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

481–490 of 508 posts

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

#481

Post by robertlagrant »

komali2 wrote: post #478
robertlagrant wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Handling cash has been an accepted cost of business for over a century, but now it’s somehow an undue burden to continue doing so? Hogwash. Handling cash is a big cost. You have to store it, get it moved in and out, stop people stealing it, be insured against people stealing it, count it, make sure you have change available, etc etc. Yes people did it, and cash used to get stolen more. More importantly, this isn't…

> It's a solution to a very specific problem: cashless shops. Why should the government be responsible for building out an incredible infrastructure project so that some businesses don't have to worry about handling cash? Cash is not a new concept, we've been using it since the inception of the nation. Suddenly some businesses find a way to save a buck by not handling it, but this also happens to segregate a portion…

> Why should the government be responsible for building out an incredible infrastructure project so that some businesses don't have to worry about handling cash?

Your post is pretty poor tone-wise, but I'll address this. It's the exact opposite of what you're saying. If the government wants something, it should pay for it. Business is not imposing anything on the government. Business pays the government money it earns, and the government decides how much, and how long to lock the owner in a box for if they don't pay enough. Why should businesses be financially responsible for things the government is paid to solve?

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

#482

Post by Nasrudith »

sambazi wrote: post #476
makeitdouble wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I told you that outside of the US we're seeing tax offices progressively refusing cash payments and/or putting a penalty with a maximum accepted amount for people who still try to bring cash ? Forcing all businesses to follow a model that is already getting phased out doesn't make sense.

yes it does make sense. tax office has very little similarity with a retail store, idk what you are advocating here.

But they share the important detail of "essential to access". Now combine that with Operation Choke Point style abuses of power. Hello there arbitrary arrest and detention under the pretense of failure to pay taxes to the same government which prevented you from paying in the first place!

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

#483

Post by JohnFen »

jdietrich wrote: post #254
nonrandomstring wrote: post #162

Almost every comment is about politics, choice, privacy, rights, markets and percentages. There's a completely different take; Civic resilience From an operational and strategic security POV, cash is a vastly superior technology. It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. Therefore cash in circulation acts as a buffer that provides economic stability and continuity of operations. Also,…

>From an operational and strategic security POV, cash is a vastly superior technology. It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. If the power goes out, I can't get any cash. I don't keep any meaningful amount cash on hand and neither does anyone I know, including my elderly relatives. Most of the stores I shop at won't actually be able to sell me anything, because none of the products…

I live in the US. I keep a couple thousand dollars in cash at home for emergencies, and in my part of the US if the power went out there are a number of stores that could continue operating.

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

#484

Post by SergeAx »

kxrm wrote: post #19

I live in DC and support this law not just from an accessibility standpoint but also from a privacy standpoint. I am tired of every retail/restaurant establishment building a profile of me.

Imagine you entering a non-crowded venue and prices on wireless e-Ink tags are changing according to your profile got by face-recognition camera at the front door.

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

#485

Post by JohnFen »

olyjohn wrote: post #426
FredFS456 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case you would often need gold, not cash.

What are you going to do, cut up your gold into tiny bits to give to people? Gonna keep a scale with you and weigh it out exactly based on the market rate? It seems pretty useless for spending on supplies and food if you ask me.

You keep the gold in the form of relatively small coins, not large bars.

> It seems pretty useless for spending on supplies and food if you ask me.

Seem pretty useful to me. At least historically, you can generally exchange gold for goods even in a total disaster scenario. You won't be weighing anything out or getting change, of course. You'll be seriously overpaying by the standards of a functioning economy. But nonetheless, you'll be able to engage in enough commerce to help you survive.

That said, I don't keep gold around. I do keep cash -- but if things have devolved to the point where cash isn't useful, then I'll have much larger problems than figuring out how to buy stuff.

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

#487

Post by JohnFen »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #306
Xylakant wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a broad space between "a single shop" and "an entire country". Entire cities or states being hit by a technical glitch or a natural desaster (flooding , storms, ...) happens on a moderatly regular basis. Backbone connnections failing and taking certain areas or chunks of the internet population offline is also moderately common. Banks having issues with payouts happens, too. There are a lot of scenarios where…

There's not enough cash in D.C. for D.C. to function anywhere near normally in a not-short, total blackout. I don't think it makes sense to argue we should all use cash in case some small section of D.C. loses power for 10 weeks. The advantages to the cashless society far outweigh that small benefit to the average person.

> The advantages to the cashless society far outweigh that small benefit to the average person.

I disagree with this. There are great advantages to having a cashless option, but I see no real advantages that are greater than the disadvantages to having a cashless society. What are they?

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

#488

Post by JohnFen »

sgjohnson wrote: post #329
pc86 wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really understand the point of this comment. "Credit cards don't need this network, except realistically they do , they just didn't used to." So in some scenario where electricity is unavailable, credit cards will be just as worthless in most cases as apps and gift cards.

If you have an embossed credit card and the store has an imprinter, that's still true today. I don't expect any store anywhere to have an imprinter, but it's definitely an option.

Imprinters are a convenience, not a requirement. Stores could still accept the cards without one.

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

#490

Post by kobalsky »

yftsui wrote: post #180
nonrandomstring wrote: post #162

Almost every comment is about politics, choice, privacy, rights, markets and percentages. There's a completely different take; Civic resilience From an operational and strategic security POV, cash is a vastly superior technology. It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. Therefore cash in circulation acts as a buffer that provides economic stability and continuity of operations. Also,…

Cash is a superior technology for security -> Huh? The bullet proof glass cage protecting the cashiers is the “technology”.

You are misquoting, they said "From an operational and strategic security POV".

This is about money being able to function with crippled infrastructure, not about someone stealing dollars stashed inside a mattress.

Post reply on HN