Author Topic: Cashless Australia  (Read 26411 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #50 on: March 10, 2021, 08:14:05 am »
I think they want cashless because it's cheaper, easier and less error prone to handle. Taking cash and counting out change takes time, it requires a cashier that is paying attention (harder to achieve these days than it ought to be) and it is error prone. At the end of the day you have to count the till and either store the money away in a safe or take it to the bank. Digital money has none of that, it extracts the exact amount needed, there is no need for change. It does not rely on a human to count or handle it, the risk of petty theft is lower, it doesn't have to be stored in a safe and nobody has to physically take it to a bank. You also don't have to print it (significant expense) and it never wears out. There are a lot of reasons for businesses and government to prefer cash-less that don't involve any kind of ulterior motive.
 
The following users thanked this post: duckduck, retiredfeline

Offline MIS42N

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 528
  • Country: au
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #51 on: March 10, 2021, 08:45:08 am »
The only difference between cash and cashless is that cash is a transaction between two people, cashless is a transaction between at least three. It only takes two to see the physical handing over of a $50 note and agree that money has been transferred. If someone were smart enough to come up with an electronic version of this, then I would have no problem with going cashless. I don't want to pay a third party to move my money, and I don't like that every movement is recorded somewhere.

This thread reminded me that we paid the deposit on our first home in cash. The real estate agent thought it strange but had no problem taking the money. Maybe he thought we were drug dealers. I wonder what would happen if someone tried that today.
 

Offline Oldtestgear

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 171
  • Country: gb
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #52 on: March 10, 2021, 10:52:49 am »
A cashless society has the following advantages:
- all your money goes through a bank & can be tracked or traced.
- with interest rates of almost zero there is no incentive to keep money in a bank.
- many people (me included) find it difficult to keep track & so will spend more money than if cash is used.
- as there is no real money changing hands, the real cost is less obvious & can help increase prices.
- those nasty poor people who do not have access to a card or bank account can be ignored as they do not have enough income to worry about.
- it will be impossible to get a discount for cash

Seems to me that all these advantages benefit the banks & government but not the actual consumer. I used to live on cards when I was working as I was travelling all over the world. Today, happily retired, I definitely prefer to use cash & will not use a card for small payments like coffee or snacks.  Yes, I know that I am old & grumpy but am fed up with being told that I must conform to a norm that is of no practical benefit to me.

Thee are also many activities ( radio rallies, flea markets, etc.) that the small stall holders will be barred from in a cashless society. I do not plan to pay for a card reader just to do a couple of events a year.

FWIW

 
The following users thanked this post: Cubdriver

Offline jonovid

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1546
  • Country: au
    • JONOVID
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #53 on: March 10, 2021, 11:16:59 am »
A cashless society has the following advantages:
- all your money goes through a bank & can be tracked or traced.
- with interest rates of almost zero there is no incentive to keep money in a bank.
- many people (me included) find it difficult to keep track & so will spend more money than if cash is used.
- as there is no real money changing hands, the real cost is less obvious & can help increase prices.
- those nasty poor people who do not have access to a card or bank account can be ignored as they do not have enough income to worry about.
- it will be impossible to get a discount for cash

Seems to me that all these advantages benefit the banks & government but not the actual consumer. I used to live on cards when I was working as I was travelling all over the world. Today, happily retired, I definitely prefer to use cash & will not use a card for small payments like coffee or snacks.  Yes, I know that I am old & grumpy but am fed up with being told that I must conform to a norm that is of no practical benefit to me.

Thee are also many activities ( radio rallies, flea markets, etc.) that the small stall holders will be barred from in a cashless society. I do not plan to pay for a card reader just to do a couple of events a year.

FWIW


I do not plan to pay for a card reader ether! :o
 No more garage sales, church fetes  or trash and treasure.
were we get odd bits of cheap used electronics!  :'(
Hobbyist with a basic knowledge of electronics
 
The following users thanked this post: duckduck

Online tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8217
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #54 on: March 10, 2021, 12:22:33 pm »
Thee are also many activities ( radio rallies, flea markets, etc.) that the small stall holders will be barred from in a cashless society. I do not plan to pay for a card reader just to do a couple of events a year.
It literally takes 10 seconds to setup a transfer between accounts with a QR code.
You set the amount your phone shows the QR code, they read it, click accept done. You might need to place your finger on the fingerprint reader once.

