, considering the powerful interests that must be in favour of cashless. Cashless stores could be a stepping stone in the abolishment of cash. The main issue for me is that if society is cashless, we could get negative interest rates, and we would be at the mercy of banks. All kinds of offers and conditions could be tied to and bundled with an increasingly abstract concept of money, credit and income.

dcplogic 8y ago
Sweden is almost entirely cashless; cash is about to go extinct. :/ Just the last few months, however, the the powers to be (the elected government) have chosen to tell the population that this could be problematic if there was an extended power outage because of some vague reason. (We all know it would be Russians, though.) Incidentally, the Swedish Riksbank repo rate is -0.25%.
mikeash 8y ago
Is there much difference between a negative interest rate on a bank account, and holding cash in an economy that experiences inflation?

walterbell 8y ago

https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/03/cashless-cash-free-ban-bill-new-york-retail-discrimination/584203/ https://www.citylab.com/equity/2019/03/cashless-cash-free-ba... > In February, New York City Councilmember Ritchie Torres introduced legislation that would prohibit retail establishments from refusing to accept payments in cash. The council hasn’t made a decision on the bill yet, but Torres is confident that it will pass by mid-year. If it does, cashless businesses could face fines of up to $500 for every violation ... Also in February, both houses of New Jersey’s state legislature passed a similar bill and are only awaiting the governor’s signature. San Francisco has recently proposed a similar ordinance, and Washington D.C. and Chicago have also introduced legislation that would make it illegal to discriminate against cash as a form of payment.

ChrisArchitect 8y ago

I was thinking about this recently when news broke that Atlanta's Mercedez-Benz Stadium (home to MLS's Atlanta United, NFL Atlanta Falcons, recent superbowl host) was going cashless too. While technologically 'neat' or whatever, it always also feels just like a flashy move and definitely a slight against the poor. Sports entertainment doesn't have to be only for the rich, a trend that always creeps

LanceH 8y ago
My first move would be to eliminate the ability to write off tickets/boxes. I can't count the number of people I know that have corporate tickets that are 90% for personal use, but written off because they take the occasional client to a game/show.

ChrisArchitect 8y ago

novacole 8y ago

As a Philadelphian, I find this odd and backwards. It’s cash only stores (Chinese food stores, corner stores, etc) that are annoying to me since I almost never have cash on hand and prefer to pay with my card. Plus I’m sure the city is bringing in far less tax revenue from cash only stores than a cashless store since there’s no paper trail with cash.

novacole 8y ago
However, I am aware Philadelphia is a poor city, with around a 20% unemployment rate so, and many unbanked/underbanked ppl I can see the other side.
gerbilly 8y ago
> since there’s no paper trail with cash. Exactly this. This is why cash is good. Anonymity. Enjoy it while it still exists.

mnw21cam 8y ago

I'm not entirely sure why the article is conflating credit with this issue. Card != credit. There are debit cards too, and you don't need credit for one of those.

dragonwriter 8y ago
The same factors that lead to being denied credit also result in being denied access to banking, so, sure, the problem is really for the unbanked and not those simply lacking credit, but those groups have a deep and fundamental link, not a mere casual correlation.

swasheck 8y ago

i thought that because cash was "legal tender" it was required by law to be accepted but the second paragraph disabused me of that.

deckar01 8y ago

> ... shall not: ... Charge a higher price to customers who pay cash than they would pay using any other form of payment. https://phila.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3710586&GUID=FD85947F-8151-4DB5-9949-AF6FEF14A9C9 https://phila.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3710586... Businesses are also prohibited from charging a cash processing fee higher than the processing fee of any other type of payment. Depending on how this is interpreted you could introduce an alternate form of payment that carries a high processing fee and charge the same amount to pay with cash. Edit: Replaced joke with the technical insight it was meant to suggest due to downvote.

icebraining 8y ago
"Any other" is not "some other". I don't think that's ambiguous, you can't charge more for cash than the cheapest alternative payment method.
- deckar01 8y ago
  It sounds like it might also require a company to give cash purchases the same discount they offer to consumer credit card purchases.

gambler 8y ago

Good for them. Cashless stuff sound cool and progressive in the short run, but it's is a horrible idea in the long run. It's a privacy nightmare and gives disproportionate power to a few middlemen entities that usually have zero obligations to anyone. Also, it's a great stepping stone towards centralized control over all transactions.

danielfoster 8y ago

>Philadelphia City Councilman William Greenlee, a Democrat, >said he was inspired to introduce the bill after noticing >some Center City sandwich shops had gone cashless. >“Most of the people who don’t have credit tend to be lower >income, minority, immigrants. It just seemed to me, if not >intentional, at least a form of discrimination,” he said. >Now, he said, stores will be required “to do what businesses >have been doing since Ben Franklin was walking the streets of >Philadelphia.” Shame on Philadelphia for punishing innovation instead of helping low income families access banking and credit cards.

dkhenry 8y ago
There is no one in Philadelphia who does not have access to the banking system, or have the ability to pay cash for a prepaid debit card. After dealing with people in Philadelphia who are "unbanked" it was never because they couldn't get access, it was a choice they made to avoid having assets in the regulated banking system

goscots 8y ago

The whole argument for this doesn’t make sense. Cashless payment systems are ubiquitous across socioeconomic lines in China and other countries. The problem is specific to the US and can be solved in a less destructive manner to businesses. Instead of punishing retailers, the city should create an incentive system to help people from less privileged backgrounds obtain access to banking systems and electronic payment systems.

rospaya 8y ago

Good. I prefer paying with my phone/card, but cash should always be an option.

soulnothing 8y ago

I posted this in the article about NYC going cashless as well. The thing that I find interesting is the lack of septa key being mentioned. Septa key is their new transit card. But it can act as a debit card with money loaded via cash. No bank account required. Caveat that the kiosks aren't spread every where. But they are in enough locations. Despite that I have barely heard mention of it during this cashless discussion. The whole crux is allowing underprivileged to access stores. Which was one of the reasons for the Key card as well. https://billypenn.com/2018/08/28/your-septa-key-is-now-a-debit-card/ https://billypenn.com/2018/08/28/your-septa-key-is-now-a-deb...

joekrill 8y ago
It's not mentioned because SEPTA still accepts cash. You aren't required to buy a Septa Key card to ride.
- soulnothing 8y ago
  I understand that. But the Key card can act as a debit card / electronic payment. Without a backing bank account. The whole complexity add of turning it into a debit card. Was so that people without banks could shop at card only stores.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]