29 ms·

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

232 points by maxwell 4y ago

mindslight 4y 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.
- asdff 4y 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.
  - mindslight 4y 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 4y 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 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtM6tud8n1I
- davzie 4y ago
  This was a great watch, thanks for posting! A book I read recently called "Cloud Money" also re-iterates the point perfectly.
isaacremuant 4y 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 4y 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.
- ghaff 4y 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).
kwhitefoot 4y 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-cpl 4y 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.
- hinkley 4y ago
  There's a satire sketch in there somewhere about not being able to buy a phone charger because your phone is dead.
  - Smoosh 4y 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. . .
    - hinkley 4y ago
      I think we're about due for a remake of Brazil. I hear Taika Waititi might be available in about ten years...
forgotmypw17 4y ago
It certainly discriminates against those without a bank account.
- ncpa-cpl 4y 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.
  - pb7 4y 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?
    - forgotmypw17 4y ago
      You are replying to a comment about a specific case, which you know very little about, with a generalized categorizing statement. What is your goal with this comment?
      - pb7 4y ago
        The goal is to highlight that legal judgments having more teeth is a pro of a cashless society. You shouldn’t be able to easily side step them. What more do I need to know? If they don’t want the judgment used as a counter example, they shouldn’t bring it up as evidence for their point.
        thorncorona 4y ago
        Legal does not mean just, nor does it mean moral.
daveoc64 4y 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 4y ago
  Not all jobs are office jobs.
- prepend 4y 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 4y ago
    The traditional, non-computerized way to pay bills (utility for example) is to simply mail a check. That usually still works.
    - prepend 4y ago
      Usually yes. But he also clicks yes on everything asked of him. This has led to probably comical situations where he’s in the apple store trying to pay his bill. There’s no way to mail apple a check. Recently when I refinanced I got a mortgage and the servicer (can’t remember their name as they sold to mrcooper and then to WellsFargo) that funneled everything through their app that wanted to auto withdraw from my bank. I tried to pay by check and couldn’t get an address out of them despite multiple calls and hours on the phone.
motohagiography 4y 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 4y 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.
  - sneak 4y ago
    I always like to remind people “when you pay with your card, you help finance the forever war”.
    - nisegami 4y ago
      Using any form of fiat currency does the same.
    - sixstringtheory 4y ago
      Coins/cash have been around for thousands of years, and war since time immemorial. Cards aren’t making us do anything we haven’t already done since, well, forever.
      - 4y ago
kepler1 4y 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.
- mdp2021 4y 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 4y 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.
  - kepler1 4y 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.
bern4444 4y 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).
- ouid 4y ago
  Calling something elderly discrimination is the most universal way to gain support, everyone either is, or plans to be, old.
  - imtringued 4y 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.
jjslocum3 4y ago
It definitely discriminates against the Salvation Army, Buskers, and Panhandlers.
codelord 4y 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.
- sneak 4y 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 4y 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.
    - mdp2021 4y ago
      If there is no need to have third-party controlled video cameras in your bedroom, and you can opt-out of the "service", you do not need to regulate their use. Of course laws against abuse should be developed so that when you need the service you are protected - but the main thing is that the service is not forced on you.
    - sneak 4y ago
      They can’t really swat everyone who does something they don’t like, that doesn’t scale. It’s why private arms ownership (in the millions) and ability to use cash (also in the millions) IS one of the (only effective) checks and balances. The idea of the state having effective state-based checks and balances to restrain the power of the state is nonsense. We tried that and got a military-industrial takeover of all 3 branches via universal communications surveillance of every single judge, congressperson, and chief executive/cabinet by unelected military spies. There are people in the USG who know the location tracklogs and call history, iMessage history, iCloud Photos, email contents, and fb/wa/ig DM contents of every single mistress, sex worker, bag man, and drug dealer that services every individual member of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, as well as their entire personal and professional staff, and can threaten or blackmail any of them at will. In theory there are checks and balances over these spies, but in practice once they have that kind of power, they have enough power to keep abuses of same out of the newspaper. It’s like the police stopping police crime; it is a nice idea in theory but does not happen in the real world. To maintain a free society you must maintain the practical ability for millions to do things that are legal but that the state REALLY does not want them to do. Payments are #1 on that list as they enable publishing and organizing. Also, the USG does call in missile strikes on US citizens (as well as their entire families) that they simply don't like, and checks and balances don't stop that at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awla... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Nawar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Nawar_al-Awlaki
clord 4y 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.
coldtea 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
crazygringo 4y 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 4y 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-households-into-the-banking-system/ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/bringing-unbanked-househo... [^2]: https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y 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.
