5 ms·

You can be barred from flying (is that still true?) and now banking, without trial or evidence. It's already highly anti-democratic, but imagine what an aggres

You can be barred from flying (is that still true?) and now banking, without trial or evidence. It's already highly anti-democratic, but imagine what an aggressive, oppressive government will do with this power.

sitzkrieg 3y ago
as shown in the article!
raybb 3y ago
Yup. Reminds me about how Madison Square Garden was using facial recognition to ban its owners enemies https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/nyregion/madison-square-garden-facial-recognition.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/nyregion/madison-square-g...
sneak 3y ago
Banking is optional; the problem is that many businesses insist on bank cards to transact. It’s important that businesses be compelled to accept cash for all transactions. It’s particularly bad in some cities. Rather than enforcing access to the special hell that is US retail banking, just prohibit businesses from ripping out their existing cash infrastructure. Even with a bank account, your ability to transact is subject to surveillance and seizure/freezing without evidence or probable cause. Cash has none of these problems.
- noSyncCloud 3y ago
  Cash is absolutely subject to freezing/seizure. Try carrying $25,000 and letting the police search your vehicle.
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    > letting the police search your vehicle. Good idea to decline those
    - smokeydoe 3y ago
      Good luck with that. There are multiple reasons cops use to do a search if they want to. Probable cause can range from seeing something sticking out from under your seat, speeding, suspicion of being under influence, or being in proximity of another crime. Pair that with the incentive of civil forfeiture profits and it’s not looking like a good idea to travel with 25k
      - Ajay-p 3y ago
        I am convinced that if the American police forces wish to detain, arrest, or take your money, they will find a reason to do so, or create one where none was there before. Assets forfeiture, detainment, and arrest without legitimate judicial reason is deeply unfair. Regardless of innocence that may be found and adjudicated later, the damage to ones reputation, employment, and even banking can be disastrous. Recourse is often costly or non-existent.
    - gorbachev 3y ago
      They will then bring in a drug sniffing dog they've trained to notify the police officer of a presence of drugs on command, and voila, there's reasonable grounds to search your vehicle. This has been going on for a very, very long time: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/drug-search-trekies-stopped-searched-illinois_n_1364087 https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/drug-search-trekies-s...
      - genewitch 3y ago
        "One of my in-laws was EOD in the US Army, and has rode in this vehicle. You need to find a dog that will not signal on explosives of any kind. Furthermore, the clock on this stop, per <supreme court decision about unreasonable roadside detention>, is starting to run a bit long. Here is my attorney's card."
    - obviouslynotme 3y ago
      The one time I was asked to be searched while driving I declined. They immediately called a drug dog, yanked its leash, and called it a drug hit. I then hung out for an hour while they confirmed I was a poor college student with zero drugs. Driving with any amount of cash above a few hundred will get you robbed by the police in asset forfeiture. It happens everyday around the country to small business owners that deal with a lot of cash.
  - comte7092 3y ago
    I mean, why would you ever “let” them do that? Either they are doing a compulsory search or they aren’t getting permission.
- almatabata 3y ago
  I cannot get paid by my company without a bank account. No company would pay me my salary in cash. A bank account is no longer optional if you want to live a normal life.
  - SllX 3y ago
    If they issue you a check you can take it to the banking institution listed on the check and they will honor it. The downside is, now you’re dealing with cash (and some companies went DD only a long time ago).
    - toast0 3y ago
      Most banks (in the US) will charge the presenter a fee to cash a check drawn on an account they service. [1] It's reasonable to demand that your employer make your whole pay (less withholdings) available to you, and if you are unable to maintain a bank account, and their bank charges a fee to honor checks, that's not really reasonable if you are paid by check. [1] https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/check-cashing-fees-top-banks https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/check-cashing-fees-top-ba...
    - robocat 3y ago
      For the moment. New Zealand doesn't have cheques any more. Banks here totally phased them out a couple of years back. The USA will also make checks obsolete over time. Plus cash is disliked at many retailers and cash is not acceptable at some locations (e.g. my skifield only accepts cards - I was told it is because the nearest small-town bank won't accept cash deposits from the skifield). I suspect our government will slowly discourage cash 1. to prevent tax evasion (cash jobs), and 2. to prevent illegal purchases (e.g. weed). Those are the main uses for cash that I personally see others use cash for (I use cash because I like using it and I like privacy).
      - SllX 3y ago
