7 ms·
'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans
- kai_ferr 3y agoToday, many different payment methods, virtual wallets, banking applications, and payment systems have been created. Some of them work all over the world. For example, I use Google Pay a lot, and I read here https://casinosanalyzer.com/online-casinos/google-pay https://casinosanalyzer.com/online-casinos/google-pay that it can be used to pay almost everywhere. And although I mostly use cards and apps, I don't want to give up cash completely, I would like to be able to pay with both cash and cards.
- laweijfmvo 3y agoAnecdote: I've never seen this. I have seen "cash only" still, though.
- 2024throwaway 3y agoI misread
- HWR_14 3y agoOne is 100% cash, 0% non-cash. The other is 0% cash, 100% non-cash. The difference is as wide as it is possible to be.
- woodruffw 3y agoIt was somewhat common in NYC, until the city banned it[1]. There are a few chains that have notably attempted to ignore the requirement[2]. [1]: https://www.nyc.gov/site/dca/consumers/Prohibition-of-Cashless-Establishments.page https://www.nyc.gov/site/dca/consumers/Prohibition-of-Cashle... [2]: https://nypost.com/2021/12/04/nyc-businesses-told-to-pay-up-after-not-accepting-cash/ https://nypost.com/2021/12/04/nyc-businesses-told-to-pay-up-...
- HaloZero 3y agoI live in Oakland and it's getting more and more popular here in order to avoid theft. SF I think requires you to take cash as legal tender though so it's not allowed there.
- pimlottc 3y ago> SF I think requires you to take cash as legal tender though so it's not allowed there. I don't know anything specifically about SF, but just to note that the term "legal tender" specifically refers to payment for a debt. Since most retail business require payment before giving customers their goods, no debt is actually incurred. Table-service restaurants are a common exception to this, where you eat first and then pay, but counter-server restaurants often require you to pay up front when you make your order.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- superfrank 3y agoI can definitely name a few in Seattle off the top of my head that don't accept cash. 2 because they stopped during covid and never started back up. One because of robberies and break ins, so they've stopped keeping cash on site as a deterrent.
- legitster 3y agoThis happens a lot at foodtrucks and farmer's markets. It's so much easier to set up Square on your phone than haul around a till.
- aidenn0 3y agoA few categories: - Many hotels no longer accept cash (this was gradual; it was formerly an increasingly large deposit to stay with cash) - Many vending machines will not take cash; either by design or due to disrepair on the bill feeder. - Specific areas where you can find out ahead of time that cash will not be accepted: (music festivals, airplane flights &c.) I have only seen a few traditional stores with no-cash, but I expect it to accelerate.
- adventured 3y agoOn the flip side, it has never been easier to become banked in the US. Chime & Co. have lowered the entry difficulty for fundamental banking services for the poor. And loading cash is trivial, walk into any number of thousands of stores (such as Walgreens which charges no fee). You see these cards commonly used by poorer Americans across all of retail now.
- woodruffw 3y agoChime is not a bank; it’s a financial services company. This distinction is important: people who depend solely on bank-adjacent financial services are more likely to lack access to ordinary banking services for the reasons mentioned in the article.
- tracerbulletx 3y agoThat's well and good but isn't the article about the impact of businesses going cashless? I talk to a lot of homeless and other low income people through some work I do and they generally have a Venmo card or something like that and don't have an issue with cashless transactions.
- beaeglebeached 3y agoHow KYC do? Was 'homeless'. Bank say no bueno, could be terrorist. I can legally carry gun no problem without papers in bank though, lmao.
- ensignavenger 3y agoThats the goverments fault, not the banks fault. Go talkm to you US Congress ritter/Senator.
- woodruffw 3y agoI think there’s a reasonable observation to be made that these kinds of services companies have filled a historically underserved niche. At the same time, they are fundamentally not banks and are not subject to a whole slew of consumer protection regulations that ensure reliable access to funds. Venmo and PayPal are both infamous for their capricious account suspension policies (which I have personally experienced). That’s a long way of saying that it isn’t nothing, but is also not the best we can do. It also doesn’t necessarily guarantee service users access to retail (since the cards that come with these financial providers are typically tied to banks and accompanying KYC controls).
