Slashdot Mirror
Cash Might Be King, but They Don't Care (nytimes.com)
In Midtown and some other neighborhoods across New York City, cashless is fast on its way to becoming normal, The New York Times reports, sharing anecdotes where merchants have refused to accept bills from customers (the link may be paywalled). From the report: Cashless businesses were once an isolated phenomenon, but now, similarly jarring experiences can be had across the street at Sweetgreen, or two blocks up at Two Forks, or next door to Two Forks at Dos Toros, or over on 41st Street at Bluestone Lane coffee. In the future, when dollar bills are found only in museum display cases, we will look back on this moment of transition and confusion with the same head-shaking smile with which we regard customs on the Isle of Yap in Micronesia, where giant stone discs are still accepted as payment for particularly big-ticket items. Some people already live in this cashless future. They find nothing strange about paying for a pack of gum with a swipe of a card. If you are one of these people and you are still somehow reading this article, you may be thinking, "What on earth is the big deal?" At Two Forks on 40th Street, where the lunch offerings have cheery names like Squash Goals, Kristin Junco, a 34-year-old auditor for the state Education Department, said she had not used cash for about a week and much prefers a cashless establishment to its opposite. "We travel a lot for work," she said, gesturing to a colleague, "and if they don't take credit cards that makes things difficult." [...] Not surprisingly, the credit card companies, who make a commission on every credit card purchase, applaud the trend. Visa recently offered select merchants a $10,000 reward for depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice. A Visa executive described this practice to CNN as offering shoppers "freedom from carrying cash."
Visa recently offered select merchants a $10,000 reward for depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice.
Clearly they are wielding monopoly power now against GOVERNMENT-BACKED legal tender. If bribing vendors to reject Bills and accept only Visa fake money that only those with good credit or a bank account can get isn't a threat to freedom, democracy, and capitalism, then I dunno what would be.
Visa recently offered select merchants a $10,000 reward for depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice.
This just sounds hysterical. What if the customer wants to pay with the mentioned stone discs? Is the business depriving them of yet another non-existent "right"?
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
I have been carrying more cash lately since is seems to speed transactions over credit cards with the embedded chip.
The poor still don't have free cards. They either have to pay for a credit card, usually via super high interest rates, or have to pay for a bank account.
This is in addition to the issue of privacy, though their are apps like privacy.com (basically unlimited burner visa cards that pay for themselves by taking the 1% that credit cards usually offer as cashback) that offer enhanced privacy for cashless transactions.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
accepting cash isn't free. Employees steal. You have to do the paperwork to keep track of it and account for all the receipts. Unless you run to the bank daily, you have to pay an armored car to pick it up and deposit it for you.
For ALL debts public and private. If I eat at your restaurant and you tell me you don't accept ANY US bill (even hundreds) I say thanks for the free meal!
Not accepting cash at all? That's pretty novel for a brick and mortar business. I rarely use cash, but I've never been to a business that wouldn't accept it. What about when the power goes out? Are we just supposed to stop being able to make purchases?
I don't think my bank or credit card company needs to know where I eat lunch every day. Sure, I use plastic to avoid dealing with a cashier (gas stations and parking) and of course for online shopping where you can't use cash. I find cash convenient for me and faster than a lot of transactions I see when people have to use a card, wait for it to authorize, some then fire up a printer, then they sign it. Dunno. My bank probably thinks I'm a drug dealer. My cash machine is only a few minutes away from the office, so it's easy to get more. Lots of point-of-sale machines at small shops get malware on them as well. We've had a few instances at work where a lot of people suddenly saw unexpected charges on their cards. In both cases, a nearby lunch place had their point-of-sale system infected and it stole their information. So, it does happen.
Get off my lawn...I suppose?
We have a big problem with cashless businesses. Where I live you can't go swimming or take the bus with cash.
I think it's a shame. You should be careful to preserve the cash option. First of all it's good for kids to learn the value of money, you don't get the same sense of spending if you don't lose something physical. Second of all, if your bank screws up you're supposed to be able to take out your money and walk out of the bank. If you can't use the cash you take out the banks' power increases a lot.
This ``depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice'' is bullshit. If you eat at a restaurant, and then they announce they don't accept cash as payment, you're perfectly OK to just walk out. They may not accept your particular brand of credit card, but they MUST accept cash.
You have the right to settle your debts... and there's a government mandated way of doing that. They might as well claim your only way of settling debt is to present your first born... or give them one of your kidneys. Cash has that ``all debts, public and private'' in there for a reason---it's so everyone is forced to accept it on settling of debts.
Many places wouldn't even have the capability to ring you up or keep transaction records during a power outage. If the power grid in your area is pretty stable, it might not be worth setting up contingencies.
...they're doing it because they think they'll have less chance of being robbed.
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
dine and dash if you cash only = legal?
What if are in the place where you just have cash or only have and a card they don't take?? Can they call the cops on you? Do they have to a big sign + the sever saying up front that we do not take cash?
In an criminal court some fine print may not stand up.
Are the obstacles towards going cashless technological or political?
Just supposing the technology did exist to have cards that held a representation of value. Let's say that these cards were backed by the government (i.e. so that you could transfer money to an individual or organisation without anyone having to pay charges on the transfer). Lastly let's also say that such technology was anonymous (i.e. so that if I stole your card with whatever 'money' was on it, I could use it without anyone asking me whether I was authorised to do so).
Would this take off? Would it be blocked by lobbying from Visa and other payment system companies, or protests from anti-government types who would not believe that such technology would *truly* be anonymous?
Deal with reality - the world as it is - rather than ideality - the world as you would like it to be.
Android pay became faster than credit card due to the introduction of the chip; ranked by speed it seems to be:
1. Tapping a card (e.g. PayPass)
2. Swiping a card (such as a gift card, or if terminal or card is not yet chip enabled)
3. Cash with no change, or automatic change dispenser
4. Android/Apple pay
5. Cash with hand counted change
6. Chip card (no pin or signature)
6a. Chip card with pin
6b. Chip card with signing
7. Personal Check
Has you seen the posts my msmash? Very hit or miss. I'm sure Slashdot has received numerous complaints but it falls on deaf ears. I find myself spending more time on reddit than slashdot because the quality of this site is not what it used to be.
We'll make great pets
Thanks to those of you still carrying around cash. You help offset the credit card fees incurred by the merchant when I make a purchase, since they are built into the sale price. The credit card company then kicks back a portion of the fee to me, which I transfer to hotel or airline award programs and use to take a nice vacation every year.
It is also illegal.
Nope, it's not.
This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise.
For me Android pay is now unusable. For some reason the Marshmallow update causes the phone to hound me for the administrative password before it will let the transaction go through. All kinds of people complain about it, and as far as I know nobody has ever gotten any kind of a straight answer as to why or what it takes to fix this.
For the most part I just use cash for small transactions.
small shops want you to buy more then a pack of gum to be able to use a card!
Of course, NYC assumes their experience is typical. But where I'm at, EVERYONE still uses cash. It actually annoys me, because it takes time to make change. I'm actually surprised when I see someone else (like myself) paying with a debit card. Cash is still king here.
At least it's not as bad as it was in the 1980's in Miami, though. Back then, with all the drug smugglers, *everything* in that city ran on cash. People bought cars and mansions with suitcases full of cash (and banks, realtors, and car dealerships never asked where it came from, of course). It was a very strange place to be.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Disclaimer: Living in Europe, Belgium. I only use cash is when I go out with friends or have drinks.
The reason is that most bars do not have a have a wireless payment yet, so ordering a drink and paying is not really an option if you want to pay each time. Paying at the end of a heavy night has other disadvantages.
