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

'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 98 posts

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#31

Post by athrun »

mindwok wrote: post #11

Card-based transactions becoming so pervasive has made me wonder if countries should start redirecting their efforts to building nationalised payment infrastructure that would allow citizens to transact electronically with zero fees, rather than their main function being managing and printing physical currency. Maybe some countries have done this already, but in Australia at least we're basically building our entire…

Don't forget that Australia has EFTPOS and most debit cards are co-branded. The RBA is pushing for transactions to be routed over EFTPOS when possible [1].

And obviously, NPP continues to be rolled out: Osko is now widely available and PayTo [2] will be rolled out throughout 2024.

[1] https://www.rba.gov.au/payments-and-infrastructure/debit-car... [2] https://payto.com.au

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#32

Post by ars »

YoyoyoPCP wrote: post #17

Dumb guy question: why does the US government not offer all citizens a bank account? Is there some constitutional reason against it?

Because banks aren't just "store houses of money", they play important roles in the flow and quantity of money. (Each time they lend money they create money money out of thin air.)

Which means there is risk in being a bank, as you probably remember from when a few banks failed a little while ago.

But if the fed was a bank, it would be risk free (how could the fed fail?). Which cause all sorts of trouble. The fed could take actions (loan risky money) without worry. Or they would not be permitted to loan money - but that would cause even bigger problems because it would restrict the money supply.

There's no good economic way to do it.

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#33

Post by beaeglebeached »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #27
sbeckeriv wrote: post #19

Why are businesses no longer accepting cash? What are the positives and negatives for businesses? What are the positives and negatives of accepting cash for businesses? Other then 6 million people across the united states cannot buy from your shop. I can guess at reasons for both but I do not run a business.

> Why are businesses no longer accepting cash? What are the positives and negatives for businesses? It's expensive to store and transport. It gets stolen, by employees and robbers. You get handed bad bills.

I mean bank account get stolen by the government. They at least need lapdogs of the state to stomp their jackboots on the ground to take a bill out of your pocket.

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#34

Post by karlgkk »

NaOH wrote: post #18

>The FDIC calls people without a bank account “the unbanked.” People with a bank account but who primarily rely on alternative services such as check cashing outlets are called “the underbanked.” >The next time you see a sign in a shop or restaurant window stating “No cash accepted,” you’re really looking at a business excluding many unbanked and underbanked people. Speaking of the US, I would like to know how much o…

You're basically suggesting that underbanked or unbanked people shouldn't be able to shop somewhere just because they're not likely to.

The bigger problem is that this may lead to a trend of haves and have nots, and if you have a fee heavy banking system that can choose to "fire" a customer, then you've got a serious issue where people can potentially be excluded from modern life _against their choice_.

There are three reasonable fixes for this that are bandied about

- Require industry to offer no-fee and no-overdraft checking accounts to low income residents. This is onerous for a lot of reasons, a main one being that it would force a lot of institutions to take on break-even customers. It would possibly manifest in the form of a single low-cost bank that the industry funds just for compliance.

- Simple federal consumer banking services (in many countries, done through the post office). This would look like a simple checking account and debit card, with very few amenities or services. Many countries have had something like this, and although a lot of them have privatized since, they have strict regulations that view these services as a public good.

- Require all businesses to take cash. I think this is the worst option, but that's a matter of opinion I suppose.

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#36

Post by s0rce »

blibble wrote: post #15

> A recent Bankrate survey shows basic monthly service fees range between $5 and $15. Beyond these steady fees, banks earn $4 to $5 each time people withdraw cash from an ATM or need services like getting cashier’s checks. Unexpected bills can result in overdraft fees of about $25 each time an account is overdrawn. are there no free bank accounts in the US? in the UK you can pay to be ripped off and have a "premium"…

I'm not sure how easy it is to get one if you don't have a fixed mailing address.

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#37

Post by pimlottc »

HaloZero wrote: post #12
laweijfmvo wrote: post #2

Anecdote: I've never seen this. I have seen "cash only" still, though.

I live in Oakland and it's getting more and more popular here in order to avoid theft. SF I think requires you to take cash as legal tender though so it's not allowed there.

> SF I think requires you to take cash as legal tender though so it's not allowed there.

I don't know anything specifically about SF, but just to note that the term "legal tender" specifically refers to payment for a debt. Since most retail business require payment before giving customers their goods, no debt is actually incurred. Table-service restaurants are a common exception to this, where you eat first and then pay, but counter-server restaurants often require you to pay up front when you make your order.

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#38

Post by JumpCrisscross »

YoyoyoPCP wrote: post #17

Dumb guy question: why does the US government not offer all citizens a bank account? Is there some constitutional reason against it?

> why does the US government not offer all citizens a bank account?

We had one [1]. It was considered redundant to private banking. I'm surprised no states have attempted this.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_S...

Re: 'No cash accepted' signs are bad news for unbanked Americans

#40

Post by Scoundreller »

bparsons wrote: post #10

Very common in Canada now. I noticed this week that everything at Whistler/Blackcomb resort is cashless.

Teaching temporary aussie staff how to count Canadian (and occasional US) cash and coins became an untenable problem.
Post reply on HN