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

71–80 of 98 posts

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

#71

Post by ensignavenger »

woodruffw wrote: post #30
tracerbulletx wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's well and good but isn't the article about the impact of businesses going cashless? I talk to a lot of homeless and other low income people through some work I do and they generally have a Venmo card or something like that and don't have an issue with cashless transactions.

I think there’s a reasonable observation to be made that these kinds of services companies have filled a historically underserved niche. At the same time, they are fundamentally not banks and are not subject to a whole slew of consumer protection regulations that ensure reliable access to funds. Venmo and PayPal are both infamous for their capricious account suspension policies (which I have personally experienced).…

Chime isn't a bank... but they provide bank accounts via bank partners "Chime is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by The Bancorp Bank, N.A. or Stride Bank, N.A., Members FDIC". These bank accounts are still subject to all of the same regulations as any other bank account. Venmo and PayPal don't always store funds in real bank accounts, so they may have some different regulations for those funds, but they still have to comply with many of the same regulations.

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

#72

Post by throwaway15858 »

myself248 wrote: post #29
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…

Worse, is that Visa/MC/Paypal are "private" companies which can impose whatever religious slant they want, on whatever transactions they want, and your recourse as a consumer is "use the free market to pick a different payment processor". Cash doesn't care if you're buying groceries or porn. Visa very much does.

The line between "private" companies and government action is intentionally blurred.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point

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

#73

Post by jjav »

myself248 wrote: post #29
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…

Worse, is that Visa/MC/Paypal are "private" companies which can impose whatever religious slant they want, on whatever transactions they want, and your recourse as a consumer is "use the free market to pick a different payment processor". Cash doesn't care if you're buying groceries or porn. Visa very much does.

This is the fundamentally most important issue. You should not be forced to use the services of any private company to get through the basics of life. It should be an option to choose between many, but also the option to choose none.

Cash is issues by the government, it's the same for all of use, anyone is free to use it. It can't be suspended or remotely wiped, cash transactions cannot be supervised (and thus sometimes blocked) by a third party.

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

#74

Post by rawgabbit »

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.

If you ever work at a 7-11 in the US, you will get to experience a gun pointed at you so they can rob you for less than $30 because that is all that is allowed in the cash register at any time.

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

#75

Post by jjav »

legitster wrote: post #62
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.

Cash is a nuisance for a small business. You're going to lose/miscount some not-insignificant percentage, and spend a lot of time and effort counting and storing it. The benefit of accepting cash is, besides there being no processing costs, is that it makes it really easy to... uhhhh, fudge your revenue numbers. I've had a few cash transactions where I ask for a receipt from the business and the owner scowls at me. >…

> Depending on the type of business you run, I can almost assure you these customers are not going to be in your target demographic.

Don't be so sure. I'm plenty "banked" and will out of principle never buy anything from a place that does not take my cash.

Privacy is one of the most important freedoms we have and cash is absolutely vital to maintain that freedom.

The other vital freedom enabled by cash is the right to participate in commerce. With a third-party gated electronic payment, said third party (sometimes multiple third parties in the same transaction) all have a say on whether you get to spend your money or not. With cash, it's your money you spend it as you wish.

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

#76

Post by woodruffw »

legitster wrote: post #69
woodruffw wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe much of the EU has done that. The US is going in a similar direction with FedNow, although at typical US pace.

Fednow is only an inter-banking solution. It doesn't have any consumer facing component.

I know that; real-time interbank settlement is the first and necessary step for real-time consumer settlement. ACH, our current interbank system, is incapable of real-time settlement.

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

#77

Post by neilv »

> while another one-third said they simply “don’t trust banks.”

I don't blame the poor people who mistrust banks. Surprise bank fees can be downright predatory and devastating.

At a time when I had to live off credit cards, a major bank started charging me $15/month for my checking account with ATM/debit card, because my balance was too low. Which seems minor now, but was painfully worth a lot of frugal groceries at the time. And I was so afraid of closing the account and possibly disrupting the credit cards that were the only thing keeping me from being homeless, that I kept paying the fee.

Then there's the overdraft fees. (I've seen $50 for one instance!) Combined with the bank ordering transactions for the day, highest-to-lowest, to maximize the instances of overdraft fees. Overdrafts can happen without your awareness, such as when a service erroneously pulls from your account.

Then there's credit cards. Accidentally late on one payment (IIRC, an e-bill didn't come through), and I had 29.99% APR penalty rate kick in, compounded monthly. When I could least afford that, and was in no position to pay it off.

Banks aren't all bad, I appreciate their services, and I generally like my bank branch people. And there might be additional reasons that some unbanked people avoid banks. But I understand if poor people mistrust banks, since surprise predatory fees or other problems can make the difference between barely squeaking by, and no longer squeaking by.

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

#78

Post by woodruffw »

ensignavenger wrote: post #71
woodruffw wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there’s a reasonable observation to be made that these kinds of services companies have filled a historically underserved niche. At the same time, they are fundamentally not banks and are not subject to a whole slew of consumer protection regulations that ensure reliable access to funds. Venmo and PayPal are both infamous for their capricious account suspension policies (which I have personally experienced).…

Chime isn't a bank... but they provide bank accounts via bank partners "Chime is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by The Bancorp Bank, N.A. or Stride Bank, N.A., Members FDIC". These bank accounts are still subject to all of the same regulations as any other bank account. Venmo and PayPal don't always store funds in real bank accounts, so they may have some different regulatio…

Yep, that's the point in the last sentence: many of these financial services companies end up partnering with banks, but not for the "wallet" component of their services. The "wallet" part remains a relatively under-regulated financial product, while the debit card is only accessible to those who can pass KYC or otherwise meet the underlying bank's requirements.

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

#79

Post by pseudo0 »

frogamel wrote: post #54
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

Exactly one state has! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_North_Dakota It's state-owned but functions as a typical retail bank that takes deposits, makes mortgages, business loans, etc.

It's a neat historical anomaly but it is not very practical for most people to bank at. You have to be a North Dakota resident, they have one physical office in Bismarck North Dakota, and they do not provide online banking.

> Because of our unique structure as a state-owned bank, it is the Bank’s policy not to compete with the private sector for retail deposits. Therefore, convenience products such as debit cards, credit cards or online bill pay are not offered. BND has one location at 1200 Memorial Highway in Bismarck, North Dakota.

https://bnd.nd.gov/public/

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

#80

Post by onthecanposting »

throwaway15858 wrote: post #72
myself248 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worse, is that Visa/MC/Paypal are "private" companies which can impose whatever religious slant they want, on whatever transactions they want, and your recourse as a consumer is "use the free market to pick a different payment processor". Cash doesn't care if you're buying groceries or porn. Visa very much does.

The line between "private" companies and government action is intentionally blurred. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point

Most things people assume the US government "does" is performed by contractors. Even program management may be outsourced to specialty firms. The more first-hand knowledge I gain about any department, the more I believe this is universal.
Post reply on HN