When we go out with friends, we just split the bill. Throwing a lot of cash on the table is easier than having either pay per person or transferring money to friends.
There are several ways of doing the transfer of money for free. And that is also where the problem is. There is no standard yet the cab do it right away. I can transfer money via the European banking system for free, but that is cumbersome for small amounts. And as there are several ways to do it directly, you will need several ways to do it and hope that the other has one of them, so cash is easier.
For almost everything else I pay with either a credit card that I pay at the end of the month, so no interest or via debit card. So buying a magazine or a can of whatever or a snack will be paid by wireless. That is possible to 25EUR. After that I need to type in my 4 digit pin.
Remember that there is not or almost no tipping. If we go to a 1 star restaurant, we perhaps round up to the next 5EUR or 10EUR on a (4 people) 500EUR bill. People get paid for their job. Tipping is not expected and mostly just rounding up.
When I am in Germany or Spain, cash is much more a standard to use. Many places there will not accept cards or not under a certain amount. Spin is catching up fast, as far as I can tell. Germany? Not so much.
Also note the the credit card company can see where I bought something, not what. Same with the bank. The store will not have the card number, so it will not be able to link purchases to you, unless you have a store card,
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
You might not be aware, but the treasury isn't part of the judicial branch of the U.S. Government.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I havenâ(TM)t carried cash in years, except when traveling, to the US for example.
We got the app (mobile pay) in 2013 that enabled us to transfer small amount between people instantly and everyone of all ages uses that.
We have had chip on cards for some time and now contact less visa and mastercards.
Most stores donâ(TM)t hold enough cash because the open borders across the EU have imported new crime we werenâ(TM)t used to in Scandinavia.
So the banks donâ(TM)t have money to prevent bank robberies and the criminals turned to robbing shops and old people in their homes.
L'Idiot
They don't have pencil and paper? That's all that's needed to tally and track a transaction.
912 is the real 911!
A lot of the businesses I frequent are the same. I guess the difference is the kind of businesses I frequent are built upon offering a service, not turning a fast profit. I really don't understand why anyone is patronizing a business who's main product is profit for itself. It must be a NYC thing...
Few homeless persons have access to credit/debit cards.
How so? It's only a few cents to get a transaction through. On Bitcoin these days a transaction costs $20+
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Beat Up /. all you want. But don't talk like Reddit isn't a festering septic pond.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
This - Android Pay was dead to me the first time it held me up like that at POS.
So I can sue the vending machine makers for not handling $100 bills for a $1.50 bottle of Soda Pop?
Or the stores that say we do not accept bills over $20.00
In College where I needed quarters only to use the Washing Machines?
While Cash is good for all debts private and public. We don't have to accept the notes, or coins. The guy who tries to pay for his car with pennies, can be denied.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Back when I had a business taking credit cards, it was a percentage (up to 3.5% at the time, it has gone up since) of the total *plus* a flat per-transaction fee ($0.30 IIRC since I wasn't a high-volume vendor). So if somebody pays for a $1 pack of gum with their card you've potentially just lost 1/3 of the purchase price to transaction fees...
I print, therefore I am.
They don't have pencil and paper? That's all that's needed to tally and track a transaction.
Pencil, paper, and training on how to use them. A lot of places don't "waste time" on that last item. Not to mention that a lot of registers will refuse to let the clerk make change if they're powered down. And even that assumes that the clerk can do things like add up tax and calculate change.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Government wants a cashless world. It's about control. When you no longer have any tangible assets, they can take whatever money they want (ask Greece). Or, they can control/monitor your purchases. Outlaw cash...then make a law about healthcare tied to what you spend. Go into a fast food establishment...order a cheeseburger, fries and a coke....BZZZZZZZ sorry, your last healthcare checkup says your BMI is too high. Try to buy a sports car...BZZZZZZZ...sorry, your driving record shows too many speeding tickets. DON'T think it can't happen!
3. Cash with ... automatic change dispenser
This option 3 rapidly turns into option 8 after you have to keep reinserting a bill into the flaky bill acceptor multiple times.
Essentially, you would be violating the vendor's rules, meaning there was no legal transaction and you are not welcome on the property.
That's theft. And possibly trespass. I suspect you could get away with it at least once by playing innocent, but it likely wouldn't be worth the hassle.
Pretty much this. Offer to pay in cash and, especially with sizable sums, you'll see them being a lot more approachable for discounts.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So tell me... please... how well a business's right to refuse to accept cash would work for things like restaurants and hair stylists? What if the card is declined for some reason, but they still have cash as a backup?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I am stating that refusing to do business with people who don't have credit cards is blatantly discriminatory, and it doesn't matter what the treasury says, because there are many, many other *laws* that matter more than the treasuries *rules*. This is a matter of law, not rules.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
>"A Visa executive described this practice to CNN as offering shoppers "freedom from carrying cash.""
This needs to be stopped. That is NOT "freedom", it is the exact opposite. Cash should *ALWAYS* be accepted at merchants. I see nothing wrong with cash-only, or offering both cash and credit/debit, but there are huge potential issues with credit/debit only, not the least of which is privacy and tracking. Also- emergencies and technology failures.
Bullshit. Tips, as reported to the IRS, are higher when CCs were used (and there is a paper trail). What a surprise.
Even when paying with a CC, I tip in cash. Assuming it's value is stretched by the servers marginal tax rate.
It's everybody's job to 'starve the beast'. Cash is king.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Cards cost significantly more than cash. Cards cost 3%. Cash handling isn't nearly that expensive.
I don't respond to AC's.
because I get cash back and pay it off every month. It's about $500/yr. It's basically a 1% discount on life in general. It pays for my video game hobby. I'm not responsible for fraud so I don't really care about the malware and there's plenty of better ways to steal my identity than a random credit card swipe anyway. And I like the idea that if I'm mugged all they get is cheap cell phone and a wallet full of worthless plastic.
As for tracking, meh. They way I see it is that if I live in a society where tracking the sandwich I bought becomes a significant impact on freedom then I'm already so thoroughly screwed it hardly matters anymore. In terms of freedom I've got much, much bigger fish to fry.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
While this is anecdotal evidence, I have quite consistently seen chip card with pin be measurably faster than cash with hand-counted change. About 10 to 30 seconds per transaction faster.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
However having cash is dangerous to the merchants. Especially in City areas where they can get robbed. Knowing they don't accept cash means they will not have cash on their person, so robbing them for cash would be fruitless. Also by not accepting cash, the robbers cannot buy things with their dirty money directly, causing the merchant being under investigation of being part of money laundering.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
In The Netherlands, card is king: debit card. Almost no one carries cash anymore, but credit cards are also very rare for daily purchases.
Why do Americans use credit cards instead of debit cards? Is it really the 1% kick-back received from a portion of the fee the merchant pays to the credit company, or is it a real need to buy things one cannot otherwise afford?
Also, why do American merchants pay the fee to credit card companies instead of simply accepting direct debit only?
what offsets those fees is how much easier it is to upsell somebody on credit. That's why you can pay with a credit card for things like food, video games electronics and even the down payment on a car but you can't do it for rent or a house payment (not without crazy fees anyway).
I wish I could say I don't fall for this. Microsoft did this with XBox points. You don't feel the cost the same way when you're not counting out bills and change.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
... cards are *expensive*. They're about 3%. It doesn't take 3% of our gross revenue to handle cash. Nowhere close to that.
These businesses who can afford to throw away 3% of their gross right off the top are doing so because either:
- Their products are severely overpriced, and they don't mind giving 3% to Visa/MC
- They're being run by very inept people.
