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

D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 508 posts

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#131

Post by bagels »

kube-system wrote: post #125
tarboreus wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the guy who charged $4k of jewelry on my credit card. I've never been robbed of a penny of cash and now I'm having to sue my bank to get that money back.

If it was a credit card, it was $4k of the bank's money. I presume either you didn't notice the charge or you had a serious miscommunication with the bank, because the normal result under US regulations is that the bank would be the ones trying to get their money back.

Well, if the bank thinks you did it, after investigating, you end up where parent poster is.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#132

Post by philwelch »

lobf wrote: post #114
telotortium wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greed.

Why are they correlated with low-income areas then? Surely greed is more or less evenly distributed in the population… do you think there might be a reason why robberies aren’t?

The typical robber is stupid, impulsive, and antisocial. All of which are traits that contribute to low incomes.

There are relatively intelligent robbers who manage to pull off diamond heists and the like, but these are a minority of robbers and aren’t a threat to your typical local retail business.

Also, as crime becomes endemic in a community, anybody who can afford to leave does so. Businesses close as well, reducing economic opportunities for the people left behind.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#134

Post by bagels »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #54
philwelch wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody needs to rob a Shake Shack anyway. Robberies are not a product of need.

If the perp needs fent and Shake Shack has cash that can be used to purchase fent, the robbery is a product of need.

Nobody needs fentanyl.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#135

Post by lacker »

I've noticed recently more of the food truck or farmers' market type businesses aren't officially cashless, which is illegal in California AFAIU. They just don't have change for a $20.

It's a real problem that some people cannot afford the fees on a bank account, but I would prefer that we find some way to provide everyone with minimum banking services. Like a no-fee government-provided debit card.

I know, the government doing things is bad, but Wells Fargo, Citibank, etc are so heavily regulated, they are essentially a wing of the government now anyway. Maybe in exchange for being "too big to fail" they could be required to provide all American citizens with a standard, transferrable, no-fee debit accounts.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#136

Post by bagels »

lobf wrote: post #114
telotortium wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greed.

Why are they correlated with low-income areas then? Surely greed is more or less evenly distributed in the population… do you think there might be a reason why robberies aren’t?

Really, it's probably both. Why do rich people steal money? Why do poor people steal designer purses?

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#137

Post by kube-system »

supertrope wrote: post #28
dools wrote: post #7

Instead of banning cashless businesses because it's discriminatory to the unbanked perhaps they should focus on reducing discrimination in the banking sector and providing a publicly run electronic payment system.

Make access to a bank account a right. Take all of the unbanked/unprofitable customers and assign them to banks weighted by each bank’s market share. No matter their Chexsystems report status.

> Take all of the unbanked/unprofitable customers and assign them to banks weighted by each bank’s market share.

These people often don't have a bank in their neighborhood.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#138

Post by AllegedAlec »

rendaw wrote: post #85

In India, even rural farmers have easy cashless mobile payments. In D.C., the capital of the US, nobody has easy cashless mobile payments, and even card payments are too difficult, with the government finally giving up and enshrining cash.

Good luck when a bank decides to freeze your account because you called a politician a fat pig.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#139

Post by bagels »

komali2 wrote: post #86
maximilianroos wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...then don't buy things from those businesses? We need a stronger reason than "I want that" to force businesses to give us things — otherwise how do we decide whose preferences we should mandate?

Without State intervention there's nothing stopping businesses colluding to all go cashless. Or... all together do something else that's bad for us. Or monopolizing. The strong enough reason is "it's better for the people." It's easy how we decide whose preferences we mandate - we mandate people's preferences, and businesses find ways to make money within those constraints. There's no issue making profit like this, s…

Yeah, I wonder if the card processors have considered kickbacks to go cashless.

Re: D.C.'s ban on cashless businesses takes effect

#140

Post by Maxion »

lacker wrote: post #135

I've noticed recently more of the food truck or farmers' market type businesses aren't officially cashless, which is illegal in California AFAIU. They just don't have change for a $20. It's a real problem that some people cannot afford the fees on a bank account, but I would prefer that we find some way to provide everyone with minimum banking services. Like a no-fee government-provided debit card. I know, the govern…

Big problem is AML and KYC related legislation - this is expensive to do for people who are statistical outliers. I.e. people with low income. So it'd have to be government subsidised banking.
Post reply on HN