It is faster than counting coins.
Of course you might be the person that uses a Nokia 3310, or find another way of argue about this if you really want to.
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #55 on: March 10, 2021, 12:39:51 pm »
A cashless society is a prerequisite for heavy negative interest rates. While there is cash people will just keep a lot of it if interest rates go negative. In the UK the terms of service for most bank accounts recently changed, so the banks can introduce a cap on the maximum in your accounts, and can apply "charges" on deposits in those accounts. "charges" is just another way of saying negative interest rates. I am not clear why they want to cap the amount you can keep in your accounts. They aren't giving any indication of the sort of amounts they might cap your accounts to.
 

Offline cdevTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #56 on: March 10, 2021, 02:45:13 pm »
They keep saying all sorts of things wont happen but we all should assume they will. They are living on their own planet in these Internet companies, they think they have the whole world over a barrel because of the technical nature of what they do. AS somebody who has worked on a search engine at a professional level I know that the technology to spider sites and collect the data, no matter what it is,  is not rocket science.

They are definitely up to no good.   Here is  a list of NorbertHarings most popular English-language stories which contains most of this excellent demonetization work. I am ashamed that my country is trying to force this on the rest of us. The digital mafia has become a sort of a global organized crime against privacy and freedom of speech. Enabled by their partnerships with intelligence operations around the globe. Corporations are being conveniently left unaccountable to the public, no doubt intentionally.

IUndia demonetized their currency and many poor people lost their entire life savings. It was brutal.  We're talking about a tremendously mixed up country where the rich people should have known better but the fact is they don't give a fuck about the lives of most of the people in that country.

Here is a guide to  Norbert Haring's pages on this subject. summarized and linked by the author himself.
-cut here------below is quoted from Norbert Haring's web site)
Catalyst’s Malick, unhappy with report on US influence on India’s demonetisation, hits back with false claim

On rediff, one of India’s most popular news-sites, Badal Malick, CEO of the US-Indian anti-cash-organization Catalyst, explains via a friendly journalist, what Catalyst is doing and that my writing on Catalyst and on Washington’s meddling in the fight against cash in India was bogus. He did not convince me. Maybe he will convince you.

To very briefly summarize [Norbert Haring's] piece “‘A Well-Kept Open Secret: Washington Is Behind India’s Brutal Demonetisation Project‘”( augmented here or both in a consolidated version on zero hedge), I had written that the longstanding US influence, notably the influence of the Better Than Cash Alliance, in the fight against cash in India has been conspicuously absent in the discussion about the sudden demonetization that Premier Modi decreed on 8 November 2016. I have then provided the evidence of this US involvement, including the launch of Catalyst less than four weeks before the demonetization. The rediff-article even mentions that Catalyst was launched at a conference in Delhi hosted by the … drumrolls …  Better Than Cash Alliance.

This is the part of the rediff-article that deals with my writing:

”Even as Catalyst was taking its baby steps, the payments industry went on full throttle with the sudden decision by the government to cancel legal tender of large denomination notes. Khandelwal of CAIT, who had been hard selling the concept to the merchant community, summarises the impact, “Digital payments have become a fashion statement these days. But, when we were holding workshops between 2014 and November 8, 2016, hardly any one turned up.’ For Malick and Catalyst, it was a double-edged sword. While the move made their task lighter in some ways, they got dragged into a controversy after Norbert Häring, a German journalist writing for a Montreal-based think tank, linked, among other things, Malick’s “10x increase” remark in October to the demonetisation decision that came a month later. In an article titled, ‘A Well-Kept Open Secret: Washington Is Behind India’s Brutal Demonetisation Project’, Häring suggested that the seeds of India becoming a laboratory for the global digital push were sown in a meeting between US President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Modi two years ago. While the article went viral on social media, not many in the sector buy this theory. Sharad Sharma of iSPIRT said the movement of cashless India is several years old and predates Obama’s visit to India. For example, the application programming interfaces for Unified Payments Interface were issued by National Payments Corporation of India in 2014. Malick says the article was baseless. “I was grossly misquoted. Neither I nor USAID were reached out to.”