- pokstad 3y agoI think Germans are more likely to pay with cash because of privacy concerns. Maybe we need a society that values privacy more.
- 1270018080 3y agoIt's more of a broad fear of change/technology/the modern age in Germany. Homeopathy is considered real medicine there even today. Physical paperwork for all of the bureaucracy, and of course the bureaucracy there is legendary. Credit cards fall under a similar umbrella.
- bparsons 3y agoVery common in Canada now. I noticed this week that everything at Whistler/Blackcomb resort is cashless.
- Scoundreller 3y agoTeaching temporary aussie staff how to count Canadian (and occasional US) cash and coins became an untenable problem.
- mindwok 3y agoCard-based transactions becoming so pervasive has made me wonder if countries should start redirecting their efforts to building nationalised payment infrastructure that would allow citizens to transact electronically with zero fees, rather than their main function being managing and printing physical currency. Maybe some countries have done this already, but in Australia at least we're basically building our entire payment infrastructure on top of Visa and Mastercard.
- woodruffw 3y agoI believe much of the EU has done that. The US is going in a similar direction with FedNow, although at typical US pace.
- legitster 3y agoFednow is only an inter-banking solution. It doesn't have any consumer facing component.
- woodruffw 3y agoI know that; real-time interbank settlement is the first and necessary step for real-time consumer settlement. ACH, our current interbank system, is incapable of real-time settlement.
- TheNewsIsHere 3y ago> ACH, our current interbank system, is incapable of real-time settlement. This might be nitpicky given the outcome is the same, but: That was once true but is no longer the case. Nearly-instant and same-day ACH are available now, but not widely and not typically available directly to consumers.
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 3y agoWouldn't surprise me if China has already done this.
- 3y ago
- blibble 3y ago> A recent Bankrate survey shows basic monthly service fees range between $5 and $15. Beyond these steady fees, banks earn $4 to $5 each time people withdraw cash from an ATM or need services like getting cashier’s checks. Unexpected bills can result in overdraft fees of about $25 each time an account is overdrawn. are there no free bank accounts in the US? in the UK you can pay to be ripped off and have a "premium" bank account with added benefits such as crappy breakdown/mobile phone insurance but most have a free bank account with no monthly fee withdrawing from almost all ATMs is free (non-bank owned ones charge everyone, e.g. in an airport) all but very large transfers (>£1 million) are free and instant overdrafts are optional and it's difficult (but not impossible) to go overdrawn without one and no overdraft means no credit check needed
- orangepurple 3y ago[dead]
- Loughla 3y agoYes there are free accounts. And yes there are accounts where you can get money from an ATM without paying a fee. Like everything else, there are a multitude of experiences. Some places have fees. Some don't. Some pay better interest than others. Some have better web options. Source: I've never paid a fee and have had a checking and savings account for ~ 4 decades.
- Kirby64 3y agoThere’s plenty of free bank accounts. Almost every bank offers them, too, or they’re free with stuff that the “average” person would do (ie, have 2 direct deposits per month). Overdrafts are another story, many bank accounts allow overdrafts and even do predatory things to increase the amount of overdraft fees. Bank of America got sued for this behavior.
- HWR_14 3y agoThe federal government just put a cap on overdraft fees. IIRC, it is $3.
- wand3r 3y agoI want to highlight an adjacent point: The Bank Secrecy act was established in 1970 and the $10k back then had the same buying power as $78k now. Its fucking bullshit that this law has not been repealed. With crazy inflation over the past few years $10k of cash is a fairly trivial sum. In SF, if you paid 2 months of rent in advance your landlord would have to go through extra acrutiny.
- HWR_14 3y agoIt doesn't go through "extra scrutiny" in any meaningful sense. It just gets reported to the IRS so people don't evade taxes.
- beaeglebeached 3y agoThey are usually filed electronically to FinCEN now, who's namesake is crime enforcement rather than revenue collection.
- YoyoyoPCP 3y agoDumb guy question: why does the US government not offer all citizens a bank account? Is there some constitutional reason against it?
- bonyt 3y agoMany have proposed having government-provided small-scale banking as an option, administered through the post office. It's a government office, with branches in every town, that already handles things like money orders.