I use cash everywhere possible. It's easy. It's cheap. It's anonymous.
I don't respond to AC's.
Push hard and you can see discounts of near their marginal tax rates on income.
Which is a rip. You know they are keeping the cost of what they sold you on the books, just forgetting they got paid.
Protip: Only works when dealing with the owner, or at least someone who understands.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I didn't mean self-checkout... rather, the cash registers that instantly dispense the change into a cup on the customer side while the cashier handles the bills.
I am stating that refusing to do business with people who don't have credit cards is blatantly discriminatory...
So? Who said vendors can't discriminate?
...and it doesn't matter what the treasury says, because there are many, many other *laws* that matter more than the treasuries *rules*. This is a matter of law, not rules.
And yet, you don't seem able to share a reference to the laws you keep referring to. You do seem to be suggesting that the judiciary is willing to contradict the treasury. That seems unlikely unless you have something to back it up. Lunix shared info from the treasury supporting his assertion. All you've offered is a "nuh-uh".
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
I thought that the bills all stated something like they are good for all debts private and public.
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
When I lived in Philadelphia, we had under 45 minutes/year of power outages, with the longest one lasting 30 minutes (then two very short ones).
In cities the grid is often very redundant and power outages are a rarity. Sure, you may lose a single lunch or dinner rush at a sandwich place over the course of a year, but it could still be worth it.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Because I am such a moron, and you Mr. Internet Poster must be so smart. then explain where the cutoff line is?
Can I still say no bills over $20.00 if I am selling $100.00 worth of items?
Should I be required as a merchant to carry enough change to cover peoples cash purchases?
If I am not required to cover cash for change (for safety sake), then how can I accept cash to purchase something if I do not have a way to fairly pay the person back their balance?
So if I can reject any sets of notes and coinage, why can't I reject all of them?
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Visa recently offered select merchants a $10,000 reward for depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice
I could have sworn I read somethere words to the effect: THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.
And restaurants are one of the few types of establishment that are pay-after-consume. So there isn't even the possibility of returning the "goods". At least, not in their original state.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
This is more likely the test case.
Is the point of cash only to exclude the unbanked?
Do the unbanked in the area skew by race?
If those two things are determined to be true, this would likely be an example of racial exclusion (which legally doesn't need to be the intention, only the outcome of policy).
The flip side is that if safety of employees and speed of transactions can be demonstrated to be the reasons, it likely would stand as legal.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Bullshit. Tips, as reported to the IRS, are higher when CCs were used (and there is a paper trail). What a surprise.
Even when paying with a CC, I tip in cash. Assuming it's value is stretched by the servers marginal tax rate.
It's everybody's job to 'starve the beast'. Cash is king.
I don't know, facilitating tax fraud isn't something I am particularly comfortable with. I would prefer that the tax base be as large as possible, so making it more difficult for people to avoid their legal tax burden (or making it easier for people to track their legal tax burden if that framing is more pleasant) is a good thing in my opinion.
I am sympathetic to the reality that restaurant staff are not particularly well paid, and that making it harder for the wealthy to avoid taxes is probably a better thing to focus my attention on, but paying everything with plastic is also more convenient for me personally, so I have little inclination to deal with cash for a portion of the transaction.
The statement on the bill was so that no-one could refuse it during the "Great Rebellion", as the American Revolution was called at the time. A citation from 1869 is typical: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/...
At that time, the government did not wish to give person the option of refusing the (new) U.S. Dollar and demanding gold or silver before completing a transaction with the government or private individuals.
The Department of the Treasure has stated a legal opinion that the law does not apply to a large class of private transactions, on the grounds that a "debt" does not exist until the transaction is complete.
There is case law on paying the debt in cash as opposed to gold and silver, but Google Scholar doesn't report anything on refusal to accept cash for a non-debt.
An arguement can be made that the intention of the US founding fathers was to give "debt" its broadest possible reading, and that the position of the Treasury is pilpul, and requires authorizing legislation, such as (Canada's) "Currency Act"
This, of course, does not speak to other parts of the criminal code. For example, it may well be illegal to refuse to sell a necessity to a minor if they only have cash.
davecb@spamcop.net
911 will still get you the ambulance straight to ER
Not for long.
Have gnu, will travel.
Maybe this is the infamously out-of-date payment infrastructure in the U.S, but over here in Europe both NFC and Chip+PIN solutions are faster (considerably in the case of NFC-based payment methods) than paying cash even in the case you have exact change. Even with the slower Chip+PIN it's just a case of sticking the card in the machine, inputting your PIN and then waiting for 1-3 seconds for the transaction to go trough. At fast food places this happens as they're getting your food.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
Only if you're a dirtbag. Good you know yourself though.
It is a good idea to report the goddamn law abiders that refuse you a cash discount to the IRS.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The trend towards cashless troubles me because it takes a transaction between two parties and adds a third party - the bank. As we've seen in the past few decades, they're not exactly trustworthy or competent.
Retailers are already charged for every transaction made by card, which is fine for Walmart but not expensive for small traders, further biasing the market towards already huge entities. It adds a monetary cost as well as a knowledge barrier to small traders, flea market stall holders and self employed tradespeople.
Furthermore, every purchase becomes a public act with a permanent record. If there is information on you, you can bet your ass someone will pay for it - social media has made it a business model to collect it. The panopticon wasn't built around government, but advertising. This is not a hypothetical future but instead our reality, today.
Do you really wish to give up more privacy? As America lurches and burps and farts its way towards authoritarianism with King Baby at the helm, don't you think the Intelligence Services will be delighted to pour through your purchase records for signs of being an Enemy of the People?
Simply, it's another centralising trend at a time when people should be keeping well away from it. In a way, its a sign of how centralised we have become - the lie of the tech utopians was that we would rid ourselves of middle men. Instead, the middle men have become ubiquitous.
Plenty of places don't take cash. Like the DMV for example. Check or card only.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I have been doing this for years. Minus business expenses which I put on a business credit card, I pay for everything in cash. It is faster, more private, and helps prevent identity / card theft. If I have a major expense, I will use a wire or bank draft.
I really don't understand why anyone is patronizing a business who's main product is profit for itself.
Every business I can think of is motivated by either profit or expansion. Where are you shopping where customer satisfaction comes before the bottom line?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
If that were true (only outcome matters) banking would be illegal.
You don't get to _make_things_up_. Just because credit rating clearly skews by race, doesn't make it illegal to give credit.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I was at a local restaurant for lunch, average cost of $8-$10 after tip, and it was mostly full. Then they lost phone connection, so no credit card usage.
People were having to dig up bills from bottoms of the purse or where ever they could. I was sitting near the cash register and they were giving discounts because people did not have enough cash with them to pay the bill.
And knowledge of the item prices, which is typically no longer tagged onto each item. I've been through your "pencil and paper" transaction, post-Irma, and it took 15 minutes to an hour to process each transaction.
"We travel a lot for work," she said, gesturing to a colleague, "and if they don't take credit cards that makes things difficult."
Umm, am I missing something here? Surely this article is about places that don't accept cash, not ones that don't accept credit cards?
Also, how exactly does travelling a lot make it hard to use cash unless she is referring to international travel. Perhaps if you travel a lot you end up in places where you don't know where the cash machines are?
Is said 34 year old auditor extremely dumb, or (rather more likely) has she been misquoted?
We need to demand that the post office reopen its old basic banking services and issue cards that won't carry the huge taxes that the banks call "fees". Otherwise we are being robbed big time.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Given that US paper money says "This note is legal tender for ALL debts, public and private" (emphasis mine). Refusing cash is refusing to be paid, so I guess whatever it was must be free, or they're not selling it.