Malick does not say what it is I grossly misquoted. There are three quotes of his  in my piece. The first is taken from the press statement of USAID and reads:

 „Catalyst’s mission is to solve multiple coordination problems that have blocked the penetration of digital payments among merchants and low-income consumers. We look forward to creating a sustainable and replicable model. (…)”

The second and third are taken from The Economic Times and say:

“While there has been (…) a concerted push for digital payments by the government, there is still a last mile gap when it comes to merchant acceptance and coordination issues. We want to bring a holistic ecosystem approach to these problems.“

and

“The goal is to take one city and increase the digital payments 10x in six to 12 months.”

You can read for yourself that the quotes are there. Mr. Malick should kindly explain on what basis he accuses me of “grossly” misquoting him.

Note that I am not writing for a Montreal-based think tank. Global Research simply republished the piece from my blog, which I am running in a personal capacity. Sharad Sharma denies something that I have not claimed, nor suggested, namely “ that the seeds of India becoming a laboratory for the global digital push were sown in a meeting between US President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Modi two years ago.” As Sharma correctly states, the drive against cash in India dates back further –  and so does the involvement of the US. As I explain in my follow-up piece to the first one, the Better Than Cash Foundation, bankrolled by USAID and the Gates Foundation and including Visa and Mastercard amoung its members, was founded in 2012. In 2013, when Raghruam Rajan from Chicago took over at the helm of the Reserve Bank of India, one of the first things he did was to establish a commission on financial inclusion through new technologies headed by Nachiket Mor, who is now head of …. drumrolls … the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation India. Since 2013 there have been several reports by US institutions on digitalization of finance in India, written with input from the Better Than Cash Alliance. One of the latest ones, by Boston Consulting Group and Google with “guidance” from Visa and the National Payments Corporation of India among other commercially interested parties, was presented in Juli 2016. It is notable for leaving out all the usual euphemistic talk about financial inclusion and talks instead of India as a “$500 bn pot of gold” and of what has to be done to “grab” it. It rather bluntly orders the Indian government to do this, that and such to help with the grab. A month later, the Indian government sets up a (Watal) committee to make suggestions and the committee suggests almost exactly this, that and such.

All this chimes very well with a recent Washington whitepaper ona “Framework for FinTech” in which it is clearly stated that US payment services companies are global leaders, and that this should not be taken for granted. The global leader with its  very large export surplus in payment services can expect to grab a big part of the pot of gold, if cash is put out.

I will write more about this soon the BCG/Google-report, the whitepaper and the committee as soon as I get to it. Stay tuned.  [17.1.2017]

About this blog: This is the English-language section of a weblog, which is mostly in German. There is an E-mail-newsletter that will inform you only of new English language entries. If you would like to subscribe, just click on “keep me informed” on the left. You can unsubscribe easily any time. To get a PDF of this blog-entry, click on the PDF-Symbol below the headline.

Abut the author: Dr. Norbert Haering is a German business journalist and blogger. His best-selling book on “Abolishing cash and the consequences” was published in 2016 by Bastei-Luebbe (in German). More …


(end quotation)
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline vad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 518
  • Country: us
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #57 on: March 10, 2021, 03:55:28 pm »
Thee are also many activities ( radio rallies, flea markets, etc.) that the small stall holders will be barred from in a cashless society. I do not plan to pay for a card reader just to do a couple of events a year.
It literally takes 10 seconds to setup a transfer between accounts with a QR code.
You set the amount your phone shows the QR code, they read it, click accept done. You might need to place your finger on the fingerprint reader once.

It is faster than counting coins.
Of course you might be the person that uses a Nokia 3310, or find another way of argue about this if you really want to.
Major banks in the US provide Zelle for instant transfer between bank account. The sender just needs to use bank’s mobile app and enter a phone number or email address of the receiving party. The whole transaction end-to-end takes less time than counting change.
 

Offline vad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 518
  • Country: us
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #58 on: March 10, 2021, 04:02:18 pm »
Cashless society means less violent crime: fewer armed bank/store robberies, fewer street robberies. Probably less relevant to Australia than to the US though.
 

