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

No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 140 posts

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#121

Post by ddingus »

msla wrote: post #108
ddingus wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it's not. Cash does not have downtime, and it can be used by anyone. Now, someone making a business choice to refuse legal tender does not speak to the robustness of said tender, only their choices. As long as things are good, payment systems running, networks up, that choice can be compelling. When those things are not true, the fall back is what? Not do business? Queue transactions and exchange the info needed?…

> Cash does not have downtime, and it can be used by anyone. But not at the store the article is talking about. Which is the point of the article.

Yes, I could care less. I don't need what they're offering. Won't do business there.

And now that I know, I'm going to Advocate others don't either.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#122

Post by zaarn »

wilsonnb2 wrote: post #114
zaarn wrote: post #83

I don't really understand the american need for a credit card. In germany, I pay almost everything either in cash or via bank transfer, usually pull. I got a prepaid card a while ago, mostly to pay for american services (seriously, I only ever pay to american corporations with it). My debit card (EC card) is almost universal and directly connected to the bank account, no credit needed. CC is barely supported, EC is a…

Credit cards are an excellent tool as long as you don't accrue debt with them. I get 1.5%-2% cash back with everything purchased with it. I'd be losing money by using a debit card instead. Not to mention the $500 they gave me just for signing up for it. I also don't to worry about when I get paid. I might only have $100 left in my checking account when I need to buy groceries if the day I get paid falls at a weird ti…

You basically count up reasons why I don't use credit cards.

Cashback almost always is connected with some form of datamining. The 500$ bonus is usually paid back in form of hidden fees somewhere. No money is free.

I don't want to spend money I don't have, ever. And regarding if my card gets stolen, European EC cards are very safe. They aren't CCs where you can just start grabbing cash, you need the pin too and the banks are very aggressive on putting temporary blocks on any transactions (as part of EC, any totally blocked transactions are billed instead and fully transparent for you).

Going to the ATM is easy and it means I have a very good feeling of my weekly and monthly spendings just by looking at how often and how much I use the ATM.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#123

Post by kwhitefoot »

phobosdeimos wrote: post #93
gringoDan wrote: post #2

I use a credit card for 95%+ of my transactions. At the same time, I'm scared of a cashless future. As the article mentions, cash transactions are one of the last vestiges of privacy that we have. A future where the US looks like China, where all of your transactions are visible, is not something I want to see. Additionally, cash is an equalizer for the unbanked/underbanked. Financial institutions take advantage of a…

In my country banks can't refuse clients for a standard checking account. Besides how in gods name can someone even function in an advanced economy without a bank account? People have been paying with plastic since the late 80s. Its free, safe and its easier for the tax man to collect. I used to work night shifts in retail. You don't want to deal with cash.

> People have been paying with plastic since the late 80s

I've had my Barclaycard since 1972, when I was 16.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#124

Post by chillacy »

zaarn wrote: post #83

I don't really understand the american need for a credit card. In germany, I pay almost everything either in cash or via bank transfer, usually pull. I got a prepaid card a while ago, mostly to pay for american services (seriously, I only ever pay to american corporations with it). My debit card (EC card) is almost universal and directly connected to the bank account, no credit needed. CC is barely supported, EC is a…

In the US, credit card transactions are reversed in case of fraud (no questions asked, super easy), but if someone lifts your pin and empties your bank account over debit, you’re on your own. This actually makes it more dangerous to use debit vs running it as credit.

Also while you don’t want to take on debt you can’t pay, there’s nothing too complex about debt and credit. Businesses all largely do their accounting like that, and if you really zoom out, all money is a system of debt and credit: the $20 note in my pocket is credit from my company, since I gave them my labor, they owed me. My company in turn was owed by one of its customers for services my company offered. The customer might have gotten money from their company, and so on.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#125

Post by lithos »

notduncansmith wrote: post #57
mortenjorck wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What card-only establishments really need is what cash-only bars and diners have had for years: an on-premises method of conversion. It would effectively be a reverse ATM, that you could feed cash and get a prepaid card (minus, of course, an ATM fee). If something like this doesn’t exist, it seems like a good startup opportunity.

Reverse ATM would be a cool startup, especially if you could make online payments or acquire cryptocurrencies in addition to getting prepaid cards. After a quick search, it looks like someone in Portland tried to do something along these lines: https://www.atmmarketplace.com/news/reverse-atm-caters-to-po... It doesn’t look like it went anywhere, online info on the company is scant apart from a few press releases. Bas…

These are already at airports, since cash can't be accepted.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#126

Post by bena »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #120
bena wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if I write a check. And from what I recall, when you make a purchase, they don't check against your projected balance at that time, but your actual balance. So if I have $100 in my account and a pending debit of $50, if I try to make a purchase of $60, it'll get approved because I have $100 in my account. Now, there are potential things it could do, like treat pending debits like cleared debits. I mean, when I ch…

Banks don't have to accept overdrafts on checks either. That's what happened when someone says that a check "bounced". The person you wrote the check to won't be pleased because they don't get their money, but the account won't get overdrafted. Allowing overdrafts because of pending debits is also just a decision that the bank makes. They don't have to do that.

