General > General Technical Chat
Cheques being phased out in Australia by 2030
nctnico:
You don't need a wallet for cards. Just something to store the cards in like a small card holder.
CatalinaWOW:
--- Quote from: nctnico on October 12, 2023, 12:36:28 am ---You don't need a wallet for cards. Just something to store the cards in like a small card holder.
--- End quote ---
If you have the card holder the smart phone isn't an advantage. Card holders are available which hold cash also (they are then a compact wallet, just missing the baby pictures and other cruft that wallets sometimes accumulate). So now it sounds like not carrying a wallet was not a material benefit, just a justification. Which is fine. Again, you are living your life the way you want to. No need to rationalize it.
tggzzz:
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 11, 2023, 11:59:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: tggzzz on October 11, 2023, 11:29:54 pm ---Cheques USPs are unrelated to speed, so that's a strawman argument.
--- End quote ---
It's not a strawman argument. I wasn't comparing the use of cheques for everyday payments to credit/debit cards, rather it's just a method to transfer money between accounts.
--- End quote ---
So is cash.
Your point was, ahem, not clearly made when you wrote
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 11, 2023, 10:55:13 pm ---At the day, each to their own. Taking away cheque payments still leaves a handful of other options available for fast and secure payments. I'm the last person to push people onto "apps" when they don't want to.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---My point was, if you got rid of cheques tomorrow, there is a handful of other options which could easily (and have for 99% of people and businesses) take its place.
--- End quote ---
Not easily, for some people and uses. Your attitude of saying "tough shit" to those that really need cheques is morally and ethically repugnant. 99% of people aren't blind (or deaf, or...), so I presume you think it would be acceptable to remove expensive support given to them.
Please produce some figures about how much would be saved, and where the savings would end up (e.g. CEOs and shareholders).
Halcyon:
--- Quote from: tggzzz on October 12, 2023, 09:39:10 am ---
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 11, 2023, 11:59:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: tggzzz on October 11, 2023, 11:29:54 pm ---Cheques USPs are unrelated to speed, so that's a strawman argument.
--- End quote ---
It's not a strawman argument. I wasn't comparing the use of cheques for everyday payments to credit/debit cards, rather it's just a method to transfer money between accounts.
--- End quote ---
So is cash.
Your point was, ahem, not clearly made when you wrote
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 11, 2023, 10:55:13 pm ---At the day, each to their own. Taking away cheque payments still leaves a handful of other options available for fast and secure payments. I'm the last person to push people onto "apps" when they don't want to.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---My point was, if you got rid of cheques tomorrow, there is a handful of other options which could easily (and have for 99% of people and businesses) take its place.
--- End quote ---
Not easily, for some people and uses. Your attitude of saying "tough shit" to those that really need cheques is morally and ethically repugnant. 99% of people aren't blind (or deaf, or...), so I presume you think it would be acceptable to remove expensive support given to them.
Please produce some figures about how much would be saved, and where the savings would end up (e.g. CEOs and shareholders).
--- End quote ---
It's not "my attitude", it's what the consumers are demanding. You've not demonstrated one scenario where there isn't a suitable replacement... not one. To say it's morally and ethically repugnant (without explaining why) is a bit of a cheap shot. Take a look at the figures yourself. Very few people use cheques in Australia, it's down in the noise. Secondly, explain to me how a blind person would write a cheque, or even cash one without going to great lengths? Seems like the perfect use-case for more modern systems if I ever saw one.
You're also mistaken that this move is being driven by the banks (and those fat CEOs), it's not. This is being driven by the Australian government. Most banks started phasing out cheques long ago because there simply isn't the demand for this method anymore. The cost to banks is negligible. I'm sure they spend more at their staff Christmas party than the fees they collect from customers.
If you'll also refer right back to the first post (and the purpose of this thread), it's specifically about consumer habits in Australia. It's not about "Why the US should give up cheques because the rest of the world is".
I think if we pander to your kind of mentality, we'd still be paying taxes to maintain the telegraph networks, and people would still be using leaded petrol.
tggzzz:
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 12, 2023, 10:01:43 am ---
--- Quote from: tggzzz on October 12, 2023, 09:39:10 am ---
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 11, 2023, 11:59:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: tggzzz on October 11, 2023, 11:29:54 pm ---Cheques USPs are unrelated to speed, so that's a strawman argument.
--- End quote ---
It's not a strawman argument. I wasn't comparing the use of cheques for everyday payments to credit/debit cards, rather it's just a method to transfer money between accounts.
--- End quote ---
So is cash.
Your point was, ahem, not clearly made when you wrote
--- Quote from: Halcyon on October 11, 2023, 10:55:13 pm ---At the day, each to their own. Taking away cheque payments still leaves a handful of other options available for fast and secure payments. I'm the last person to push people onto "apps" when they don't want to.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---My point was, if you got rid of cheques tomorrow, there is a handful of other options which could easily (and have for 99% of people and businesses) take its place.
--- End quote ---
Not easily, for some people and uses. Your attitude of saying "tough shit" to those that really need cheques is morally and ethically repugnant. 99% of people aren't blind (or deaf, or...), so I presume you think it would be acceptable to remove expensive support given to them.
Please produce some figures about how much would be saved, and where the savings would end up (e.g. CEOs and shareholders).
--- End quote ---
It's not "my attitude", it's what the consumers are demanding.
--- End quote ---
Reallty? Customers are demanding something they don't use is removed? I think not.
--- Quote ---You've not demonstrated one scenario where there isn't a suitable replacement... not one.
--- End quote ---
Several people have done just that, repeatedly.
--- Quote ---To say it's morally and ethically repugnant (without explaining why) is a bit of a cheap shot. Take a look at the figures yourself. Very few people use cheques in Australia, it's down in the noise.
--- End quote ---
What figures? I haven't seen any stating the financial costs and savings. Percentages of something unspecified aren't sufficient.
Provide monetary costs (AUD is fine :) ), and I'll look at them.
--- Quote ---Secondly, explain to me how a blind person would write a cheque, or even cash one without going to great lengths? Seems like the perfect use-case for more modern systems if I ever saw one.
--- End quote ---
I didn't make myself clear.
I was thinking about removing the requirements for braille signs, kerbs, tactile pavements, exceptions for guide dogs, etc. After all those are expensive and 99% of people don't use them.
There are analogous issue for deaf people, invalid / invalid people, etc.
--- Quote ---You're also mistaken that this move is being driven by the banks (and those fat CEOs), it's not. This is being driven by the Australian government. Most banks started phasing out cheques long ago because there simply isn't the demand for this method anymore. The cost to banks is negligible. I'm sure they spend more at their staff Christmas party than the fees they collect from customers.
--- End quote ---
At last recognition of the lack of cost to the banks! That's a useful about-face.
I doubt that it is driven by the government; what business is it of theirs?
More likely the government sets regulatory requirements, and the banks have been quietly pushing for those requirements to be relaxed.
--- Quote ---I think if we pander to your kind of mentality, we'd still be paying taxes to maintain the telegraph networks, and people would still be using leaded petrol.
--- End quote ---
Analogies often lead to more heat than light. Or is there some way that cheques are damaging childrens' brains?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version