Cashless society ?

[Randy Winkman]

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

[The Mad Monk]

Oilchange said:

I suspect there is an argument that if payment for a service (in cash) is refused on the grounds they don't take cash (legal tender), the person can walk as having made a reasonable attempt to settle the debt.

Any lawyers care to comment?

Yes, of course you can walk, you just don't take the goods or services with you.

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/I/Invitatio...

[Kermit power]

Randy Winkman said:

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

Nope. Run a tab, split it on cards.

[magooagain]

Kermit power said:

magooagain said:

I think the cashless and the cash systems work ok along side each other,it's nice to have a choice.
Why take away one or the other?

I use a few different payment methods, all-though not cashless, and get by fine.

You might get by fine as the consumer. If you're a business who has to handle the cash, it can be a right pain in the backside!

At one end of the scale, consider somewhere a football stadium seating, say, 40,000 people. If they decided to all spend cash for food, drinks, programmes and the like whilst they're there, the club could easily have to move a million or more every match day! It all requires counting and sorting, transporting to a bank, they need to make sure they've got the right float to begin with, more serving staff and more till points because transactions are quite a bit slower when people are counting out cash in both directions. Alternatively, they can just announce that they're no longer accepting any cash, and all that goes away.

At the other end of the scale, what if you're a rural shop or pub? Your nearest bank could easily be an hour's round trip or more. Why would you want the pain of having to take cash to the bank if you can just take card payments only?

What happens at various stadiums I have been to all over the world is that some people purchase with cards and some with cash. That's how it is and I can't see it changing.

Rural shops and Post Offices have Allways dealt with cash and still do along with people using a card.

There won't be any change in the system anytime soon ,it will evolve that's for sure but not to a cashless society completely.

[bigdog3]

T-195 said:

Hasn't nine years of Tories created a Cashless Society already?

[technodup]

Kermit power said:

Anyone who can get a bank account and chooses not to, tough st. They'll just have to accept that the number of things they won't be able to do is going to increase exponentially over the next few years.

It won't though, because those type of people aren't buying quinoa salads in hipster delis, they're buying fags in the shop on their sink estate, and that's not going cashless anytime soon, for obvious reasons.

Fortunately we're not going cashless any time soon, which means I can keep a minimum of transactions electronic, and the rest nice and anonymous.

[bigdog3]

technodup said:

Fortunately we're not going cashless any time soon, which means I can keep a minimum of transactions electronic, and the rest nice and anonymous.

Dodgy deals?

[Randy Winkman]

Kermit power said:

Randy Winkman said:

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

Nope. Run a tab, split it on cards.

What if people don't want to do what you decide?

[Seanseansean]

Bank of England doesn’t think it will happen soon.

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/knowledgebank/will...

[alorotom]

Randy Winkman said:

Kermit power said:

Randy Winkman said:

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

Nope. Run a tab, split it on cards.

What if people don't want to do what you decide?

And what if they don’t want to do what you decide / want ... hardly an argument is it

[red_slr]

menousername said:

bloomen said:

sas62 said:

I don't want to come across all tin-foil hat

There's nothing tin foil about it. The end game is total control over money. Once cash is gone they can bail out, bail in, introduce negative interest rates, surveil you, shut you down and whatever else they fancy.

It boggles my mind that people are running towards it and not questioning it for a moment.

+1

Someone further down referenced how good this is in China.... the same China with their newly rolled out social credit score....

There is a lot of push back happening in the US (ironically) on cashless stores etc as it discriminates against the poor who have less access to bank cards and credit due to lower credit scores. One solution to that has been pre-paid cash cards, which actually charge excessive rates for use.

That's starting here. There was an article on the BBC about 3-4 months ago about cashless and bank closures having an impact on rural people and other demographics such as the poor. IIRC there was some government department looking into how to keep physical cash flowing into these people to ensure they still access their money. IIRC they were considering mandatory cash back as one solution..

As for China.... they have other reasons for going cashless IMHO. A lot of cloak and dagger stuff plus they really do have to keep control of their finances now the country has a few quid. What a lot of people don't realise is that some parts of China are on a par with NYC or London in terms of living costs.

For those who think cashless is just around the corner a lot of small businesses still pay their employees in physical cash. We did until last year and only stopped as the last 2 employees who were getting weekly cash pay asked to go onto BACS. That actually costs us money to pay them BACS. Where as the cash saved us money, twice. Once to pay the cash into the bank, and once to send the BACS. Such is the economics of small business that a lot of people don't understand. There are 2 other businesses on the same street as us that still pay cash, and they will probably continue for a long time yet.

[red_slr]

bigdog3 said:

technodup said:

Fortunately we're not going cashless any time soon, which means I can keep a minimum of transactions electronic, and the rest nice and anonymous.

Dodgy deals?

Every bank note has a serial number on it..... ok might not be useful for john the taxi driver spending £50 a week in Tesco but for people bunging 1000's through the system it can quite easily be tracked.

[Kermit power]

magooagain said:

Kermit power said:

magooagain said:

I think the cashless and the cash systems work ok along side each other,it's nice to have a choice.
Why take away one or the other?

I use a few different payment methods, all-though not cashless, and get by fine.

You might get by fine as the consumer. If you're a business who has to handle the cash, it can be a right pain in the backside!

At one end of the scale, consider somewhere a football stadium seating, say, 40,000 people. If they decided to all spend cash for food, drinks, programmes and the like whilst they're there, the club could easily have to move a million or more every match day! It all requires counting and sorting, transporting to a bank, they need to make sure they've got the right float to begin with, more serving staff and more till points because transactions are quite a bit slower when people are counting out cash in both directions. Alternatively, they can just announce that they're no longer accepting any cash, and all that goes away.