ideamotor 4y ago
Harms small businesses for obvious reasons.
- scarface74 4y ago
  I know plenty of small businesses who would love to get rid of cash because of employee theft and robberies.
zyncronet 4y ago
allenrb 4y 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.
mixmastamyk 4y 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
- scarface74 4y ago
  You want to protect your privacy yet you watch Netflix that tracks everything you watch….
  - mixmastamyk 4y 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.
  - mixmastamyk 4y ago
    Reminded me of this thread, took me a while to find it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33142972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33142972
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
pjkundert 4y 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 4y 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?
  - pjkundert 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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.
- mixmastamyk 4y 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.
- grandmczeb 4y 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 https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/o0100-19.pdf
csomar 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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.
- satellites 4y ago
  Capital and the Capital-owned State work in tandem to make things like this happen. They are one and the same.
- thekingofrome 4y 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 4y 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.
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      More of a reason to fight back ever harder, instead of just surrendering.
- john_the_writer 4y 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.
Proven 4y ago
msravi 4y 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?
- daveoc64 4y 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.
mvineetmenon 4y 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 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 4y 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)
  - mvineetmenon 4y 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 4y 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-statistics https://www.npci.org.in/what-we-do/upi/upi-ecosystem-statist...
rhacker 4y 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.
nicbou 4y 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 4y 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.
  - nicbou 4y ago
    https://www.thelocal.de/20210914/why-are-americans-being-turned-away-from-german-banks/ 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 4y ago
Yes
personjerry 4y ago
Does progress discriminate against those who don't adopt new practices?
satellites 4y ago
Answer: yes.
karussell 4y ago
It also discriminates against children. Or should they also use cards?
- daveoc64 4y 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 4y 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.
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 4y ago
Cashless society discriminates against common population by allowing those in power complete surveillance and control.
alex-ant 4y ago
LOL, we still use bank cheques in Malta
badpun 4y ago
Reality discriminates against the poor and elderly.
imwillofficial 4y ago
I don’t see discussed how the processing fees act as a de facto tax on every single financial operation we perform.
- imtringued 4y ago
  Pretty much. It is basically a second layer of government.
hakfoo 4y 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 4y 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.
jleyank 4y 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.
- TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
  Everything that was bad about Corporate Scrip, is bad about cashless.
  - anonporridge 4y ago
    Cash is just nation state scrip. And the nation state is just the corporation with the local monopoly on violence.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- MikusR 4y ago
  Money is made from plastic
- DerekL 4y 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.)
- pb7 4y 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.
rrauenza 4y ago
[flagged]
ghaff 4y ago
You can probably tack on the fact that owning a smartphone in the US is increasingly, if not mandatory, hard to do without.
- bombcar 4y 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.
- grecy 4y 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...
  - mixmastamyk 4y 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?
    - grecy 4y ago
      I've been using email for the last few years, and just this month my bank made a change so that you MUST use a phone call or SMS. NO getting around it. Can't even use something like an authentication app... so I MUST have a SIM with an actual number.
- LinuxBender 4y 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?
bombcar 4y 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.
- pbhjpbhj 4y 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).
  - bombcar 4y 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).
    - Robotbeat 4y ago
      Yeah, my kids understand physical money and use it to buy ice cream from the ice cream man (the primary use of physical money for allowance).
    - scarface74 4y ago
      My nine year old had a debit card attached a joint bank account. He could log in and see how much money he had. I gave him his allowance via a bank transfer.
- ghaff 4y 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.
JoeAltmaier 4y 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.
- ghaff 4y 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 4y 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 4y ago
  Quite literally equating time & money...
- jabroni_salad 4y 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.
Spooky23 4y ago
Yes. The assault on cash is pretty awful in general.
- holoduke 4y 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.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    I simultaneously rarely use cash and would hate to not be able to use cash.
    - sneak 4y ago
      Use it or lose it, one might point out. I stopped carrying cards.
  - asdff 4y 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.
  - Spooky23 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
trylfthsk 4y 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
- sneak 4y 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.
  - MandieD 4y 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.
    - viceroyalbean 4y ago
      I don't get region restricted apps. Sometimes it might make sense, but 99% of the time it's just unnecessary and achieves nothing except annoy travelers. Is there some incentive for app developers to region restrict their apps?
      - naasking 4y ago
        Maybe to cut down on bad reviews and spurious support requests?

