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

321–330 of 508 posts

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

#321

Post by II2II »

saagarjha wrote: post #274
Hnrobert42 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, it might be wise for you to withdraw some cash now (depending on your financial situation). I keep a couple hundred in crisp bills of varying denominations in a go bag.

How long would that last you, though? I’d go through that in a week…

If a widespread power outage lasts more than a week, you would have bigger issues to deal with and (hopefully) community resources to draw upon. Otherwise, there is a good chance that things would be brought back up piecemeal, and you would be able to get cash or pay via credit/debit at least somewhere.

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

#322

Post by AllegedAlec »

seanhunter wrote: post #206
AllegedAlec wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck when a bank decides to freeze your account because you called a politician a fat pig.

Are you referring to a specific incident here? Do you have a reference?

https://weltwoche.ch/daily/deutsche-staatsanwaltschaft-jagt-...

TLDR: blogger called a politician fat. The german prosecutors are considering prosecuting him and Deutsche Bank terminated his account.

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

#323

Post by causi »

Not taking cash means people without bank accounts cannot transact with you. At present that's six percent of Americans. Millions of (mostly marginalized) people who, in a world where every business made the decision to not take cash, wouldn't be able to buy food or other essentials. It would be like every store converting to drive-through only and telling everyone without a car they're free to starve to death in the street.

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

#324

Post by rescbr »

fodkodrasz wrote: post #228
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,…

Regarding resilience, and no need for electricity, and network: In Hungary currently it is mandatory to use networked cash registers for cash transactions and centralized digital reporting system for issuing invoices. There are some minor exemptions, for farmer's markets and some similar specific niche very low volume cash transactions. I know about no disaster protocols. (though the Hungarian mindset wouldn't give a…

If it is like in Brazil, the tax-enabled receipt printers have onboard memory that stores the transactions to send them off-line if the tax agency's servers are down.

Something that I've learned when I worked with those devices in the past is that the tax authorities do have strong contingency plans.

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

#325

Post by Tangurena2 »

blackshaw wrote: post #257
makeitdouble wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. But most businesses do. The main issue is there: why should a business be forced by law to accept cash if they absolutely need electricty and cables to work as a business ? It's one step below forcing them to accept hand written checks. Those are also extremely resilient, you just need a pen and paper. But god no I wouldn't want to deal with…

Let's think about who wouldn't be fine in a cashless economy: * Elderly people who struggle with technology. * People fleeing coercive situations like domestic abuse where their abuser controls their finances. * People with mental disabilities, for whom cash might be the only thing they know how to use. * Homeless people, who might literally rely on cash to survive. * Poorer people who prefer cash because it helps th…

> I have no idea how they do it.

Check cashing stores. And you pay a very steep fee for not having a bank account.

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

#326

Post by ExoticPearTree »

pc86 wrote: post #319
sgjohnson wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. To be fair, credit cards also don't. At least didn't need to, up until very recently, when most issuers stopped embossing their credit cards. Imprinters exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_card_imprinter Sure, the risk here is that the charge would get declined later on, but you get the same risk if you accept personal checks.

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.

You missed the point. Embossed CCs and an imprinter allows you to get your monet at a later date without a problem.

Card present or online transactions only prevents you as a seller to make any money when the internet is not working.

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

#327

Post by mdgrech23 »

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…

In a true shit hit the fans situation cash is you what you need to bribe the official to get you on the boat/plane/train out of the disaster area.

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

#328

Post by macintux »

blackshaw wrote: post #257
makeitdouble wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. But most businesses do. The main issue is there: why should a business be forced by law to accept cash if they absolutely need electricty and cables to work as a business ? It's one step below forcing them to accept hand written checks. Those are also extremely resilient, you just need a pen and paper. But god no I wouldn't want to deal with…

Let's think about who wouldn't be fine in a cashless economy: * Elderly people who struggle with technology. * People fleeing coercive situations like domestic abuse where their abuser controls their finances. * People with mental disabilities, for whom cash might be the only thing they know how to use. * Homeless people, who might literally rely on cash to survive. * Poorer people who prefer cash because it helps th…

Thank you; I regret that I have but one upvote to offer.

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

#329

Post by sgjohnson »

pc86 wrote: post #319
sgjohnson wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't need electricity, a network of cables, satellites and routers. To be fair, credit cards also don't. At least didn't need to, up until very recently, when most issuers stopped embossing their credit cards. Imprinters exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_card_imprinter Sure, the risk here is that the charge would get declined later on, but you get the same risk if you accept personal checks.

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.

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

#330

Post by Xylakant »

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.

You present that as a fact, but it is far from. The jury is still out. And I would also question whether this is a case where "average" is even the relevant metric - is it ok if a chunk of the population looses access to shopping, because VISA or MASTERCARD decided do cut off their access? Cash is controlled by the state, but digital payment systems are not, and unlike cash, do not ensure equal treatment.

Post reply on HN