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

Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 717 posts

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#511

Post by kQq9oHeAz6wLLS »

gloryjulio wrote: post #282
BlueTemplar wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not like that is different in the USA ? Or did Sanders et al. suddenly become the majority of the Democrats while I wasn't paying attention ?

Maybe the poor in the US are also f? Have u considered that? Sanders is not pro business. He is at least trying to help the ppl. He is not the usual democrats. Sorry what's the point that u r trying to make? I never mentioned the US in the first place.

Why are you typing like that? Use complete words please, we are not toddlers.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#512

Post by BlueTemplar »

wiml wrote: post #423
BlueTemplar wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it's not like businesses can refuse to take cash as payment - it's legal tender ! (The inconvenient bit is that they are not required to give change.)

Lots of businesses in my city refuse cash transactions. There's minor controversy about how it tends to shut out marginalized people, but AFAIK it has survived legal challenges. It doesn't matter that cash is "legal tender" if the business can just refuse to enter into the transaction in the first place.

I guess it's going to depend a lot on whether you can just plop down the money (and change) on the counter, and leave after the service has been done / with what you bought... or not (because you have to pay upfront for instance).

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#513

Post by gloryjulio »

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote: post #511
gloryjulio wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the poor in the US are also f? Have u considered that? Sanders is not pro business. He is at least trying to help the ppl. He is not the usual democrats. Sorry what's the point that u r trying to make? I never mentioned the US in the first place.

Why are you typing like that? Use complete words please, we are not toddlers.

Because I am typing in the phone browser and it's not convenient? What's the problem with that? U haven't seen abbreviations before? U think toddlers type like this?

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#514

Post by BlueTemplar »

kayodelycaon wrote: post #404
BlueTemplar wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it's not like businesses can refuse to take cash as payment - it's legal tender ! (The inconvenient bit is that they are not required to give change.)

It’s legal tender for debts. Not payments.

Depends on the jurisdiction I guess ? I just checked, and around here cash is the only type of payment that cannot be refused, and if they get caught trying they would be fined 150€.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#515

Post by kylsssssanzle »

Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

My concerns about a cashless society are the power it hands to a few oligopolistic credit card processors. Look at what happened to Pornhub. Regardless of whether you think Pornhub was in the wrong, it is striking that a business was cut off from global financial system by a small number of credit card companies. This was done without due process and under no countries laws. That should scare us at least a little.

Anyone with a brain will be using bitcoin cash or monero.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#516

Post by faeriechangling »

Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

My concerns about a cashless society are the power it hands to a few oligopolistic credit card processors. Look at what happened to Pornhub. Regardless of whether you think Pornhub was in the wrong, it is striking that a business was cut off from global financial system by a small number of credit card companies. This was done without due process and under no countries laws. That should scare us at least a little.

Which is the problem that crypto solved for the most part, independence from a few oligopolistic PROCESSORS. While I am still not a "Buying literal digital currency is a sound investment" true believer, I feel recent events are making people keen to throw the baby out with the bathwater in the notion of decentralised crypto as a medium of exchange.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#517

Post by rexarex »

thebigwinning wrote: post #338
scoofy wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might, sure, but it might also have to do with the fact that people carry almost nothing in cash compared to 40+ years ago. In 1985, when I was a child, my father would care around $300 on him effectively at all times. Credit cards were still new, and checks were a limited option, most places you still needed cash. That's the equivalent of $850 today. I rarely carry more than $200 on my person today (less than the…

I agree. It was more convenient to rob cash which is fungible. But I actually wonder if the rewards are higher today, with everyone carrying >$1000 phones.

iPhones are hardware locked now they can only be sold for parts.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#518

Post by faeriechangling »

Aerbil313 wrote: post #456
theturtletalks wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a clever setup. Using laws like the Anti-Money Laundering rules, the government nudges credit card companies to avoid high-risk businesses. These companies can then turn away any business without explaining why, all in the name of "security through obscurity." But when you think about it, this setup skips past important legal protections like due process and the presumption of innocence. It's like the government…

Digital money is clearly a downgrade. In the yet ole times, all money (precious metal coins) was decentralized, anonymous and untraceable! It even worked in all world without any exchanges! /Poe (Poe’s law, take it as you want.)

You kid, but that's a serious attack against crypto, which is that the value is dependant on the existence of a sizeable network with diverse functions.

Whereas gold in the ground is shiny rocks in the ground. You can say, wait out a tax on gold by burying your gold.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#519

Post by menus »

faeriechangling wrote: post #516
Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

My concerns about a cashless society are the power it hands to a few oligopolistic credit card processors. Look at what happened to Pornhub. Regardless of whether you think Pornhub was in the wrong, it is striking that a business was cut off from global financial system by a small number of credit card companies. This was done without due process and under no countries laws. That should scare us at least a little.

Which is the problem that crypto solved for the most part, independence from a few oligopolistic PROCESSORS. While I am still not a "Buying literal digital currency is a sound investment" true believer, I feel recent events are making people keen to throw the baby out with the bathwater in the notion of decentralised crypto as a medium of exchange.

After watching Folding Ideas' video on crypto and NFT (1) I am less convinced that is decentralised. It goes over how crypto ended up becoming the very thing it swore to destroy (banks and oligopolies).

Also anyone with the means can still do a 51% attack if they wanted.

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_xWvX1n9g

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#520

Post by ronsor »

throwuwu wrote: post #483
rsaesha wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From https://www.bcb.gov.br/en/about/faq BCB is a governmental institution, composed mainly of career civil servants hired rather than appointed or elected, whose institutional tenure typically survives transitions of political leadership. They answer to the government, not a political party. The Complementary Law No. 179/2021 defines a four-year term for the nine members of the BCB’s Board of Governors that does not…

Cool, career bureaucrats who get paid by the government and can’t be held accountable by the people. Nothing could possibly go wrong there.

Yes, I really do prefer corporate executives who also can't be held accountable by the people.
Post reply on HN