Slashdot Mirror


Philadelphia Bans Cashless Stores (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: This week, Philadelphia's mayor signed a bill that would ban cashless retail stores, according to The Morning Call. The move makes Philadelphia the first major city to require that brick-and-mortar retail stores accept cash. Besides Philadelphia, Massachusetts has required that retailers accept cash since 1978, according to CBS. The law takes effect July 1, and it will not apply to stores like Costco that require a membership, nor will it apply to parking garages or lots, or to hotels or rental car companies that require a credit or debit card as security for future charges, according to the Wall Street Journal. Retailers caught refusing cash can be fined up to $2,000.

Amazon, whose new Amazon Go stores are cashless and queue-less, reportedly pushed back against the new law, asking for an exemption. According to the WSJ, Philadelphia lawmakers said that Amazon could work around the law under the exemption for stores that require a membership to shop there, but Amazon told the city that a Prime membership is not required to shop at Amazon Go stores, so its options are limited. A top official in Philadelphia's Chamber of Commerce said that the ban will prevent Philadelphia from modernizing with the rest of the country. Cashless companies argue that cash slows down transactions when change needs to be counted and creates security risks for employees locking up at the end of the night.
Supporters of the new law argue that "not accepting cash hurts poorer residents who may not be able to afford or qualify for a credit card or who want to avoid fees that come with changing cash into a prepaid debit card," reports Ars. "Additionally, privacy advocates say that being forced to use a digital form of payment to buy things is a de facto requirement to share records of their purchases with third-party companies."

352 comments

  1. Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Glad to see there's still a little sanity left in the world.

    1. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So put down your hosts file and visit your favorite retailer like a sane person

    2. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      This should be a legally enforceable policy - cash is legal tender! You must take cash as an option if you sell something. Gentry non-legal-tender "currencies" are whatever, but you don't kick buses/taxis off the road because Uber exists.
         

    3. Re: Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Who says I don't?

    4. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cash is legal tender for all DEBTS. There is no debt involved with a retail purchase. A vendor should be free to ban cash if they feel like it, and if you don't agree, you can vote with your dollar by supporting a vendor who accepts cash. Why do we need to legislate this?

    5. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because business only cares about the law insofar that they don't want to get sanctioned or arrested, beyond that they'll do whatever they can to benefit themselves.

    6. Re:Good. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      agreed!

      the move to eliminate anonymous and track-less payment is fucking evil. we need to push back against this.

      I don't trust my phone at all; and anything that allows non-phone options in the Real World is a good thing.

      the millennials can just learn to carry cash. they will thank us old guys, too, WHEN they find out that blindly trusting 'the cloud' is stupid beyond compare.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    7. Re:Good. by Macdude · · Score: 0

      Cash is legal tender for all DEBTS. There is no debt involved with a retail purchase.

      I've picked an item up off a shelf and it is now in my possession. I have created a debt that must be paid prior to my leaving the store or I must return the item to the shelf.

      --
      "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    8. Re:Good. by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine is a hair dresser. She requires a check or credit as payment because she doesn't like to leave her salon at night, alone, with a lot of cash on hand. I suspect that the argument against allowing cash as payment, has something to do with security. We'll find out here on slashdot though.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    9. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glad to see there's still a little sanity left in the world.

      Agreed.

    10. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not how it works. No agreement has been made that picking it up is a lease.

      Evidence: you can put down the item from the shelf and not pay for it without the store agreeing to the refund. You cannot put down an identical item from outside the store and get money back.

      Technically speaking, the price hasn't even been agreed upon. The sticker price is a suggested price at the counter, and culturally we take a dim view of people who try to negotiate at the till of grocery stores but it is incumbent on the buyer to make an offer with money and the seller to accept that offer.

    11. Re:Good. by BringsApples · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Creation was racist.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    12. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's their property. They can only claim a debt against you if it's being made your property. The debt being created is from proprietor change, the named owner of the item, not picking it up off the shelf.

      In a few cases they have a product out for immediate consumption. Typically they don't (and consuming anyway constitutes theft or vandalism or whatever) but it can happen. Diners are the obvious example. They equate to picking up an item off the shelf and already being the new proprietor. It can't go back to the shelf.

      Goods are tangible and not the best example. SERVICES are easier to portray. If I claim to have rendered you a service I'll claim a debt. You can't put it back on the shelf. A court might support my claim (you owe AC $50 for 'weather consulting') but giving me a $50 bill will settle it, whether I "accept" or not. You probably know this already - most of us have probably seen the conversation a dozen times this year.

    13. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is perfectly legal to require that debts be paid using certified funds.

      The notion that "if I owe you money, and I have cash, you are legally required to take" it is false. Completely false. That text on the dollar bill about it being legal tender for all debts does NOT mean people are required to accept it as a form of payment.

    14. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Her phone, car, and person are each worth far more to criminals than a salon's revenue for a day. She is in danger merely by being outside.

    15. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because cities already issue business licenses, zoning restrictions, etc. The entirety of all business conducted within a city is theoretically an artificially government-limited supply and there are only so many that can exist. (And by "can exist" I am not talking about market forces!) Thus, a customer might not have the option to vote different with their dollar.

      For whatever reason, a bipartisan 100.0% of voters (to-date, anyway; I realize in the future this may change) have zealously insisted that cities legislate and regulate the businesses within them. Even the Libertarian Party hasn't put changing this into their platform, yet, and Republicans and Democrats will almost certainly never change it, and those parties are the ones who always win the elections.

    16. Re:Good. by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 1

      Damn right.

    17. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not a debt. That's carrying the store's item to the checkout. If you leave without paying or put it in your pocket that's shoplifting, but that's not debt either, it's theft. A debt requires a contract where you agree to pay money for something. In a supermarket checkout, the contract, payment, and transfer of ownership are simultaneous so there's no debt. In a restaurant where you pay after you've eaten, you owe them a debt until you pay. Conversely, if you paid when you ordered, the restaurant owes you a debt of food.

    18. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're half right.

      If you owe someone money, they must accept cash. This is typically the case when services are provided or goods consumed before payment. Restaurants, for example. Or any gas station where you pump before paying.

      But putting an item in your shopping cart does not make you the owner, and does not incur a debt. So in most stores, the owner does not have to accept cash. The key question is, can you walk away from the sale if you only have cash?

    19. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That is not how debt works. Nice try tho.

    20. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy above who is postings crap comments from his basement/retirement home/retirement home basement....

    21. Re: Good. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You mean Bubble Tea And Massage LLS?

    22. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trying to ban cashless stores is the same as trying to ban ad blockers. It is fighting progress, and if you didnâ(TM)t want it to get this way, you should have made the ship/site not so awful slow.

      Cash is slow. Unless you want to pay in 20â(TM)s and get no change, this is how it is going to be.

    23. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If she asks for payment after service has already been rendered, then legally she must accept cash.

    24. Re:Good. by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Actually its not shoplifting until you leave the store. You can put the item in your pocket so long as you pay for it on your way out. That is why loss prevention normally don't intercept you until you start to leave past the register. Unless its obvious you're not going to pay.

    25. Re:Good. by jwhyche · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Someone accidentally modded the parent as flamebait. Being a moderator is a very important and sacred duty. For future reference the parent post should have been modded "Insightful." In the future keep this in mind.

      Thank you.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    26. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it's shoplifting when you pass the last Point of Sale, and in some States the law also makes an "attempt to conceal" an act of theft.

      When you reach the PoS, you negotiate a price for the goods, pay for them, and then the goods enter your possession afterwards.

    27. Re:Good. by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      So then what happens if he runs out the door? If there is no debt than he hasen't stolen anything.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    28. Re:Good. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Credit card companies paid marketing trolls are expected to skulk around this story in every way possible. KEEP IN MIND, corporations demand the right to refuse trade with anyone, where the fuck would you be in a captitalist society, with only two corporations providing elctronic payment at a core level and they decide to no do business with you and no cash, you are well and truly fucked. Second point, this is basically instituting and making compulsary a CORPORATE for profit TAX on all transactions. Bitch about government taxes, no cash means compulsary corporate taxes and when those filthy slimey animal cunts have the cabal going, up goes those tax rates and you better fucking believe, they don't like you politics, wham, there goes your ability to pay for anything or be paid for anything, anyone attempt to subvert that and buy for you and you can bet, their ability to exist is a psychopathic capitalists society will also be zeroed out. Don't accept cash AMAZON well, go fuck yourself then because I can guess your psychopathic intent you fucking scum.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    29. Re:Good. by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      Glad to see there's still a little sanity left in the world.

      Where? Dang, I missed it!

    30. Re:Good. by smoot123 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because business ... do whatever they can to benefit themselves.

      Inconveniencing your customers is often a bad strategy. Raising prices because you're getting robbed and/or have to pay someone to walk large bags of cash to a bank is also often a bad strategy. Are you sure you know which one is worse?

      I suggest you assume for a moment that small business owners are not idiots. I am sure they know how many customers pay with cash versus cards. Further, I'm sure they have a pretty good idea how much business they'll lose if they don't take cash. And yet, they somehow conclude taking cash isn't worth it. Could it be they know something you don't know?

    31. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is absolutely flame bait, it's just another "oh millennials are so stupid" generalization post.

    32. Re:Good. by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Why aren't there any libertarians in here arguing that store owners should be free to set their own terms, free from government compulsion?

    33. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you are wrong.

      If you rent an apartment and you are late on a payment, you owe them late fees. And they can refuse to accept cash for those late fees, and can require a certified check.

    34. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're about as wordy as me so I had to get through it all to see you're more or less agreeing with me, but yes, what you're pointing out is that what so-called 'cashless' would lead us to is just one more way The Few (read as: The Rich) can effectively exclude The Many (read as: The Poor and The Middle Class, who are rapidly becoming The Poor, too) from being able to spend their money on quality things. Imagine only being able to buy the lowest-tier of low-quality groceries because the upscale gentrified grocery store doesn't accept cash, and you've been excluded from having any sort of plastic means to purchase things. People paying cash get marginalized. This is what must be fought against.

    35. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      No, it's really not, take a moment to not assume that and read it again to find the real meaning.

    36. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Take a moment to read this other comment of mine: https://slashdot.org/comments....

    37. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I would strongly argue against that.

    38. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Implying 'creationism' is actually real.

    39. Re: Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

    40. Re:Good. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Those sort of so-called 'libertarians' are just shy of being 'anarchists' and typically can't see past the ends of their own noses, philosophically speaking.

    41. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of them make some serious money and that is a lot of cash to carry, often more than the cost of a high end phone after a full day of work. Women spend absurd amounts of money on their hair. The upside to cash in some of these lines of work is the potential for tax free revenue by those who aren't into paying their "fair" share.

    42. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cash is a helluva lot easier to use for a criminal than anything you have to fence.

    43. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would think that the sticker could be seen as a valid contract.

    44. Re: Good. by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Cash is inconvenient, you have to plan in advance how much you'll need and always carry extra incase of unforseen problems. Carrying around lots of cash is potentially dangerous as it makes you an attractive target for thieves.

      Cash is also a big hassle for people who travel, many cards offer far better FX rates than you'll ever get at a money changer shop, and taking cash from an ATM often incurs punitive fees. Plus you have to take more cash than you need just incase, and are likely to end up with a pile of useless change once you leave the country.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    45. Re:Good. by bn-7bc · · Score: 1

      hmm might be technicality correct, but i wondoer hoe many casheers are authorized to sell anything at a prize below the sticker prize unless the goods are in some way damaged

    46. Re:Good. by bn-7bc · · Score: 1

      Am I the only person that find paying with a card (usualy debit not credit as I prefere not incurring debt when there is no need) to be far more convenient than paying cash, no hunting for atms (which at least here in Norway (and the rest of Scandinavia) is getting scarcer, and no lose change to keep track of. Oh ye big brother knows how much I use where at what time, big deal, incidently pos systems in Norway do not store card info so no chance of it beefing stolen after the transaction is done, as it has been in a few high profile cases in the US (chip and pin has been standard here for years, and now they are slowly starting to deactivate the mag stripe reader on the terminals)

    47. Re:Good. by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      You must take cash as an option if you sell something.

      While I am in favor of this, at the current time it simply is not so and saying it over and over won't make it true. This policy is only valid in places that have specifically passed laws mandating it.

      The US Treasury has said, over and over, that taking cash is not a legal requirement in the United States. Companies are free to set whatever policy they want.

    48. Re:Good. by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Oh ye big brother knows how much I use where at what time, big deal,

      It's fine and dandy until the outrage mob finds something you posted on the 'net a decade ago that was perfectly acceptable then, that is now (or in the near future) non-PC enough to get you de-platformed off the major banking/CC/debit/payment systems (and almost certainly most major social media platforms as well...but no collusion there, kids! just a co-inky-dink!) as has already happened to many who engage in discussing/expressing ideas, opinions, events, and/or concepts considered to be "wrong-think".

      They can block your access to your own money with a keystroke. Sorry, I'll never trust any government, never mind some gigantic corporation, with that sort of total power over my ability to engage in commerce. Of course I use a card and have bank accounts, but I never put *all* my money into the system and would never vote for anyone that favors something like a national cashless system.

      Anything that can be abused, will be. The potential for abuse of a cashless system for political/ideological oppression of the population by TPTB is staggering in scope and depth, beyond anything dreamed possible even in the most authoritarian 20th century regimes.

      This de-platforming of people and groups off of social media and the financial banking/transaction/payment systems is the privatized, Western version of China's social credit system. Such systems only grow more restrictive, invasive, debasing, coercive, and authoritarian, never less.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    49. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually we have standardized reverse shoplifting, where every payment terminal adds an extra percentage to your purchase by asking for a tip amount.

    50. Re:Good. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Once you have incurred a debt, the person to whom you owe money can't refuse cash. But it's perfectly legal (absent laws like this) for a vendor to say, "I won't sell this to you if you're paying cash". There isn't a debt yet, and the seller is free to set his own terms of sale.

    51. Re:Good. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      I've picked an item up off a shelf and it is now in my possession.

      You have a very odd concept about how transfer of ownership works.

    52. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > the move to eliminate anonymous and track-less payment

      A technical issue to be fixed. The bank should send the money with the ID of the transaction, without any reference to the customer. Banks will have some info, but not about the exact products/services.

      > the millennials can just learn to carry cash

      Bank notes have serial numbers. And ATMs, in theory, can track who the notes are given.

      > they will thank us old guys

      I am an old guy. And I hope youngsters are not idiots to thank for false claims.

    53. Re:Good. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      So then what happens if he runs out the door? If there is no debt than he hasen't stolen anything.

      Uh, no. It's because there's no debt that he's stolen it.

    54. Re:Good. by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

      Agreed! No cloud for me and no purchases over my smartphone either. The younger generations will have to learn the hard way.