        I wouldn’t necessarily expect us to follow New Zealand’s example. We’ve accumulated a lot of methods for exchanging money without really discarding any in particular. New Zealand is a small country way out in the middle of the South Pacific Ocean 2.5K miles (or over 4K kilometers) away from its nearest neighbor and with a population smaller than NYC. The United States is 50 stubborn ass States plus the Fed’s occupation in southern Maryland. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand has an address in Wellington, is owned by the New Zealand government and answerable to Parliament. The Federal Reserve system isn’t even a single bank with a single board of directors, isn’t wholly owned by the US Government and isn’t directly answerable to Congress. There’s no easy way to make a lazy comparison between us and have it be convincing. Parts of the Federal Government would likely love to see the United States become a cashless society but they don’t always get what they want.
- rkagerer 3y ago
  I'm not sure I would agree that banking is optional in today's society. Canada has laws[1] intended to ensure access to banking, with $10M fines for violations. Not familiar with them myself and wondering how effective they are, and whether anyone has sued and won. It's maybe a bit ironic considering how the government here improperly locked a lot of people out of their funds during the trucker protests (the inquiry found collateral damage where people completely uninvolved were affected). [1] https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/banking/rights-new-protections.html https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/...
  - refurb 3y ago
    Canada does the same thing with shutting down bank accounts based on "suspicious transactions" and then turning around and saying "we can't tell you why". Pretty sure it's a global agreement around terrorist funding.
- cjalmeida 3y ago
  Banking is not optional in today's advanced societies, and the sooner we recognize that, the sooner we'll have proper regulations mandating a minimum level of banking service, eg. Limited deposits, withdrawals, debit/secured cards.
  - Gibbon1 3y ago
    Solution, bring back post office banking or banking through the social security admin. Turn 18 you get a banking and benefits card. Do that and most people won't ever have to do business with a private bank, ever.
    - astrange 3y ago
      That defeats the purpose of a bank, which is to give businesses loans. SSA has no one to give loans to.
  - sneak 3y ago
    Millions of people live normal lives without bank accounts. The solution to the problem is not to force retail banks to extend their terrible customer service to all of society, it’s to ensure the utility of cash. Cash works great even if the banks (or the state) hate you.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Ridj48dhsnsh 3y ago
      This depends highly on the country. Cash doesn't work so great in most of the EU anymore. In Spain and Greece for example, it's illegal to buy anything with more than 500 euro cash I believe.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > Banking is optional I believe it's optional for you, but not for the great majority of people. Lack of access to banking services specifically holds back a lot of people (look up 'unbanked').
- PKop 3y ago
  Why would banking be optional even if every single business accepted cash? Where are you supposed to hold your cash, under a mattress?
- x-complexity 3y ago
  > Banking is optional Banking is definitely not optional. Certain transactions, specially those done online, require digital payments that cannot be done with physical cash. It's increasingly a required part that's needed if you want to participate in modern society, and the lack of access to such banking systems forces people to adopt subpar services as a replacement. In the ideal case, banking should be a utility like power & water: A necessity for modern life, without which certain daily routines would not be possible.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y ago
  You can walk into any USPS office and buy up to $1000 in money orders anonymously. What prevents them from selling anonymous prepaid cards the same way?
fragmede 3y ago
it's almost as if power doesn't want to do things democratically. who cares if it's the government with it's boot on my neck, or a corporation with a boot on my neck, either way, I'm getting trod on!
Ajay-p 3y ago
You can also have your money and property seized without charge or conviction by police, while sitting on the side of the road. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-glaring-injustice-of-civil-asset-forfeiture/392999/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-gla...
- TacticalCoder 3y ago
  I think there's a recent and ongoing bipartisan bill in the US trying to fix some of the worst aspect of civil asset forfeiture. With some luck ten years from now there may be a bill in the US trying to fix some of the worst aspect of KYC/AML (like regular people getting their bank accounts closed for no reason and without any explanation).
- 77pt77 3y ago
  > A DEA agent boarded the train at the Albuquerque Amtrak station and began asking various passengers, including Rivers, where they were going and why. When Rivers replied that he was headed to LA to make a music video, the agent asked to search his bags. Rivers complied. He was the only passenger singled out for a search by DEA agents – and the only black person on his portion of the train Never answer with any info, never consent to searches.