At the other end of the scale, what if you're a rural shop or pub? Your nearest bank could easily be an hour's round trip or more. Why would you want the pain of having to take cash to the bank if you can just take card payments only?

What happens at various stadiums I have been to all over the world is that some people purchase with cards and some with cash. That's how it is and I can't see it changing.

OK, I will bow to your clearly superior knowledge.

Maybe you'd like to call Quins, Spurs, the O2 Arena, Bayern Munich, Ajax and the Atlanta Falcons (and possibly others) to let them know that their websites somehow stupidly say that they don't accept cash, but this must be wrong because you've been to stadiums that accept cash, and nothing is going to change any time soon?

I reckon when you let them know, they'll probably be so grateful for you bringing their attention to this silly mistake that they'll offer you a free lifetime season ticket!

Personally, I reckon it's more likely that other clubs will see the benefits these early adopters achieve and all stadiums will be cash free within five years but what do I know, given that I'm clearly mistaken in thinking that I've been going to a cashless Quins all season with signs dotted around the stadium reminding people they no longer accept cash, when all along or turns out they do because you say so!

[Randy Winkman]

alorotom said:

Randy Winkman said:

Kermit power said:

Randy Winkman said:

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

Nope. Run a tab, split it on cards.

What if people don't want to do what you decide?

And what if they don’t want to do what you decide / want ... hardly an argument is it

But I'm the one saying people should be prepared to pay in whatever way others want to.

[Randy Winkman]

alorotom said:

Randy Winkman said:

Kermit power said:

Randy Winkman said:

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

Nope. Run a tab, split it on cards.

What if people don't want to do what you decide?

And what if they don’t want to do what you decide / want ... hardly an argument is it

But I'm the one saying people should be prepared to pay in whatever way others want to.

[Kermit power]

Randy Winkman said:

Kermit power said:

Randy Winkman said:

bigdog3 said:

Kermit power said:

I don't think that's an age-specific thing, is it? I'm close to fifty, and wouldn't have had cash on me either.

I always use credit cards unless refused for some reason. Cash is an absolute pain in the harris. I'm 65

That's fair enough normally - but to go out to a pub on team Christmas dinner with 20 colleagues? Would you not have thought "I'd better take a bit of cash with me just in case"?

Nope. Run a tab, split it on cards.

What if people don't want to do what you decide?

For the moment, they can pay cash. How long that will be the case isn't up to me or them. It's up to the pub.

[alorotom]

You just have to look as far as cash not being accepted on planes now either for many airlines - which was one the final frontiers of cash being king thats been overcome in the past 2yrs

[NRS]

Randy Winkman said:

But I'm the one saying people should be prepared to pay in whatever way others want to.

Why can't the cash people do the same?

(Btw, I never take cash "just in case", and not sure the last time I ever used it outside holidays. As no one else uses it either, so I'd just be the problem maker if I did).

[Antony Moxey]

Kermit power said:

At one end of the scale, consider somewhere a football stadium seating, say, 40,000 people. If they decided to all spend cash for food, drinks, programmes and the like whilst they're there, the club could easily have to move a million or more every match day!

That would require every person in the ground spending at least £25. With a crowd that size entry would be through advanced ticket sales only with none sold at the ground on the day. Not sure it would happen.

[menousername]

Kermit power said:

I'm not completely certain you've thought this through too well...

1. As I understand it, savings of under €100k were state-insured in the same way that up to £75k would be here. Obviously a pain in the arse for companies, but how many individuals have savings of so many multiples of €100k that not ensuring they had it split between different banks was anything other than just plain laziness or, given the high proportion of dodgy-sounding Russians involved, just a case of having to take the risk of there only being so many places in the world that will take your dirty money?

2. Relatively speaking, this affected a tiny handful of people. Can you honestly say you'd rather keep your savings under the mattress when UK fire brigades typically respond to around 30,000 domestic fires each year?

3. From reading that article, I'll grant you, it sounds as though anyone with more than €100k in Laiki, the smaller bank got truly shafted, as they were looking at losing money with no compensation. Those who were directly clients of Bank of Cyprus, on the other hand, did at least receive shares in the bank in return for their scalping, and as the bank is still a going concern, those shares still hold value.

If anything, the thing that should've worried you about this bail out is the fact that the ten largest "victims" were all shady Russian or Ukranian oligarchs who, between them, ended up owning enough of a bank for one of them to become a Vice President of the bank, all with none of the usual checks and balances that would occur to ensure they're fit and proper to be in that position. Surely it would've been better to say "sorry, anyone with uninsured losses is out of luck" rather than handing them a large chunk of a bank?

The issue is that depositors are not clients of banks who are investing and accepting the risks of insolvency. They are depositing savings in a bank, as required by law and by the system.

Only since the crash has the notion really come to the fore that by being a depositor you are actually making an unsecured investment.... previously people expected their money to be there tomorrow. Cash is / was liquid and cash in the bank was safer than under the mattress.

If the law / system requires society to deposit their savings then there should be no upper limit on what is safe. If we are to be treated as investors then we should be getting a better rate of return than we have been for the last 10 years.

£75k is a lot of money but inflation will see to it that pretty soon today’s 75k is tomorrows 40k, and so on. Will the FSCS move with it? What does Open Banking mean in all this- are we likely to see a situation where you are regarded as only having one bank account and splitting your cash 5 ways still means only 1x 75k worth of guarantee?

Finally - is it accurate to say only Russian gangsters lost out and that they were facing losing everything anyway. There were genuine people with savings / retirement savings caught out. There were people mid-house move that were caught out.

If we go cashless all these issues very quickly become a lot more relevant.