So tell me... please... how well a business's right to refuse to accept cash would work for things like restaurants and hair stylists?
Simple. If you don't have a card, you have to wait tables or cut hair until you're square with the house. Problem solved. Things get even more interesting when you can't pay your orthodontist.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Kristin Junco, a 34-year-old auditor for the state Education Department, said she had not used cash for about a week and much prefers a cashless establishment to its opposite. "We travel a lot for work," she said, gesturing to a colleague, "and if they don't take credit cards that makes things difficult." [...] Not surprisingly, the credit card companies, who make a commission on every credit card purchase, applaud the trend. Visa recently offered select merchants a $10,000 reward for depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice.
So, despite just quoting Kristin Junco that paying via credit card is her preferred method of payment, the "reporter" than writes of credit card companies "depriving customers of their right to pay by the method of their choice" (the reporter assumes everyone prefers to pay in cash)?
When did a desire to pay a debt in a certain manner (cash, credit card, debit card, personal check, bitcoin, third-person check, loose coins, beaver pelts, etc.) obligate a retailer to accept your form of payment?
Ken
refusing to do business with people who don't have credit cards is blatantly discriminatory
In the US, there are a handful of things you can't discriminate against. "Not having a credit card" isn't on that list.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
Like trying to force "self-driving" cars down our throats (quotes becauses the tech's a fucking joke), this is what seems to be happening when those with profoundly unimpressive intellects are allowed to make decisions that affect the rest of us.
On a related note, if you place an order and food is prepared for you, would that not constitute a "debt?" 'Cause if so... these dumbasses are breaking the fucking law by refusing cash.
They don't have pencil and paper?
Very sharp objects. Too dangerous.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Tell it to the FCC
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Various services have been in trouble over the years because their criteria that weren't race based skewed too heavily on race (for example car insurance with too granular an address based rate, or in the criminal system sentencing variation between crack and powder coke).
Even in my post I point out that criteria not involving the potential customers would likely pass muster.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Try and mentally play that out for a second... getting someone who doesn't work for you to cut hair with no prior training, or waiting tables.
Uh... no.
It's about as likely today as getting them to go in the back and wash dishes to pay off the meal.
And again, remember... we are talking about a person who has offered a completely legally recognized means of squaring the debt owed.
While it's certainly possible that the restaurant *could* call the police, I can't imagine any exchange they could possibly deliver to the cops that would get them to come without also leaving out the fact that the customer did offer to pay in cash, and if they got there and found out that was the deal, they'd probably be more pissed off at the restaurant than anything else.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
A lot of people use cards for payment because they don't have to have a pile of cash, it's sort of quick (so long as the bank network doesn't go down), you can track payments, but there are very serious downsides that these people who are pushing the so called cashless society do not want to consider and definitely do now want to tell people about.
1. You can track all payments. Fine if you're dopey person parroting the state's "Nothing to hide nothing to fear" nonsense, but that means they will know everything about you, what newspaper you buy, did you buy a sex toy, did you give your grandchildren a bit of birthday money.
2. You lose all control of your wealth. What I mean is, instead of having an ability to buy what you want with cash, the moment it's all electronic, the government can stop you existing by freezing your access to electronic "money". Good luck to eating / paying bills without money. This can be extended so you vote the right way in elections nothing happens, and raid your account as punishment if you voted "the wrong way".
3. With no cash, at a moment's notice, the government can decide it will raid all your bank / savings accounts for x%, just like the European Central Bank did to Cyprus - they called that state crime a "bail-in". Noticed how the US economy is $19Trillion+ in debt, reduce it by raiding your accounts one day, you won't have a say in it.
4. With electronic "money", there is NOTHING to stop the banks and card providers suddenly increasing their transaction fees. Want to protest about it? Too late, you have no alternate way of paying for anything,.
5. Much is made of the ability to track transactions, with the claim you can stop money laundering. This is false. If a drug dealer for example has a suitcase of $20 bills, it's going to weigh a lot, and attract a lot of attention. But in the electronic world, at a press of a button, that same amount of money can be sent around the world any number of times, cleaning it. Nobody does it? Just ask HSBC (and other banks) who where caught doing just that, laundering money for drug cartels.
6. Cash funds crimes and terrorism? It's far easier to move electronic "money" around to fund terrorism, just ask governments and banks and stock exchanges, they do it daily.
So before people think what a great idea going cashless is, you better be prepared to sign your life away to being totally controlled, and not cry about it when it is.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
Cash does allow for transaction privacy, which credit cards definitely do not. I have nothing to hide, that doesn't mean I want ALL my purchases tracked, and linked to recent ad campaigns, and input to recommendation engines, and given to my health insurance provider, and such. (Not that that any of that would happen. ha.) Maybe there will be a bitcoin option..?
OK, now come at me, troll bros! I know how you all hate any thinking that's not pro-business, so score me a 1 and tell me all my problems.
Double down on 'wrong'...
Crack is _still_ punished harder than powder cocaine, but exactly the same as meth. People bitch about it, but they are rightly ignored.
Car insurance rates often go up in fancy zip codes. Because your neighbors are paying crazy money on cars trying to impress each other. But 'race pimps' never go there.
Your main point remains wrong: Racially skewed outcomes legally prove _nothing_, or every lender would be in deep deep shit. The credit reporting agencies in particular would be out of business.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
This is more likely the test case.
Is the point of cash only to exclude the unbanked?
Do the unbanked in the area skew by race?
Possibly, but it certainly skews by demographic. How will the illegal drug dealer sell his drugs on the street? How will streetwalkers do business? Hell, how do you give a grandkid $5 when they aren't even old enough for a phone/bank account/card?
I'm "Not Sure" (wait, that's not..OW!) I want the answer.
I'm sure we'll be better off without the ability to spend money without government tracking, analysis, taxation, and prosecution.
After all, what do you have to hide from Big Brother, Citizen? All personal, social, and financial interactions are tracked and analyzed...for your protection, of course.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
There is no law requiring businesses to take payments in cash. Even businesses that choose to take cash can refuse to take certain coins or bills. Ever seen a sign that says "exact change only" or a "No bills larger than a $10 accepted?"
Governments must accept cash, but businesses can do what they like. They could charge you in jelly beans if they wish. If you take their goods or services without paying them in the agreed/posted amount of jelly beans, then you'd be guilty of theft or theft of services. That could land you in civil court if it were a contract payment -- say you were to pay 5,000 jellybeans per month and suddenly stopped shipments. In that case, they'd sue, and then a judge would either compel you to produce the required jellybeans or a cash equivalent. If you simply took an item without payment in jellybeans, you'd likely be arrested and taken to criminal court then have to return the stolen items or make restitution for stolen services in either jellybeans or cash.... plus additional fines, jail time, etc.
This isn't some undefined area of law that hasn't been explored. Physical US bills and coins are legal tender for state and federal governments. There is zero legislation compelling businesses to use them. There are businesses in the USA that do business using strips of precious metals -- because they have lost faith in US currency. There are businesses that exclusively use tokens -- like casinos in Vegas that use them for gambling. There are some businesses that exclusively barter for items and have no cash involved whatsoever!
Credit cards, Debit cards, pre-loaded cards, and gift cards aren't radically different than tokens. Anyone can go to WalMart and buy a pre-loaded VISA or Mastercard without having to have a bank account, much less good credit. You can argue that they're discriminatory all you like, but not only is it a poor argument to make, there's no legal standing for disallowing such discrimination. One can't discriminate based on race, sex, religion, and many other factors for most for-profit entities, but there's no law against discriminating against poor people. There's no law against discriminating based upon credit rating either.