232 points by maxwell 4y 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.

asdff 4y 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.
- mindslight 4y 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 4y 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 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtM6tud8n1I

davzie 4y ago
This was a great watch, thanks for posting! A book I read recently called "Cloud Money" also re-iterates the point perfectly.

isaacremuant 4y 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 4y 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.

ghaff 4y 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).

kwhitefoot 4y 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-cpl 4y 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.
hinkley 4y ago
There's a satire sketch in there somewhere about not being able to buy a phone charger because your phone is dead.
- Smoosh 4y 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. . .
  - hinkley 4y ago
    I think we're about due for a remake of Brazil. I hear Taika Waititi might be available in about ten years...

forgotmypw17 4y ago

It certainly discriminates against those without a bank account.

ncpa-cpl 4y 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.
- pb7 4y 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?
  - forgotmypw17 4y ago
    You are replying to a comment about a specific case, which you know very little about, with a generalized categorizing statement. What is your goal with this comment?
    - pb7 4y ago
      The goal is to highlight that legal judgments having more teeth is a pro of a cashless society. You shouldn’t be able to easily side step them. What more do I need to know? If they don’t want the judgment used as a counter example, they shouldn’t bring it up as evidence for their point.
      - thorncorona 4y ago
        Legal does not mean just, nor does it mean moral.

daveoc64 4y 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 4y ago
Not all jobs are office jobs.
prepend 4y 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 4y ago
  The traditional, non-computerized way to pay bills (utility for example) is to simply mail a check. That usually still works.
  - prepend 4y ago
    Usually yes. But he also clicks yes on everything asked of him. This has led to probably comical situations where he’s in the apple store trying to pay his bill. There’s no way to mail apple a check. Recently when I refinanced I got a mortgage and the servicer (can’t remember their name as they sold to mrcooper and then to WellsFargo) that funneled everything through their app that wanted to auto withdraw from my bank. I tried to pay by check and couldn’t get an address out of them despite multiple calls and hours on the phone.

motohagiography 4y 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 4y 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.
- sneak 4y ago
  I always like to remind people “when you pay with your card, you help finance the forever war”.
  - nisegami 4y ago
    Using any form of fiat currency does the same.
  - sixstringtheory 4y ago
    Coins/cash have been around for thousands of years, and war since time immemorial. Cards aren’t making us do anything we haven’t already done since, well, forever.
    - 4y ago

kepler1 4y 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.

mdp2021 4y 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 4y 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.
- kepler1 4y 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.

bern4444 4y 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).

ouid 4y ago
Calling something elderly discrimination is the most universal way to gain support, everyone either is, or plans to be, old.
- imtringued 4y 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.

jjslocum3 4y ago

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

codelord 4y 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.

sneak 4y 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 4y 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.
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    If there is no need to have third-party controlled video cameras in your bedroom, and you can opt-out of the "service", you do not need to regulate their use. Of course laws against abuse should be developed so that when you need the service you are protected - but the main thing is that the service is not forced on you.
  - sneak 4y ago
    They can’t really swat everyone who does something they don’t like, that doesn’t scale. It’s why private arms ownership (in the millions) and ability to use cash (also in the millions) IS one of the (only effective) checks and balances. The idea of the state having effective state-based checks and balances to restrain the power of the state is nonsense. We tried that and got a military-industrial takeover of all 3 branches via universal communications surveillance of every single judge, congressperson, and chief executive/cabinet by unelected military spies. There are people in the USG who know the location tracklogs and call history, iMessage history, iCloud Photos, email contents, and fb/wa/ig DM contents of every single mistress, sex worker, bag man, and drug dealer that services every individual member of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, as well as their entire personal and professional staff, and can threaten or blackmail any of them at will. In theory there are checks and balances over these spies, but in practice once they have that kind of power, they have enough power to keep abuses of same out of the newspaper. It’s like the police stopping police crime; it is a nice idea in theory but does not happen in the real world. To maintain a free society you must maintain the practical ability for millions to do things that are legal but that the state REALLY does not want them to do. Payments are #1 on that list as they enable publishing and organizing. Also, the USG does call in missile strikes on US citizens (as well as their entire families) that they simply don't like, and checks and balances don't stop that at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Abdulrahman_al-Awla... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Nawar_al-Awlaki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Nawar_al-Awlaki

clord 4y 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.