Offline AntiProtonBoy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 988
  • Country: au
  • I think I passed the Voight-Kampff test.
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #59 on: March 10, 2021, 04:35:48 pm »
Number one reason why a government would prefer a cashless society is that every transaction can be tracked, traced and accounted for. They can keep tabs on tax evasion, money laundering and link every little purchase to an individual, or a business entity. This is all part of the surveillance apparatus, which naturally has serious privacy implications for everyone involved.

The obsession with limiting cash flow is also evident by the proposed $10,000 cash payment limit bill, and there was also talk about scrapping $100 notes, but I don't think that's gonna happen any time soon. That being said, I rarely see ATMs dispense $100 notes these days.

I would not be surprised if these kinds of restrictions would compel people to start hoarding cash rather than depositing money in banks.
 

Offline coppice

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10031
  • Country: gb
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #60 on: March 10, 2021, 04:39:08 pm »
Cashless society means less violent crime: fewer armed bank/store robberies, fewer street robberies. Probably less relevant to Australia than to the US though.
The numerous Indians bankrupted by government actions over cash in 2016 probably aren't particularly consoled by the crime being non-violent.
 

Offline themadhippy

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3264
  • Country: gb
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #61 on: March 10, 2021, 04:57:32 pm »
Quote
Number one reason why a government would prefer a cashless society is that every transaction can be tracked, traced and accounted fo
And give them control of who spends how much  on what.In the uk its been suggested sevral times to make benefit payments via a card that can only be used for certain transactions in certain shops
 

Offline Monkeh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8134
  • Country: gb
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #62 on: March 10, 2021, 05:08:05 pm »
Quote
Number one reason why a government would prefer a cashless society is that every transaction can be tracked, traced and accounted fo
And give them control of who spends how much  on what.In the uk its been suggested sevral times to make benefit payments via a card that can only be used for certain transactions in certain shops

So Mrs. 25-Children can't go and spend my taxes on her 60" TV? My, that'd be a shame..
 

Online Halcyon

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6125
  • Country: au
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #63 on: March 10, 2021, 06:48:46 pm »
Number one reason why a government would prefer a cashless society is that every transaction can be tracked, traced and accounted for. They can keep tabs on tax evasion, money laundering and link every little purchase to an individual, or a business entity. This is all part of the surveillance apparatus, which naturally has serious privacy implications for everyone involved.

The obsession with limiting cash flow is also evident by the proposed $10,000 cash payment limit bill, and there was also talk about scrapping $100 notes, but I don't think that's gonna happen any time soon. That being said, I rarely see ATMs dispense $100 notes these days.

I would not be surprised if these kinds of restrictions would compel people to start hoarding cash rather than depositing money in banks.

I see this as a good thing. The Government don't care what you and I spend our money on, rather it's about stopping serious and major crime but cutting off funding. It's becoming increasingly hard as a criminal to transfer money around the place and large amounts get noticed. It has the added benefit of being more convenient and secure.
 

Offline cdevTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #64 on: March 10, 2021, 07:08:02 pm »
Quote
Number one reason why a government would prefer a cashless society is that every transaction can be tracked, traced and accounted fo
And give them control of who spends how much  on what.In the uk its been suggested sevral times to make benefit payments via a card that can only be used for certain transactions in certain shops

So Mrs. 25-Children can't go and spend my taxes on her 60" TV? My, that'd be a shame..

Is this the so called "poverty porn"?
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 07:18:27 pm by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline vad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 518
  • Country: us
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #65 on: March 10, 2021, 07:11:39 pm »
Cashless society means less violent crime: fewer armed bank/store robberies, fewer street robberies. Probably less relevant to Australia than to the US though.
The numerous Indians bankrupted by government actions over cash in 2016 probably aren't particularly consoled by the crime being non-violent.
It is not uncommon for communist regimes to redistribute wealth through confiscation. They can confiscate cash, bank deposits, or both.

Here is my experience.

Before its fall in 1991, Soviet regime removed 50- and 100-rubble notes from circulation with immediate effect. People were given 3 days to exchange to different bank notes, with universal limit of 1000 rubbles per person (for comparison, the cost of Big Mac in McDonalds in Moscow was 3.75 rubbles at the time)

However bank accounts are not immune from institutional robbery either. Hyperinflation and denomination are another two tools in government toolbox. The 1000 rubbles that soviet people were allowed to keep a year earlier, could barely buy a lunch by 1992 due to hyperinflation. And it did not matter if you had 1000 in bank or in cash.

