Live data from Hacker News

Why we should fear a cashless world

theguardian.com

141–150 of 257 posts

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#141
post #131
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roads and bridges are fine. 700 hammers for the military maybe not. I worked as project manager for a contractor doing public works at one point. The government (at least in the US and probably everywhere) wastes a staggering amount of money. Not saying the government doesn't need funding. They do. But they could certainly do a lot more with less.

They need better internal auditors. If you just cut their budget alone, it doesn't decrease waste or fraud. To change the percentage of waste requires accountability for wasting.

Accountability must come from outside government for it to be effective.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I care about those things. I simply think that government is not required to provide them.

So who provides them if the government does not without falling into the tragedy of the commons and/or cutting off the poor from access to such services?

James Tooley has done fascinating work on private education for the poor around the world, putting the lie to the myths that private education is only for the wealthy and that the government must provide education.

There is an excellent EconTalk expisode[1] with Tooley, as well as a lengthy article here[2] by the author.

[1] http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/12/james_tooley_on.htm...

[2] http://educationnext.org/privateschoolsforthepoor/

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#143
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm. I understood that freeway (one of the most expensive roads in the world) was $1000 per foot. $5M per mile. I would expect asphalt to be much less. Here's a link: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/policy/costs/costs-D7.pd... Florida says 2-lane roadway is $3.3M per mile. So a few hundred feed, costing millions? Nonsense.

> So a few hundred feed, costing millions? Nonsense. 1. Your parent actually actively maintains a private road, and has probably done their research... 2. It costs them so much because they just have a single road, so they can't amortize the cost over an entire city or country of roadway. Public utilities tend toward monopoly for exactly this reason -- providing the utility to any small fraction of society is enormou…

The Govt doesn't actually pave anything. Roads are a commodity. There are a half-dozen pavers in my small community of 50,000. If the costs are in the $100K per thousand feet, they are that for everybody.

Again, $M for a few hundred feet is nonsense.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#144
post #53

Here in Italy the big issue is that many business will just not declare cash transactions. It's pretty common not to be given a receipt when buying a coffee and often when you visit a doctor they'll say: do you want the invoice or a discount? A couple of friends got married recently and I found out they paid over half of what the owed in cash to get pretty decent discount. So before we talk privacy and company let's…

Lets put that theory to the test, lets imagine a world where each transaction is added to companies and private citizens total tax record, and then all details are imminently deleted. At the end of the day, you get the same total sums as if you had all the individual transactions, but you can't derive any additional information. Would this be an acceptable deal for introducing a cashless society? My conclusions is that the banks would not accept it, and the government would not accept it. By default, cash would thus continue.

Banks would not accept this deal, as they need the customer data for data analyzes and market research. It is also a resource to be sold in some places or to be "shared" by "partners" like insurance companies and marketing firms.

Government would not accept it, since if the tax department get this then a dozen other department also want it. Police, secret police, and prosecutors want to dig for dirt, and has a long history of ignoring anything that would benefit a defense. Social security want to dig through it in order to skip doing a real assessment of a person (having dept is a good sign, and a buffer is a sign that the person should be denied help). Political parties and political research wants to analyze it and draw conclusions without having to talk to people and do polls.

I do not want someone else to analyze my transaction, and if they have to, I want safeguards that prevent incorrect conclusions to be drawn. As it stand, there isn't any, and its barely even recognized that I am a stake holder with any rights over the data.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So who provides them if the government does not without falling into the tragedy of the commons and/or cutting off the poor from access to such services?

James Tooley has done fascinating work on private education for the poor around the world, putting the lie to the myths that private education is only for the wealthy and that the government must provide education. There is an excellent EconTalk expisode[1] with Tooley, as well as a lengthy article here[2] by the author. [1] http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/12/james_tooley_on.htm... [2] http://educationnext.org/…

1) What does that have to do with roads, military, etc?

2) His argument still would fundamentally function as a regressive tax burden greater than the existing tax burden [for education] on the poor.

3) A fee-for-service regressive tax burden will ultimately cut the poor off from services.

> With a minimum wage of about $33 per month in the area, monthly fees in the private unrecognized schools are thus about 12 percent of the average monthly earnings of an adult earner.

You do understand in the US the poor aren't paying 12% of their income to send their kids to school right?

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/military-spendi...

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-inco...