sitzkrieg 3y ago

as shown in the article!

raybb 3y ago

Yup. Reminds me about how Madison Square Garden was using facial recognition to ban its owners enemies https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/nyregion/madison-square-garden-facial-recognition.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/nyregion/madison-square-g...

sneak 3y ago

Banking is optional; the problem is that many businesses insist on bank cards to transact. It’s important that businesses be compelled to accept cash for all transactions. It’s particularly bad in some cities. Rather than enforcing access to the special hell that is US retail banking, just prohibit businesses from ripping out their existing cash infrastructure. Even with a bank account, your ability to transact is subject to surveillance and seizure/freezing without evidence or probable cause. Cash has none of these problems.

noSyncCloud 3y ago
Cash is absolutely subject to freezing/seizure. Try carrying $25,000 and letting the police search your vehicle.
- Scoundreller 3y ago
  > letting the police search your vehicle. Good idea to decline those
  - smokeydoe 3y ago
    Good luck with that. There are multiple reasons cops use to do a search if they want to. Probable cause can range from seeing something sticking out from under your seat, speeding, suspicion of being under influence, or being in proximity of another crime. Pair that with the incentive of civil forfeiture profits and it’s not looking like a good idea to travel with 25k
    - Ajay-p 3y ago
      I am convinced that if the American police forces wish to detain, arrest, or take your money, they will find a reason to do so, or create one where none was there before. Assets forfeiture, detainment, and arrest without legitimate judicial reason is deeply unfair. Regardless of innocence that may be found and adjudicated later, the damage to ones reputation, employment, and even banking can be disastrous. Recourse is often costly or non-existent.
  - gorbachev 3y ago
    They will then bring in a drug sniffing dog they've trained to notify the police officer of a presence of drugs on command, and voila, there's reasonable grounds to search your vehicle. This has been going on for a very, very long time: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/drug-search-trekies-stopped-searched-illinois_n_1364087 https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/drug-search-trekies-s...
    - genewitch 3y ago
      "One of my in-laws was EOD in the US Army, and has rode in this vehicle. You need to find a dog that will not signal on explosives of any kind. Furthermore, the clock on this stop, per <supreme court decision about unreasonable roadside detention>, is starting to run a bit long. Here is my attorney's card."
  - obviouslynotme 3y ago
    The one time I was asked to be searched while driving I declined. They immediately called a drug dog, yanked its leash, and called it a drug hit. I then hung out for an hour while they confirmed I was a poor college student with zero drugs. Driving with any amount of cash above a few hundred will get you robbed by the police in asset forfeiture. It happens everyday around the country to small business owners that deal with a lot of cash.
- comte7092 3y ago
  I mean, why would you ever “let” them do that? Either they are doing a compulsory search or they aren’t getting permission.
almatabata 3y ago
I cannot get paid by my company without a bank account. No company would pay me my salary in cash. A bank account is no longer optional if you want to live a normal life.
- SllX 3y ago
  If they issue you a check you can take it to the banking institution listed on the check and they will honor it. The downside is, now you’re dealing with cash (and some companies went DD only a long time ago).
  - toast0 3y ago
    Most banks (in the US) will charge the presenter a fee to cash a check drawn on an account they service. [1] It's reasonable to demand that your employer make your whole pay (less withholdings) available to you, and if you are unable to maintain a bank account, and their bank charges a fee to honor checks, that's not really reasonable if you are paid by check. [1] https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/check-cashing-fees-top-banks https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/check-cashing-fees-top-ba...
  - robocat 3y ago
    For the moment. New Zealand doesn't have cheques any more. Banks here totally phased them out a couple of years back. The USA will also make checks obsolete over time. Plus cash is disliked at many retailers and cash is not acceptable at some locations (e.g. my skifield only accepts cards - I was told it is because the nearest small-town bank won't accept cash deposits from the skifield). I suspect our government will slowly discourage cash 1. to prevent tax evasion (cash jobs), and 2. to prevent illegal purchases (e.g. weed). Those are the main uses for cash that I personally see others use cash for (I use cash because I like using it and I like privacy).
    - SllX 3y ago