- ars 3y agoBecause banks aren't just "store houses of money", they play important roles in the flow and quantity of money. (Each time they lend money they create money money out of thin air.) Which means there is risk in being a bank, as you probably remember from when a few banks failed a little while ago. But if the fed was a bank, it would be risk free (how could the fed fail?). Which cause all sorts of trouble. The fed could take actions (loan risky money) without worry. Or they would not be permitted to loan money - but that would cause even bigger problems because it would restrict the money supply. There's no good economic way to do it.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> why does the US government not offer all citizens a bank account? We had one [1]. It was considered redundant to private banking. I'm surprised no states have attempted this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_S...
- frogamel 3y agoExactly one state has! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_North_Dakota https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_North_Dakota It's state-owned but functions as a typical retail bank that takes deposits, makes mortgages, business loans, etc.
- 3y ago
- NaOH 3y ago>The FDIC calls people without a bank account “the unbanked.” People with a bank account but who primarily rely on alternative services such as check cashing outlets are called “the underbanked.” >The next time you see a sign in a shop or restaurant window stating “No cash accepted,” you’re really looking at a business excluding many unbanked and underbanked people. Speaking of the US, I would like to know how much overlap there is between businesses that don't accept cash and people who are unbanked or underbanked. My limited exposure to no-cash businesses suggests these establishments are not losing/excluding customers as these were not places that would be patronized by un/underbanked consumers. But I'm not confident where I live and where I have seen this practice is indicative of generalizations.
- karlgkk 3y agoYou're basically suggesting that underbanked or unbanked people shouldn't be able to shop somewhere just because they're not likely to. The bigger problem is that this may lead to a trend of haves and have nots, and if you have a fee heavy banking system that can choose to "fire" a customer, then you've got a serious issue where people can potentially be excluded from modern life _against their choice_. There are three reasonable fixes for this that are bandied about - Require industry to offer no-fee and no-overdraft checking accounts to low income residents. This is onerous for a lot of reasons, a main one being that it would force a lot of institutions to take on break-even customers. It would possibly manifest in the form of a single low-cost bank that the industry funds just for compliance. - Simple federal consumer banking services (in many countries, done through the post office). This would look like a simple checking account and debit card, with very few amenities or services. Many countries have had something like this, and although a lot of them have privatized since, they have strict regulations that view these services as a public good. - Require all businesses to take cash. I think this is the worst option, but that's a matter of opinion I suppose.
- sbeckeriv 3y agoWhy are businesses no longer accepting cash? What are the positives and negatives for businesses? What are the positives and negatives of accepting cash for businesses? Other then 6 million people across the united states cannot buy from your shop. I can guess at reasons for both but I do not run a business.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> Why are businesses no longer accepting cash? What are the positives and negatives for businesses? It's expensive to store and transport. It gets stolen, by employees and robbers. You get handed bad bills.
- beaeglebeached 3y agoI mean bank account get stolen by the government. They at least need lapdogs of the state to stomp their jackboots on the ground to take a bill out of your pocket.
- pizzalife 3y agoWhy? Because handling cash is expensive. You need to make trips to the bank (takes time + risk) to deposit, or you pay some company to do it for you (cost). Positives: You don't need to deal with any of that. Negatives: You can't take business from people who only have cash, but depending on what you're selling that might not really matter.
- blibble 3y agothe employees need to manage their floats too (counting before and after + balancing it) and you likely need a safe on premises too when their floats under/overflow, and controls around that cash is a huge pain in the ass
- superfrank 3y agoDon't forget that there's far less risk of theft, both from employees and non-employees when there's no cash on site. Also, needing to keep cash in small bills in the drawer to make change is a big pain in the ass.
- thatoneguy 3y agoMan, this is a nightmare. I spent my freshman year of college homeless because I had bad credit (thanks, former roommates!). I couldn't even get a checking account to get a debit card...the bank would only give me a cash in / cash out account.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- eek2121 3y agoThere are MANY banks that don't check your credit or banking history these days.
- TravisCooper 3y agoTerrible for personal freedom and autonomy. We have to mandate that sellers of essential goods (grocery, fuel) must always accept cash. Obvious that this will be used against "anti government forces" in the future... which will grow over time to encompass everyone. CBDC discussions already market their ability to limit what/when/how you can use your "money". Killing cash is just step one. Watch this space.