The full federal tax burden for education, infrastructure, etc. on the poor is ~3%.

http://taxfoundation.org/article/state-local-tax-burden-rank...

If you factor in the state-and-local burden, the full burden is barely higher at ~13%. So for literally one service, the cost is nearly the entire tax burden for the poor.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#146

I am not one to argue that technology solves the problems of the poor. But, there are lots of holes in this argument: 1. The unbanked already exist in a world that expects them to be banked. Almost all jobs in America are paid in checks or direct deposit. Checks are useless to people without bank accounts. They then have to spend time and money getting the check turned into cash at a check cashing place, like Amscot.…

Except laws, regulations and transparancy are changing all the time. If cash remains, it gives you some margin to operate despite bad state, silly leadership, idiotic laws, wrong social decisions, etc. It's also a buffer for transitions, and help initiating things on the side that can grow eventually into something legit and good-for-society that would otherwise have not be possible because doing it right would have kill it.

Thing is, since no system is perfect, and no system stays the same, you need to have a small, yet stable % of grey area to let the population compensate and adapt.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#147

I am not one to argue that technology solves the problems of the poor. But, there are lots of holes in this argument: 1. The unbanked already exist in a world that expects them to be banked. Almost all jobs in America are paid in checks or direct deposit. Checks are useless to people without bank accounts. They then have to spend time and money getting the check turned into cash at a check cashing place, like Amscot.…

Except laws, regulations and transparancy are changing all the time. If cash remains, it gives you some margin to operate despite bad state, silly leadership, idiotic laws, wrong social decisions, etc. It's also a buffer for transitions, and help initiating things on the side that can grow eventually into something legit and good-for-society that would otherwise have not be possible because doing it right would have…

Those all seem like good points, which the article does not explicitly make.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#148
post #53

Here in Italy the big issue is that many business will just not declare cash transactions. It's pretty common not to be given a receipt when buying a coffee and often when you visit a doctor they'll say: do you want the invoice or a discount? A couple of friends got married recently and I found out they paid over half of what the owed in cash to get pretty decent discount. So before we talk privacy and company let's…

You can't have "privacy, but". Either you have privacy and accept that sometimes, some people are going to use that privacy to commit crimes (such as dodging taxes), or you don't have privacy. If there can be an exception to privacy because tax, then there can also be an exception to privacy because terrorism.

Yes. But our society have had so much freedom for so long they can't imagine that they need to make an active effort so that it remains that way. It's not limited to freedom. Ecology is the same. Resource managment is the same. Weigh loss is the same.

When one is quite ok right now and that he/she needs to spend energy and think, and take responsability, for what's going to happen way later, it's rarely done.

So "privacy but" are going to win. Because it takes thinking and effort to fight it. And what for? Righ now, i'm alrigh.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#149
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So a few hundred feed, costing millions? Nonsense. 1. Your parent actually actively maintains a private road, and has probably done their research... 2. It costs them so much because they just have a single road, so they can't amortize the cost over an entire city or country of roadway. Public utilities tend toward monopoly for exactly this reason -- providing the utility to any small fraction of society is enormou…

The Govt doesn't actually pave anything. Roads are a commodity. There are a half-dozen pavers in my small community of 50,000. If the costs are in the $100K per thousand feet, they are that for everybody. Again, $M for a few hundred feet is nonsense.

Parent said METERS, not feet. So parent is saying maybe 8mil for a mile. Not insane to assume low volume work in a presumably remote area will be double or triple the price that the entire state of Florida can get.

Especially for a previously unpaved roadway with bridges that probably also needs widening, leveling, etc. That isn't patch work cleaning up existing paved road...

The number is high but not unfathomably so...

Anyways, either parent is telling the truth or not. But I find it hard to believe parent helps maintain a 2 mile private road and also you know better than him the cost of paving that particular road.

Re: Why we should fear a cashless world

#150
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cost for society You meant "cost for government," right? It sounds like the slice of society that gets the cash discount is benefiting greatly from this "hidden economy." Saving 50% on a venue is a big win for the newlywed's pocketbook, leaving more money in their pocket to buy goods for their new household.

True. If you don't believe the government has any role to play in, say, paving roads, maintaining bridges, etc, then there's no "cost for society". Well, until the bridges start falling down, anyway...

No one takes this argument seriously because the people who use that argument usually want the government to do so much that roads are tiny fraction of what they do, or in a lot of cases, are outright hostile to roads altogether.
Post reply on HN