I mean, when you really look at it, banks aren't really up to speed with the speed of information these days.

A lot of these things that shouldn't be issues are issues because they're still operating as if there are still people who are managing most of this and physical checks and credit slips are being passed around.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#128

Post by zaarn »

chillacy wrote: post #124
zaarn wrote: post #83

I don't really understand the american need for a credit card. In germany, I pay almost everything either in cash or via bank transfer, usually pull. I got a prepaid card a while ago, mostly to pay for american services (seriously, I only ever pay to american corporations with it). My debit card (EC card) is almost universal and directly connected to the bank account, no credit needed. CC is barely supported, EC is a…

In the US, credit card transactions are reversed in case of fraud (no questions asked, super easy), but if someone lifts your pin and empties your bank account over debit, you’re on your own. This actually makes it more dangerous to use debit vs running it as credit. Also while you don’t want to take on debt you can’t pay, there’s nothing too complex about debt and credit. Businesses all largely do their accounting l…

If someone lifts my pin and does transactions, my bank will reverse it or cover the damage, no questions asked.

I'm aware how credit works, but I prefer not to rely on credits for my life, I prefer spending only money I have right now.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#129

Post by TheCoelacanth »

bena wrote: post #126
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banks don't have to accept overdrafts on checks either. That's what happened when someone says that a check "bounced". The person you wrote the check to won't be pleased because they don't get their money, but the account won't get overdrafted. Allowing overdrafts because of pending debits is also just a decision that the bank makes. They don't have to do that.

I mean, when you really look at it, banks aren't really up to speed with the speed of information these days. A lot of these things that shouldn't be issues are issues because they're still operating as if there are still people who are managing most of this and physical checks and credit slips are being passed around.

None of these scenarios require them to allow overdrafts. Even operating by passing physical checks around does not make allowing overdrafts necessary.

Refusing to honor checks drawn against accounts with insufficient funds has been around for ages, even when everything actually was managed by passing around physical checks.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#130

Post by NeedMoreTea »

bena wrote: post #119
NeedMoreTea wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debate is impossible if you're going to be merely absurdly argumentative. You can be a customer if you have the money part of the exchange, otherwise you're clearly not a customer.

I'm being absurdly argumentative? Because I don't agree with your vague waffling when you are confronted with the implications of your ideas. If you don't mean X, then don't say X. You can't be a customer if I don't let you be a customer. When you walk up to a counter and say "I would like to buy these things" you are not a customer yet. You are giving an "invitation to treat". An invitation the establishment may dec…

In encountering dozens, perhaps hundreds of uses of the very well worn cliche "customer is always right" only once has the conversation or article suffered because it did not fully spell out, in legally precise language, all and every possible exception to the generality that everyone knows is but a convenient generalisation. Some customers may be committing fraud, other customers will abuse the privilege, shares may go down as well as up.

Most find that a useful shorthand in achieving concise and clear discussion, that helps to avoid overly formal and long grandiose Victorian circumlocution, without finding it vague waffle. Something I am eternally thankful for.

We could have an equally lengthy, fruitless and absurd discussion picking holes in Rackspace's "fanatical" support and Amazon's many slogans including "customer obsessed" and "most customer-centric company" because they do'nt spell out all exceptions, limitations and exclusions to the clearly generalised slogan at full length with legal precision.

> You are giving an "invitation to treat". An invitation the establishment may decline

Quite, and yet you write "What if all I have is corn? I'm a customer." You're not yet a customer and you're not offering legal tender or any other form of recognised currency. Which is why it is clearly absurd and takes the discussion away from the actual topic in TFA - the rise, and potential discrimination, of cashless.

At no point did I dispute any electronic payments are exchanging money. That again is clearly absurd. What I did say is the form may inconvenience me (even if it becomes endemic) and I dislike it becoming required. As the article points out 7.5% in the US are unbanked. 12% aren't on the net.

That's a far larger and problematic discrimination than "no hats". I won't be discriminated against, just inconvenienced. Which is why I mentioned, in another comment, I would encourage requiring businesses to accept legal tender (subject to any legislated limitations on paying large amounts in small change that many countries already limit).

Legal tender is currently cash but an equally valid solution would be a state or central bank run fee-free, privacy respecting eCurrency as it could be easily made universal, separate from the banking system, and legal tender. Who knows it might turn out cheaper to run than mints producing coins and notes. In other words something outside the duopoly of MC and Visa that doesn't require a bank or abandonment of privacy to buy a pair of jeans. Then require businesses to accept that legal tender.

Post reply on HN