More like it shows dangers of using only one provider for almost all IT infrastructure.
…why not both?
Because if everyone used cash, schedule systems, records systems, communication systems around the world, breakdown still.
If there’s a verity of software vendors used in these systems, and financial systems, you don’t get simultaneous global breakdowns any more.
Basically. Using cash won’t prevent this from happening. Using several interoperable software providers and systems will.
Using cash won’t prevent this from happening.
I mean yeah, that’s why I said both, not just cash. I carry some cash on me because you never know. I’d also like to see less monopolization of just about everything because it makes for single points of failure. Diversifying your payment methods by including the potential for cash also helps.
But cash has nothing to do with this.
It’s an entirely unrelated issue.
It could equally be a warning to floss every day for all they’re related.When the payment processor goes down, I can buy my groceries/gas/weed with cash, not by flossing my teeth. I don’t follow the point you’re making. Going fully cashless is a bad idea, and the recent outage didn’t affect every system used. I don’t see how having multiple methods of payment is possibly a bad thing. I’m not advocating for only cash.
The inventory and POS systems also go down. You still can’t by your groceries/gas/weed.
Going cashless is a bad idea. But not because of this.
That’s not what I witnessed recently. Payment processors went down but local POS was fine. Inventory didn’t matter with the short duration of the outage. This is one of the reasons going cashless is a bad idea. Far from the only one, but it’s a factor, and I experienced it. Going cashless reduces diversity in payment options and makes the system more vulnerable.
Going cashless is a bad idea. But not because of this.
It’s pretty clear this incident has highlighted a myriad of very important issues.
It’s likely more productive to discuss the other issues in their own threads - this thread is clearly focused on the cashless problem.
this wasn’t a problem with cashless infrastructure tho, this was a problem with monoculture. if the globe stopped using microsoft for gov and business, and instead threw their tax money towards open development; as in - the people, not microsoft, these kind of global issues wouldn’t exist.
It’s also not like as if I care. In case of total collapse and me being hungry, I’ll just take the food regardless. Cash is pointless as we’ve already moved digital, even in a cash country like mine.
Choice sounds like something people should not be fighting over :)
Because cash doesn’t solve the problem. If the stores themselves rely on computers, and they do, it doesn’t matter what’s in your wallet. (In other words, you need more than just cash to have a reliable alternative. It’s certainly possible to do so.)
Also, some of the big problems were in airports and hospitals where payment was not the serious concern.
because cash is disgusting
Agreed. While I agree with the privacy and security arguments against cashless payment methods, I’m still for them for the simple fact that as someone who works as a cashier for a living (or some semblance of one anyway), I’m more aware than the average public of just how DISGUSTING cash actually is.
Is the money really filthy or what?
Oh gods yes.
I get so many bills that are dirty, but also you don’t wanna know all the germs that are on a lot of those bills. Another thing I learned from years of working in retail is that people are also disgusting as all hell. Many people don’t bother washing their hands after going to the bathroom, or they’ll hand you nasty sweaty bills they pulled out of their pocket after walking into a store or up to a fuel kiosk during a >80 °F (26 °C) day, or after working a shift in construction or a factory job or even simply just exercising. Some women will pull cash directly out from under their bra, as if I want to accept sweaty boob money. Yes, they could use a wallet. However, many people don’t. Rather, they just shove the cash directly into their pocket or bra and be done with it. Because fuck cashiers, I guess.
Not to mention that the majority of bills out there have at least some trace amount of cocaine or other drugs covering it, though you may not be able to see it.
So, in short, sorry for the ramble but, yes, people are absolutely disgusting and so is their cash.
Retail. has. fucking. ruined me.
/rant lol
There’s more to it. The mono-culture is one thing, but rolling out the update to millions of computers on the same days sounds like a bad idea.
Fun fact in 2008, with nuclear submarines, the mono-culture was not that bad yet.
It’s interesting to note the UK went with a Windows XP variant and not Windows Vista, which is marketed as the more reliable OS. The USA never made the same calculations: The American Navy runs on Linux.
Navy: “we use Arch btw”
No wonder those Navy touchscreen controls killed people…
I personally have never had good luck with Linux touchscreens…
sounds like they rather spend that RND on pocket lining over contributing to software dev.
Not necessarily one provider but one point of failure. In this case it was the update system that allowed one company to push something to production on other companies systems.
This
*global IT outage shows dangers of monopolies.
Why do you hate the “free market”
One problem no one has mentioned, is that it also makes life a lot harder for homeless people. I guess they need to open a bank account and start writing their account number on a cardboard.
