Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In praise of cash

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 369 posts

Re: In praise of cash

#141

Post by cortesoft »

iopq wrote: post #137
CPLX wrote: post #9

The core concept to remember I think is that there are two ways to pay for things: * Ways that involve cash or cash equivalents * Ways where a purchase requires the permission of someone else Just think of the word authorization, which is a required element of essentially all non-cash transactions. It has the word authority embedded right in it. If you're OK with that concept, you are necessarily OK with the idea tha…

Bitcoin uses a system that doesn't rely on any single person's authority.

No, but it generates a perfect paper trail.

Re: In praise of cash

#142

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

M_Grey wrote: post #78
CPLX wrote: post #9

The core concept to remember I think is that there are two ways to pay for things: * Ways that involve cash or cash equivalents * Ways where a purchase requires the permission of someone else Just think of the word authorization, which is a required element of essentially all non-cash transactions. It has the word authority embedded right in it. If you're OK with that concept, you are necessarily OK with the idea tha…

A cashless society would be an attempt to create a society that lacks basic economic freedom, but it would also fail. People will simply return to barter, and the use of whatever precious metals/stones/etc are hot that year.

We have cryptocurrencies already, no need to return to precious metals

Re: In praise of cash

#143

Post by dragonwriter »

scott_s wrote: post #131
dragonwriter wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In what societies have humans used barter? All of them, including (but not limited to, since barter predates money) all the ones that also have a money economy.

The book "Debt: The First 5,000 Years" ( https://www.mhpbooks.com/books/debt/ ) makes a compelling case that no societies on record have depended on a barter economy. The author also argues that debt even predates state sponsored currency.

Debt obviously predates states sponsored currency. Heck, money economies (that is, ones in which there is a generally accepted medium of exchange and unit of account for debt) predate state sponsored currency (or even states). I've never even heard of that being an active argument.

And the question was about using barter, not depending on barter exclusively; every society has used barter.

And, in any case, debt and barter are not opposed; a system that uses debt of arbitrary commodities without a commonly-accepted unit of account is still a barter system (barter systems with debt certainly have existed, whether or not they were ever the dominant basis for any economy.)

Re: In praise of cash

#144

Post by stinkytaco »

wyldfire wrote: post #73
schoen wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very complicated to articulate exactly who can block Bitcoin transactions. The traditional simple answer is that "a majority of mining power" can block an individual transaction by refusing to include it in blocks. However, they have to be pretty committed to this, because if someone outside of the group does eventually mine a block that contains the censored transaction, the group members also have to be willin…

I think it's great to think about weaknesses and corner cases, but you're being too generous/imaginative here. A pithier version would be: it's infeasible to censor transactions and if a nation state spent enough to try it, it would indeed be noticed and the community would fork.

I agree, but the more forks, the less value that currency has. And if a nation state actor did block, it would shake confidence in the currency and be at least temporarily disastrous.

Re: In praise of cash

#145

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

afarrell wrote: post #109
M_Grey wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A cashless society would be an attempt to create a society that lacks basic economic freedom, but it would also fail. People will simply return to barter, and the use of whatever precious metals/stones/etc are hot that year.

> People will simply return to barter. In what societies have humans used barter? I suspect we would instead use something like tobacco, laundry detergent, or startup t-shirts as cash or we would keep a mental register of who owes whom a favor.

You're right to question it, there is no evidence of the idea Adam Smith promulgated (that barter societies were natural). Ancient societies used a credit system with debt being the social tie that binds a community together

Re: In praise of cash

#146

Post by modeless »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #114
nannal wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a bitcoin supporter (and user) for this among many other reasons.

I don't see how Bitcoin solves the anonymity problem cash does. If anything, banks and intelligence agencies would love a world where everyone transacts on a distributed ledger.

It doesn't solve anonymity, but it does solve the permission problem. You can transfer unlimited amounts of Bitcoin at any time and place without anyone's permission or approval.

Re: In praise of cash

#148

Post by icantdrive55 »

huffmsa wrote: post #121
ghaff wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can go weeks without touching cash these days. Nonetheless, I find the idea that I could be prevented from making a person-to-person financial transaction for even a modest amount without a paper trail pretty unsettling.

Paper trail? What are you hiding citizen? Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

He buys a pack of cigarettes for someone else, and happens to rack up a huge medical bill. The Insurance company might have a reason to disavow him? (Trump and disavow?)

He buys a 12 pack, and his kid steals it, and gets into an accident causing front page news. His kid lies, and says dad gave me the beer. (He is screwed.)

He goes onto physical therapy office. One of the legitimate places that, but sounds weird--like the power of hands--whatever. The wife sees the bill and it always stays in the back of her mind forever.

He buys a pressure cooker, and is suddenly profiled?

He pays out of packet for a CAT scan because he's a hypochondriac, and things he has a brain tumor. He is forced to claim he did have a CAT scan on all those pesky insurance forms. (Happened to me.)

Yea some of these are far fetched, but not being able to buy groceries last nights wasen't. My slick new chipped bank card was not recognized by the machine. I usually carry a c-note, but used it the following week because of bank card problems.

I guess the McCarty Era is not taught in school anymore?

So no--I don't want a paper trail either. Hell Safeway knows my diet better than me. (Yes--different card.)

Re: In praise of cash

#149

Post by ghaff »

allemagne wrote: post #98
CPLX wrote: post #9

The core concept to remember I think is that there are two ways to pay for things: * Ways that involve cash or cash equivalents * Ways where a purchase requires the permission of someone else Just think of the word authorization, which is a required element of essentially all non-cash transactions. It has the word authority embedded right in it. If you're OK with that concept, you are necessarily OK with the idea tha…

I am okay with acknowledging this and using both cash and non-cash systems when they fit my needs. While cashless systems are gaining traction, is there any actual attempt for them to replace cash wholesale?

As in eliminate cash entirely? Not as far as I know. Even in Sweden, articles I've read suggest that the shift to cashless will continue at its own pace but no one is really talking about completely pulling cash out of circulation at this point. (And most people don't seem to be in favor of that.)

What probably does happen over time though is that, if the cashless penetration becomes high enough, a lot of retail merchants and individuals just stop accepting cash because it's too big a hassle for a tiny slice of their business.

Re: In praise of cash

#150

Post by problems »

modeless wrote: post #146
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how Bitcoin solves the anonymity problem cash does. If anything, banks and intelligence agencies would love a world where everyone transacts on a distributed ledger.

It doesn't solve anonymity, but it does solve the permission problem. You can transfer unlimited amounts of Bitcoin at any time and place without anyone's permission or approval.

But they can still come and beat you for it.

Other cryptocurrencies like ZCash, Monero, etc solve this in a more elegant way by making transaction actually anonymous.

Post reply on HN