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

No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 140 posts

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#91

Post by solatic »

electroSurveil wrote: post #28
orangechairs wrote: post #18

To echo what others have said, cashless systems -- especially in fast food chains -- are a quick way to discriminate against a whole population of the underbanked. I was in Dos Toros (burrito chain mentioned early in the article) about a month ago, and the woman in line ahead of me didn't have a card. She got so embarrassed at the register despite having ample cash to pay for her meal. I paid for her with my card, sh…

I feel weird spending at places like this at all. Not just because of what it does to other people, but also how it modifies my own behavior. What if it had been me? I can't leave the house with just a twenty in my pocket? That's not good enough? I have to stop, wait, find my wallet, make sure it has a card with a balance on it, know what that balance is, make sure the card isn't damaged (demagnetized, scuffed chip c…

> Why would a restaurant prefer anything over cash?

Because there is a dramatic reduction in costs from going completely cashless. You don't have to pay for security for cash-on-hand. You don't have to pay for an armored car to transport cash to a bank. If you don't want to pay for an armored car, you don't have to pay (and trust) an employee to do it for you, else paying with your time by doing it yourself. You can serve more customers in less time because you no longer have to make change with each transaction, and you no longer have the cognitive load of ensuring that the bank gives you enough change and in the correct amount on each bank trip so that you can make change for your customers. Because you don't need to trust your employees with cash anymore, you have reduced the risk associated with the hiring of an individual employee, which makes it easier to hire ex-convicts - and in many areas, that (unfortunately) makes it dramatically easier to hire people, period.

Sure, these costs are balanced out by the formal costs associated with card processing fees and no longer being able to partially hide income from the taxman. But the flip side is the improvement in trust between management and labor, which overall ought to make cashless businesses better workplaces.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#92

Post by CaptainZapp »

miohtama wrote: post #84
adamzochowski wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compare cash to the walmart card: 1) walmart charges 3% for all purchases outside of walmart 2) walmart charges 1$ for all purchses 3) walmart charges 5$ monthly maintenance fee 4) walmart charges 3$ to 5$ per deposit 5) even to check account status costs 50cents Holding cash has none of these costs. I am not surprised that there is a large contingent of society that doesn't trust cards and banks.

In European Union 1) Bank account is a right https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/financial-pr... 2) debit and credit card fees are capped very low http://www.thetravelmagazine.net/no-credit-debit-card-fees-e... This does not remedy privacy issues, but in general is more democratic way of doing things. Card payment cap also effectively killed cashback cards and premium credit cards that largerly favour ric…

2) debit and credit card fees are capped very low

True, they try to compensate by pulling some other shitties. Like the old "Do you want to pay in your home currency?" crap.

Worst are ATMs, which offer you to "conveniently guarantee a fixed exchange rate", which can be over 10% of the amount retrieved and - needless to say - which you should never accept.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#93

Post by phobosdeimos »

gringoDan wrote: post #2

I use a credit card for 95%+ of my transactions. At the same time, I'm scared of a cashless future. As the article mentions, cash transactions are one of the last vestiges of privacy that we have. A future where the US looks like China, where all of your transactions are visible, is not something I want to see. Additionally, cash is an equalizer for the unbanked/underbanked. Financial institutions take advantage of a…

In my country banks can't refuse clients for a standard checking account. Besides how in gods name can someone even function in an advanced economy without a bank account?

People have been paying with plastic since the late 80s. Its free, safe and its easier for the tax man to collect. I used to work night shifts in retail. You don't want to deal with cash.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#94

Post by bena »

valleyer wrote: post #81
bena wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh. They do offer banking. But banks make their money investing your money. Also, I think "no overdraft fees" is just as wrong as overly punitive overdraft fees. If there were no overdraft fees, credit cards and small loans just wouldn't be a thing. Just overdraft your account and treat it as an interest free loan. When you overdraft, you are no longer dealing with your money. You're dealing with someone else's money…

Banks could easily simply reject overdrafts instead of allowing them while charging fees.

Not if I write a check. And from what I recall, when you make a purchase, they don't check against your projected balance at that time, but your actual balance.

So if I have $100 in my account and a pending debit of $50, if I try to make a purchase of $60, it'll get approved because I have $100 in my account.

Now, there are potential things it could do, like treat pending debits like cleared debits. I mean, when I check my balance on my app, it shows the balance with the pending transactions accounted for.

And that does prevent overdrafts from ATMs and debit cards, but there are other debits to the account that could cause overdraft.