    55. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really you think its a good thing?
      Everyone else around the world is going cashless and the US .. well they go the other way...
      I hope you enjoy your imperial system and your wallet full of no wait you got mugged... well it was full of cash...

      Whats so wrong about using cards?
      Im not talking about using your phone here Im not into it either but having cash on you is sooo 1900 and highway men.

      Explain to me why carrying a card with a PIN that someone CAN'T steal from YOU is worst then a guy who, at the point of a knife, take your money because you can't really stop him.

      When a credit company covers you if someone steal your PIN and use your card.
      Or get the app that tells you when your card has been used.

      I dont see any good reason to have cash on you at any time.
      Thats like saying you should not get a vaccine...

    56. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forcing people to use digital payment is tantamount to being forced to show your identification for every purchase. Remember "show me your papers" from Nazi Germany?

      Whatever drawbacks cash may have, it is necessary to protect this right to pay with cash for the sake of freedom and democracy.

      Remember that digital payments not only divulge your purchase history and identity, but your location as well.

    57. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cash ... Legal tender for all debts public and private!

    58. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sanity? You must be crazy.

      As a shop I should be able to almost ask anything as payment. Don't want to pay the currency I am asking? Shop elsewhere!

    59. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you telling me that you have a significant portion of your savings stored under your bed? No? Then you can be subject to a "money ban" too, they (the government, the men in black, the Illuminati, the Illinois Nazi, you choose) can simply block your bank accounts and force you to live with the spare change in your pocket.

    60. Re:Good. by number6x · · Score: 1

      "Raising prices because you're getting robbed and/or have to pay someone to walk large bags of cash to a bank is also often a bad strategy.

      How often does this kind of robbery take place? Once in a while is a rare occurrence. More likely is after hour break ins where liquor and equipment are stolen. Cashless will not fix this kind of theft.

      Balance loss of cash due to theft against the transaction fees credit and debit cards charge. You lose money on each transaction, every transaction. It adds up. I've lived in a number of sketchy neighborhoods in my lifetime. Cash only businesses are more common in neighborhoods where theft of money would be more likely. The customers are less likely to have credit cards, the business owner has a smaller margin and needs to maximize their cut by not paying transaction fees, and even taking higher theft rates into account cash only is better. If you've lived in these kind of neighborhoods, you'll be familiar with cash only mom and pop businesses.

      Credit card only businesses are more likely to be catering to an upscale crowd, and located in areas where theft rates are lower.

    61. Re:Good. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      That's quite the generalization old man.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    62. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if I put a sticker on something and you touch it, we're now bound to the rules of a contract?

    63. Re:Good. by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      How often does this kind of robbery take place? Once in a while is a rare occurrence. More likely is after hour break ins where liquor and equipment are stolen. Cashless will not fix this kind of theft.

      My bigger point is, how is this any of your or my business? It seems obvious to me that this is a negotiation between the businesses and their customers. There's no justification for you or me to stick our noses into that conversation.

      The business owner bears the consequences of either lost business, increased security, increased theft insurance, or stolen cash. Therefore, the business owner should get to decide how often is too often for robbery. Not you. Not me. Not the Philly City Council.

      For those who complain about differential loss of access, be serious. There are a zillion decisions a business owner needs to make which affect who can patronize their business: location, hours, prices, choice of products, and a million other things. Why are we treating this one special? And what evidence can you produce which shows there are people who (a) must buy a certain product, and (b) cannot reasonably get some form of debit/credit/pre-paid card, and (c) have literally no way to buy this product short of going to a vendor who doesn't take cash? And for (c), I don't mean "more limited choices than they'd like" I mean "there is no reasonable choice at all."

      Here's a further illustration. I have friends who are recovering addicts and don't trust themselves to carry cash. There are vendors who only take cash, or who charge a premium for using a credit card (BTW, a perfectly justifiable thing to do). They're discriminating against my friends! Should the city council require all vendors take no-fee credit cards to ensure access? You'd be laughed out of chambers if you suggested it. At least I hope you would, now I'm not so sure.

    64. Re:Good. by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      You're implying, I stated. I stated "Creation", you implied "creationism".

      'Taking what was said out of context' is probably the main ingredient that divides people these days.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    65. Re: Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US treasury doesnt control this, so I'd like to read your source. If someone claims I have a debt, I try to pay in cash, and they refuse saying I have to pay it in fair market value of mangoes, they will lose in court every time. Legal tender is a constitutional definition of how transactions may be settled. We trade digits representing cash all the time, but with the legal framework that these are tied directly to funds through licensed and regulated entities as set forth by federal law. The fundamental link is that the digits are tied to legal tender. Part of the US definition of legal tender is that it is exchangeable for any other legal tender (e.g. making change from other US monies). So I can use my debit card to get cash, and I can trade that can for other cash of the same value, but the bank cannot bar me from converting to cash. A credit card conpany can as this is the extension of credit rather than a leveraged bank account.

    66. Re: Good. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      You are an imbecile

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    67. Re:Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it should moded +1, Insightful because it's true. Millennials are pretty stupid.

  2. It's illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and unconstitutional.

    1. Re:It's illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is?

    2. Re:It's illegal by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      Being an AC

  3. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake me when Denver bans incels, then I'll have something to say. /Kendall

    1. Re:Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because then you won't be able to visit Denver.

  4. Cash still a good thing by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Supporters of the new law argue that "not accepting cash hurts poorer residents who may not be able to afford or qualify for a credit card or who want to avoid fees that come with changing cash into a prepaid debit card," reports Ars. "Additionally, privacy advocates say that being forced to use a digital form of payment to buy things is a de facto requirement to share records of their purchases with third-party companies."

    I think that's a good point. While I have some sympathy for Amazon Go trying to do something revolutionary, their stores are effectively closed to people who can't get a credit card. Their model is fundamentally incompatible with paying cash. Doesn't bother me, but I have all the choices of places to shop.

    From the privacy perspective, you're boned regardless if you shop at Amazon Go, since lack of privacy is how their system works. That's fine as long as the other option remains.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    1. Re:Cash still a good thing by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To reinforce what you're saying with a supplementary perspective: there is a growing divide between "The Rich" and "The Poor", and the middle-class keeps shrinking, forcing people who were once middle-class into the ranks of "The Working Poor". It's not all that bad yet but it keeps getting incrementally worse every year for one reason or another. Something like retailers going 'cashless' will just accelerate the process. Some will say "you can get a prepaid debit card without a bank account" but all of those cards have fees attached to them, some exorbitant, and when every penny counts you can't afford to have some parasite company siphoning off your money because you needed groceries.

    2. Re:Cash still a good thing by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      There are people who can't get a credit card? People without a lot of money seem to be the prime customers because they'll run the card up and only pay the minimum monthly payment, yielding shit tons of money for credit card companies due to absurd interest rates those cards charge. Most places that will take a credit card will also accept some form of debit cards or reloadable gift cards. Sure it's an extra hassle to get those if you don't have a credit card, but that may be as much of a personal choice anything to do with your financial situation.

    3. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Cash is NOT a good thing.
      It is COMPLETELY under the CONTROL of NOT YOU !!!
      Commodities like Gold, Silver and now, thankfully, Cryptocurrency...
      those are things that YOU CONTROL and OWN in a DISTRIBUTED and resistant to influence fashion.
      Cryptocurrency is a good thing that has been a long time coming.
      A few more years of development of privacy features and blockchain scaling and it will sweep the world, probably in under 10 years from now.

    4. Re:Cash still a good thing by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Insightful

      their stores are effectively closed to people who can't get a credit card.

      Nope. You can buy with a debit card. You can also buy with a prepaid gift card, which you can buy for cash elsewhere.

      From the privacy perspective, you're boned regardless if you shop at Amazon Go

      Only because the government is making it harder to buy prepaid cards anonymously. I believe the current limit is $50, and even then, they can't be used for international transactions.

      So we need a stupid law to protect us from a stupid law.

    5. Re:Cash still a good thing by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      when every penny counts you can't afford to have some parasite company siphoning off your money because you needed groceries.

      This is backwards. Companies want to eliminate cash because the security problems and handling issues raise costs, which leads to higher prices.

    6. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The law will probably force them to innovate a little more. I would guess they will just set up some sort of vending machine at the front of the stores that accepts the cash and converts it into a amazon gift card balance and then it is pretty much business as usual for them

    7. Re:Cash still a good thing by supremebob · · Score: 1

      Besides, it is really that hard to add a bill feeder and change dispenser to their automated checkout machines? Most brick and mortar stores have had this available for years.

      If they want to encourage this behavior because it adds wear and tear to the machines, just offer a discount for credit purchases.

    8. Re: Cash still a good thing by Ken_g6 · · Score: 1

      Not that I'm against cash, but how can people be unable to get a bank account? I can get free checking and a debit card at my credit union for, at most, a $25 refundable savings deposit.

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
    9. Re:Cash still a good thing by markdavis · · Score: 4, Informative

      >"there is a growing divide between "The Rich" and "The Poor", and the middle-class keeps shrinking, forcing people who were once middle-class into the ranks of "The Working Poor""

      That is not what is actually happening in the USA or the world. In both, the "poor class" keeps shrinking while both the middle andupper class have been increasing. In the world it is far more prevalent, but I will stick to the USA

      http://www.aei.org/publication...

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...

      So you have to get the whole picture. ALL people are doing better. So although there is a greater divide on the extremes, far fewer people are actually negatively affected by it.

      There isn't a fixed pie. The pie has been growing. More people are eating more pie than ever before.

    10. Re:Cash still a good thing by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      Credit cards and bank accounts aren't a replacement for cash. They're a tool to dispense cash. They were developed in order to keep The People safe from thieves and such. However here we are talking about the safety of vendors. So evidently money is just a scary thing to associate with.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    11. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few more years of development of privacy features and blockchain scaling and [cryptocurrency] will sweep the world, probably in under 10 years from now.

      I was being told that ten years ago.

    12. Re:Cash still a good thing by jythie · · Score: 2

      Yet I still encounter plenty of companies that give you a discount for paying cash due to the additional fees credit card companies charge them. I question how much this actually saves them vs simply presenting a more modern image that just happens to keep out the unwashed.

    13. Re:Cash still a good thing by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      There isn't a fixed pie. The pie has been growing. More people are eating more pie than ever before.

      So that's why we're having an obesity problem. Too much pie.

    14. Re: Cash still a good thing by jythie · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bank accounts are one of those catch 22 type things, once you are in the system you are in, but if you are outside of it, things can be difficult. Banks can also be surprisingly selective about who they allow to open accounts and redlining has been a historical problem. People with similar incomes often find themselves being marked as a risk or not depending on where they live.

    15. Re: Cash still a good thing by BringsApples · · Score: 2

      Lots of people are poorer than you seem to imagine. This is why those "Cash advance" places are successful.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    16. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a pretty good point, there's plenty of unattended vending machines that take cash. Amazon's stores are basically just giant walk-in vending machines.

    17. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're all missing the point.

      It means the costs of handling cash, for some retailers, are higher than credit card processing fees.

    18. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well here's your problem:
      "hurts poorer residents ...fees that come with changing cash into a prepaid debit card". Banks don't want to stop charging colossal transaction fees so they don't want an environment where charging nothing/next to nothing gives you a competitive edge. It makes more sense to ban such fees or classify them as interest and thus in violation of existing usury law.

    19. Re:Cash still a good thing by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      their stores are effectively closed to people who can't get a credit card

      Take $25, deposit it to open a free checking account at your local credit union, and they'll give you a visa or mastercard debit card you can use as credit. We need to figure out who these people are who can't do that, and address their problems. Maybe it's difficult for illegal immigrants to open an account? Not sure who else.

      One option is a state or national credit union, with post offices serving as banks.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    20. Re: Cash still a good thing by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      never in with bankers, you will start getting denials if you have too many bank accounts, and closures if too much money moves around

    21. Re:Cash still a good thing by LesFerg · · Score: 1

      It's not just the issue of attracting external thieves to your premises or to the person transporting your cash to the bank, there is also the overhead of having to install security cameras and watch your own staff full time, cos anybody handling those big bills gets tempted to slip a few into a pocket eventually. Having cash being handled forces distrust of employees, making for a less comfortable work place.

      --
      If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
    22. Re:Cash still a good thing by LesFerg · · Score: 1

      Then again there is the NZ way, just raise your prices to cover potential credit card fees, whether the buyer uses one or not.

      --
      If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
    23. Re:Cash still a good thing by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Being cashless doesn't prevent employee theft. There was a local story in the news today where a woman at a cluck and chuck was using her phone to take pictures of peoples debit / credit cards.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    24. Re:Cash still a good thing by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      a woman at a cluck and chuck was using her phone to take pictures of peoples debit / credit cards.

      That is a different problem. She was stealing from the customers, not her employer.

      The solution to credit card fraud is for America to do what all the other countries in the world are already doing.

    25. Re:Cash still a good thing by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      While I have some sympathy for Amazon Go trying to do something revolutionary, their stores are effectively closed to people who can't get a credit card. Their model is fundamentally incompatible with paying cash. ... That's fine as long as the other option remains.

      And IMHO that's a better way to deal with the problem, if it even is a problem. Ensure there are alternative places to shop, perhaps by making easier to open retail outlets. As long as they exist, business owners and customers will sort it out. The boss's are greedy bastards, right? They won't give up on all that lucrative cash business until they have to.

      Unless, of course, their clientele doesn't actually buy with cash all that often and they're better off ditching the legacy payment system.

    26. Re:Cash still a good thing by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      ...and the middle-class keeps shrinking, forcing people who were once middle-class into the ranks of "The Working Poor".

      This is a tangent but actually, no. People are leaving the middle class but more of them are becoming "rich" than becoming "poor". It's a surprising and happy development.

    27. Re:Cash still a good thing by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      Yet I still encounter plenty of companies that give you a discount for paying cash due to the additional fees credit card companies charge them. I question how much this actually saves them vs simply presenting a more modern image that just happens to keep out the unwashed.

      Beats me. But you know what? I bet the business owners have a dang good idea how much business from the unwashed masses they're turning down. And I bet they have a dang good idea how much handling cash costs them. And I'd bet a cup of coffee they know this better than you or I do. So why are we second guessing them?

    28. Re:Cash still a good thing by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Around here, the automated checkout machines no longer accept cash.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    29. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Companies want to eliminate cash because the security problems and handling issues raise costs, which leads to higher prices.

      Do you really think they're going to cut prices because they're going cashless? Cash-only is the way to go for any transaction that is not online. It helps you actually see the money leaving your hands and makes you less likely to impulse buy, especially if you're holding a $100.

    30. Re:Cash still a good thing by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"So that's why we're having an obesity problem. Too much pie."

      LOL +1 funny

    31. Re:Cash still a good thing by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Take $25, deposit it to open a free checking account at your local credit union, and they'll give you a visa or mastercard debit card you can use as credit.

      ....and charge you a $35 NSF fee if you go over your balance by a penny. Whereas a cashier will tell the customer they are short and put back their items, so people with no money are charged money.

    32. Re:Cash still a good thing by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      You may not be able to get a credit card because noone would lend you money, but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to get a debit card.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    33. Re:Cash still a good thing by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Only handling cash is not free, and in many cases can be more expensive than the card processing fees...

      You need to transport the cash to the bank, which takes someone's time and carries a risk of robbery or you have to pay a dedicated cash transport service.
      You have to get small change from the bank so you can provide change to customers, which isn't free either.
      You incur extra costs from mistakes (over changing etc).
      You can incur costs due to theft by staff.
      You lose money due to forged cash, and also have to invest in mechanisms to check for forged cash.
      You have to provide security to cover large amounts of cash on the premises, and pay for insurance.
      Cash transactions take more time if your staff and/or the customer are counting out change.

      Then there is the inconvenience for the customer of having to carry and use cash.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    34. Re:Cash still a good thing by lgw · · Score: 2

      The solution to credit card fraud is for America to do what all the other countries in the world are already doing.

      Deny fraud protection when someone gets your card and extracts the PIN? (There's a reason chip and PIN is on version 3 or 4.)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    35. Re: Cash still a good thing by r2kordmaa · · Score: 2

      Court order can freeze a bank account and take money from it to cover debts, many people have more debts than money to pay them. Someone with no money, but also no debts can of course get a debit card. But someone deep on the red... they would never see any money they put to bank again. And then there are people who don't pay taxes, they are allergic to any institution with accurate accounting. Should the law make it simpler for people not pay their debts, their taxes and hide criminal money? Probably not, but I think you can see why many people really like their cash.

    36. Re:Cash still a good thing by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Aside from adding the physical hardware for cash handling, you will also have to pay for a cash transportation service to empty out the larger bills and restock the small change regularly. These services aren't cheap.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    37. Re:Cash still a good thing by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Your card should reject the payment if there is insufficient funds in the account, if you have agreed an overdraft with the bank which includes high fees thats your fault.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    38. Re:Cash still a good thing by lgw · · Score: 1

      So that's why we're having an obesity problem. Too much pie.

      That's pretty much true. World obesity problems matched world hunger problems some years ago. It's a real problem for people who transition from never enough food to always enough food - they've never lived in a world where eating less than you could made sense.

      There are still a lot of problems in the world, but food supply is decreasingly one of them.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    39. Re:Cash still a good thing by lgw · · Score: 1

      A few more years of development of privacy features and blockchain scaling and it will sweep the world, probably in under 10 years from now.

      My calendar has it coming the year after the year of Linux on the desktop, and just before commercial fusion.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    40. Re: Cash still a good thing by houghi · · Score: 1

      In Belgium every adult will be able to get a card from its bank. Not a credit, bit a debit card where you can not go below zero on your bank account.

      So as long as there is money on the account, they can buy stuff with it. No need for a credit card. Once proven track ncome rises above a certain amount, the could ask to go below zero. Earn even more and they could get a credit card.

      Pre-paid cards are an option as well.

      All in all, credit cards are the worse option.

      So the issue to me is not that they can not get a credit card, but that debit cards (bank cards) are not easily to get.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    41. Re: Cash still a good thing by houghi · · Score: 1

      Weird. In Europe there are plenty of banks that are without fees and where your debit card is free as well.

      You might not overdraw your account, but you will still have a free account with a card you can use.

      Out if experience, I know this to be the case in at least Spain, Belgium and Germany and the whole SEPA thinks makes transfering money free as well.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    42. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The best deal I've seen for a prepaid gift card was a 4% fee. Many are 5%-7% (e.g. you get a $100 prepaid Visa card but you have to pay $106.95 for it.)
      Now, I would never use such a thing because I'm rich and I have a bank account with free checking and a no-fee debit card.
      But in the twisted universe we live in, poor people should have to pay an extra 5% to spend their money? That's ... twisted.

      I think this law is not stupid at all. It's solving a very real problem in the present day for a certain class of shoppers, and delaying the coming catastrophe in which Amazon will have done to all brick-and-mortar retail what Walmart did to small-town retailers. The future will not be pretty, but at least for now it is still in the future.

    43. Re:Cash still a good thing by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I think it's a good point too but the solution to the problem is completely stupid. How about tearing down the barriers that affect the poor rather than introducing laws that embed inefficient ways of operating. Why in 2019 does it cost you money, or why is anyone denied from a cashless opportunity? I've had a debit card since I was 8 years old and have been able to pay cashless without any fees. I've had a VISA Debit / Debit Mastercard which allowed me to use debit for credit transactions since I was 15, again without any additional fees.

      Why is this so expensive to do in America?

    44. Re: Cash still a good thing by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      Banks can also be surprisingly selective about who they allow to open accounts

      That is an American problem, and speaks to this law here. The justification for the law as cashless being a burden on the poor is solid. But rather than fix the problem through regulation of banking they just force retailers to accommodate a system perpetuated by banks and credit agencies.

      In many countries being homeless or poor does not disqualify you from any cashless options.

    45. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the cost of business. If they don't like it, they don't have to be in business.

    46. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is fucking AMAZON we're talking about, not a small business, you blithering fucking shill. They can afford that shit.

    47. Re: Cash still a good thing by lgw · · Score: 1

      It's more that it can be hard to get a bank account when you're poor. It's really a failing of the US banking system (more properly, a failing of the regulators) that there's not a kind of bank account especially for poor people, one with no fees and no ability to overdraw, that banks are required to provide.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    48. Re:Cash still a good thing by lgw · · Score: 1

      Amazon go does not have any kind of checkout at all. It really is a new model. You verify your identity when you enter, take what you like, and walk out the door. Your account get billed for what you took.

      As you might imagine, there are a lot of cameras involved.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    49. Re:Cash still a good thing by jythie · · Score: 1

      Because we are talking public policy, not what makes individual companies more money or prestige. What is good for the community and what is good for individual businesses are not always the same thing, otherwise we would just go back to 'whites only' signs.

    50. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that's why we're having an obesity problem. Too much pie.

      But I like pie... and pi.

    51. Re:Cash still a good thing by mjwx · · Score: 2

      when every penny counts you can't afford to have some parasite company siphoning off your money because you needed groceries.

      This is backwards. Companies want to eliminate cash because the security problems and handling issues raise costs, which leads to higher prices.

      Using debt and credit cards actually increases prices because you're adding additional middlemen into the equation. A card transaction has a minimum of 5 parties:

      1. Purchaser.
      2. Purchaser's bank.
      3. Credit network (Visa/MC/AMEX).
      4. Merchant's bank.
      5. Merchant.

      Parties 2-4 will each be taking a piece of the transaction. They've made rules and in come countries, laws, that the merchant has to hide this cost from the purchaser. So the business a merchant does on card, the more they have to raise their prices to compensate for the additional percentages being removed from the sale. Such percentages can be up to 6% of the transaction amount, not including the cost of terminal or line rental.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    52. Re: Cash still a good thing by houghi · · Score: 1

      That is indeed a downside of the system.

      Just a few months ago, I opened a new bank account in Belgium. It is free. Not sure if I can overdraw it, but I doubt it. I got a card and a card reader for autentication send to me. Been able to use it to withdraw money all over Europe for free.

      Just as of lately, they ask 0.50 EUR per cash withdrawls with non-ING banks. https://www.ing.be/en/retail/d...

      There are several banks that are completely free. Some banks will ask a monthly fee of around 3.00 EUR per month.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    53. Re:Cash still a good thing by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Some people can't get bank accounts. No bank account, no debit card.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    54. Re:Cash still a good thing by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      We need to figure out who these people are who can't do that, and address their problems.

      Well, you have to know that's an option before you can do that. We don't generally teach much in the way of financial literacy in school.

      Banks which make as much money as possible on as much predatory behavior as possible have the money to advertise, where the local friendly credit union which is non-profit does not. Very predatory businesses like rent-to-own, pay-day-loan, and pawn shops set up in dilapidated buildings in the poor parts of town, and are often some of the only "financial institutions" near where residents live and work.

      When all your parents ever really knew was getting screwed by banks and predatory businesses, and they don't teach you anything better in school, how does a large portion of the population figure out that there's another option? What tools do they have to understand the difference between a good and a bad financial institution? How do they even know good ones exist and where to find them?

      One option is a state or national credit union, with post offices serving as banks.

      I've been in favor of this for a very, very long time. It would radically change the ability of the poor to access non-predatory financial services. Tie this into the IRS and social safety nets, and you can get your government money from the post office, send it to people you need to pay via the post office, and keep it safe in the post office. In the US, almost every town with more than a thousand people in it has a post office, and they already have a nation-wide distribution network, online financial accounts for businesses, and a solid web presence. There are 30,000 branches that in short order could offer basic financial services to something like 99.99% of the US population.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    55. Re:Cash still a good thing by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      Because we are talking public policy, not what makes individual companies more money or prestige. What is good for the community and what is good for individual businesses are not always the same thing, otherwise we would just go back to 'whites only' signs.

      My point is it's not that simple. It's not at all clear which choices are ultimately good for society. And thus we need a way to make those decisions.

      In my opinion, making one decision for an entire city is a recipe for suboptimal results. Allowing thousands of vendors to experiment with millions of transactions will allow us to gradually discover and adjust our spectrum of answers is much more likely to find when cash-vs-nocash transactions is a net benefit.

      Let me pose a hypothetical so you can see how goofy this gets. I think the surviving Blockbuster store should be required to offer VHS cassettes. There are people who don't have a streaming service or DVD/BluRay player and can't afford to buy one. To ensure those people have access to second-run movies, it's reasonable to require Blockbuster to stock tapes. For that matter, it's unfair that Redbox only offers DVDs. They should add a VHS carousel to their kiosks too. And now that I think on it, Netflix should be required to offer VHS tape rental along with DVDs, BluRay, and streaming. It's only fair.

      Other than being obviously silly, how is that argument different in any ethical way than requiring cash transactions?

    56. Re:Cash still a good thing by Stickybombs · · Score: 1

      The main difference is that a DVD/VHS/movie rental is a luxury good, not required for someone to stay alive. Groceries, water, things like that, are quite a bit more important, and everyone should be able to purchase the things that they absolutely need in order to live. Besides, no one is mandating what stores must sell, only that everyone is able to have access to whatever goods they do choose to sell.

    57. Re:Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Companies want to eliminate cash because the security problems and handling issues raise costs, which leads to higher prices.

      Do you really think they're going to cut prices because they're going cashless? Cash-only is the way to go for any transaction that is not online. It helps you actually see the money leaving your hands and makes you less likely to impulse buy, especially if you're holding a $100.

      True but "Gen Stupid" never learned how to handle debt so they expect gubbamint to vacate their college/university debt because "Gen Stupid" took useless classes (like "Intersectional Cross Dressing" and "Underwater Basketweaving") and not stuff that actually could help them in life.

    58. Re: Cash still a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how can people be unable to get a bank account? I can get free checking and a debit card at my credit union for, at most, a $25 refundable savings deposit.

      Chances are, you also had to show a government-issued ID, but just don't remember it (or thought it so trivial to not be worth mentioning).

      For the last 15 years or so, there has been a hard push to make it difficult for certain types of people to get government-granted IDs (or register to vote).

      You must be talking about illegal aliens to the USA, right?

    59. Re:Cash still a good thing by wagnerer · · Score: 1

      Also most banks charge for significant cash deposits. If you deposit $10,000 in a month that is a $75 deposit charge at the first bank I checked.

    60. Re:Cash still a good thing by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Because poor people can TOTALLY have their choice in terms of service. Banks make billions every year from NSF's. Tens of billions. Like they're just going to pass up revenue from their target market willy-nilly.

    61. Re:Cash still a good thing by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, because cash is anonymous the banks are required to perform anti money laundering checks on large deposits and they will pass these costs onto their customers.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  5. Mark Of The Beast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark"

    I sure hope those pre-trib rapture interpretations are correct. I can't due without my electronic gadgets.

  6. But how will rich people be able to ban poors? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

    Eww, poor people might buy things in stores like rich people, and even gasp talk to us!

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re: But how will rich people be able to ban poors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Raise prices?

      What a dumbass post. But what would I expect from a progressive.

    2. Re:But how will rich people be able to ban poors? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Every time a story like this comes up and a comment like yours comes up as a result, it always leaves me wondering why the US can't solve the actual fucking problem, rather than dicking around the periphery

      For example, in this case the problem is "stores don't allow people to use cash", and comments indicate it's a way to exclude those who can't use anything but cash - the poorer people in society, apparently.

      Why is that? Why don't the poor in your country have access to banking? In the country that I come from, banks are legally obliged to provide free no-frills accounts with debit cards, no credit facility, electronic payments, direct debit payments and both online and counter access. Everyone, including the homeless, can have a bank account in my country.

      So wouldn't that be a better solution? Fix the access to banking, as that seems to be the real problem here?

    3. Re:But how will rich people be able to ban poors? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Because we set it up that way.

      I'm all for encouraging everyone to join credit unions, but here it's all about barriers, and rewarding the ultra-rich.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    4. Re:But how will rich people be able to ban poors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like communism to me comrade.

    5. Re:But how will rich people be able to ban poors? by dryeo · · Score: 4, Funny

      And how are the banks supposed to make record profits every quarter with laws like that? Luckily in America, banks have the freedom to finance politicians who pass business friendly laws. Being a free country, the poor also have the right to pay off politicians so it's fair.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  7. Change is obsolete by Ichijo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cashless companies argue that cash slows down transactions when change needs to be counted

    Then bundle taxes into store prices and make sure those prices end in whole dollars and not a penny less.

    Morons.

    --
    Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    1. Re:Change is obsolete by DogDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If a cashier has trouble counting change, that person needs to find a different job.

      -retailer for 17 years

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Change is obsolete by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      Don't most cash registers *tell* you the exact change too?
      Fuck people are dim.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    3. Re:Change is obsolete by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      all the young ones seem to have trouble with 'new math'.

      and by new math, I mean COUNTING.

      I drove thru a fast food drive-in and the bill was $4.06

      I gave the cashier a fiver and 6 cents. I did not have 4 ones with me.

      the cashier paused, not sure what to do. "why did this customer overpay like that?"

      yeah, that's a hard one. think long and hard about it, millennial.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re: Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, we will round prices up to the nearest dollar for everyone. Good job, you were inclusive and equitable!

      (What do you plan to do if someone wants to pay with change?)

    5. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If a cashier has trouble counting change, that person needs to find a different job.

      -retailer for 17 years

      And it takes time to count out the bills and then the coins. Eliminate the coins and it speeds things up quite a bit - d'uh! - you should know that if you were actually in retail for 17 years.

      And pennies are the most pointless things with our currency. Their only purpose is for retailers to play those stupid games of pricing shit at $x.99 thinking they are fooling people into thinking it's "only" x dollars.

    6. Re: Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Direct them to the Coinstar.

    7. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually had a similar situation where it was some dollar amount and ten cents. I gave them a 20 and a dime. They handed me back the dime I gave them and said, "you don't need this," and then looked at me like I was a complete idiot. Then they proceed to count out all the bills, plus ninety cents in small change. If I hadn't been laughing so hard I probably woulda punched the kid right in his stupid smirking mouth.

    8. Re:Change is obsolete by kamapuaa · · Score: 0

      Wow, you normally would expect over-worked fast food workers to be math geniuses. Fucking millenials.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    9. Re:Change is obsolete by Whorhay · · Score: 4, Informative

      The speed of the transaction, in my experience as someone that worked as a cashier, is usually killed by the customer not being ready to pay. As a cashier I could usually take the money, press all the necessary buttons on the register, and return the change faster than most customers could get the money out of their wallet/purse. Card transactions were slower than cash most of the time and it still seems that way, especially with the newer chipped cards. Paying with a Check was of course always the absolute slowest way to go about business.

      I think the biggest boons to businesses in not accepting cash is reducing the chances of a robbery, cutting back on employee theft of cash, and cutting out conning the cashier by claiming incorrect change. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people claim they paid with a twenty instead of a ten.

    10. Re:Change is obsolete by Solandri · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The guy in charge of collecting cash and distributing change throughout the day for the booths at a festival was a friend of mine. During pre-festival prep, I noticed him working on the price display boards. He was setting the prices to all end in 99 cents. I pulled him aside and asked him, "Do you *really* want to run around all day collecting and distributing pennies?" The light bulb went off in his head and he changed them all to end in 95 cents. After the first day, he changed the prices again, so they all ended in multiples of 25 cents, with most of them ending in round dollars.

      Lesson: Make sure the guy setting the prices is also the one who has to deal with the hassle of dealing with change.

    11. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I could do this kind of math in the 3rd grade (everyone was expected to) and I count as a millennial. I think people are just getting stupider/more useless.

    12. Re:Change is obsolete by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Card transactions were slower than cash most of the time and it still seems that way, especially with the newer chipped cards.

      Most people don't seem to realize you can swipe/insert the card while the cashier is scanning your purchases. Then when the cashier completes the transaction, the charge is processed almost immediately. From what I've seen, bagging is what slows the process down the most (that and price checks on items which don't ring up correctly).

      I can't tell you how many times I've seen people claim they paid with a twenty instead of a ten.

      That isn't always the customer conning the cashier. Numerous times, the cashier has claimed I only gave a ten when I gave a twenty (in one case I was playing in line with my friend, folding two tens together in creative ways, and the cashier claimed I only handed him one ten when I gave him both).

      People make mistakes. It's not always malevolent.

    13. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even getting to the nearest quarter rather than the nearest dollar should speed things up considerably.

    14. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most people don't seem to realize you can swipe/insert the card while the cashier is scanning your purchases.

      Not at my grocery store. If you insert a chip, it locks the register and nothing will scan. And this is a major chain.

    15. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most people are older than you and realize that some POS will get screwed up if you swipe early.

    16. Re:Change is obsolete by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I once gave a cashier 3EUR in three piles of coins, each pile 1EUR in total. Simplified: 10 x 10Cent, 5 x 20Cent, 1x 50Cent + 2 x 20Cent + 1 x 10Cent.

      He was so confused he simply mixed them and started counting.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    17. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proponents will tell you the reason we have sales tax added to the sticker price is because some people don't pay sales tax. What they don't tell you is that it's only a few percent who don't pay sales tax, and that the true purpose of having a separately itemized sales tax is to create consumer outrage at being taxed in the first place.

      We need an amendment that requires companies to include all taxes, fees, and surcharges in the quoted / advertised price.

    18. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wow, you normally would expect over-worked fast food workers to be math geniuses. Fucking millenials.

      As the parent of teens that have worked in restaurants, let me say the following: It's the management's fault. There is literally zero training in most restaurant jobs. With my kids representing four different restaurant jobs over the past two years, not one time did any of the management of those four places evaluate their employees for abilities to count or train them on how to operate a cash register. It was all self training.

      I have had experiences where I provided change and a bill to a cashier only to get the deer-in-the-headlights look or the "you can keep this" response but you can blame the people who are hiring abject retards and turning them loose to sink or swim. Restaurant employees are completely disposable.

      For all the SJWs and haters out there... Chick Fil A was an exception.

    19. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I hand you a $20 to pay for a $3 item, I damn sure expect to get my $17 in change.

    20. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wendy's has a change-counter for their challenged employees. The employees still have a register for the bills, but the coins get auto-dispensed. If it's really a problem, the system could also tell the employee which bills to use.

      If the problem were really that their bottom-quartile employees can't count change, there are already plenty of solutions for that...

    21. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I remember when I got my first job 40 years ago. There was no cash register. Credit Cards required 15 minutes on the phone to get authorized. Fraudulent Card lists were actual lists that came in the mail every couple of days that you had to "read and compare" manually. The floor limit was so low that almost no CC transactions occurred. Receipts were hand written and added up "the old fashioned way" (by hand). Tax was computed by looking it up in a table (and sometimes adding multiple results together). Almost all transactions were cash. We sold calculators, so sometimes they were used, but were generally so slow that manual processing and arithmetic was often faster.

      It took all of 15 seconds to explain how to properly "make change" and manage the "cash drawer".

      I do not understand what is so wrong with people today ... are they addle or what?

    22. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One does not calculate the "change" in order to make change. The first thing that really slowed down the cash handling process was "gizmo's" which subtracted the "amount tendered" from the "amount due" and showed how much "change" was due.

    23. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you put the money that the customer gave you away (as in into the cash drawer) before you finished making change and having the customer accept the result, then you should be fired (or at least pay for any discrepancies out of your own pocket).

    24. Re:Change is obsolete by smoot123 · · Score: 1

      Most people don't seem to realize you can swipe/insert the card while the cashier is scanning your purchases. Then when the cashier completes the transaction, the charge is processed almost immediately.

      Y'know, this is something I'm pretty happy about these days. It seemed card or chip transactions used to be gawdawful slow. Now they seem pretty quick, especially since many vendors don't even require a PIN for small values. The cafeteria here at work lets me just slide my card, wait about a second, and the cashier tells me I'm good to go. As much as I like technical solutions, they often are slower than older, non-technical answers. In this case, given a few years, people figured it out.

    25. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they could use tech which given an amount of money (either inserted directly or typed in by the cashier), spits out the correct change for the customer to grab. No need to open a cash register. Really, this is a trivial problem to solve using tech and not a single store does it. It's either a fully automated store or a person manually does everything. No one makes a middle ground!

    26. Re:Change is obsolete by dryeo · · Score: 1

      yeah, that's a hard one. think long and hard about it, millennial.

      Right, because nobody has ever gotten stuck behind some innumerate old fucker in the store trying to buy $100 worth of groceries with $80 cash.

      I'm always getting stuck behind people doing the card shuffle, try half a dozen in the hope that one won't be declined. And each card is slower then using cash.
      I always look at the cashier lines looking for customers with cash as that line will move.
      Other week, one out of four cashiers had a sign, "cash only, card reader down", watched for a while, the speed that people went through that line was amazing.
      I think stores would stop accepting cards if it wasn't that they encouraged people to spend money they don't have with a smile.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    27. Re: Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems more and more common. I too have run into this situation.

    28. Re:Change is obsolete by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Good cashiers leave the cash you gave on top of the cash register, usually just above the draw, until they've given change.
      Mistakes are quickly corrected and I've seen mistakes from both the cashier and myself.
      You're right about cards almost always being slower then cash. The advantage to the store is people spend money they don't have with a smile when using cards.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    29. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 99 is an old sales/marketing trick. It conditions the buyer to think the item is cheaper than it is, something about rounding down instead of up. Thus a 99 cent product looks like its worth 90 cents not 100 cents or 1 whole dollar.

    30. Re:Change is obsolete by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If a cashier has trouble counting change, that person needs to find a different job.
        -retailer for 17 years

      It's not the cashier that is slow. It's me, going to pay $1 for a Marsbar. Only to be told that it's actually $1.27 and having to get additional crap out of my wallet again, having to wait (admittedly a short period of time) for some change, and then walking around with a pocket full of shrapnel which me as a non-cashier will then battle with trying to get rid of when the next Marsbar craving kicks in.

      Every other country in the world the sticker price is the price. I can count my change while waiting in line. In many sane countries lower value shrapnel is abolished. These days I flat out refuse 1c and 2c pieces from German retailers as change. I can't use them as tender in my country. Yet the cashiers in Germany are a mixture of both confused and worried, not quite sure how to handle the situation.

      I actually had one person tell me I have to take it since the till won't add up causing big troubles at the end of the day and she could be fired for stealing if I refused to take it and she pocketed it. She was speechless when I took the change and threw it in the bin next to her and walked out.

    31. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what reduces the chances of a robery is less subhumans around you

    32. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why a good cashier holds the payment on top of the register until the customer is satisfied with his change.
      You can say: "See, right here is the 10 that you used". The CYA works both ways. And it's not always the
      customer trying to run a scam. I've paid with 20's only to have the clerk try to return change for a 10. Cashiers
      can try to steal too.

    33. Re: Change is obsolete by houghi · · Score: 1

      The handeling if cash does not stop with the customers ttansaction. Unless you where allowed to tske ot all home, you nneed to count it at the end of your shoft. Somebody has to check that. Then you need to do a bitmore with it, before it is on the bank account.

      Card payments do that automatically. I pay almosteveruthing by vard, be it with Pin or wireless. Much faster than cash. I live in Europe where the banking system is in the year 2019.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    34. Re:Change is obsolete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all you geezers crack me up..

      My only question is this: when did it go from cracking a whip to driving a whip??

      Now get off my lawn!

    35. Re: Change is obsolete by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Cashier should not even exist

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  8. is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless plac by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless place and to not pay with card?

    Can you get changed with dine and dash at card only restaurant if you leave cash on the table and walkout?

  9. Why? by fluffernutter · · Score: 2

    Why is this even up to individual states? This is federal currency.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because the transaction doesn't cross state lines. Federal currency is about making sure states don't lock in citizens. Your money and property needs to be movable between states freely, But the business conducted solely in a state is the states responsibility to regulate. Otherwise all money transactions would be federally controlled and there would effectively be no state's rights (or states really). If it worked as you suggested, the federal government could end run any law, even things its expressly constitutionally prohibited from regulating (like alcohol), by controlling how its money was used in those transactions.

    2. Re:Why? by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Yes the little people version of interpreting the Commerce Clause. Entirely reasonable. But you know if a law enforcement or political interest desired, their interpretation would apply and it would go "cash crosses state lines, that's money you did or could have spent at a store that buys products from out of state, and you effect the overall market" and it's now subject to federal regulation as "interstate commerce." There's nothing that isn't subject to federal regulation under interstate commerce if the right people ask the court for it to be.

    3. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      god this has been discussed again and again

      1) what's printed on a bill is not a law in the first place

      2) legal tender for all debts public and private doesn't have anything to do with a seller being required to accept the cash, it is informing the world that the bill is legal to offer (that's what the word tender means) as payment (vs counterfeit currency that is illegal to offer)

      this is not just Internet lawyer speak, the Treasury department has issued public statements to this effect

    4. Re:Why? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      What about all people being equal under the law? Your point is irrelevant because the constitution is being broken.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean gold or silver coin? The only legally valid money in the U.S. according to the constitution?

  10. The Rich once again benefit from the Poor... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I'm all for this move, but a funny side effect this has is supporting the ability of rich people to remain anonymous by using cash for transactions they do not want others to know about.

    If all stores were allowed to go cashless, it would be harder and harder to hide any transaction from everyone - stores on the lower end the spectrum are just the edge of that slippery slope.

    So I applaud citied working at keeping the economy free from meddling for those that care to expend effort.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:The Rich once again benefit from the Poor... by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      If you're rich enough you just pay cash to have someone else go buy the thing for you. It's not particularly difficult and some stores will always take cash simply because they get the business of anyone who only carries cash.

    2. Re:The Rich once again benefit from the Poor... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IDGAF if The Rich get to hide their questionable purchases so long as everyone has the ability to protect the privacy of what they spend their money on too. It's all part of this concept called "Freedom", which may have a potential for abuse, you must just accept that as part of the cost of freedom.

    3. Re:The Rich once again benefit from the Poor... by chaotixx · · Score: 1

      IDGAF if The Rich get to hide their questionable purchases so long as everyone has the ability to protect the privacy of what they spend their money on too. It's all part of this concept called "Freedom", which may have a potential for abuse, you must just accept that as part of the cost of freedom.

      Shouldn't businesses be given the freedom of deciding how they want to run their business? If some stores decide they don't want to accept cash, you must just accept that as part of the cost of their freedom.

    4. Re:The Rich once again benefit from the Poor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all part of this concept called "Freedom"

      "Freedom" should also include the freedom to run a store that doesn't accept cash. Just like people have the freedom to not shop there.

  11. Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Remember when stores used to try to charge fees for using credit cards, and when that didn't fly they started offering discounts for using cash, because it was cheaper dealing with cash than credit? Did that change at some point? Is that why some stores want to go cashless all of a sudden?

    1. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      Time. Handing, counting, safe movement in/out, depositing cash takes employee time.

      Theft. Cash is far easier to steal then credit card fraud. Especially when a clerk "forgets" to enter a transaction into the register.

      Speed of transactions. A good credit card system is faster than an employee counting change and making change.

      Automation. Kiosk checkout systems are a lot simpler when they are card only.

    2. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Credit/debit cards come with MASSIVE SWATHS of data that someone, somewhere, is willing to pay for. And believe me, some accountant fuckwad has figured out a way to twist and turn credit card transactions directly into profit centers, or this whole cashless thing wouldn't be taking off like it is.

    3. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Automation. Kiosk checkout systems are a lot simpler when they are card only.

      More reason to force acceptance of cash then. Kiosk checkout systems frequently add time to my checkouts when they jam up waiting for overrides from an absentee clerk playing on her cell phone for simple items like alcohol or spray paint. And when they require you to look up an item yourself in some half assed visual database because it has no UPC, I drop my shit on the counter and walk out. When sellers want to shift costs onto their customers and pocket the savings, I shop elsewhere. If I wanted to scan and bag items myself I'd get a fucking job doing that.

      I seriously do not understand those who claim it is faster. You have to unload, scan, pay, bag, and reload yourself. A good cashier can scan faster than I can unload and a bagger can have everything loaded by the time I can pay.

    4. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That changed because, after failing to prevent cash discounts through litigation, credit card companies eventually started actually competing with cash by dropping their fees to less than a fifth of what they were before. Cash is still cheaper, but the difference isn't significant and the convenience for the customers in being able to use whichever method is handy makes it more than worthwhile.

      While cash is cheaper per transaction, there's an overhead to handling any cash at all, so the only way to further save money is to refuse all cash purchases. Assuming that the credit card providers don't react to the reduction of cash transactions by raising their fees again, this still means you will lose some customers to competitors who still accept cash, missing out on more revenue than the money you're saving. The fix to that problem is to coordinate with your competitors and all go cashless at once, which screws over the populace as they can't even vote with their wallets anymore. And that's how we get to the last resort of legislation.

    5. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Speed of transactions. A good credit card system is faster than an employee counting change and making change.

      Going for a funny mod?
      Anyways, you forgot the main reason, customers spending money they don't have or weren't planning on spending. Show up at a store with $20, you're not going to spend over $20, and you will feel some disgust seeing the twenty go along with the pleasure of acquiring something. With the card, the disgust doesn't happen until you get the bill or look at your bank balance.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    6. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Cash is far easier to steal then credit card fraud.

      I'm calling bullshit. Credit card fraud is automated. Cash theft requires physical interaction every single time.

    7. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      It's faster because the store can have more of them and keep them permanently open, whereas its uneconomical to keep cashiers on standby waiting for customers so there will usually be a queue.
      Some stores also have a system whereby you use a handheld scanner (or your phone) to tally up the items in advance before putting them in your cart, then you only have to pay which eliminates many of the steps you've highlighted above.

      The lazy clerks playing on their cellphones or having idle non work related chats also occur with those who are supposed to be cashiers. I walked out of a store in disgust recently because the only cashier was chatting to her friends on a phone (she was loud enough everyone could hear her conversation) while a large queue was forming.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    8. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Cash being stolen deprives you of the cash permanently...
      Card fraud you report and in 99% of cases the bank will sort it out and refund you.
      Financial loss vs minor inconvenience.

      Also cards have to be fraudulently used somewhere, which leaves a trail for law enforcement to follow. Cash is much harder to trace once it's gone.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    9. Re:Cashless Now The Cheaper Option? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the 10 items or less bunch, I estimate that they need about twice as many stations to get the same amount of throughput. That's who I mainly see waiting for the self checkout anyway. If you have a full cart, I'd say it takes 3 or 4 stations because of all the inefficiency of trying to unload, scan, bag and then reload with nowhere to put your items in the process. I've seen long lines of small purchases waiting for the "quick" self checkout while I go through the slow full service checkouts and leave before they can get to the stations.

      Most of the cashiers playing on cellphones that I have seen are the guards watching over the self checkouts. They are only watching to keep the customers honest and do those age related overrides. The regular cashiers are too busy to play with their phones. My biggest complaint with standard checkouts are the cashiers who like to chit chat with every customer and then the customer stands around after they are done to catch up on gossip.

  12. Digital? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    privacy advocates say that being forced to use a digital form of payment to buy things

    Uh.. isn't cash digital?

  13. Cashless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like Manafort. He got 19 years (whatever 232 months comes to). He will get out early ... once sized for a pine box. Trump will get more time, kids too.

  14. Easy fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Little kiosk outside the store, let people load some money onto there account. problem solved.

  15. membership required by renegade600 · · Score: 1

    wonder if this means more retailers will require membership to shop there in order to bypass the cash.

    1. Re:membership required by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      wonder if this means more retailers will require membership to shop there in order to bypass the cash.

      It does, but it will also act as a limiting factor because such stores will have less customers. It will help reduce the number of other retail outlets which they displace.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:membership required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wonder if this means more retailers will require membership to shop there in order to bypass the cash.

      Ultimately no, although it will be funny to watch the lawsuits from people only hearing about this new law right now.

      Philly already had a law banning cashless stores that was made in 1984.
      The mayor was informed about this after passing this new law and he had no clue it was already a law.

      The detail about the memberships however was not included in the prior law, and that law is still in effect.
      So costco may claim they are membership only and are exempt, but they are only exempt from the 2019 law, the 1984 law still makes their membership only cashless business illegal.

      But on the same turn, and I didn't know this until recently, apparently between 1984 and today there has only been ONE court case involving not accepting cash, and that was for a car rental company.
      That case was settled so there was no judgement, but this new 2019 law wouldn't have come into play in that situation anyway.

      Further reading: https://www.philly.com/business/philadelphia-cashless-store-ban-pennsylvania-amazon-20190216.html

    3. Re:membership required by blindseer · · Score: 2

      I remember a conversation with one of my co-workers about a silly membership rule he ran into. He was passing through a "dry" county somewhere and wanted a drink at the end of his day. He found a random bar and sat down to ask for a drink. The lady asked if he was a member as only members could be served alcohol. He said we was not, then asked how to become a member. The lady said it was X dollars (about the price of a beer) and the first drink is free. So he pays for his membership and got his membership card as a napkin under his glass of beer.

      If the laws on membership and paying with a credit card are similar then have a similar membership rule as this "gentleman's club" in that dry county. If you aren't a member then make membership $15 with a bonus of $15 off their first purchase. If it's someone that just wants a burger and a beer than might otherwise cost $13.50 then they would either get people to pay the $15 just so that they can eat and be on their way, or order a dessert too to get above the $15 limit. Just have the "membership card" print out with the receipt.

      I can imagine that in fact many shops, especially the small "mom and pop" shops, would use a creative membership rule to get around the law. The stores affected would likely be large chains that don't want to bother with such "creativity".

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    4. Re:membership required by mentil · · Score: 1

      They could likely argue that a free Amazon.com account counts as membership.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    5. Re:membership required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Membership included with every purchase."

      Done.

  16. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2

    Cryptocurrency is a meme, and I scoff at and ridicule anyone who falls for it. It goes up and down worse than the stockmarket, blockchain has now been proven to not be unhackable, and it seems like every day I read another story about another cryptocurrency exchange being hacked and everyone losing everything they had in it. LOL no thanks.

  17. Dumb by mattyj · · Score: 1

    I can sympathize with poor people, I was one at one time, but if a bodega wants to only accept chickens as payment, I think they should be able to do that. People that don't have chickens can then go someplace else to buy goods.

    I do the same, but opposite, by not patronizing cash only establishments. There's no excuse for not taking credit cards (or variations) in 2019. If you can't be bothered to have a cheap phone and Square, then I'll be bothered to buy my tacos from the next truck over.

    1. Re:Dumb by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Credit card companies take 3% of everything you spend. If you use your card all the time, you're Visa's bitch, even if you don't see the bill.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Visa takes the money from the merchant, cutting into their profits, and not from me. It's rare that a merchant gives me a discount when I bring cash. Probably because they're worried about counterfeiting.

      but if a bodega wants to only accept chickens as payment, I think they should be able to do that.

      Local governments are within their right to regulate business. We still live in a world where it is quite normal to require permits to operate a business. Probably because the people cede their freedom to operate business how they see fit and exchange expect the regulation of standardized business practices.

    3. Re:Dumb by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      by not patronizing cash only establishments.

      Is it cash only?
      I thought they just wanted places to also accept cash.

      Whats wrong with that?

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    4. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...And do you think the merchant neglects to account for that when pricing their goods? Increased cost to the merchant directly correlates to increased cost to you.

    5. Re:Dumb by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      The fact that it comes out of the businesses profits is exactly why some businesses don't use that form of payment. It could be that the owner is a penny pinching Scrouge who just wants every cent of profit possible, or it could be that they run a very narrow profit margin and that 3% makes it untenable. If I'm not mistaken there is also a monthly fee for having a credit card terminal so if using a credit terminal doesn't increase their revenue enough to cover the new expense I could see skipping it. If the business is already essentially already selling at capacity there might be no incentive to start taking cards as it would just represent a direct decline in profit margins. I've frequented a few lunch places that were cash only and always at full serving capacity, accepting cards would just hurt them.

      All that said there is a cost to business of accepting cash, so I can also understand businesses not wanting to accept it if they prefer credit terminals.

    6. Re:Dumb by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Yup, because banks *never* charge businesses for their services...

    7. Re:Dumb by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"Credit card companies take 3% of everything you spend. If you use your card all the time, you're Visa's bitch, even if you don't see the bill."

      AND all the prices go up by X% due to those fees. So cash users end up paying MORE for the same items.

      And before someone points out things like cash theft and cash errors... Card payments often have to deal with errors PLUS "chargebacks" and the labor that goes to dealing with those and fighting those. And those fees usually do NOT include the expensive card readers or other infrastructure (and they have to be updated fairly often). So I would think it is a wash on the overhead. Leaving that 3% or whatever going straight into higher prices due to cards.

    8. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said:

      It's rare that a merchant gives me a discount when I bring cash.

      It's pretty clear that it does not correlate to increased costs to him.

    9. Re:Dumb by QuasiEvil · · Score: 1

      Trust me, as a small business owner myself, that 3%, plus a "pain in the ass" fee of dealing with the card processor, is built into the price for everything. There's always the chance the customer is going to reverse the charge on you as well, and often Visa/Mastercard is going to side with them even when you've got overwhelming proof that you fulfilled your obligations on the purchase. Then you're out both the product and the payment.

      If somebody wants to hand me cash, I have never once even thought about turning it down. Usually it just means more money to my bottom line. Sometimes, if it's a large enough invoice, I'll even cut them a discount of about - ding, ding, ding - 3%.

      I don't oppose the legislation, but it just seems like an unnecessary, "feel good" sort of lawmaking with little substantiated data to show cashless businesses were causing a significant problem. Debit cards are stupid easy to get, as are bank accounts. And if there were a significant population of people walking around with cash going "I wish somebody would take this in trade - who wants some business", some smart business is going to find a new customer base.

    10. Re:Dumb by fox171171 · · Score: 1

      AND all the prices go up by X% due to those fees. So cash users end up paying MORE for the same items.

      No they don't. They pay the same. Just the merchant gets to keep more.

    11. Re:Dumb by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      They might, but i don't get a 3% discount if i pay with cash so why would i care? The retailer sets their prices taking into account the cost of processing transactions.
      Handling cash is also not free, depending on the retailer it might cost more than the 3% to handle cash (losses due to theft, risk of theft, cost of transporting cash and acquiring small change etc).
      As a visitor to a foreign country, the FX rates provided by card operators are MUCH better than i can get by exchanging cash, which makes paying by card much cheaper for me, I also don't end up with piles of useless change at the end of my trip.

      Cards are massively more convenient from an end user perspective, the only reason to use cash for a customer is if you're concerned about privacy, and you'll also be trying to avoid all the cctv in and around the store.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    12. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no excuse for not taking credit cards (or variations) in 2019. If you can't be bothered to have a cheap phone and Square, then I'll be bothered to buy my tacos from the next truck over.

      There's no excuse for not accepting cash in 2019. If you can't be bothered to have a cheap cash register, then i'll be bothered to buy my tacos from the next truck over.

    13. Re:Dumb by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"No they don't. They pay the same. Just the merchant gets to keep more."

      That is not how economics works in a free market. If it were true, they could continue to charge anything they like for prices and make any amount of profit they want. But it doesn't work that way because of competition.

      Most increased unavoidable costs- fees, taxes, materials, energy, are passed along to the consumer.

  18. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by NerdENerd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A restaurant told a group of us the other day that they had a one bill per table policy and didn't want to split the bill. We all said we don't want to cover the whole bill. Split the bill or we walk, they split the bill. A restaurant cannot force you to cover someone else's order, they also can't say you have a debt with them and are going to refuse your legal tender.

  19. Privacy angle by TigerPlish · · Score: 2

    More and more I use cash, I wish to bank less and less, and offer less of a digital footprint. I also wish to deny banks the ability to float with my money.

    That, and smaller merchants get robbed every time you buy [thing] with credit / debit. (yes, the banks put a fee on debit transactions too.) Are you a big corporation? Then hell yes I pay with debit AND make a cash-back just to stick you with the fee (yes, I know that's all factored into the pricing, it's more a principal-of-the-thing thing for me.)

    Funny that I'm regressing to what life was like before gas pumps started taking cards directly, which for me was around 1994 or so.

    And now, even the gas stations don't get my card, I pay with the app for mobil/exxon. I don't trust the card-readers at the pumps any more than I can throw one, I live in the skimmer capital of the US. (or so claims my local rag.) I have reason to believe I've been skimmed, but the bank won't tell me where. They just automagically send a new card.

    So now, fuck 'em all, cash is king.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
  20. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shills like the above are even making it start to sound like a MLM scheme. No thanks as well.

  21. Many of us don't use cash or credit by raymorris · · Score: 2

    I'm fine with the law. Doesn't bother me.

    That said, it's factually incorrect, and in my opinion silly, to pretend the only options are carrying cash or borrowing from Capital One. Maybe it's a symptom of our debtor society and lack of basic education about money that when some people think of a card, it doesn't occur to them there is any card but a credit card.

    Many of us store our money in the bank or credit union, which is free, then use our debit card to spend our money. In fact that's how most people whose financial picture is improving do it. If you're using a credit card for everything, you're likey going deeper and deeper into debt. If you haven't bothered to get a checking at savings account at your local credit union, your money management probably hasn't improved all that much since you were getting an allowance.

    A debit card, spending your money which is stored in your local credit union or bank, is absolutely an option. It's even the option most people use who aren't spending more than they make, going into debt.

    1. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by markdavis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >Many of us don't use cash or credit.

      That is true. But the ONLY option that really protects privacy is cash.

      >"A debit card, spending your money which is stored in your local credit union or bank, is absolutely an option."

      Card payments of any type leave a trail AND force you to disclose your identity to not only the retailer but also a third party (both of which prevent privacy).

      I will also point out that some people who have bad credit, cannot even open a bank account to get a debit card. And now they are cracking down on anonymous debit card sales, closing that avenue too. So it really can still be both a privacy and a poor issue when you are faced with a cashless business.

    2. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anybody who is too paranoid to let "them" know what groceries they buy should be living in the wilderness and eating squirrels. How much fucking privacy do you need? Oh noes, somebody knows I just bought a loaf of bread... now they will be coming for me!!!

    3. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by dryeo · · Score: 1

      One thing about cash is the way it affects the brain compared to using any type of card. Use cash and the disgust as well as the pleasure parts of the brain light up, that disgust works to help you manage your money compared to using a card and only having the pleasure part of your brain light up.
      You can say that people shouldn't be affected by their brains, but they are. Personally, I find it a lot easier to manage my small income by taking X amount out of the bank and only spending that. This way I actually have some savings as well.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    4. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by andymadigan · · Score: 1

      If you're using a credit card for everything, you're likey going deeper and deeper into debt. If you haven't bothered to get a checking at savings account at your local credit union, your money management probably hasn't improved all that much since you were getting an allowance.

      My "local credit union" had fees for just about everything you could imagine, pop-up ads in their online banking, etc. I haven't overdrawn my account in more than 10 years, but as an example, their overdraw fee is $25 per transaction. Of course, on the debit card you have to opt-in for this "service", but they push for it, hard. They're only slightly better than a bank like Chase or Bank of America. That is to say, they're way worse than your average online bank.

      I use Fidelity (Fidelity Investments, there's apparently also a bank called Fidelity), which is in fact not a bank or a credit union. They don't charge for checks, ATM withdrawals, international wires, and they don't have the concept of a overdraft. They also don't charge me anything (not because I meet some minimum deposit requirement, there's just no fees on their accounts). I used to use Ally, but I decided the interest wasn't worth the hassle anymore, it's easier to only need to log in to one site. I keep any cash beyond my "rainy day fund" in investments. My net worth is leaps and bounds higher than it was when I used a debit card and a traditional checking account. I've done business with two credit unions and they both had terrible service and high fees. I've considered others, but usually their service was so awful that I got disgusted with them before I even finished the sign-up process.

      I also make every purchase I can on credit cards. I've optimized for cash back, with a minimum of 2%. Any card I have is set up for automatic full balance payments each month, the only time I look at my checking account balance is when I copy it to a spreadsheet along with my credit card statement balances to calculate how much to transfer to investments that month. Aside from the revolving credit cards, which are paid in full each month, I have zero debt. I haven't had any since I paid off my car around five years ago.

      I'll bet I have a better handle on my money than you do, and I do all of it without using a debit card or a credit union. I remember when I used to use a debit card and look at my checking account to figure out if I could afford something, I stopped when I had a $3,000 overdraft.

      The crazy people are the ones who hand their debit card to a waiter, who takes a picture of the front and back and empties the account. Sure, you can try to dispute the charges, but meanwhile your rent check bounces.

      Oh, and I never got an allowance.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    5. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I made the switch to cash a few years ago. I'm on a very limited income -- a disability pension -- and before I switched to cash I would often run out of money before the end of the month. I had to hit up food banks, borrow from friends... it was hell.

      After switching to cash, that all changed. Knowing, seeing and feeling the money leave my hands was exactly what I needed for my brain to stop being stupid with money.

      Now, after several years of saving, I've saved up enough money to buy the computer hardware necessary to start my own business. I might actually wean myself off the government tit and rejoin the workforce, all from switching to cash and being more mindful of the money I spend.

    6. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"Anybody who is too paranoid to let "them" know what groceries they buy should be living in the wilderness and eating squirrels."

      Are you really that dim? I tell you what- why not start posting an itemized list of EVERYTHING you buy from "stores" for a few years, where you bought it, exactly when, followed by your legal name, to a public site that is stored "forever" and shared.

      Then from that data we will statistically "know" where you live (based on geo data), your age, your gender, if you are pregnant, if you have children, how "healthy" your food choices are, if you eat "too much" fat or sugar or meat, if you drink alcohol and how much, if you smoke, if you vape, what kind of health issues you have, if you are sexually active, if you are incontinent, if you rent any sleazy sexual videos or accessories, how far you drive, if you have a weapon, possibly your sexual orientation, and good guesses at how much money you make, possibly your political outlook, your race, who you might associate with, how environmentally "friendly" you are, your work hours, where you might work, etc.

      Oh, and if our "assumptions" are wrong based on our analyses, well, too bad. Not only can't you change it, you won't even know what they are. And what decisions companies or governments make based on those assumptions, now or far into the future, who knows. Shall I go on?

    7. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >But the ONLY option that really protects privacy is cash.

      Not really. How did you think people were caught for money laundering before credit cards?

      I don't know about American currency, but there are identifiers on our cash that makes it traceable, too.

      Cash is less easily traceable and less easily "washed" than debit or credit payments, but that is all.

    8. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're totally confused. This isn't about debt vs spending-only-what-you-have-in-checking; it's about paper money (or coins) vs "plastic."

      What's happening is that some businesses are taking plastic money only (and they don't care if it's a credit card or a debit card) or maybe even proprietary exchange systems (e.g. Apple Pay, etc) but NO PAPER MONEY. They won't take an anonymous $20 bill, unless you put the $20 into your bank or credit union account and then use a debit card to access it.

      They'll only take forms of payment where 1) data is generated to prove who bought what 2) at least one middleman gets a piece of the action 3) have weird barriers to entry (which I think most people here are unaware of, because they satisfied the conditions way back when they were a kid, likely prior to 9/11 when Congress when apeshit and started making life harder for everyone).

      If you got your first checking account and driver's license back in the 20th century, or if you're rich, (either will do) then you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You got grandfathered in, before the government got all hostile, so that you wouldn't complain, rebel, or stop voting for Republicrats.

    9. Re:Many of us don't use cash or credit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If it's so unimportant, then why go to so much extra trouble to make sure they're able to know?

      And "them" might be burglars. Do you want to think through every item on your grocery list and try to figure out whether or not letting burglars know about your habits with regard to that item, are exploitable? What about insurance companies? Do you want your insurance company to know how many cookies you buy? How much beer?

      Should they know if you're pregnant before you do?

      Privacy should be the default, just like only-you-should-know-your-password should be the default. If you want to deviate from that, that's cool. You have plenty of time to think about what you're trying to do and make your move. That's the luxury of coming from a position of security and trying out a little weakness, compared to coming from a position of weakness and trying to get some security.

    10. Re: Many of us don't use cash or credit by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      privacy is gone. You are just hippie nuts thay must die.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  22. Cash 4 Privacy, Freedom of Speech,.. by MonsterMasher · · Score: 1

    Good move Philly!

    Using cash prevents bank 'paper-trail' where&when information, as well as what purchased so important for privacy.

    With banks now refusing to do business with some politically critical of policies, labeled on-line as 'far-right' etc, money is a Freedom of Speech issue.

    Cashless societies are subject to neg interest rates policies to force population to spend & stimulate as all savings in banks are reduced.

    What else .. ?

  23. cashless means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's harder to launder illegal money in a cashless world. I'm guessing Philly politicians need to spend their ill gotten cashola somewhere.

    1. Re:cashless means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm guessing Philly politicians need to spend their ill gotten cashola somewhere.

      You can guess all you want, but I know you're a fucking tool.

    2. Re:cashless means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's harder to launder illegal money in a cashless world.

      No, it isn't. Learn how crime really works.

  24. You're entirely a moron Ken Doll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody is accusing you of overthinking or even adequately thinking this.

    1. Re:You're entirely a moron Ken Doll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, I'm automatically modding SuperKendall up every time I see this flamebait troll in response to one of his comments. There's no need for following someone around to make personal attacks, just because you disagree with someone's political point of view.

  25. NAZI RAYMORRIS CAUGHT DEAD PUSHING NAZI PROPAGANDA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  26. Cash isn't slow by quonset · · Score: 1

    For the vast majority of cases, using cash to pay is no faster/slower than using a debit or credit card. Any perceived difference in time is insignificant.

    Just today I used cash to buy lettuce and bananas. Granted, I had my cash ready when I got to the counter (including coins), and I know that the time I spent handing over a few coins and bills was the same amount of time it would have taken to insert my card, tap through the extra money question, input my code, wait for confirmation, then stow my card before walking out with my food.

    People who think cashless transactions are faster are fooling themselves. It makes them feel special that they're not degrading themselves by using cash and are instead pushing boundaries because they're digital.

    1. Re:Cash isn't slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      first I think you're comparing the most optimistic speed of cash to the least optimistic speed of a electronic transaction

      the reality is that when paying when cash, many people fumble about, especially older people who often insist on trying to count out exact change, ironically declaring how they'll save the cashier time as they spend time picking through coins

      but that's all hooey anyway, why most retailers would love to be shed of cash is not about the speed of individual transactions, it's all the other mess that comes in handling cash, having to account for drawers and do bank deposits and suffer theft risk (both from employees and robbers)

      and imagine you're a business that doesn't do much cash at all, like a higher end department store, probably many days you've got no one using it in practice at all yet you're still having to go through all that cash related mess every day

  27. "Shanghai" Bill invents new facts daily / hourly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Like how "Blood plasma is stable" as he repeats that lie about 12 times, or "China's Communist Party / Government doesn't censor people directly." -Shanghai Bill is not a valid source of fact-checkable information. In fact, he's full of shit.

    This is not why companies like Amazon are doing this. They are eliminating employees and pushing their robotracker technologies. Nobody is opening up cashless drug stores or check cashing bodegas, which get robbed.

    Stop lying Bill.

  28. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Learn economics and facts before you speak...
    - Volatility is COMPLETELY NORMAL and EXPECTED process of adoption of a new distributed currency into a free and open market. Fiat is only "stable" due to manipulation to target, see the Fed's own whitepapers on that. IN FACT, Fiat is extremely volatile when priced in cryptocurrency.
    - Blockchain design model itself has NEVER been "hacked". Only the shitware and shitcorps and shitcoins surrounding it has been.
    - NOT your keys, NOT your Cryptocurrency. Read the news... banks get "hacked" ALL THE FUCKING TIME MATE.

    Stop making yourself look stupid.
    You are a smart person. Please, learn.

  29. They don't have to take it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They'll deny it. I have been denied SEVERAL times for trying to buy things with just bags of pennies. Off the top of my head, 2 times were at gas stations and once was my very own goddamned credit union. Stores will not take rolled change either. That credit union (Ascend FCU btw) requires you to use a change sorter similar to the Coinstar thing and will hear no arguments about the authenticity of the count either. To further reinforce their douchbaggery, the machine dumps everything into one big bucket so you can't get it back out and hand count it. And I'm I still a memeber there. Those fuckers fuck you less than all the other fuckers around me. I'm stuck at the company store.

    1. Re:They don't have to take it by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      Those credit union coin sorters show you a running count. If you're that worried that they're short-changing you on your pennies, drop them in one at a time and wait for each cent to register on the display before adding the next penny.

  30. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by supremebob · · Score: 1

    I'm curious which cryptocurrency you would want people to adopt. Bitcoin transactions can take up to half an hour to verify, making it pretty much useless for a brick and mortar retail. Other cryptocurrencies are faster, but none of them have the popularity of Bitcoin.

  31. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by nbritton · · Score: 1

    is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless place and to not pay with card?

    Can you get changed with dine and dash at card only restaurant if you leave cash on the table and walkout?

    If you owe the restaurant a debt then they have to accept cash, so I suppose the solution is to take a bite out of it first before you attempt to pay.

  32. If you want society to go cashless by Macdude · · Score: 1

    If you want society to go cashless then all banks must be required to issue bank cards and associated accounts to anyone and everyone who applies without fees of any kind.

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    1. Re:If you want society to go cashless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who pays for personal banking services any more? Business accounts I could see but I can't remember the last time I paid a fee for any type of personal bank account.

    2. Re:If you want society to go cashless by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      This is already the case in many countries (eg in europe)... You can get a basic account into which you can deposit funds and to which is attached a debit card you can use for purchases. The basic operations of depositing funds, receiving/sending transfers, making card payments or using an atm are free.
      You don't get any form of credit, you can't spend any money you haven't already deposited into the account.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:If you want society to go cashless by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Who pays for personal banking services any more? Business accounts I could see but I can't remember the last time I paid a fee for any type of personal bank account.

      You're probably "rich". Once my GF was complaining about her bank fees and I was about to mention that I didn't pay fees, but then I remembered that the bank DOES charge fees. I just had enough in the account that I didn't get charged.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  33. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

    Learn economics and facts before you speak...

    Oh, this is going to be good.

    - Volatility is COMPLETELY NORMAL and EXPECTED process of adoption of a new distributed currency into a free and open market.

    Citation needed.

    Fiat is only "stable" due to manipulation to target, see the Fed's own whitepapers on that.

    So if you abandon all pretense of manipulation to target, you get volatility. Nice own-goal.

    IN FACT, Fiat is extremely volatile when priced in cryptocurrency.

    Yes, due to the volatility of the cryptocurrency. Now price either of those in real world goods, like a pizza.

    - Blockchain design model itself has NEVER been "hacked". Only the shitware and shitcorps and shitcoins surrounding it has been.

    Counterpoint. Unless your "blockchain design model" manages to exclude every cryptocurrency deployed to date.

    - NOT your keys, NOT your Cryptocurrency. Read the news... banks get "hacked" ALL THE FUCKING TIME MATE.

    Not as frequently as cryptowallets, not without recourse (insurance because thank you state banking laws), and not with the ability to disappear with nary a trace because thank you Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation).

    Sounds plenty learned to me.

  34. Malicious Compliance by GoRK · · Score: 1

    Just put in a bill changer kiosk that vends prepaid cards. Every kids' arcade in the country knows how this shit works.

  35. Two words by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Postal Banking.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  36. I'm not sure it goes far enough. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    nor will it apply to parking garages or lots,

    They likely didn't want to suddenly make a bunch of parking lots illegal, but frankly since these credit-card only lots started up, I really don't like them. The same problem applies to anyone needing to park. In some places, like a hospital you don't really have any other choices. I think sometimes there might be a way to pay with cash at these places, but I wouldn't bet on it.

  37. Cash is slower? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    BS, Go to a bar on a crowded evening and tell me what is slower a cash or card transaction at the bar? In the time it takes a bartender to handle a card transaction they could have served 2 or 3 other cash paying customers.

  38. Re:"Shanghai" Bill invents new facts daily / hourl by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 0

    FYI, I'm automatically modding ShanghaiBill up every time I see this flamebait troll in response to one of his comments.

    There is no need for that. I am actually flattered to have my own private little troll following me around. I consider it to be a status symbol. I am honored that someone cares enough about my opinions to troll me.

  39. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin transactions can take up to half an hour to verify, making it pretty much useless for a brick and mortar retail.

    You don't actually need to wait for the transaction to be confirmed. It only takes a few seconds to see that a valid transaction was uploaded. At that point the only risk is the buyer attempting to double-spend before the original transaction is confirmed, which is not easy to pull off, and if they do succeed at doing that you can track them down. For moderate-size transactions in a brick-and-mortar retail environment this is more than sufficient. Contrast with the risk of a credit card chargeback, which can occur months later and leaves the merchant very little recourse.

    Waiting for confirmations is mainly needed for high-value transactions and certain digital deliveries where you either can't or don't wish to rely on more traditional means to deal with fraudulent payments.

    --
    "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
  40. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by dryeo · · Score: 3, Informative

    Unless they demand payment upfront.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  41. Do US banks not give debit cards to the poor? by quenda · · Score: 1

    I understand lack of access to credit, and cost of prepaid, but what is the problem with debit cards attached to savings account?
    Do poor people not have savings accounts in the US?

    In other countries, you need a savings account even to receive welfare payments, and there are zero-cost options, even though banks are hardly known for generosity. Cheques have faded into history like the fax machine and 1 cent coins.

    1. Re:Do US banks not give debit cards to the poor? by Yosho · · Score: 1

      Many banks require that you keep a minimum amount of cash in your account at all times and will charge monthly fees if you drop below that, which is another thing that is tough for the poor. Almost all ATMs charge a fee for withdrawing cash, and that fee is proportionally quite large if you're just withdrawing a small amount. ATMs owned by your bank or your bank's teller probably won't charge you a fee, but that's very inconvenient if you don't have a bank located right next to wherever you're doing your shopping.

      Security and customer protection on most debit cards in the USA is also quite poor. Many card readers only require a signature to complete a transaction, and no verification is done on that. You can dispute fraudulent charges on a credit card, but many banks will not allow that on a debit card; that means that if somebody steals your debit card and uses it before you can cancel it, you've lost all of your money. That's worse than leaving most of your money somewhere safe and just carrying around a few bills with you.

      I know I've said "many banks" several times, and there are definitely banks for which some of those complaints don't comply -- but good luck finding a bank for which none of those apply and it's located somewhere remotely close to you.

      And, of course, any time you use a card associated with a bank account, it's trivial to trace it back to you. Many people do not want their purchases to be associated with them in a private company's database.

      Debit cards are handy, but are absolutely not a replacement for cash.

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
    2. Re:Do US banks not give debit cards to the poor? by blindseer · · Score: 1

      The problem with debit cards attached to a savings account is one case of a fraudulent payment can clear a person out.

      There's all kinds of cases of this kind of fraud if you look for them. Such as a crooked cab driver charging "$66.00" for a ride but ends up as "$6600.00" when it shows on their statement. Now, how can this be reversed? They got the money and they are not going to give it back without a fight. That's assuming they didn't leave the state/country/planet in this time just to make things more difficult.

      Oh, and if you believe fax machines are gone then you don't deal with government agencies with any regularity. They love their fax machines.

      I haven't written a personal check in a very long time. I do get them sent to me once in a while. When I needed a check recently it's been for a large purchase and in that case I just went to the bank to get them to print one for me. The recipient usually appreciates this as it means the money has been set aside first and it won't bounce. Going to the bank for a check was just easier than finding my checkbook, my bank is very close to home.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
    3. Re:Do US banks not give debit cards to the poor? by quenda · · Score: 1

      Many banks require that you keep a minimum amount of cash

      Many, or all? Don't you have free online banks?

      We used to have ATM fees in Australia, but easily avoided by getting cash out with EFTPOS, e.g. with grocery shopping.

      You can dispute fraudulent charges on a credit card, but many banks will not allow that on a debit card; that means that if somebody steals your debit card and uses it before you can cancel it, you've lost all of your money.

      WTF!? That is bad. I know banks are evil, but don't you have any sort of regulation and consumer protection in the US?

      What about PIN protection? Surely not still using signatures or magnetic stripes?

      Here, no PIN is needed for contactless transactions below $100, but the banks had to agree to take the risk for that before it was allowed.

       

      but good luck finding a bank for which none of those apply and it's located somewhere remotely close to you.

      Not even a national online bank? Mine has no physical branches anywhere.

    4. Re:Do US banks not give debit cards to the poor? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      ATMs owned by your bank or your bank's teller probably won't charge you a fee, but that's very inconvenient if you don't have a bank located right next to wherever you're doing your shopping.

      And why would you use an ATM to take cash for your shopping? Surely it makes more sense to just use the debit card to pay for the shopping directly, thus avoiding any ATM fees.

      In many countries, ATMs don't charge fees - at least for domestic users.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:Do US banks not give debit cards to the poor? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that many debit cards have the same protections as credit cards. However, in a fraud case, you're fighting to recover your money vs the bank's on the credit card, and if the account that got zapped was your bill-paying account, or worse, your only account, you'll be in for fun times until the bank sorts everything out.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  42. If you bounce a lot of checks by raymorris · · Score: 1

    To be specific, it's bouncing a lot of checks that will make it difficult to get a checking account. A company called ChexSystems tracks that. It not related to your credit score, which is about borrowing money

    I'm at the grocery store right now. I've heard comments about "cracking down", and there are anonymous prepaid Visa cards for sale right here in the grocery store.

    1. Re:If you bounce a lot of checks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not anonymous.
      To activate the card Visa wants personal information.

    2. Re:If you bounce a lot of checks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there are anonymous prepaid Visa cards for sale right here in the grocery store

      This is true, but spending $10 for a prepaid debit card so you spend $1 on a bottle of Pepsi is one of those rare consumer decisions that's so stupid that it ought to not just be unnecessary, but actually illegal.

  43. To be totally clear by raymorris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To make this totally clear, you can make six figures and be turned down for a checking account because you bounced checks. I know because I've done that.

    You can flip burgers for a living and have two checking accounts. I know because I've done that.

    It's not a rich or poor thing, it's a "don't write checks for more than what's in the bank" thing

    1. Re:To be totally clear by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"It's not a rich or poor thing, it's a "don't write checks for more than what's in the bank" thing"

      Well, that is, of course true. When I said "bad credit" I meant it broadly in the sense of "bad financial decisions". But you will find there is a correlation between being poor, having bad credit, and also making bad financial decisions (of which having bad credit is a sub-set). Not saying it is causal, but it will affect the poor more, in general.

      Also, bouncing checks or not handling your checking account properly will often result in the bank reporting that to a credit agency, resulting in a bad score. Again, like you said, you don't have to be poor to do that, but I am sure the poorer are more disproportionately represented there.

  44. surcharge by Chris+Dodd · · Score: 1

    Did they also ban charging a surcharge for cash? If not, then it would seem to be an obvious way around the problem.

    1. Re:surcharge by Phasedshift · · Score: 1

      The crazy part is that cards cost money for a merchant to process - 3 to 5% of the transaction many times... I suspect in most cases it is actually cheaper for them to accept cash, potentially unless they are dealing with many smaller transactions.

  45. #1 point - it's a personal freedom issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cash or Card it's a personal freedom issue.

  46. Blue collar won't accept it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The concept of a cashless store has a very class-oriented aspect. I worked in an industry for many years that was very blue collar; about 2/3rds of the company. The company encouraged everyone to at least do direct deposit by paying a day early, brokering a deal with a local credit union to set up people on-site to get guys to sign up for free checking accounts, etc.

    Still, about 20 to 30% of the company wanted a paper check and then would immediately go to a check-cashing facility, paying a whopping 7% of their paycheck to turn it into cash.

    There is an entire segment of the population that does not accept banks or anything other than cash. To them cash is real money. Force them into cashless models and you hurt that group that's just not culturally ready to accept these types of financial systems.

    1. Re:Blue collar won't accept it by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Still, about 20 to 30% of the company wanted a paper check and then would immediately go to a check-cashing facility, paying a whopping 7% of their paycheck to turn it into cash.

      There is an entire segment of the population that does not accept banks or anything other than cash. To them cash is real money. Force them into cashless models and you hurt that group that's just not culturally ready to accept these types of financial systems.

      You don't "hurt" that group, you force them to wake up to their own stupidity...
      These people usually aren't on very high incomes to begin with, and then they throw 7% of their salary away every month? They are hurting themselves.
      There's no reason they can't setup a direct deposit and then withdraw the cash from the bank or using an ATM, same end result without incurring the 7% fee. In some places it's difficult to find a usable ATM on payday as they've all been drained and the network is overloaded.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:Blue collar won't accept it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wanna keep all your employees? Show up on payday with an armored car and pay everybody cash.

  47. Most dispensaries are still cash-only. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most dispensaries are still cash-only.

  48. THIS IS WHY WE NEED CRYPTO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol

    I'll see myself out, no need for the pitchforks.

  49. Pros and cons of cash by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Pro:
    Citizens have the freedom to buy any product and service they want with cash.
    No social media tracking, ads. No supporting the politics of the companies offering cashless products and services with every use of their service.

    Cons:
    Cashless makes illegal migrants and criminals trying to create a new ID have to register some more information with every transaction.
    Having to create a new bank account with fake ID may not work as expected in past decades.
    State ID might finally detect more illegal migrants and criminals when banking and using new cashless services.

    Taxation is enforced on digital accounts when in use. Money in and money out on every digital account can finally be tracked and taxed.
    More income for the city and state to spend on US citizens.
    Better education, roads for US citizens as tax is finally getting collected that was once lost to crime and illegal migrants.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  50. Here's a solution... by mysidia · · Score: 1

    Clerk: How would you like to pay? Customer: Credit card?
    Clerk: OK. Your total is $25.99 after discounts.

    Clerk: How would you like to pay?
    Customer: I have Cash here.
    Clerk: OK; there's an extra $100 checkout fee that is only discounted if paying by card, so Your total is $125.99

    1. Re:Here's a solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that a solution to anything, aside from the "I haven't had my snooty fucking face punched in today" problem?

  51. Also, Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The collection of by the government, who want every penny. Avoiding the payment of, by many smaller businesses that can hide cash transactions.

  52. Re: is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well no shit genius. He said a debt, and we're talking about a restaurant which means you get the bill afterwards.

  53. Re:"Shanghai" Bill invents new facts daily / hourl by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    I consider it to be a status symbol. I have at least half a dozen that follow my every post and mark them "overrated." I call them my overrated ducking. I also have one that I will not name that has been trying to troll me for a year now. It gives the ego a real rush.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  54. Re:"Shanghai" Bill invents new facts daily / hourl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What you need a constant fact checker following you around instead. Saying "blood plasma is stable" 12-25 times doesn't make it true, fuck you very much no matter who you are, liar.

    We've caught you dozens of times falsely pontificating and then pretending you never had, because you have no integrity. A man admits when he's wrong, maybe you never had that taught to you. You should, even now.

  55. People operate on automatic by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    The guy was so surprised at something new like that he panicked. Remember, most people are really not bright, especially not compared with geeks... be nice to them or they'll beat us up!

    1. Re:People operate on automatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pay with coins and bills to get a different denomination bill back and no coins :)

  56. Contactless however... by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    Which is now standard in Europe even on buses let alone shops, merely requires you to wave your card close enough to the reader, and with no entry of a code. Valid for sales up to £30, it's WAY faster than cash.

    1. Re:Contactless however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Canada it's up to $100, and that payment system scares the fucking hell out of me.

      What's to stop someone from installing some sort of skimming device under a chair or bench in a public area, stealing transactions off anyone whose wallet is in their back pocket? It's a wireless signal, it can be captured and replicated.

      Losing $100 to a fraudulent transaction might be nothing to some people but for me it's the difference between eating and starving. Yes, I know I can dispute the charges. I also know that these disputes take time, sometimes months, to resolve.

  57. Awww - a believer that governments are wise... by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    "More income for the city and state to spend on US citizens."

    Yes - but WHICH US citizens? You mean you seriously believe that a lot of money isn't redirected in corrupt contracts?

  58. Cash is 'slow'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bullshit. I pay cash all the time, and I'm constantly waiting in line behind people who take fucking forever running their cards through the swipe termnals. My fucking shit goes faster just handing over dollars. Not my fuckng fault the cashiers are slow making change.

    1. Re:Cash is 'slow'? by Phasedshift · · Score: 1

      For every person like you, there are 30 people counting pennies out of their change purse. Delay at swipe terminals is usually the point of sale terminal being worn out in my experience as well. With that said, I still support a cash option, even if most of the time I will use my card - I want the freedom to use cash, even if I rarely use it.

  59. There is no reason for Amazon to resist this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazon, whose new Amazon Go stores are cashless and queue-less, reportedly pushed back against the new law, asking for an exemption.

    Why? I can pay with cash at the self check-out at Canadian Tire. Is Amazon saying they can't keep up with Canadian Tire? Do they not see how pathetic and laughable that is?!

  60. Cash is violent crime by backslashdot · · Score: 1

    Cash increases violent crime.

    1. Re:Cash is violent crime by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      See this comment: https://slashdot.org/comments....
      Everything going cashless would become a crime against basic civil rights. Furthermore, as more important people than you or I have already pointed out, there is a privacy issue. You may not care who knows about every last thing you purchase, but I and many others do care. Therefore excluding cash is bullshit and cannot be allowed to stand. Here's one more reason for you: when you have 'all your eggs in one basket' (your bank account) and you sling around electronic payment methods all day every day, every time you use that is one more opportunity for criminals to hack your bank account and drain it. Don't tell me that's paranoia because it happens practically every damn day anymore. Then there's fucktards like Christoper Wray who want to put backdoors in all encryption, which would make it dead simple for criminals to hack anything they choose. At least with cash what you have in your hand is real.
      There are many more arguments I could make for cash but those are the important ones.

    2. Re:Cash is violent crime by mark-t · · Score: 1
      What people call "privacy" is nothing more than an illusion... it exists only because of whatever threshold a person might put up to prevent other people from seeing some particular detail about them happens to be greater than or at least equal to the effort that another hypothetically interested party is either willing or able to expend in order to surpass it. We are each responsible for our own privacy, and expecting laws to provide it for us is one of the worst things that we can do, because it's not going to stop people who are interested enough in what we do anyways, and there's absolutely no assurances beyond what measures we might take for ourselves to ensure that our privacy remains respected anyways.

      Cashless is empirically proven to be safer, and the impact that has on the physical health and safety of civilization should trump any subjective desire that one has to "protect their own privacy". If a person desires so much privacy that they prefer to not be identifiable within a society when the mechanisms that might cause any appearance of less privacy still have a clear and measurable benefit to that society, then I would suggest that the most logical course of action for that person would be to withdraw from that society entirely.

  61. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    Fuck off troll.

  62. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless place and to not pay with card?
    Since this is new territory the courts would have to decide, but on the surface it would not be smart since there's no one there to accept the cash or to prevent someone else from scooping it up and walking away with it.

  63. I'll say there is causation! by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > you will find there is a correlation between being poor, having bad credit, and also making bad financial decisions (of which having bad credit is a sub-set). Not saying it is causal

    I'll say it's causal. Given that the definition of "making bad financial decisions" is pretty much "doing things that cause poor financial conditions, that's causation by definition. Making bad financial decisions causes poor financial situations.

    Remember most millionaires in the US never made $100K in a year, they became millionaires by deciding to save rather than spending the entire paycheck today. Decisions. Based on culture, values, and education.

    As you mentioned, credit score is a measurement of certain types of financial decisions. Specifically the "buying things using other people's savings, instead of saving like a grown-up" variety.

  64. That's absolutely true. I'm scatterbrained by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Even though I normally use a debit card rather than cash for anything over $10, I absolutely agree with you on the power of cash.

    Day to day decisions about spending are as much emotional as mathematical, and cash has emotional connections that can often subconsciously help us be more wise with our money. I switch to cash for a month a few times per year. I teach my daughter about money by putting hers, as cash, in a clear plastic cup where it's visible - it's not hidden behind a card.

    I'm also super ADD and remembering to get cash, the right amount, all the time adds cognitive load that doesn't work well for my weird brain. I could stuff my wallet with a month's worth of cash at the beginning of every month, but I misplace my wallet far too often.

    I'm the type of guy whom everyone in the office comes to for help because I'm "so smart", yet I forgot to wear a shirt to the office. Walked in my office, took off my coat, and "oh shit". No shirt. For *me* a debit card normally works better. I suggest people try cash, based on a budget, though. It works very well for a lot of people.

  65. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Early days of adoption of anything are expected to be dynamic, that's the very nature of any such thing, cryptocurrency is no exception.

    It's NOT a question of which one RIGHT NOW or NEXT YEAR will be THE ONE.
    In FACT, there will NOT be just ONE.
    The end state years away is a handful of leading blockchains, say no more than 10, for various mainstream things.

    Load and use what works saves and spends for you today, shift into what works saves and spends for you tomorrow.

    Will Bitcoin-BTC be among the 10 global adoptees 10 years out, MAYBE.
    Will other chains and coins and tokens that either dont exist or are nothing today be among the 10 adoptees, ABSOLUTELY.
    Know and expect that.

    Once you actually Free Your Mind to new things, new knowledge, new learning... a whole new world opens up for you.

  66. It's the first dollar by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    Collecting the first dollar is really expensive. You have to have cash registers, procedures to prevent stealing, change on hand, security, a way of delivering the cash to the bank, etc. Collecting the second dollar is really cheap. Once stores accept cash at all, they want to accept a ton of cash. However, if you never accept cash, the credit card processing fees are probably less than starting to accept cash. And they get cheaper as you get bigger, whereas cash has points of getting more expensive, so that remains true.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  67. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The on-targeting in free markets with fixed issuance currencies is *you*, what are *you* going to buy and sell and use crypto at, where are *you* going to place that valuation. You don't have to buy/sell/use. Be your own market stability agent. Go ahead, Buy, Sell, Spend, Save... I dare you.

    Blockchain model... sorry, for ie: BTC, blockchain history past even a few blocks has never been rewritten, not have the crypto UTXO signatures ever been broken. You're a FOOL for not waiting past the block security window for major transactions, AND for using shit brainwallets, etc. Any "hacks" have been userland market shit, not the leading chains themselves. 51% is NOT a chain problem, it's a security adoption problem. Or you go write a chain that starts day one with BTC level security without being horribly centralized... good luck.

  68. Re:Cryptocurrency FTW !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then go make them popular.

    BCH takes seconds to appear and minutes to confirm.

    You think some Starbucks schmooz is going to blow $THOUSANDS trying to 51% BTC BCH LTC XMR ETH ZEC just to steal a fucking $5 coffee ?!?!?!? You're fucking insane.

    You think Starbucks is going to give a shit about waiting 5 confirms for a $5 coffee that costs them NOTHING ?!?!?!?

    Get effing real mate.

    None of you have the slightest clue about cryptocurrency or economics.

    Nor are you holding, clearly, so go fill your bags, then come talk.

  69. Frist Post by jrumney · · Score: 1

    The move makes Philadelphia the first major city to require that brick-and-mortar retail stores accept cash. Besides Philadelphia, Massachusetts has required that retailers accept cash since 1978, according to CBS.

    It's lucky there are no major cities in Massachusetts then, otherwise it might leave Philadelphia looking a little hasty making their claim to be first.

  70. Philadelphia Airport? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I went through Philiadelphia Airport and and the airline demanded I use a bank card to check a bag. Will that practice be stopped, or is the airport exempt?

  71. Cash Does Not Slow Down Transactions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Credit cards do. It's always the damned idiots using credit cards, who are always searching for a pen because they never carry one on their person and the badly fumbling it as they sign the credit card receipt while holding their late in one hand and their smartphone in the other.

  72. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you get changed with dine and dash at card only restaurant if you leave cash on the table and walkout?

    Generally speaking, cash is legal tender for all debts whether public or private. What this means in practice is that "fast casual" restaurants that take your payment before they put you order in may refuse to accept your cash, but a restaurant that serves your meal first, creating a debt, and then presents you with a bill cannot legally refuse an offer of settlement of that debt, represented by the bill, in cash. If they do, then the debt is null and void and you can leave. Although, one might reasonably argue that you cannot simply leave the cash on the table and walk out without handing it to an employee of the restaurant so that it's in their custody before you leave. It would be highly unusual for a restaurant that tendered a bill after serving the meal to refuse cash. I have never in my lifetime seen that happen.

  73. Cash is crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cash is petty crime, cash is mugging and robbery, cash is beggars on the street. Cash is theft, it's drug trafficking, it's low lifes and thuggery.

    That's what cash is, and enables.

    End anonymous payments for good. End cash.

    1. Re: Cash is crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And instead favor a 1% to 8% increase in the cost of all goods as funneled through a credit card provider for the convenience of not having to use cash. I'm sure you won't starve if your card is flagged for fraud and it takes a week or more for a new one to arrive. Add that to the ability for a card company to sell of lose your transaction history saying how many 15 inch black rubber cocks you bought last month. No way that could ever have a negative consequence. Looking at you AC.

  74. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by bn-7bc · · Score: 0

    or one of you could pay, and just jue one of the many mobile payment (person to person) apps out there to split the bill, of couse it's not a costumer friendly polecy to demand that costumers jump thru hoops, but at least that bypasses the need for a lengthy discussion with the waiter/waitress) who is just following a policy they might or might not agree with in the first place

  75. Amazon Says by mentil · · Score: 1

    Let them eat neufchatel!

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  76. the homeless thing is a red herring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the businesses at which a homeless person may shop are not the ones going cashless anyway

    the people of PA are particularly drawn to the whole paranoid privacy thing, that's why it's one of the last states to implement Real ID

    and you know I get where they're coming from, but at the same time, unless you're living like an Amish person, you're not "off the grid" and you might as well give up the pretense

  77. Re: is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

    Well no shit genius. He said a debt, and we're talking about a restaurant which means you get the bill afterwards.

    Yeah, what about McDonalds genius? You pay your bill there before or after you eat? How about Panda Express (if you want an example that is a little more "restauranty") ?

  78. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by thegarbz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A restaurant cannot force you to cover someone else's order

    They wouldn't have forced you to cover someone else's order, restaurants work by table. It's nice for you to think that you have some legal right here, but you don't. Consider yourself lucky that the restaurant just thought it easier to split the bill rather than deal with having to file police reports against a bunch of arrogant customers.

    Sidenote, it's 20fucking19. There's a mountain of technological options available that make sorting our your bill afterwards easier and faster than having the restaurant split the bill in the first place. Hell even my bank has an app that takes care of tracking who has paid, who hasn't, sends them reminders over whatsapp, etc.

    they also can't say you have a debt with them and are going to refuse your legal tender.

    And that's been covered many times before. Did both parties sign a legal lending document? No? You don't have debt with them. You're just a customer who has taken something and not yet paid. That's not "debt" in any legal sense or financial sense, and just looking up the word in the dictionary doesn't help your case either.

  79. Re: is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but whuddabout all these situations that are irrelevant to the conveseration guyz i wanna win this debate waaaaaaah

  80. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why you call the manager and insolently throw the money at his feet.

    "Pick it up."

  81. I know why they're passing this ordinance by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    In Philadelphia, stickup men are a voting majority.

  82. Re: is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, what about McDonalds genius?

    What about McDonalds? It's not a restaurant, it's an overpriced drive-thru and take-away that sometimes has tables. You're wasting your money and endangering your life whenever you eat something from there. You get much better quality food, more of it and for far less from most fish and chip shops.

  83. Excellent! by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

    I hope this spreads. I still use cash for 99% of my purchases and always will. If I go in a store that doesn't take cash I say "BYE BYE!" and leave. I think it's retarded when people buy a soda and bag of chips with a CC or debit card. CARRY SOME FREAKING CASH people.

  84. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by dwpro · · Score: 1

    Likewise, there are mountains of technologies available for splitting checks from the server side that are much more convenient. Don't provide table service if you can't handle the complexity/cost -- have customers order at the counter.

    --
    Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
  85. Read your money by sabbede · · Score: 1
    It says right there on the front. "Legal tender for all debts public and private".

    I take that to mean no vendor can "go cashless".

  86. Of course Amazon Go requires a membership by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't have to sign up, there would be zero way for them to charge you when you walk out for $100 of groceries.

  87. We are going the other way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in Denmark we had such a law for long time. But the politicians want to remove to get cashless stores.

    Almost everyone has a "Dankort", a debit card which usually also doubles as as Visa card, but is way cheaper to use. I think we the standard fee payed by the shops per transaction is 0,50kr, around 8 US cent (might have doubled since I read that number though.)
    The system is backed by all the banks together, so only a very few people don't have it.

  88. Counter-point by Khyber · · Score: 1

    "Cashless companies argue that cash slows down transactions when change needs to be counted and creates security risks for employees locking up at the end of the night."

    I contend that if your cashiers can't count change faster than the credit card machine can register a transaction, your cashiers are worthless and need to go back to school. Also, purely cashless means attractive fucking hacking target thanks to the aforementioned clueless retailers that can't count and probably aren't paying attention when that skimmer gets installed.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  89. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by fox171171 · · Score: 1

    A restaurant told a group of us the other day that they had a one bill per table policy and didn't want to split the bill.

    I'd say okay, but there will be a 10% service fee for that.

  90. Gosh, whatever will I do? by Archangel_Azazel · · Score: 1

    Oh, right. Go somewhere that accepts money. You don't HAVE to eat at said establishment, and I'd be willing to bet that if enough people simply did that companies might just get the picture.

    But this is America, where we just whine and then accept whatever people give us and hope they don't make it worse. Don't think so? How's that whole 'net neutrality' thing going? As slowly as possible while they rake in millions....because people just can't seem to stand up for themselves. Weird that.

    --
    Your mind is like a parachute. It works best when it's been opened.
  91. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

    Sidenote, it's 20fucking19. There's a mountain of technological options available that make sorting our your bill afterwards easier and faster than having the restaurant split the bill in the first place.

    And there's a rather large percent of us who aren't interested in paying to use the technological offerings of dodgy startups that aren't financial institutions but are trying to play them. And aren't willing to link our bank accounts to said companies, and share with them all our personal info, the info of our friends, and our spending habits. Some of us aren't brain-dead morons who still remember all the fucking shit that PayPal has done to screw over customers. I don't have any additional faith in venmo or whoever the current not-a-financial-institution of-the-day is.

    (Well shit, apparently PayPal owns venmo. No surprise then that, In February 2018, the FTC settled with Venmo, after an investigation uncovered false representations about "bank grade" security and failures to comply with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Safeguards Rule and Privacy Rule)

    At least in the US, there's no easy way to transfer money from one financial institution to another. It might be easier to transfer between accounts in one institution, but even then it's hit or miss depending on who you're a customer of.

    Personally, I'm not paying a third party money to help me transfer it to another person. There are multiple free ways to do that. The only downside is that they take time.

    It's 20fucking19. If a restaurant is living 20 years in the past and can't split a bill, they can fuck right off. If my local dive-bars which haven't put any money into their establishment for the last decade can split a check, I expect that anyone can do that. Even by hand if it comes down to that.

    --
    Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  92. Re: is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excellent. A service fee, also known as a tip. That reduces the 'regular' tip to 5-10%.

  93. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In California, if you walk out of a restaurant without paying, no matter how righteous you think you are, that is a crime known as "defrauding an innkeeper," and you can be arrested. The proper recourse is to pay and then sue the innkeeper. The law always favors businesses over individuals.

  94. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by nobuddy · · Score: 1

    Demand instead to all have your own table, then drag them all together and resume your dinner, one person per table.

  95. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by Daralantan · · Score: 1

    Sidenote, it's 20fucking19. There's a mountain of technological options available that make sorting our your bill afterwards easier and faster than having the restaurant split the bill in the first place.

    This reminds me of when I worked in retail. About 10 years ago I worked at Bed, Bath, and Beyond. You could split paying the register with multiple methods. Want to pay part in cash and the rest on debit? No problem. 10 gift cards, $50 in cash, rest on credit? Sure whatever, wait while I scan all this crap in.

    Then 5 years later I hear places saying "We can't take multiple payments, our system isn't able to do that. The system we had at BBB when I first worked there must been 10-15 years old in 2007! These places usually newer seeming systems. (Though I honestly doubt the system was incapable of doing it. More likely the cashier was too stupid to figure out what to do)

  96. Not using cash is racist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Often, people with economic disadvantages use cash for everything because they are under-served with other financial methods.

    Credit cards available to those groups are either pre-paid with a huge upfront fee (15-25%) and 1 yr "use by" date or credit cards have 20+% APRs. This is terrible.

    They aren't likely to have an iPhone either, at least not one new enough to be fully patched.

    But if you have the means to have the hottest, new $1000 smartphone, don't concern yourself with poor, brown, people. It doesn't matter which shooter or EV you will buy.

  97. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They wouldn't have forced you to cover someone else's order, restaurants work by table. It's nice for you to think that you have some legal right here, but you don't. Consider yourself lucky that the restaurant just thought it easier to split the bill rather than deal with having to file police reports against a bunch of arrogant customers.

    Really? You're doing them a favor of sharing a table. Everyone at the table was happy to pay for their individual order, but the restaurant just wanted to be lazy and not bother with separate checks. Good luck getting the police involved in a civil matter when you clearly have a group of people with cash in hand looking to pay for themselves.

  98. Re:is an crime to just leave cash at an cashless p by wagnerer · · Score: 1

    At least in the US, there's no easy way to transfer money from one financial institution to another. It might be easier to transfer between accounts in one institution, but even then it's hit or miss depending on who you're a customer of.

    That's a joke right? Most banking apps let you do ACH transfers easily, especially if both are members of Zelle. I've done several wire transfers online between banks and it went through in minutes. Sounds like you need to find a better bank.