Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The end of cash?

MickiQ said:
However the banks don't update their records straightaway is a bit of a strawman, there is the implication there that people living on a tight budget are reliant on the banks record and can't remember anything or write stuff down.
Click to expand...
Now you really are reaching. That's not what anyone's said or implied, but I suspect you knew that already.
 
MickiQ said:
However the banks don't update their records straightaway is a bit of a strawman, there is the implication there that people living on a tight budget are reliant on the banks record and can't remember anything or write stuff down.
Click to expand...

It's also rapidly vanishing. My transactions show up instantly and I get a notification to my phone. Of course this also means if there a fraudulent one I'd spot it very quickly.
 
Last edited:
UnderOpenSky said:
It's also rapidly vanishing. My transactions show up instantly and I get a notification to my phone. Of course this also means if there a fraudulent one I'd spot it very quickly.
Click to expand...
Yep, I do completely agree with LeytonCatLady that its really hard to budget if you don't have up-to-date info - but for those with smartphones I think it's an issue that is rapidly disappearing. Perhaps what's needed is some sort of basic electronic device that's somewhere between a card and a phone that would allow you to pay and lets you continually see remaining balance.
 
lazythursday said:
Yep, I do completely agree with LeytonCatLady that its really hard to budget if you don't have up-to-date info - but for those with smartphones I think it's an issue that is rapidly disappearing. Perhaps what's needed is some sort of basic electronic device that's somewhere between a card and a phone that would allow you to pay and lets you continually see remaining balance.
Click to expand...

Not just the smartphone but who you bank with. I've got my main account with Starling which is instant, but have another account I keep transferring to claim bank switching offers. Co op one I've got make a certain number of transactions on my card before I can claim the money, seems so backwards that they don't show up straight away.
 
mojo pixy said:
I'm quite flabbergasted at how ok we seem to be here with the overall idea of social exclusion due to not having a bank account, and that our go-to solution to that problem isn't to make it less necessary to have a bank account, but rather to make sure everybody has a bank account. Fine bunch of lefties we are :D

To reference a popular U75 meme, Keir Starmer’s time it seems to me is far from 'up'. It's only just beginning.
Click to expand...
Left wing is becoming more and more divided.
 
lazythursday said:
Yep, I do completely agree with LeytonCatLady that its really hard to budget if you don't have up-to-date info - but for those with smartphones I think it's an issue that is rapidly disappearing. Perhaps what's needed is some sort of basic electronic device that's somewhere between a card and a phone that would allow you to pay and lets you continually see remaining balance.
Click to expand...
I do have a smartphone/internet banking, and for what it's worth my bank is usually pretty quick, but even I've been caught out before and gone overdrawn (namely when using TFL services with my contactless debit card, which is why my Oyster card is such a godsend). Those who don't have access on a phone and have to check their balance on an ATM might not see their transactions right away! I'm not anti-technology at all, I just believe there needs to be some kind of non-digital back up in case things go wrong. For me, that's cash.
 
I just want to use cash. It stops me stressing about if I'm overspending. I'm right on the breadline. I'm sorry if me needing to physically see my money to have a slightly less stressful life is a bit of a bind for capitalists.

Fucking hell. Is this where we are now?
 
MickiQ said:
65% of people with mental health issues might find it harder to manage their money.

Broadly agree with this but all people vary some might, some might not nor does it mean that such people don't have issues managing money regardless of whether it's cash or card.

67% of people on low incomes might struggle to balance their household budget

This is downright insulting the implication being that people on low incomes can't add up or track their money because they can't see it.
Clearly the reason they're poor is that they're thick. Straight out of the Daily Heil playbook.

63% of people would lose the value of money; they say holding cash in your hands makes you think more about how you spend it.

This is just another variation on the one above, some people like to see the cash, some aren't bothered. But whether it is a good thing or a bad thing is entirely personal choice.

56% of rural communities would become less viable.

This is definitely stretching the point, I would suggest lack of affordable housing and employment opportunities are far more significant issues for rural communities than lack of cash.

74% say we would all be more vulnerable to cyber-attacks

The greatest risk to people as individuals in a cashless society would be someone stealing their card as opposed to just stealing physical money, great thing about cards is the bank carries the risk not the individual.