It's practically a no-win scenario. If I have an automatic payment to my electric company and I don't have the funds in my account to pay it, I'm fucked no matter which way you look at it. Either I overdraft or my electricity gets shut off due to non-payment.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#95

Post by bena »

18pfsmt wrote: post #68
dionidium wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're giving good-faith rebuttals to arguments that weren't offered in good faith. Nobody actually has trouble leaving the house with their wallet. That's not a real problem that intellectually average people actually have.

I don't own a wallet. I keep my license and debit card in my vehicle, and my one credit card in my desk at home. I pay cash for everything but gas, except online purchases. I've been operating this way for most of life. Treating people as if they're degenerates or below intellectually average for not using plastic (or staying away from Facebook) is uncalled for.

But if you had a wallet, would you consider it a herculean task to "take it with you"?

That's who he's "treating... as if they're degenerates or below intellectually average", people who think "bringing a wallet" is this massive undertaking that requires a paragraph to describe.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#96

Post by bena »

solatic wrote: post #91
electroSurveil wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel weird spending at places like this at all. Not just because of what it does to other people, but also how it modifies my own behavior. What if it had been me? I can't leave the house with just a twenty in my pocket? That's not good enough? I have to stop, wait, find my wallet, make sure it has a card with a balance on it, know what that balance is, make sure the card isn't damaged (demagnetized, scuffed chip c…

> Why would a restaurant prefer anything over cash? Because there is a dramatic reduction in costs from going completely cashless. You don't have to pay for security for cash-on-hand. You don't have to pay for an armored car to transport cash to a bank. If you don't want to pay for an armored car, you don't have to pay (and trust) an employee to do it for you, else paying with your time by doing it yourself. You can…

In my experience, a good rule of thumb is that anything the wait staff argues for only has one actual reason - more money for them. Anything else is a smokescreen.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#97

Post by bena »

ac29 wrote: post #51
orangechairs wrote: post #18

To echo what others have said, cashless systems -- especially in fast food chains -- are a quick way to discriminate against a whole population of the underbanked. I was in Dos Toros (burrito chain mentioned early in the article) about a month ago, and the woman in line ahead of me didn't have a card. She got so embarrassed at the register despite having ample cash to pay for her meal. I paid for her with my card, sh…

The question to me is, why does this population exist in such great numbers? I understand not having good credit, but having access to a checking account with a debit card doesn't seem like it should be insurmountable. The last checking account I opened just took $5 to open the account (technically a "membership" fee at a credit union). No any proof of employment, income, ar assets was needed [0], and I left with a d…

How long ago?

Some banks are doing these Pre-paid-ish cards now. I know Chase has Liquid, other banks may call it something else. For the most part, it functions mostly like a debit card backed by an actual checking account. But the requirements are far lower. They don't give a flying fuck who you are. You can even get checks to access the funds on the card.

And for like 90% of the time, you'll never realize you don't actually have a checking account. You won't realize that your money isn't technically backed by the bank. Then that 10% of the time will make your life inconvenient.

So I'd say that access to a card-based payment method doesn't seem insurmountable. But an actual checking account could still be out of the reach of some people.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#98

Post by supertrope »

zaarn wrote: post #83

I don't really understand the american need for a credit card. In germany, I pay almost everything either in cash or via bank transfer, usually pull. I got a prepaid card a while ago, mostly to pay for american services (seriously, I only ever pay to american corporations with it). My debit card (EC card) is almost universal and directly connected to the bank account, no credit needed. CC is barely supported, EC is a…

It's a cultural and market network effect thing. A lot of Americans use debit card instead of credit card that can quickly accrue interest charges if not fully paid off every month. But plenty of people carry high interest debt. The average American who carries a balance owes 15000 USD. USA has high adoption of credit card network. In most places, debit cards are only accepted as Visa/MC not the low fee inter-bank network such as PLUS or STAR or NYCE.

Then there's consumer credit history/score. Americans like to buy houses (it's de facto subsidized by the government through implicitly government guaranteed 30 year fixed rate loans). A high credit score can mean the difference of tens of thousands of dollars over the term of the mortgage. If you have no credit history, you get the worse possible rate. Housing choice determines school district, and therefore whether your children get a good excellent so-so or bad education. House prices are highly correlated with school quality - public schools are free but you have to be able to afford residency. The worse neighborhoods have shootings at night, rampant drug abuse and gangs, burglary/robbery, lack of jobs/grocery stores/medical service/non-convenience retail.