coldtea 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

crazygringo 4y 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 4y 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-households-into-the-banking-system/ https://www.brookings.edu/articles/bringing-unbanked-househo... [^2]: https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y 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.

ideamotor 4y ago

Harms small businesses for obvious reasons.

scarface74 4y ago
I know plenty of small businesses who would love to get rid of cash because of employee theft and robberies.

zyncronet 4y ago

allenrb 4y 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.

mixmastamyk 4y 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

scarface74 4y ago
You want to protect your privacy yet you watch Netflix that tracks everything you watch….
- mixmastamyk 4y 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.
- mixmastamyk 4y ago
  Reminded me of this thread, took me a while to find it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33142972 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33142972
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

pjkundert 4y 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 4y 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?
- pjkundert 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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.

mixmastamyk 4y 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.
grandmczeb 4y 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 https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/o0100-19.pdf

csomar 4y 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 4y 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 4y 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.

satellites 4y ago
Capital and the Capital-owned State work in tandem to make things like this happen. They are one and the same.
thekingofrome 4y 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 4y 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.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    More of a reason to fight back ever harder, instead of just surrendering.
john_the_writer 4y 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.

Proven 4y ago

msravi 4y 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?

daveoc64 4y 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.

mvineetmenon 4y 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 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 4y 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)
- mvineetmenon 4y 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 4y 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-statistics https://www.npci.org.in/what-we-do/upi/upi-ecosystem-statist...

rhacker 4y 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.

nicbou 4y 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 4y 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.
- nicbou 4y ago
  https://www.thelocal.de/20210914/why-are-americans-being-turned-away-from-german-banks/ 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 4y ago

Yes

personjerry 4y ago

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

satellites 4y ago

Answer: yes.

karussell 4y ago

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

daveoc64 4y 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 4y 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.

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 4y ago

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

alex-ant 4y ago

LOL, we still use bank cheques in Malta

badpun 4y ago

Reality discriminates against the poor and elderly.

imwillofficial 4y ago

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

imtringued 4y ago
Pretty much. It is basically a second layer of government.

hakfoo 4y 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 4y 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.

jleyank 4y 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.

TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
Everything that was bad about Corporate Scrip, is bad about cashless.
- anonporridge 4y ago
  Cash is just nation state scrip. And the nation state is just the corporation with the local monopoly on violence.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
MikusR 4y ago
Money is made from plastic
DerekL 4y 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.)
pb7 4y 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.

rrauenza 4y ago

[flagged]

ghaff 4y ago

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

bombcar 4y 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.
grecy 4y 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...
- mixmastamyk 4y 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?
  - grecy 4y ago
    I've been using email for the last few years, and just this month my bank made a change so that you MUST use a phone call or SMS. NO getting around it. Can't even use something like an authentication app... so I MUST have a SIM with an actual number.
LinuxBender 4y 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?

bombcar 4y 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.

pbhjpbhj 4y 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).
- bombcar 4y 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).
  - Robotbeat 4y ago
    Yeah, my kids understand physical money and use it to buy ice cream from the ice cream man (the primary use of physical money for allowance).
  - scarface74 4y ago
    My nine year old had a debit card attached a joint bank account. He could log in and see how much money he had. I gave him his allowance via a bank transfer.
ghaff 4y 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.

JoeAltmaier 4y 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.

ghaff 4y 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 4y 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 4y ago
Quite literally equating time & money...
jabroni_salad 4y 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.

Spooky23 4y ago

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

holoduke 4y 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.
- ghaff 4y ago
  I simultaneously rarely use cash and would hate to not be able to use cash.
  - sneak 4y ago
    Use it or lose it, one might point out. I stopped carrying cards.
- asdff 4y 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.
- Spooky23 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

trylfthsk 4y 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

sneak 4y 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.
- MandieD 4y 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.
  - viceroyalbean 4y ago
    I don't get region restricted apps. Sometimes it might make sense, but 99% of the time it's just unnecessary and achieves nothing except annoy travelers. Is there some incentive for app developers to region restrict their apps?
    - naasking 4y ago
      Maybe to cut down on bad reviews and spurious support requests?