51% of people would become less social

Again how? Going out and meeting people makes people social. The idea that buying someone a drink is friendlier using cash rather than a card is bizarre

69% say it would be difficult to pay for certain things like trademen and window cleaners.

I haven't paid trademen including window cleaners with cash since at least before lockdown. Even our local Chinese now takes card and they held out longer than anyone. I believe from reports from other Urbs that even drug dealers take cards these days.

60% say we would have less privacy.

Yes that's true of course but if not being tracked was your most important concern, you would have to stop using loyalty cards, mobile phones, private cars and cover your face in public. There is also some general misunderstanding about how paying for groceries with your card actually works. If you use your debit card in Tesco's the transaction is done via encrypted tunnelling, Tesco's servers don't see your card data just a bank transfer from your account to Tesco's. That's why you have a loyalty card so they can know who you are and what've you bought. It would make more sense to dump the loyalty card rather than use cash.

74% say charities and homeless people would suffer if people didn't carry small change.

Sadly this one is definitely true, Whilst most of my charitable giving is via standing order, I have been much less generous with the homeless recently simply because I rarely have change. Whilst I have made the odd concious effort to sometimes carry change for this purpose it requires active rather than passive action on my part. However surely the solution to this is not to encourage people to carry donateable cash but greater effort to get the homeless into employment and housing.

70% say people wouldn't have the peace of mind of having spare cash in their pockets.

This is just nonsense even though I personally do in fact carry cash for this purpose, peace of mind is purely a mental state.

75% say some older people would find it difficult to do everyday things like pay bills.

This is a very popular argument but it seems to be a bit of a strawman, what bills? how many people pay their utility bills these days by going to the PO with cash and handing it over? If that's the case how is it different than using a card? And bills are better paid by DD anyway so the elderly don't have to venture out in the cold and wet to pay their bills. This is an argument for better (and free) access to banking services.

72% say vulnerable groups of people are more likely to get scammed or defrauded.

Definitely true since you can't really send cash over the phone but they can still lose cash when their homes are robbed and the odds of this go up as more people are suspected of keeping cash at home. This is again an argument for something else ie more robust policing and better social services (this applies to point 1 as well)

74% say it would take away people's right to choose.

Classic FOTL logic here, if you claim a right to demand to pay in cash then the retailer has an equal right to tell you to sod off.

79% say people who don't have access to good internet connections would lose out.

More stretching, Digital Exclusion of the Poor is a major social problem that we are doing little to nothing to address. But whilst it makes online banking harder, it isn't really relevant to the case of card vs cash.You don't need any kind of internet connection at all to use a card so long as the retailer has one. Commercial internet connections are far more robust than domestic ones with 99.99% (or 99.999%) availability often written into the contract.


That's because it's a good idea, just because something is an evil capitalist plot doesn't mean it's a bad thing. They no doubt think it's a good idea and are encouraging it but the move away from cash is being driven by the public for MOST of whom it is of benefit not by the banks.
We all agree that there is a problem in that some of society are being unintentionally excluded as a result of this and as a society we need to do something about this, however trying to force people who don't want to use cash to start using it again is not going to work.
Click to expand...
This is just (very detailed and thorough) shouting at the clouds, though. These are the published polling numbers based on a sample of 2000 in November 2018. They are what they are.
 
lazythursday said:
Yep, I do completely agree with LeytonCatLady that its really hard to budget if you don't have up-to-date info - but for those with smartphones I think it's an issue that is rapidly disappearing. Perhaps what's needed is some sort of basic electronic device that's somewhere between a card and a phone that would allow you to pay and lets you continually see remaining balance.
Click to expand...
I really don't get why you'd assert, without any evidence, that budgeting with cash is "an issue that is rapidly disappearing"?
More and more people are struggling with their weekly 'budget' and more are reverting to cash use in an attempt to monitor/control spending.

1692885182114.png

What is motivating you to deny that this is happening?
 
brogdale said:
I really don't get why you'd assert, without any evidence, that budgeting with cash is "an issue that is rapidly disappearing"?
More and more people are struggling with their weekly 'budget' and more are reverting to cash use in an attempt to monitor/control spending.

View attachment 388620

What is motivating you to deny that this is happening?
Click to expand...
You are completely misinterpreting my point - go back and read the posts. The problem of it being hard to budget using bank apps because of lack of up to date balances is the problem that's rapidly disappearing.
 
mojo pixy said:
Why?

