491–500 of 508 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feel free to use my phone number for these if you’re in the US. 212-867-5309. Replace area code with one near your location.
> He gets calls throughout the week, but "mostly on weekends, mostly from people that are drunk."
Argentina has effectively a cash-only economy. Queues in excess of an hour at the supermarket are fairly common partly because of the overheads in having everyone pay with cash (needing to empty the tills, validate large notes, taking time to get correct change out and/or giving change). Let's not be so quick to say that card payments are all bad.
Is this a product of it being cash-based or a product of the high inflation that Argentina sees? I imagine it would be quite chaotic with prices fluctuating so rapidly.
people don't want the government seeing what they spend their money on, or if it was saved.
almost everyone does this to some extent due to the insanely high tax load and double economy that exists in every facet of our lives.
for example, when someone is buying real state, big part of the negotiations are how much is the declared price of this transaction (how much our "IRS" sees), because clean money and undeclared money have different costs. So when our "IRS" comes asking "where did you get the money from?" you say "from all these cash extractions of course, I saved most of that, I ate rice only", you can't say that if you spend your money with a credit card, they don't need an investigation to see your spending habits, in fact a change in spending habits will trigger an investigation.
I'd like to clarify that I don't have experience with anything of this, a friend told me about it.
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 could carry some Goldbacks: https://www.goldback.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally I think Netflix should be compelled to offer a path to using cash as well.
Many of the larger internet services, including Netflix, can already be funded with cash via gift cards sold in supermarkets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally I think Netflix should be compelled to offer a path to using cash as well.
I'm not really sure how you could ever realize something like this without inventing prepaid cards which go through a card network anyway and are just ephemeral bank accounts backed by real banks. Any business that is large enough can get their gift cards in retail stores which would be fine. It would definitely create a moral hazard if Netflix had to provide a cash option like this because retail stores would sudden…
No attack on you, but I feel like lots of people are suffering from not only a lack of imagination, but a serious lapse in memory for the days when they didn't always have a card and not every subscription was an online direct debit arrangement.
Ridiculous. Why not also then force cash only businesses into taking card and mobile payments also?
Probably because the state has limited ability to compel business relationships, thank God, and taking card effectively means enforcing a business relationship with a duopoly.
For the record I don't support either and believe it's up to every business to decide what form of payments to accept.
Ridiculous. Why not also then force cash only businesses into taking card and mobile payments also?
Cash is a free service provided by the government. Card and mobile payment is a fees-attached service provided by businesses. There is every reason to mandate acceptance of the former, and zero reason to mandate acceptance of the latter.
There are costs involved in dealing with both forms of payments.
Ridiculous. Why not also then force cash only businesses into taking card and mobile payments also?
Because not taking card or mobile payments doesn't directly harm people. It's a little less convenient, but you can still carry out your business. By contrast, allowing direct businesses to not take cash harms a not small section of our society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So? Taking cash costs money as well: more security, more auditing, more cash transport, higher insurance costs, etc Even better, because of forced cash now every business incurs those costs even if the overwhelming majority of their transactions aren’t in cash. The solution to “discrimination against homeless” is not forcing people to take cash, it’s forcing banks to allow homeless people to open bank accounts.
Forcing banks to allow homeless people to open bank accounts only "works" if someone is going to compensate the banks for all the costs associated with those clients. Banks only "work" because they can earn interest on deposits. Homeless people will likely not have enough deposits to make it worth serving them, and they will likely also cost more in support and fraud. If you compensate them too little, banks will do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because not taking card or mobile payments doesn't directly harm people. It's a little less convenient, but you can still carry out your business. By contrast, allowing direct businesses to not take cash harms a not small section of our society.
If a high end retailer like Gucci decided to stop accepting cash, who exactly would that harm?
Cash laws are about interacting with your grocery, your gas station, your local government, etc.
However, I'm not going to be particularly worried that Gucci has to accept cash transactions to make sure that Walgreen's also has to accept cash.
Somehow, I bet Gucci will be just fine.