So yes, authoritarian governments can rob you, no matter if you keep your money in cash or in bank.
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #66 on: March 10, 2021, 07:52:49 pm »
The cashless society is a worldwide trend. I really fear it for a number of reasons, some of which having already been exposed here. In theory, we could very well go "cashless" - in the sense of transforming currencies into a purely digital form - while retaining the same "freedom" cash offers. Current cryptocurrencies, for instance, are mostly that. But this is definitely NOT what cashless is going to be. You'll basically have absolutely no control over your own money. Banks, and any organization with the relevant power, will be able to cut your from your money in an instant. You may argue that it's already more or less the case. But it will be a final nail in the coffin.

Of course there's also the technical issues - any network problem could mean no access to money. Not what worries me the most actually, but still a major concern.

And for those who think the bright side is how this will eradicate criminal activities, I think this is completely deluded.

We're just rushing towards Brave new world and 1984 combined, and a large majority doesn't care one bit.
That's all for now.
 
The following users thanked this post: Cubdriver, tpowell1830

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #67 on: March 10, 2021, 07:59:54 pm »
Thee are also many activities ( radio rallies, flea markets, etc.) that the small stall holders will be barred from in a cashless society. I do not plan to pay for a card reader just to do a couple of events a year.

Total non-issue. There are services like Paypal and Venmo, and numerous others would pop up if there was a need. It wouldn't surprise me if an app appeared specifically for events like garage sales and hamfests. I already use Paypal to pay my friends for things, or buy goods off sites like Craigslist. I just ask the seller for their paypal address while I'm standing there looking at the thing and use my mobile phone to send them the money. They get the notification and I leave with my purchase. Painless.
 

Offline tpowell1830

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Country: us
  • Peacefully retired from industry, active in life
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #68 on: March 10, 2021, 08:36:26 pm »
The cashless society is a worldwide trend. I really fear it for a number of reasons, some of which having already been exposed here. In theory, we could very well go "cashless" - in the sense of transforming currencies into a purely digital form - while retaining the same "freedom" cash offers. Current cryptocurrencies, for instance, are mostly that. But this is definitely NOT what cashless is going to be. You'll basically have absolutely no control over your own money. Banks, and any organization with the relevant power, will be able to cut your from your money in an instant. You may argue that it's already more or less the case. But it will be a final nail in the coffin.

Of course there's also the technical issues - any network problem could mean no access to money. Not what worries me the most actually, but still a major concern.

And for those who think the bright side is how this will eradicate criminal activities, I think this is completely deluded.

We're just rushing towards Brave new world and 1984 combined, and a large majority doesn't care one bit.
That's all for now.

Yes, I agree with this, and how about those of us that simply do not want this for varying reasons. Not that I carry a lot of cash on me at any given time, but if I want to pay someone in cash, I can go get the cash out of the bank and pay if I want. To me, it is not about convenience, although it is convenient not to carry cash, but freedom to pay either way I choose.

Just my 2 cents...
PEACE===>T
 

Offline cdevTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #69 on: March 10, 2021, 09:55:33 pm »
Vendrs like it because they can debit your account monthly for a service. Also, creditors can seize money they are owned out of debtors accounts, at least in theory.