Credit score usage has metastasized into many more facets of life than originally intended. Even if you want to only rent housing, the landlord will check your credit. Good landlords only reject for evictions or out of control debt that suggests you cannot afford rent, but some decide based off score e.g. if your score is below 20th percentile you will not get approved. You cannot get electricity/water/natural gas turned on without a credit check unless you place a large security deposit. Some companies will not hire you if you have bad credit! Those with bad credit have to pay up to double for car insurance.

Of course many people like to spend beyond their means. But even responsible people put themselves at a disadvantage by not participating in the credit system.

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#99

Post by bena »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #78
ac29 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons for a business to not want to take cash (employee time in cash handling likely adds at least 5% in payroll overhead, theft can also be an issue in retail at least). You may want to pay in bitcoin, nickels, or with bushels of corn, but that doesn't mean any of them are practical or desirable for the business owner on the other end.

Having to deal with the elderly or disabled adds overhead from employee time or premises adaptations. All that changes is the disenfranchised group. All should be considered discrimination. Maybe it's the European perspective but I welcomed it when the UK required all premises to be wheelchair accessible, even though I am able bodied. I'd equally welcome making accepting the country's currency mandatory as I don't be…

Not taking cash is not the same as not serving the disabled or elderly.

Even in the statements after you said we should go back to "the customer is always right" you said "a business was supposed to serve the customer's needs and did what was necessary to achieve that".

Which runs counter to your later statement that you only care about the "core" idea.

Corn is useful. People want corn. You can trade corn for other things. What if all I have is corn? I'm a customer. My need is to trade this corn for something else. To serve my need, they could sell my corn for me and just let me barter corn for goods and services.

The point is, you realize that the adage is ridiculous. People like to trot out the Nordstrom story of how they accepted a return on snow tires even though the store doesn't sell any sort of tires. They treat is as some sort of customer relations parable of the right thing to do.

But why?

It'll just open you up to straight fraud. That's why you shouldn't use qualifiers like "always". Even the foreign language ones are slightly better

And hell, a lot of times the customer is just plain wrong. Nintendo proves this over and over again. Constantly bucking against what their customers claim they want. But Nintendo gets it right more often than wrong. The Game Boy, Wind Waker, the Wii, etc. All of these things were considered "dumb" by the customer.

Apple manages to prove it as well. They'll do something with the iPhone and people will get up in arms. Then it becomes standard.

It really seems that you consider the "core" idea to be: "Just cater to what I want".

Re: No Shirt, No Swipe, No Service

#100

Post by bena »

zaarn wrote: post #83

I don't really understand the american need for a credit card. In germany, I pay almost everything either in cash or via bank transfer, usually pull. I got a prepaid card a while ago, mostly to pay for american services (seriously, I only ever pay to american corporations with it). My debit card (EC card) is almost universal and directly connected to the bank account, no credit needed. CC is barely supported, EC is a…

I like how you use the law as a reason despite the law already restricting how you can pay.

The U.S. used to have coinage limits as well, but tied to dollar amounts rather than total coins, but those were stricken to make all coinage legal tender.

Which is even funnier when you think about it. Because originally coinage was the tender. It was stamped and minted precious metals of a certain weight.

Bills were basically receipts or scrip that represented those metals. Essentially a token saying "Dude, it's cool, I do really have this money somewhere". And now the big hubaloo is the switch to electronic payments and people are freaking out because it's not real because it's not paper, which also isn't real. Just a representation of credit you have that's backed by the government that issued the bill.

And I wouldn't say it's a need, it's more of a convenience. Instead of mucking about with bills and coins, counting out change, etc, I just swipe or insert. No need to keep anything organized, etc. No need to pop off and find an ATM every week. And I'm not saying it's an earth-shattering difference. It's more like the convenience of going out to eat rather than cooking for the night. But in this case, I'm doing it almost every night.

And I kind of went through the same phases you're describing. When debit cards were becoming ubiquitous, you'd use them for the "big" things. Going out to a "proper" restaurant, stuff that cost more than the cash in your wallet, etc. And yeah, it was like "Ugh, I'm buying a soda with my card, awkward. Sorry". When the first fast food places installed card readers it was like "This is weird. Buying a Big Mac with a card."

But now, the situation is nearly flipped. It's more like when I go through the drive through, if we have to do the cash passing game, I feel bad. The card is simple. Hand one thing over, get it back with a slip of paper.

Post reply on HN