Also, which services? Why plural services? We're only talking about using cash, why should not wanting to pay cashless exclude from services? Where does education, vaccines, health etc come into it? How would my 'wanting me and my kids to be healthy and educated' equal 'needing a bank account'?
Click to expand...

Maybe I was reading too much into your post and taking a liberty by extending the notion But the idea of opting out of various standard methods of transaction but retaining complete and equal access to all those services and goods to which they pertain is just nonsense. You might argue for it but this situation already has disappeared and aint coming back. Better to argue for everyone being able to have a bank account and card. Businesses that want to except cash will carry on doing so.
 
lazythursday said:
You are completely misinterpreting my point - go back and read the posts. The problem of it being hard to budget using bank apps because of lack of up to date balances is the problem that's rapidly disappearing.
Click to expand...
Apologies, but that wasn't clear at all form what you had posted.
 
mojo pixy said:
I'm quite flabbergasted at how ok we seem to be here with the overall idea of social exclusion due to not having a bank account, and that our go-to solution to that problem isn't to make it less necessary to have a bank account, but rather to make sure everybody has a bank account. Fine bunch of lefties we are :D

To reference a popular U75 meme, Keir Starmer’s time it seems to me is far from 'up'. It's only just beginning.
Click to expand...

Er maybe cos that ship has sailed, docked and rotted away in a harbour long since. how do the bank accountless get cash anyway. That rather restricts them to the casual economy, which is not generally known for it's inclusivity, fair practise and workers rights.

If you want to actively argue for a world where it's easier to have no bank account, go ahead. Just be mindful of concussion. :D Me, i'm teaching some of the older people how to use tech to become included. I mean that's literally part of my job.
 
brogdale said:
and, when questioned, large majorities could foresee the difficulties that a cashless economy could create for other, less fortunate/more vulnerable groups:

View attachment 388583
Click to expand...
This survey is psychologically very complex. It is not a survey of attitudes. It is a survey of “metarepresentations” — the interpretations people construct about the way that other people think. It does not ask if YOU will become less social without cash. It asks if (nameless) OTHERS will become less social. It does not ask if YOU will struggle to manage money. It asks if OTHERS will struggle. And so on. Metarepresentations are a valid and interesting object of study, but they are at least two steps removed from being even an attitude survey, let alone a survey of actual behaviour and lived reality.

Furthermore, this is a survey of metarepresentations in 2018, not metarepresentations in 2023. A lot has changed in 5 years that will affect the way that people think that other people think. For a start, COVID caused a massive acceleration of cashless payments. People may have made assumptions about the effect that it would have on other people that have not manifested in practice, and that may now have changed the way that they think that others will think.
 
kabbes said:
This survey is psychologically very complex. It is not a survey of attitudes. It is a survey of “metarepresentations” — the interpretations people construct about the way that other people think. It does not ask if YOU will become less social without cash. It asks if (nameless) OTHERS will become less social. It does not ask if YOU will struggle to manage money. It asks if OTHERS will struggle. And so on. Metarepresentations are a valid and interesting object of study, but they are at least two steps removed from being even an attitude survey, let alone a survey of actual behaviour and lived reality.

Furthermore, this is a survey of metarepresentations in 2018, not metarepresentations in 2023. A lot has changed in 5 years that will affect the way that people think that other people think. For a start, COVID caused a massive acceleration of cashless payments. People may have made assumptions about the effect that it would have on other people that have not manifested in practice, and that may now have changed the way that they think that others will think.
Click to expand...
All good and useful points. :)
 
xenon said:
Er maybe cos that ship has sailed, docked and rotted away in a harbour long since. how do the bank accountless get cash anyway. That rather restricts them to the casual economy, which is not generally known for it's inclusivity, fair practise and workers rights.
Click to expand...
This is true, but it's not a good thing ...
xenon said:
If you want to actively argue for a world where it's easier to have no bank account, go ahead. Just be mindful of concussion. :D Me, i'm teaching some of the older people how to use tech to become included. I mean that's literally part of my jjob.
Click to expand...
I have assisted people to get bank accounts and learn how to use them, budget etc. Most maybe all of this has been done with notes and coins, for the disabled people I'm talking about it's the case that cash makes spending easier to process, literally visualise etc.

My point really is that another approach is to actually boycott cashlessness as far as possible and encourage others to do the same. Like any boycott that’s going to make odd bedfellows and get a mixed response.

