3 ms·

> Does cashless society discriminate against the poor and elderly? Of course it does. But so did society that started adopting the telephone, or automobiles,

> 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.
jaclaz 4y ago
>People have to deal. And if they cannot, bad for them? My mom has developed an eye problem, that - while not making her totally blind - makes impossible for her to use Pos' and ATM's, let alone the (crappy) bank website or app. (with a lot of difficulties, in the "right" lighting, in the comfort or her house, she can still read the screen and type on her devices). She is "technologically advanced" (within limits, she has an iPad and Facebook and e-mail, and a smartphone and Whatsapp and can use them). Since a couple of years she doesn't use anymore her card(s) simply because she cannot see the Pos or ATM display or keypad, and she has switched (back) to cash-only for the small day-to-day payments, while I manage all the other ones. If shops started to implement cashless only she would be severely affected, and deprived of the little things she now still enjoys doing, like going out to get a coffee, buy some groceries, etc.

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.

jaclaz 4y ago

>People have to deal. And if they cannot, bad for them? My mom has developed an eye problem, that - while not making her totally blind - makes impossible for her to use Pos' and ATM's, let alone the (crappy) bank website or app. (with a lot of difficulties, in the "right" lighting, in the comfort or her house, she can still read the screen and type on her devices). She is "technologically advanced" (within limits, she has an iPad and Facebook and e-mail, and a smartphone and Whatsapp and can use them). Since a couple of years she doesn't use anymore her card(s) simply because she cannot see the Pos or ATM display or keypad, and she has switched (back) to cash-only for the small day-to-day payments, while I manage all the other ones. If shops started to implement cashless only she would be severely affected, and deprived of the little things she now still enjoys doing, like going out to get a coffee, buy some groceries, etc.