Australia is heading towards a debit card for people on public assistance, I read the other day. It will step in and manage their bank accounts and if they apply they can have their parole lifted, although its claimed that it will be hard for people to escape ( for example, see the web page of an Austrlian opponent of the cashless debit cards. https://www.facebook.com/notowelfarecard/ ) thus easy money from small fees which add up contributes to keep the poor in a predatory situation. Fees feeding a proliferation of third party management companies. (who will get a percentage of their income for "managing" it. ) There is a huge proliferation of these companies it seems, in the UK and Australia and soon the US.  who take one percent here and two percent elsewhere , basically insider corporations get free money for doing something that is automated and implemented in software..mostly so the cost is a taking from poor people. Why cant the government do it? The GATS services agreement, of course, ended that - it would be taking the food off the health insurance companies plates.. It  prohibits any new noncommercial services, and privatizes existing ones,  the classic example is public healthcare in the United States. which is banned because the GATS rules deemed it a trade barrier. - ts rules on financial services  mandate governments to allow any and all new 'innovative financial services', no matter how little sense they make. They can't refuse to allow them. even if usurious. Subsequently corporations receive an entitlement for it to continue, unless another more profitable one springd up in its place. Many involve surveillance and/or loss of privacy. One take away we should consider is the fact that the more digital a process seems the more fraud becomes endemic in it. Mortgage fraud is a good example, it skyrockted in the 2990s in no small part because a proliferation of online lenders. Many of them were running moprtgage fraud operations but none were ever really prosecuted. These large, well known national firms were systematically stealing peoples houses, typically their largest investment. Then these loans were used to defraud others by puffing up the values of the banks in what amounted to a huge Ponzi scheme. No matter how just their case was the simple fact that so much fraud was occurring enabled these fraudsters in a big way. It was an explosion of criminality. And its even more outrageous that they got away with it. Something similar happened in the UK a few years earlier with the BCCI scandal. It seems there are problems in the system that are driving vast increases in what is called systemic risk. zmor on this affair here: https://info.publicintelligence.net/The-BCCI-Affair.pdf
 and here: http://visar.csustan.edu/aaba/bccipage.html   These kinds of crimes are why they claim they need a cashless system globally in finance. But I have little confidence that setting up a system with the potential of being so intrusive, alone would lead to a reduction in the pervasive system of offshore banks, and shell companies, that are making the rich so unaccountable to anybody.
--------
The cashless society is a worldwide trend. I really fear it for a number of reasons, some of which having already been exposed here. In theory, we could very well go "cashless" - in the sense of transforming currencies into a purely digital form - while retaining the same "freedom" cash offers. Current cryptocurrencies, for instance, are mostly that. But this is definitely NOT what cashless is going to be. You'll basically have absolutely no control over your own money. Banks, and any organization with the relevant power, will be able to cut your from your money in an instant. You may argue that it's already more or less the case. But it will be a final nail in the coffin.

Of course there's also the technical issues - any network problem could mean no access to money. Not what worries me the most actually, but still a major concern.

And for those who think the bright side is how this will eradicate criminal activities, I think this is completely deluded.

We're just rushing towards Brave new world and 1984 combined, and a large majority doesn't care one bit.
That's all for now.

Yes, I agree with this, and how about those of us that simply do not want this for varying reasons. Not that I carry a lot of cash on me at any given time, but if I want to pay someone in cash, I can go get the cash out of the bank and pay if I want. To me, it is not about convenience, although it is convenient not to carry cash, but freedom to pay either way I choose.

Just my 2 cents...
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 10:40:26 pm by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 

Offline duckduck

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 420
  • Country: us
  • 20Hz < fun < 20kHz, and RF is Really Fun
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #70 on: March 10, 2021, 10:02:51 pm »
Once they are hooked into your bank account, you have no control over what they do. And often if they take out money that will trigger a cascade of new fees from the bank. People in Australia have been so beaten down by this "robo debt" system that some have committed suicide, Ive read, but the government denies that.

I have been there when I was younger and dumber and poorer. A debit to your checking account with a low balance takes it to a negative balance and then the bank issues an "overdraft" fee that is twice what the grocery store would charge for a bounced check (someone at the bank is driving a Ferrari because of that grand idea), and then the bank charges a "low balance" fee. Yes, a blizzard of fees for poor people that do not manage their money like a pro. It is very stressful and humiliating. Now you go get a payday loan to clean up the bank situation and buy food and gasoline until payday and you have stepped out of the frying pan and into the fire. It's enough to make a man want to change his name to "Jacques" and join the Foreign Legion.