Frankly, most online businesses already require a credit card of some sort & the few that don't require a checking account instead. (A few rare businesses will take a cashier's check or a moneygram, but hey... may as well get a pre-loaded card if you're going to go through that trouble!) No online business takes cash through the mail, and most don't have a physical presence where you could take cash if you wanted to.
So, yeah, I personally think it sucks that fewer places are taking cash, but it's not illegal. Never was -- won't be no matter how much you hold your breath, turn blue, and act like Donald Trump by doubling down on something when you're wrong.
Try and mentally play that out for a second... getting someone who doesn't work for you to cut hair with no prior training, or waiting tables.
I didn't think I needed a </sarc>. Sorry. I wasn't really suggesting that unqualified people should wait tables, cut hair, or perform orthodontia.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Good.
I waited 30 years after reading, as a kid, that all the future money would be "credits" on some central account, accessible at a tap by authorised people. Every comic book, sci-fi movie, future-prediction TV science show, everything.
Finally it's here and people are whining. Now, yes, ideally it would be zero-fee and not run by two major corporations (American Express hardly counts outside of America, I've literally never seen anyone use one), but pre-pay credit cards are so cheap as to be cheaper than banking rates for personal customers nowadays (free bank accounts are rapidly becoming a thing of the past and never let you do all the useful stuff anyway).
Now, finally, we don't have to carry little tokens that are produced at great expense, and copied en-masse, to represent things that don't actually exist. We can just go straight to using a number that's traceable, accountable, recordable, etc. Whether the bank has all its gold stolen or not I really don't care. My account says so-much-money and that's what I want back, guaranteed by law in my country.
And it saves me having to carry change, get the right note, update all my coins every 10 years when they change the designs (in my country in the last 10 years they've changed the 10-pound, 5-pound notes and the 1 pound coin at least and that 10 years might even encompass the 2 pound coin, I forget).
To be honest, cash has been dead to me for a while.
I have a wallet with cards in. I have backup cards. I have pre-payment cards. And I can buy pre-loaded cards in minutes using anything from Bitcoin to Amazon vouchers.
I have a handful of high-value coins in the car to pay for parking (because we STILL haven't worked out how to pay for parking in my country - either convoluted, per-car-park SMS-based pissing about, or cash! Where are the card-readers? Where's the national chain? Where's the "pay-by-Oyster"? Useless people!) and to put a coin into shopping trolleys that are locked together.
Everything else... if it's notes I spend it as soon as I can or bank it if it's a lot. For coins, I stick them in a jar which my friends and I use for lunch or whatever else we need it for.
It's about time we just ditched the concept of cash entirely. There is no redeeming feature of it that isn't vastly outweighed by the cost of making and handling it.
Please use this comment thread to list all the reasons why 'cashless' isn't practical.
Here's one: How do you buy something from a random person on Craigslist when there's no cash? I don't want this person having anything to do with my bank accounts or even knowing my name. I wouldn't give him a check for the same reason. How do you pay this person for what you're buying from them if there is no cash?
More importantly, this allows the server the possibility of keeping the tips when the new administration rules allowing the business to keep the tips kick in.
If after eating at a restaurant I was told that they don't take cash, I would just leave. If it went to court, I would tell the judge that I offered federal legal tender as payment and they refused.
Cashless is great, convenient etc. until it isn't. Wait until the next hurricane, earthquake or N Korea shoots an EMP attack and the power is out for days or weeks. Then the people with no cash will be stuck with no ways to buy food and water or other necessities... There is a reason that hard currency is still around even when credit cards have been around for decades.
The other problem with going cashless is the invasion of privacy that is routine by big businesses and the government. If you are fine with both knowing every intimate detail of your life, go for it, but if not, you may want to make some purchases with untraceable cash.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
Wow, get a new transaction broker. I think I pay a flat 10c for any card because I'm very low volume up to a certain amount, then it's like 2% + 10c. You add the cost into your gum or set a minimum transaction, business 101
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
That has a blatantly disproportionate impact on protected minorities, and will be very easy to win in court.
Are you sure?
It is a widely held belief that, in the United States, a business must accept cash payments from a consumer. Some people take the argument a step further, arguing that if a business refuses to accept cash from a customer, the business loses its ability to charge the customer. Neither belief is true.
Some exceptions by state:
Although as a general rule a private business may restrict or refuse to accept cash payments, at times states will mandate that a business accept cash or limit any restrictions a business may impose on cash payments. For example, some states require that a landlord accept rent payments in cash. Many states require that a private impound lot accept cash payments by an owner seeking the release of a motor vehicle.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Here in Europe we have chipped credit/debit cards with RFID chips too. Itâ(TM)s possible to make paynents up to 25 EUR by just holding the card against the reader. Very easy and fast.
Donâ(TM)t you have anything like that there? Most payments are quite small anyway so itâ(TM)s always a lot faster than using cash.
Versus government tit suckers and 'workers'?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
This is a matter of law, not rules.
Fine. Here's some law.
Paper currency in the United States is printed with the provision that it is "legal tender for all debts, public and private", language that flows from the provisions of a federal law, 31 U.S.C. Sec. 5103,
United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.
The principal purpose of that statute is to ensure the nationwide acceptance of U.S. currency, consistent with constitutional language that reserves to Congress the power to create a uniform currency that holds the same value throughout the United States. While the statute provides that U.S. money is legal tender that may be accepted for the payment of debts, it does not require acceptance of cash payments, nor does it provide that restrictions cannot be imposed upon the acceptance of cash.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
That held together well. (emphasis mine)
http://time.com/money/4621673/... Think about that next time you go to McDonalds or some similar restaurant where the person handling cash is often handling food.
So ... they can say that they accept payments only in beans, pebbles or pine cones and nothing else? And that would be legal? The more I learn about US the harder it is to believe.
I'm surprised that a "no cash" policy hasn't attracted lawsuits from advocacy organizations for the homeless or illegal immigrants. If you're somebody living on the street or unable to establish an account due to being in the US illegally, then if you want to pay cash for some food you're out of luck.
As far as I know, most credit unions don't charge any fees for regular savings and checking accounts
Is everyone included in some credit union's geographic "field of membership"? And for those new to banking, how much does it cost to obtain the ID required by "know your customer" regulations?
Real story: At a McDonalds. The cashier rings up the wrong amount tendered. Not knowing what to do he calls over a second cashier. They stand there trying to figure out how to make the change. Manager comes over and looks at amounts and gives me the correct change. And the first cashier looks in disbelief and says "You can do math in your head!!"
Really happened.
They press pictures of the food you order on the register. Idiocracy is coming true!
What about when the power goes out? Are we just supposed to stop being able to make purchases?
I've experienced a power outage while shopping maybe 3-4 times in my life, but the response has always been the same. After about 5-10 minutes, they usher everybody out.
I don't know if they're more worried about liability or theft, but most businesses are willing to shut down during an outage.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
The credit card fee is just one of the "fees" baked into your purchase. If you go down the fees that are added to the cost of an item, that you may or may not use, credit card fees are just one of them. For example, many shops offer "free" parking. If I walk to the store, I'm still having the "free" parking baked into the cost. Perhaps other stores offer a very generous return policy. If I'm the kind of person who buys something and rarely returns it, then I'm paying for the return policy. Same is true for good customer service--if I walk in and know exactly what I want, I'm still paying for the knowledgeable staff. In general, the "baked in" fees should average out. On some transactions you might not need the service, and on others you take advantage of free parking, credit card, generous return policy and knowledgeable staff. If you feel that the merchant is charging you for services that you never use, perhaps you're shopping a store that is targeting a different customer.
This reads like a paranoid schizophrenic's writing. I'm not a fan of centralization, but most of your points focus on hair-brained nightmares of a libertarian without properly thinking them through. For example, #4 isn't possible because the value of the dollar is only stable internationally due to its reliability - if you want to see what happens when governments confiscate assets from private individuals and corporations without cause, look at Argentina and Venezuela and their currency volatility. Confiscating people's savings would send the dollar into a tailspin and cause it to lose more value than they gain by stealing it. Your take on this shows a severe lack of understanding in macroeconomics and how the global economy works, especially the focus on the national debt.
So, the person cheating on the taxes is OK, but the person who reports them is a dirtbag?
How about shoplifters? Spouse beaters? Muggers? People planting bombs? Which crimes that you might observe would you report? Where is the line that you pay attention to? Corporate malfeasance? Littering? Industrial pollution? Voter fraud? Government corruption? Cheating at poker? Checkers? Go-Fish?
I am genuinely curious.
I haven't actually reported anyone in this type of case, but the "snitches get stitches" type of philosophy doesn't really seem like the best way of running a society. That's how a gang/tribal/warlord type of society might be structured, and frankly isn't the type of rule-of-law society I would prefer to live in.
Physical US bills and coins are legal tender for state and federal governments.
"United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues." So you can pay your taxes with cash. I'm not sure exactly what public charges and dues refers to. That also means you can pay your mortgage with cash and the bank cannot refuse the payment (though it wouldn't surprise me if they tried).
So ... they can say that they accept payments only in beans, pebbles or pine cones and nothing else? And that would be legal?
The organizing principle of US law is (supposed to be) that anything not specifically prohibited is allowed. So in the absence of any law requiring businesses to accept a particular form of payment, they can demand payment in any medium they choose. And there is no such law.
Goddamn law abider!
Government is like a teanager. The last thing they should have is a credit card or unlimited funds. They just get into trouble, doing things they shouldn't.
It is immoral to _not_ avoid AND evade your taxes as much as possible!
So you are ok with tax fraud at any level? It is people's duty to try to evade taxes through illegal means? How's that supposed to work?
I want people to be nervous about committing tax fraud. Our tax system only works because the vast majority of payers are honestly trying to follow the rules. If almost everyone tried to cheat, most would get away with it. I want people to be ashamed of breaking the law and worried about flouting their illegal activities. Do you really want everyone to "lie, cheat, and steal"? Yeah, I understand the idea that governmental over-reach is a problem, but if the answer is every-gang-for-themselves, I don't know that is the best solution.
Personally, I hate cash because of the pocket change that often results from it. Later, futzing around said coinage to pay for food at a drive-through or whatnot is a major PITA.
Life is not for the lazy.
Taxation is theft!
Life is not for the lazy.
... with any of those grubby poor people who don't have credit cards or smartphones and only have access to cash. Why would a business that encourages people to use a freakin' credit card to buy a pack of gum want to have any of "those" people lingering around their stores?
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
It's not so much power outages that are the big issue, but network outages in general, which does not have power outage as a prerequisite.
Around here, there have been more than a few occasions where I go to Dollar Tree, or Safeway, or Salvation Army, and their card swiper network is down (and typically any places that use the same service are affected). When that happens, it is cash only. At least it is not yet cash, grass, or ass (where ass can just mean physical labor and not, you know...giggity).
This space unintentionally left blank.
I went to walmart customer service to get a 100 dollar bill for a Christmas present. The cashier pulled out a stack of probably 100 of them. I was amazed that they had that much money in a single register in a fairly insecure location.
my business if they go cashless. It's a retarded move for these idiots. I refuse to use a card of any kind for small purchases. It's stupid. Cash or you can GFY.
I remember that through the 1970s and 1980s, a whole lot of Christian sects were big on the whole "mark of the beast" thing, and railed against trackable transactions (among other things). Their fears were most likely way out of proportion to the actual threat, but where are they now? We could use some useful idiots willing to take the point.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
I also favour cash with local businesses because I know full well that card transactions reduce their income by a margin that, at the end of the year, is not so insignificant. And I know (from talking to them) that they generally appreciate it.
It’s a shame that the government does not set up an alternative payment method. Historically, governments have promoted trade through the creation and management of currency (which, by the way, is not free to the community, but the nation bears the cost because it is an essential tool). But policymakers have failed to provide an upgrade, possibly because of technical limitations: it’s obviously difficult (but, I imagine, not impossible), to create a secure, portable, anonymous and community-supported (i.e., at no cost per use) way of paying that could advantageously replaces cash-carrying wallets with electronic wallets. Of course, there may be other reasons in play, including lobbying from the banking sector (particularly, the credit card business), the desire to eliminate anonymous transactions for easier policing (fighting tax fraud, money laundering, etc.), and more.
Nonetheless, it’s also the role of the citizenry to demand for solutions, and fair solutions at that (i.e., not pseudo-solutions that allow private corporations to track your life and every purchase, and to get a financial cut on top of it). Yet, I haven’t seen any public discourse on the topic, which I find really strange.
You are preaching to idiots. There is no question that a bill can be paid in cash. IF you try to pay a $1 bill with $1000 bill they can refuse to provide $999.00 change, but a $1000 bill is legal tender for a $1000 debt, and to refuse to accept said payment is to forgive the debt. Period.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
with big privacy and social implications: https://www.wired.com/story/ag...
"Cash, Liu could see, had been largely replaced by two smartphone apps: Alipay and WeChat Pay. "
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
They can say exact amount only. It is about providing change. What they cannot say is "Even exact amount is unacceptable."
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Paypal become unusable for me when it now requires a mobile telephone number to register an account.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
I guess they will just start mugging customers for their credit and debit cards and demand the PIN for each card.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Taxation is theft!
Just like copyright infringement, right?
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Actually it depends.
Situation 1: You walk into a gas station to buy a candy bar with a $100 bill. Gas station says no, we don't handle bills above $20. Same goes for filling up your fuel tank if it is posted prominently that large bills are refused
LEGAL - you have not incurred a debt yet on the candy bar since the store still owns it, and you were warned by prominent signs that company policy states that the large bill would not be accepted.
Situation 2: you order food at a restaurant and eat it. No signs or other indications are present.
ILLEGAL You have a debt owed to the restaurant now, they have accepted and entered into a situation where they are your creditor, and they MUST accept the legal tender offer.
Unless the restaurant here has signs and / or makes it abundantly clear that cash will not be an accepted form of payment before the food is consumed they have to accept cash. If they make it clear that cash cannot be used before the food is consumed they can legally refuse to accept cash, unless state law comes into play wherein the state says they have to accept cash.
To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
to refuse to accept said payment is to forgive the debt. Period.
How do you know? Is there a statute that says so? Is there a court judgment that says so? Because the Treasury Department doesn't say that, so we would need a higher authority than that to contradict them.
Because I'm not an idiot, I know that if someone says I owe them $1000 dollars and I offer to pay them $1000 dollars, they cannot refuse my payment and say they want payment in cashcows, and will refuse to accept my *legal tender* dollars. They can refuse to provide change if the bill is $999 and I give them a $1000 bill, but they cannot say I didn't offer to pay.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
they cannot refuse my payment and say they want payment in cashcows, and will refuse to accept my *legal tender* dollars.
I don't know where you're getting this idea (I suspect thin air / your ass). Businesses can and do refuse cash, every single day. I have never heard of any business getting in trouble for this practice - have you? If so, what business, and what happened?
They can refuse to provide change if the bill is $999 and I give them a $1000 bill, but they cannot say I didn't offer to pay.
And if you try to leave with merchandise, they can also detain you and call the police and tell them you tried to leave the store without paying. Until the transaction is complete, you haven't paid. Secondly, the merchant is under no obligation to provide change. If you offer to pay with a $1000 bill and they tell you they can take the bill but can't give change, your options are 1) pay $1000 for it, or 2) don't buy it. 3) leave with the item without paying for is not a (legal) option.
Now that Verifone has started fixing their shit software, chip can be faster. At least until it gives the customer a bunch of confusing messages.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Cash also goes missing. The average register is short by a couple of bucks a day. In a major place that is couple if weeks pay for the employees.
The more people who use one register the greater the amount that it will be off.
Credit card receipts are almost never off.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If I enter a wrong pin or choose the wrong account, that adds perhaps about 10 or 15 seconds to total the time it takes, which can still in some cases be faster than cash only.
But yeah.... that will slow things down a lot. In general, I don't have any difficulty with my pin, or choose the wrong account to pay from.
Notwithstanding, Ive seen some people take 2 or 3 minutes just counting out money from their own purse or wallet, compared to the 20 seconds or so it would take for me to handle such a transaction electronically via chip and pin.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
When any business can be hit up for their services by refusing legal tender for services rendered (or products delivered), they quickly return to at least accepting cash, even if it's not their preferred method of payment.
After all, on every bill, there is a line that reads: "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER, FOR ALL DEBTS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE". This quote is missing from any coins, thus being a main reason that the $1 coin has not even come close to replacing the bills in the U.S.
Any business that refuses Legal Tender for services rendered can consider the debt paid in full... IF the state where you are attempting to do so has a law in place that prohibits refusal of legal tender.
See the following for details:
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx/
All in all, there are still a few holdouts on the "No Cash" bandwagon.
Frankly, as long as my non-credit-card-based debit card is accepted, I'm good to go. It is a shame that more places don't accept such debit cards, though...
China, especially in big cities, most people have gone cashless, they pay using smartphone apps, and 3D barcodes
A lot of stores don't take cash, even roadside vendors and beggars, YES, BEGGARS have put up 3d barcodes
It brings a lot of conveniences - and a lot less petty crimes, such as robbery
But the ultimate consequence is that the authority knows and controls everything
Every single transaction is recorded, with timestamp, GPS location, and so on
Because of this, it is becoming more and more difficult for people to donate their money to 'rebels', or groups of people who have 'different thought' from the 'official approved' version
What is happening in China should be our reminder --- never, ever allow the authority too much leeway, and a cashless society will definitely tied us to A MONOPOLY THAT WE CAN NOT SHAKE LOOSE
I can take my business elsewhere if you only take Apple Pay, Android Pay and chip-only credit cards.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
NY and CA are where 18.25% of the population of the US live, that's significant.Those two states combined are 19.1% of the US's GDP. Throw in a big state like Texas and you find combined they go past a quarter of the total population.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I really don't understand why anyone is patronizing a business who's main product is profit for itself.
Every business I can think of is motivated by either profit or expansion. Where are you shopping where customer satisfaction comes before the bottom line?
Customer Satisfaction will bring about repeat customers. Repeat customers tend to not only spend more, but also tend to provide free marketing and thereby bring in more customers (work of mouth, friends & family, etc). Thereby growing the profits more. Of course, customer satisfaction has to be done in a profitable manner; but a high customer satisfaction will also mean that folks can typically charge more.
For instance, Chik-fil-a has a higher cost than the vast majority of their competition. However, customer satisfaction is a high priority so customers are more than happy to pay the higher cost.
If you don't have good customer satisfaction then the first that that it impacts is your profit margins as your customers will not be willing to pay the higher cost (bigger margins) you want to charge.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
Sounds like you need to go get a job as a pizza delivery driver. You'll change your tune in about a week, 2 at tops.
I don't know. I have been underpaid in the past, and I don't feel I was particularly open to tax fraud then. I will admit that I have never been in particularly high risk of not having enough money to pay my expenses, with solid family support available if necessary, so I might feel different if I was just scraping by.
Is it so strange to think that income should be reported as required? It seems like at least 84% of people agree with in that "they thought it was not acceptable to cheat at all on taxes" according to https://www.livescience.com/81...
It looks like I am in the majority on this one.
Sounds like a problem with that company's cash management procedures, more than a problem with cash itself.
Bankers rob the poor and give sweetheart deals to the rich. Bought & paid-for government not only allows but facilitates their mass robbery. News at 11!
They don't let you fill up first if you're a cash customer, or if your card is declined for the preauthorization amount. Haven't for years.
It is also illegal.
Nope, it's not.
This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise.
I see you've read Coinage Act of 1965. Now the question is have you actually read what is printed on the front of ALL US currency?
"THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE"
It's practically a contract written directly on the damn money we're debating about. Tends to make you wonder who's actually in the wrong here.
Exactly. These cashless cretins enable identity theft, tracking and surveillance, and destruction of anonymity and freedom.
Businesses like this should be avoided as traitors to our society.
Your country implemented chip and pin poorly of that is the case.
>Where are you shopping where customer satisfaction comes before the bottom line?
Not NYC, obviously. Since we're stating obvious facts. My point is that the only product a lot of these inner city businesses offer is a product that you can get anywhere but here it costs a lot, and for some reason that brings in customers. I just can't understand why anyone goes there. Examples of these businesses are Einstein Bagels and Starbucks. I hessitate to mention Apple as they're still the only cell phone that isn't absolute garbage but they're getting closer and closer to "as long as it's better than Android" and farther away from "it just works"
Beat Up /. all you want. But don't talk like Reddit isn't a festering septic pond.
They both are that by virtue of being composed of largely ignorant human beings. At least on reddit I can subscribe to topics selectively and if I find an idiot that keeps posting shit I can block them and not see it anymore. I can essentially customize my experience whereas on slashdot I have to deal with what is effectively a top down dictatorship.
We'll make great pets
There is a difference between a debt and a contract or transaction.
Under the laws of most countries, if you incur a debt then cash money (legal tender in that country) must be accepted by the creditor. (There is usually a limit on the numbers of any one denomination or coinage in most countries, in order to avoid someone paying with $500 of 1c pieces)
In a normal transaction, no debt has been incurred (It's a contract involving an offer, a consideration and acceptance), therefore there is no obligation to accept cash, or particular denominations of cash (Eg, "we refuse to accept £20 notes due to the high degree of counterfeits being passed")
A merchant would be silly to refuse 100% to accept cash (especially given the percentages that payment processors take on small transactions), but it's entirely within their right to do so if they either set a blanket policy or refuse based on a suspicion that the proffered money is counterfeit (US money might be very bland visually but it's a different story under UV lights. The same applies to most currencies)
Refusing because of a customer's colour, religion or gender is covered by a different bunch of discrimination laws and is a hot-button issue in most countries. On the other hand refusing because the customer is an asshole is usually perfectly legal.
They can say exact amount only. It is about providing change. What they cannot say is "Even exact amount is unacceptable."
Actually they can, it's a basic part of contract law - unless specifically forbidden by law, the contract aka agreement between two or more parties can state pretty much anything the parties agree on in advance. If a restraunt put up a sign that they'll only accept payment in bottlecaps, that's perfectly legal. What would not be legal is the restaurant refusing to accept cash for your bill if they DIDN'T inform you in advance that they would not be accepting cash.
