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

Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 717 posts

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#291

Post by 908B64B197 »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #233
arcticbull wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Emergencies Act and how it's applied are governed by the Charter. It's a function of government as defined under the Charter. It's not a suspension thereof. It's moving into a different mode of operation, sure, but the it's still all a defined function of that system. As [1] states: > Any temporary laws made under the act are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Bill of Rights, and must…

What you conveniently leave out is that government in its infinite wisdom can simply decide it does not apply under exceptions[1] in section 1 of the charter. Shocking. Government left itself an out. What is more annoying that people defend it as it is not what it actually is. Now compare it to what the act was intended for ( some sort of senior politician kidnapping ) and what it was used for in peace time ( forcibl…

> ( some sort of senior politician kidnapping ) and what it was used for in peace time ( forcibly dismantling a protest ).

The state media and government tried to pin mailbox bombings and an instance of kidnapping to this group called the FLQ until an RCMP agent was caught literally red-handed (with severe burns and a torn off finger) planting bombs in a mailbox to pin it on the "FLQ"! [0] The feds then confessed to more than 400 illegal search and seizures, criminal trespass, breaking and entering and arson incidents and the bomb planter admitted he “had done much worse for the feds” (all of these incidents that were used to invoke the constitution's suspension!).

Who was prime minister during that time? You guessed it, Justin Trudeau’s father. What a coincidence.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#293

Post by hayst4ck »

I have such mixed feelings.

On one hand, it clearly creates a power problem where too few have too much power.

On the other hand, you don't run a company without a dashboard of statistics and information to inform the decisions you make and theoretically the higher fidelity of the information you use to make decisions, the better decisions you can make. It's also very convenient.

Since people can exercise power without consequences it seems like anything that centralizes power is bad and therefore preserving cash is fundamentally good, but if people could provide consequences to those who abuse power, then things like digital currency could be used for great good.

I have to admit, relatedly, I am incredibly skeezed out by square e-mailing me itemized digital receipts for purchases made against a square terminal. What are they doing with that data? Are the regulated? Are they selling it? Are they using it to collude against customers (like the people who suggest rental prices creating a de facto cartel)?

Cash doesn't really have metadata.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#294

Post by Wohlf »

orhmeh09 wrote: post #115
danpalmer wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might work but sending cash in the mail is a pretty terrible idea. Most postal services strongly discourage it, or you're using recorded services which are expensive and add all the same tracking issues.

Which postal services? The USPS doesn't strongly discourage it.

They absolutely do and may refuse to mail it in some cases. It increases the risk of theft astronomically, that's why money orders exist.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#295

Post by johncessna »

willmadden wrote: post #136
Seattle3503 wrote: post #13

My concerns about a cashless society are the power it hands to a few oligopolistic credit card processors. Look at what happened to Pornhub. Regardless of whether you think Pornhub was in the wrong, it is striking that a business was cut off from global financial system by a small number of credit card companies. This was done without due process and under no countries laws. That should scare us at least a little.

Pornhub? How about the Canadian truckers protest where Canada's handful of banks froze their accounts and their gofundme was seized? How about all of China? There's no way government can be trusted. We would need a bill of rights applied to our money first to protect us and have a check and balance. We already need this!

Or Russia.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#296

Post by sebzim4500 »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #133

I can't believe how willingly people submitted to going cashless. I was at a trendy rivertown restaurant, went to pay with cash, and the shock on people's faces was unbelievable, like I was some ancient alien. It honestly feels pretty forced, like there's a hyper-fashionable status attached to paying digitally. It's not the first time people lapped up a status marker hawked to them by some globocorp, just like iphone…

Paying with a card is not a status symbol, it's convenient.

If anything it's the opposite, if you want to flaunt wealth then you normally pay cash and round up to the nearest 50.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#297

Post by SergeAx »

shishy wrote: post #10

Cash is great. Can't be tracked, credit card companies don't get to discriminate against the poor and create negative feedback loop traps that they can't out of, it's easier to be financially responsible with it. Bit unfortunate too that paying with cash just adds a tax onto the poor since the fees are basically priced into goods sold at stores, typically regardless of whether or not cash is used. But yeah, nice to h…

Accepting cash also has its fees for businesses, primarily a cash collection fee made by banks.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#298

Post by tchaffee »

cortesoft wrote: post #274
tchaffee wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if it's for human trafficking? Payment processors are made up of people, and people have to have the freedom of drawing a moral line they won't cross. The real problem as I see it is that payment processing is a near monopoly. Better competition and smaller players would almost guarantee that every transaction except the most egregious would have a willing payment processor. Diversity is so often the best answer…

If you know it is for human trafficking, why would you cut off the payment instead of arresting the people?

Where did I say instead? You should do both.

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#299

Post by sebzim4500 »

medler wrote: post #134
harimau777 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the government often creates crimes that citizens don't agree with. Or the majority uses the law to try to force their preferences on the minority.

So should everyone simply disregard any laws they disagree with, provided they can get away with it? Where does it end?

Obviously yes. If you don't agree with a law and there is close to no chance of getting caught then why follow it?

Re: Pro-cash movement warns that people could be losing more than they bargained for

#300

Post by lazide »

cortesoft wrote: post #274
tchaffee wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if it's for human trafficking? Payment processors are made up of people, and people have to have the freedom of drawing a moral line they won't cross. The real problem as I see it is that payment processing is a near monopoly. Better competition and smaller players would almost guarantee that every transaction except the most egregious would have a willing payment processor. Diversity is so often the best answer…

If you know it is for human trafficking, why would you cut off the payment instead of arresting the people?

Because arresting people requires evidence and due process, which is work.
Post reply on HN