(Speaking of which Elohim I'm afraid you're going to have to backtrack a way past globalist, which around here is usually taken - with justification tbf - as a dog whistle for 'the cabal of jews who control the world'. Deal with that please, because it's hard enough to oppose capitalism without err clumsy utterances from people who appear as allies, that reveal them not to be. So please let globalist have been clumsy, not that other thing)
 
brogdale said:
This is just (very detailed and thorough) shouting at the clouds, though. These are the published polling numbers based on a sample of 2000 in November 2018. They are what they are.
Click to expand...
Polls by their very nature can be rather suspect depending on a) the complexity of the subject and b) the motivation of the pollsters. The classic example of this is the Countryside Alliance who back during the days of the fox hunting ban being implemented conducted a poll which asked the question "Do you think the Govt has more important priorities than banning hunting?" The answer they got was Yes,
I wasn't one of those asked but I too would probably have answered yes as well. However the Countryside Alliance then interpreted this vote as public support for hunting whereas I suspect that had they asked "Do you think Fox Hunting should be banned?" then the answer would have been a fairly emphatic Yes in favour of a ban. The answer is often shaped by the question, given the fairly complex structure of those statements then I think the answers should be taken with a pinch of salt.
There is also a very great deal of hypocrisy over this, Conduct a survey with the simple question "Should Cash be phased out?" then I would bet a sizeable sum of money (real or virtual) that the answer would be a solid No. I'd answer No. But I suspect most of the people answering would prefer other people do the spending cash thing and will continue themselves to prefer card over cash.
The results of that survey don't really tally up with the reality that a ever increasing proportion of the populace are using cash an ever decreasing amount. Maybe this is rather sad but it is what it is.
 
Last edited:
MickiQ said:
Polls by their very nature can be rather suspect depending on a) the complexity of the subject and b) the motivation of the pollsters. The classic example of this is the Countryside Alliance who back during the days of the fox hunting ban being implemented conducted a poll which asked the question "Do you think the Govt has more important priorities than banning hunting?" The answer they got was Yes,
I wasn't one of those asked but I too would probably have answered yes as well. However the Countryside Alliance then interpreted this vote as public support for hunting whereas I suspect that had they asked "Do you think Fox Hunting should be banned?" then the answer would have been a fairly emphatic Yes in favour of a ban. The answer is often shaped by the question, given the fairly complex structure of those statements then I think the answers should be taken with a pinch of salt.
There is also a very great deal of hypocrisy over this, Conduct a survey with the simple question "Should Cash be phased out?" then I would a sizeable sum of money (real or virtual) that the answer would be a solid No. I'd answer No. But I suspect most of the people answering would prefer other people do the spending cash thing and will continue themselves to prefer card over cash.
The results of that survey don't really tally up with the reality that a ever increasing proportion of the populace are using cash an ever decreasing amount. Maybe this is rather sad but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Really good point. Despite hardly using cash, I'd be very opposed to cash just being phased out, without tangible and tested methods to replace it for the most disadvantaged. I worry if we don't have the conversations about how it's going to happen they will really be left behind and me paying for my shopping with cash in Aldi isn't going to change that.
 
brogdale said:
A slightly larger, (3k), and more recent, (2021), piece of polling on cash.

View attachment 388682

That last 20% make a lot of noise in this thread.
Click to expand...
Another case of cherry picking data if you add up the would struggle column then it come to 10.5 million or 19% of the population so that survey says 81% would be alright in a cashless society even if they 'preferred' cash to remain and would grumble about it. I would prefer cash to remain for a number of reasons but I'm confident that I would cope fine if it went.
It isn't going to get banned though is it? It's just going to be harder and harder to get hold of and use and whilst there might be the odd peak and trough the path is downward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hash tag
The end of scab tills
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
874
Views
31K
hash tag
hash tag
story
A thread for posting memes and pisstakes of the current government, and the end of the world
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
378
Views
22K
elbows
elbows
editor
Petition: End "Prince of Wales" title out of respect for Wales
Replies
2
Views
516
spellbinder
S
RileyOBlimey
The Tories and Russian cash
Replies
19
Views
1K
The39thStep
The39thStep
elbows
End-to-end encryption propaganda campaign
Replies
1
Views
471
NoXion
NoXion
Back
Top Bottom