      I wouldn’t necessarily expect us to follow New Zealand’s example. We’ve accumulated a lot of methods for exchanging money without really discarding any in particular. New Zealand is a small country way out in the middle of the South Pacific Ocean 2.5K miles (or over 4K kilometers) away from its nearest neighbor and with a population smaller than NYC. The United States is 50 stubborn ass States plus the Fed’s occupation in southern Maryland. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand has an address in Wellington, is owned by the New Zealand government and answerable to Parliament. The Federal Reserve system isn’t even a single bank with a single board of directors, isn’t wholly owned by the US Government and isn’t directly answerable to Congress. There’s no easy way to make a lazy comparison between us and have it be convincing. Parts of the Federal Government would likely love to see the United States become a cashless society but they don’t always get what they want.
rkagerer 3y ago
I'm not sure I would agree that banking is optional in today's society. Canada has laws[1] intended to ensure access to banking, with $10M fines for violations. Not familiar with them myself and wondering how effective they are, and whether anyone has sued and won. It's maybe a bit ironic considering how the government here improperly locked a lot of people out of their funds during the trucker protests (the inquiry found collateral damage where people completely uninvolved were affected). [1] https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/banking/rights-new-protections.html https://www.canada.ca/en/financial-consumer-agency/services/...
- refurb 3y ago
  Canada does the same thing with shutting down bank accounts based on "suspicious transactions" and then turning around and saying "we can't tell you why". Pretty sure it's a global agreement around terrorist funding.
cjalmeida 3y ago
Banking is not optional in today's advanced societies, and the sooner we recognize that, the sooner we'll have proper regulations mandating a minimum level of banking service, eg. Limited deposits, withdrawals, debit/secured cards.
- Gibbon1 3y ago
  Solution, bring back post office banking or banking through the social security admin. Turn 18 you get a banking and benefits card. Do that and most people won't ever have to do business with a private bank, ever.
  - astrange 3y ago
    That defeats the purpose of a bank, which is to give businesses loans. SSA has no one to give loans to.
- sneak 3y ago
  Millions of people live normal lives without bank accounts. The solution to the problem is not to force retail banks to extend their terrible customer service to all of society, it’s to ensure the utility of cash. Cash works great even if the banks (or the state) hate you.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Ridj48dhsnsh 3y ago
    This depends highly on the country. Cash doesn't work so great in most of the EU anymore. In Spain and Greece for example, it's illegal to buy anything with more than 500 euro cash I believe.
wolverine876 3y ago
> Banking is optional I believe it's optional for you, but not for the great majority of people. Lack of access to banking services specifically holds back a lot of people (look up 'unbanked').
PKop 3y ago
Why would banking be optional even if every single business accepted cash? Where are you supposed to hold your cash, under a mattress?
x-complexity 3y ago
> Banking is optional Banking is definitely not optional. Certain transactions, specially those done online, require digital payments that cannot be done with physical cash. It's increasingly a required part that's needed if you want to participate in modern society, and the lack of access to such banking systems forces people to adopt subpar services as a replacement. In the ideal case, banking should be a utility like power & water: A necessity for modern life, without which certain daily routines would not be possible.
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 3y ago
You can walk into any USPS office and buy up to $1000 in money orders anonymously. What prevents them from selling anonymous prepaid cards the same way?

fragmede 3y ago

it's almost as if power doesn't want to do things democratically. who cares if it's the government with it's boot on my neck, or a corporation with a boot on my neck, either way, I'm getting trod on!

Ajay-p 3y ago

You can also have your money and property seized without charge or conviction by police, while sitting on the side of the road. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-glaring-injustice-of-civil-asset-forfeiture/392999/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-gla...

TacticalCoder 3y ago
I think there's a recent and ongoing bipartisan bill in the US trying to fix some of the worst aspect of civil asset forfeiture. With some luck ten years from now there may be a bill in the US trying to fix some of the worst aspect of KYC/AML (like regular people getting their bank accounts closed for no reason and without any explanation).
77pt77 3y ago
> A DEA agent boarded the train at the Albuquerque Amtrak station and began asking various passengers, including Rivers, where they were going and why. When Rivers replied that he was headed to LA to make a music video, the agent asked to search his bags. Rivers complied. He was the only passenger singled out for a search by DEA agents – and the only black person on his portion of the train Never answer with any info, never consent to searches.