EDIT:

As one of the posters above mentioned, the goal of "going cashless" is not about stopping crime (crime will always find a way), but about forcing everyone to put 100% of their money in the bank where negative interest rates can be applied. If the banks charged you a fee (instead of paying you interest) to keep your money in an account, you'd just buy a safe and a gun and keep all of your money in cash at home. With cashless, there is no option to keep your money out of the bank, other than by buying crypto-currency, gold, and/or huge stacks of obsolete HP test gear. I see that some members of this forum are way ahead of the pack here. ;)

EDIT EDIT:

Negative interest rates are a way to incentivize people to not save money, but rather to buy goods or invest it in the stock market. This helps the uber-wealthy. "If it doesn't make sense, someone is probably making money off of it."
« Last Edit: March 11, 2021, 07:25:56 am by duckduck »
 

Offline cdevTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 7350
  • Country: 00
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #71 on: March 10, 2021, 10:06:19 pm »
As mentioned earlier, banks want more for providing the service of offering accounts. Maybe it will be negative interest, maybe it will be profits from selling information about where you go or what you do derived from an RFID tag bearing card you must carry and use to do anything. (or a phone, which likely will have to be kept on) . Everything you do will involve micropayments, and micromanagement of your digital destiny. each one bearing a location and exact time attached to it. Just driving down a street will involve dozens of micropayments and opportunity for them to deny payment, and generate a fee. Maybe if the payment is denied your car will pull over at te side of the street, lights blinking, immobilizing you. Too many fees and your car is impounded. (unless you have diplomatic immunity, its my understanding) Anybody who lives in a city while owning a car is familiar with the difficulty of avoiding this trap, brought about bny having outstanding parking tickets . They alternate rules on parking by days so people have to keep moving their cars. Renting an off-street parking space may cost you as much as a small apartment would. This is really a great time to be a well connected transnational corporation.



Yes, I agree with this, and how about those of us that simply do not want this for varying reasons. Not that I carry a lot of cash on me at any given time, but if I want to pay someone in cash, I can go get the cash out of the bank and pay if I want. To me, it is not about convenience, although it is convenient not to carry cash, but freedom to pay either way I choose.

Just my 2 cents...
« Last Edit: March 10, 2021, 10:15:24 pm by cdev »
"What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away."
 
The following users thanked this post: duckduck

Offline AntiProtonBoy

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 988
  • Country: au
  • I think I passed the Voight-Kampff test.
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #72 on: March 11, 2021, 01:35:50 am »
The Government don't care what you and I spend our money on, rather it's about stopping serious and major crime but cutting off funding.

One can say the same thing about mass surveillance of electronic communications: the government don't care what you and I say, rather it's about stopping serious crime. Sure, they don't care... until they do. It only takes a single despotic political decision to start scrutinise everything you spend on, the things you say and with whom. This leads to enacting legislations to enforce conditions in your daily routine or spending activity. Just remember, what you say and buy today might be declared illegal tomorrow. When there is a permanent record of your communications and spending habits, I can pretty much guarantee this information will be exploited by someone, and used as a leverage against you, or use it to profit somehow at your expense.

 
The following users thanked this post: Cubdriver, duckduck

Online Halcyon

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6125
  • Country: au
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #73 on: March 11, 2021, 08:04:30 am »
The Government don't care what you and I spend our money on, rather it's about stopping serious and major crime but cutting off funding.

One can say the same thing about mass surveillance of electronic communications: the government don't care what you and I say, rather it's about stopping serious crime. Sure, they don't care... until they do. It only takes a single despotic political decision to start scrutinise everything you spend on, the things you say and with whom. This leads to enacting legislations to enforce conditions in your daily routine or spending activity. Just remember, what you say and buy today might be declared illegal tomorrow. When there is a permanent record of your communications and spending habits, I can pretty much guarantee this information will be exploited by someone, and used as a leverage against you, or use it to profit somehow at your expense.

I honestly think mentality like this is damaging. Everyday things that you and I buy, say or do won't be made illegal tomorrow. Nor is legislation enacted quickly or as far-reaching as you describe. It just doesn't happen. Hell, even our cloud data laws are out of date (and are currently in the process of being reviewed). I've seen the drafts and even then, it doesn't go far enough.

Surveillance, certainly in this country, will never impact 99.99% of residents.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2021, 08:07:20 am by Halcyon »
 

Offline AndreZheng

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 18
  • Country: cn
Re: Cashless Australia
« Reply #74 on: March 11, 2021, 08:21:04 am »
 ;)I don't use cash for several years already. In China :-DD
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf