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."
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."
Glad to see there's still a little sanity left in the world.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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?
wonder if this means more retailers will require membership to shop there in order to bypass the cash.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 .. ?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Because then you won't be able to visit Denver.
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?
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
Oh, this is going to be good.
Citation needed.
So if you abandon all pretense of manipulation to target, you get volatility. Nice own-goal.
Yes, due to the volatility of the cryptocurrency. Now price either of those in real world goods, like a pizza.
Counterpoint. Unless your "blockchain design model" manages to exclude every cryptocurrency deployed to date.
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.
Just put in a bill changer kiosk that vends prepaid cards. Every kids' arcade in the country knows how this shit works.
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! --
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.
Postal Banking.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
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.
Being an AC
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
Unless they demand payment upfront.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
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.
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.
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
Did they also ban charging a surcharge for cash? If not, then it would seem to be an obvious way around the problem.
Cash or Card it's a personal freedom issue.
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.
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"
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
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.
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!
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.
"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?
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.
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
Cash increases violent crime.
Fuck off troll.
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.
> 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.
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.
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!
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.
Let them eat neufchatel!
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
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") ?
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.
In Philadelphia, stickup men are a voting majority.
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.
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
I take that to mean no vendor can "go cashless".
"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.
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.
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.
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
Demand instead to all have your own table, then drag them all together and resume your dinner, one person per table.
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)
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.