- legitster 3y agoThe actual report in question is kind of fascinating: https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/2021execsum.pdf https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/2021execsum.p... The thing they are not telling you in this article is that the "unbanked" rate has fallen nearly in half in the last decade - down to just 4.5%. Unbanked people still use prepaid cards, online payment portals, and money transfers at very high rates. And that the number one source of unbanked people getting a bank account is... getting a job. I think the concern is a bit overstated. Most prepaid cards (including the cited Walmart card) have no fees or waive them entirely.
- Scoundreller 3y agoOn the one hand, buying online without a credit card or debit card has become a bit easier as Amazon/Paypal/Ebay/Sony/Microsoft/Uber etc have gift cards that you can buy in stores with cash and purchase with. (Dunno if the accounts work without an attached card at all though). On the other, I'm also seeing fewer "self-checkouts" capable of accepting cash. While I generally prefer staffed check-out, retailers focus a lot on making sure the staffed checkout always has a bigger line than the self-checkout. But the store gets to say "we still accept cash" while making it more difficult to spend it there.
- xnx 3y agoCashless is great for reducing tax dodging and theft.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago> The latest FDIC data shows almost 6 million unbanked and 19 million underbanked U.S. households. Given that 2.5 people live in the average household, this means there are over 15 million people living in a home with no connection to banks, and 48 million more in homes with only a tenuous connection to banks. I think it is a big assumption that the 6 million unbanked are living in an “average household”.
- abrookewood 3y agoI was about to say that this would be illegal in Australia, but I'm wrong. There is no law against a business refusing to accept cash for goods and services: https://www.accc.gov.au/business/selling-products-and-services/payment-methods https://www.accc.gov.au/business/selling-products-and-servic...
- neilv 3y agoOn a main drag here, with concentration of nightlife, and also a concentration of street people, one upscale fast-food place started going cash-free at night. I don't know whether that was because they were concerned about robberies, or because they didn't want any of the street people sitting in there and making it less attractive. (Like in another nearby fast-food place.) Cash-free can be a conscious way to avoid serving much of a socioeconomic demographic you don't want to serve. A bit like the past practice of refusing to serve certain racial/ethnic groups, and posting signs stating that.
- neilv 3y ago> while another one-third said they simply “don’t trust banks.” I don't blame the poor people who mistrust banks. Surprise bank fees can be downright predatory and devastating. At a time when I had to live off credit cards, a major bank started charging me $15/month for my checking account with ATM/debit card, because my balance was too low. Which seems minor now, but was painfully worth a lot of frugal groceries at the time. And I was so afraid of closing the account and possibly disrupting the credit cards that were the only thing keeping me from being homeless, that I kept paying the fee. Then there's the overdraft fees. (I've seen $50 for one instance!) Combined with the bank ordering transactions for the day, highest-to-lowest, to maximize the instances of overdraft fees. Overdrafts can happen without your awareness, such as when a service erroneously pulls from your account. Then there's credit cards. Accidentally late on one payment (IIRC, an e-bill didn't come through), and I had 29.99% APR penalty rate kick in, compounded monthly. When I could least afford that, and was in no position to pay it off. Banks aren't all bad, I appreciate their services, and I generally like my bank branch people. And there might be additional reasons that some unbanked people avoid banks. But I understand if poor people mistrust banks, since surprise predatory fees or other problems can make the difference between barely squeaking by, and no longer squeaking by.
- Brian_K_White 3y agoCredit Union. It's not magic or all that much cheaper, but the fundamental incentives are better aligned. (I recognize that you no longer have this problem needing a solution)
- sgent 3y agoBanks now have to order transactions / clearing in the way most beneficial to the consumer. One of the big items that passed under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
- neilv 3y agoBuried on page 6. We need to remember to upvote posts and comments, not only post our comment. > 169. 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans (theconversation.com) 40 points by bikenaga 1 hour ago | unvote | flag | hide | 76 comments
- thiht 3y agoI’m surprised it’s legal for a business in the US to refuse cash payments. Is there a reason supporting cash payments is not mandatory?
- elforce002 3y agoIf you don't want my money, so be it.