If the menu lists costs in bottlecaps then you are correct, but if it lists costs in US dollars they must accept dollars, i.e. cash. I'm sorry if this is hard for you to understand.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Open the package before or after the sale? If it's after, there never was a debt. If it's before, you've damaged someone else's property.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Nope. While most places have laws requiring that prices be posted in a clear, easy to understand fashion (meaning that in my analogy hey'd have to list menu prices in bottle caps as well as dollars), posting prices in USD doesn't mean you need to accept payment in a certain form, that comes down to your contract(i.e agreement) with the store - if the restaurant informs you in advance they only accept payment in X form, and you sit down to eat you have agreed to pay in X form.
Without getting into the details of why you are wrong, almost all my assets are digital. This includes my bank and other dollar accounts, my bonds, and my stocks. There is functionally no difference between dollars I own and credit cards I use, except for the very small amount I keep in the form of rectangular pieces of paper and metal disks.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
If you really knew anything about contract law you would know that certain things cannot be valid in a contract. You are a clueless bafoon who has literally no clue what you are talking about. Kindly FOAD. Thanks.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I like it when the economy is sufficiently good that people like those cashiers can find work.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
If it's service, then payment, I believe a debt is created, and they must accept cash. If the meal or hair styling requires payment up front, they can set any terms they wish.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Sure. That's why I tip well. If the server isn't making much money, helping the server commit tax fraud isn't going to be as helpful as leaving a larger tip.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Most stylists or hairdressers I've seen require payment afterwards, and the only restaurants I know of that require payment up front are fast food places that do not offer full service.
Basically, any occupation where one might reasonably expect to make a fair amount of money on tips based on quality of services received.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
That's exactly as helpful as leaving a tip that's scaled by his/her marginal tax rate.
Do both.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
If they're stealing from thieves, I don't care.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
You have obviously never paid with check.
Going cashless is a way for restaurants to keep out poor customers that they don't want sullying their doorsteps. They don't care that it's discrimination; they're doing it BECAUSE it's discrimination. Unless we pass laws prohibiting the practice the trend will continue.
Never let them take cash away from us. If we go to a cashless society then the politicians can play more games because they can. They will. Note I didn't say R or D or anything else. It's just too tempting.
The result is we'll have to go back to something physical, like silver and gold. Something they can't steal from us nearly as easily.
Oh it's not that bad I hear you say. In 1954 I have a picture of the 1954 Plane-O-Rama by Beechcraft aircraft. There are around 50 aircraft in that picture and it says it's a 1 million dollar display of NEW aircraft. Twins, bunch of singles, etc. over 50 of them. Today 1 million would buy you maybe two singles, one of the twins. The room would be almost empty. That's how much money politicians have stolen from us since WWII. That is, around 95% of the value.
The pump won't turn on without a card or a prepay. Twenty years ago, your method might have worked, because most people filled up first and paid cash after. Today, not so much. You want to pay cash, fine, but you have to do it before the pump will start.
Cash is legal tender for all debts public and private. What the establishment could do is ask for payment up front, like many fast-food restaurants do. They can't refuse to accept cash for a debt. But they can refuse to serve you if you don't pay up front electronically. Since no food has been prepared or served, there is no debt to pay, and no dispute.
Payment up front avoids unpleasant surprises, regardless of whether you want to pay via cash at a card-only outfit, or via credit-card at a cash-only outfit. Another wrinkle; I've seen a few places that take cash or debit-card only; no crdit cards.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
I need to find that court case from the 70s.
Restaurant refused to accept a sack full of pennies for a meal and called the police on the poor chap. The judge ruled that a merchant refusing legal tender for a debt just gave away the merchandise.
Cashless may be the wave of the future but just might not be legal to refuse cash yet.
NRRPT/RCT
Not in the US, you don't. Reread what I said. The pump will not turn on until you have either put in a valid card or prepaid the cashier.
Maybe late in this discussion, but I've read the comments and nobody mentions that cashless business let some groups, like homeless, really out of systems, not given them even the possibility of buy groceries with cash. Cash is, as somebody mention, not only anonymous but even a democratic way of transaction in some places. At Sweden, comments before, where the no money movement has some years pushed by the government, this topic hasn't closed today.
It is also illegal.
Nope, it's not.
This statute means that all United States money as identified above are a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise.
If the goods or services were already provided such that the customer owes a debt, then cash must be accepted or the bill considered paid. That does not help a customer at the supermarket but if the meal has already been eaten or the service provided, then the customer owes a debt and may always pay with cash.
Plenty of places don't take cash. Like the DMV for example. Check or card only.
How does that work with a fine? Are fines somehow not considered debts?
As you said..
So tell me... please... how well a business's right to refuse to accept cash would work for things like restaurants and hair stylists? What if the card is declined for some reason, but they still have cash as a backup?
How well would it work? It would not work.
So tell me... please... how well a business's right to refuse to accept cash would work for things like restaurants and hair stylists?
Simple. If you don't have a card, you have to wait tables or cut hair until you're square with the house. Problem solved. Things get even more interesting when you can't pay your orthodontist.
That would be fun in jurisdictions where table waiting and cutting hair are licensed professions.
I wish the U.S. had a healthy government.
That is a Crazy Eddie solution. Forget it.
So I can sue the vending machine makers for not handling $100 bills for a $1.50 bottle of Soda Pop?
Or the stores that say we do not accept bills over $20.00
In College where I needed quarters only to use the Washing Machines?
While Cash is good for all debts private and public. We don't have to accept the notes, or coins. The guy who tries to pay for his car with pennies, can be denied.
If the vending machine, store, college, or car lot presented me with a debt, then yes, they must accept cash. If they just denied service, then no.
So you go out of your way to facilitate tax fraud. Fantastic.
When enforcing compliance costs as much if not more than the taxes raised? Absolutely.
That would be fun in jurisdictions where table waiting and cutting hair are licensed professions.
Or practicing orthodontia? I thought that surely once I included that I could get past the need for a </sarc>. I guess I was wrong. I wasn't really suggesting that somebody who couldn't pay their orthodontist should start tightening braces to pay it off.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
The statement on the bill was so that no-one could refuse it during the "Great Rebellion", as the American Revolution was called at the time.
You meant, of course, the Civil War.
Thanks for this link -- fascinating reading!
It is immoral to _not_ avoid AND evade your taxes as much as possible!
Spoken like a true corporation.
Say, shouldn't you be out fighting a fire, or repairing a road, or arresting an armed robber, or doing one of those other things that taxation is apparently an immoral way to fund?
That would be fun in jurisdictions where table waiting and cutting hair are licensed professions.
Or practicing orthodontia? I thought that surely once I included that I could get past the need for a </sarc>. I guess I was wrong. I wasn't really suggesting that somebody who couldn't pay their orthodontist should start tightening braces to pay it off.
Cutting hair is state licensed more often than not. So is table waiting when federal and state requirements are taken into account.
https://www.treasury.gov/resou...
I thought that surely... I could get past the need for a </sarc>.
Cutting hair is state licensed more often than not. So is table waiting when federal and state requirements are taken into account.
That's super. Orthodontics, I'm assuming, is licensed all over. I don't get where you're going with this.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
There are no manned petrol stations here anymore, unless you're really rich or handicapped.
Don't be an ass. Power goes out. trees fall on lines. Heavy snow snaps things. cars crash into things. It happens.
I always tip cash at my local restaurants. It's not my job to report someone's tip earnings, it's up to them at that point. If they choose not to report it....well, not my problem.
Plus, I have a moral problem with taxes on a voluntary ( tip) payment to justify wage shenanigans with wait staff.
Righto, thanks!
davecb@spamcop.net
My point is that all professions are licensed one way or another. Some are more obviously licensed than others.