This actually reminds me of when I went to a restaurant a while ago. I had some physical money to spend, so I figured I’d take it with me and pay with that. At the end of the meal, while my friends paid with a card, I asked if I could pay with cash. Immediately, the waiter’s demeanor changed and he looked almost… disgusted? I don’t even know. Then he asked me in a tone that matched his expression if I didn’t have a card, and I answered something like “Well, I do, but it would be more convenient for me to pay with cash, if that’s okay”. Then he, for some reason, repeated the question, and I answered similarly. He didn’t say anything and just avoided looking at me. While a friend next to me was paying I asked again, “so, can I pay with cash?”, and without looking at me, he just barely shook his head yes. So I paid with cash, and then I awaited my 3€ change back (in my country it’s not usually custom to tip because waiters actually get paid full salaries). Eventually he came back with our receipt, but no change. I just left without saying anything - at this point I wasn’t going to argue about 3€ - but I’m most definitely not coming back to that place.
Still don’t know what the dude’s problem was, but it did leave me wondering how are homeless people expected to pay for anything, if even a person who isn’t homeless can receive such cold treatment just for choosing to pay with cash.
One problem no one has mentioned, is that it also makes life a lot harder for homeless people. I guess they need to open a bank account and start writing their account number on a cardboard.
And you need a permanent address for a bank account. Unfortunately, that’s a feature of the cashless movement not a bug. Anything to make the lives of people experiencing homelessness harder.
In Europe it’s so much more common to use cash than card anyway, that guy was a fucking weirdo
Europe is not a single country
Yeah but most of the continent is under a unifying government with a shared currency (with a few exceptions, but paying in euros implies OP is still under EU jurisdiction)
Obviously nothing holds true for an entire region that won’t also hold true for the majority of the world, but I feel like businesses in countries that use the euro are FAR more likely to regularly accept payment in cash or even require cash than counties in any part of the Pacific hemisphere
Then why does my map have a big blob on it that says EUROPE??? Checkmate. King me.
Depends where, but definitely a weirdo.
He was probably Americanized.
One problem no one has mentioned, is that it also makes life a lot harder for homeless people.
But to those who organise those systems, they’re not consumers with disposable income or a credit line to spend. They are happy for them to fall through the cracks and people not using cash penalises them further by eradicating charity and widening divisions.
It is functioning as designed.
I would have ripped him a new one right there and then in front of everyone. And I would not have asked more than once, I’d just drop my share in cash on the table and be done with it.
That’s right. Little turd is way out of line lol
That’s wild
I would of given that person a piece of my mind. I don’t know about different customs but to me that’s very disrespectful. They would’ve gone with no tip or a very small one. I only tip bigger when they pass the baseline of not being rude.
Not sure why you are being downvoted.
I guess depends what you would have said…
Either way, in the US you can just remind them they are legally obligated to take cash. Put down the cash, snap a picture and leave.
If they call police, allow them to explain to a government official how they refused to accept the legal tender in this here country 🐸
I generally don’t advise schooling staff but this one is disrepect of liberty, and I don’t care, they can get fucked for being a bootlicker.
Shit is disgusting, your preference on my payment method is not a thing and you are beyond out of line with such behavior. Freedom ain’t free folks
There are more cashless options than using banks.
In some countries you can use phones (and phone credit, more or less) as your payment option. Doesn’t even have to be a smart phone, though that makes it easier.
Beggers on the street with QR codes printed out. Or their phone number on cardboard.
And in other countries, you can use the local equivalent of the Uber app instead of a bank account.
Cashless is good. Safer for the homeless (harder to rob) and still easy to give money to them.
To use phones people need to first buy them and regularly recharge them. Homeless people already have hard time to find other necessities.
Also in some countries you don’t have any option to get any sim card and use it without first registering to your name and your address.
For the safety aspect yes, it is harder to rob them of their money but the phones are very easy to steal.
Cashless is only good if you already have some base level of comfort and do not care about your financial privacy. Every cashless transaction you make is recorded, tracked and sold via however many middle man you use.
I am not saying everyone has to use cash but people should have the freedom to choose how they want to pay.
lol. no.
Congratulations! You’re the winner of today’s most delusional comment award!
and you’ve never left the usa.
I’m European, but sure.
that makes it worse.
A European who acts like they’ve never left the usa.
dude, I’m literally begging you, go have a conversation with a homeless person and talk to them about your idea
dude, I’m literally begging you to understand nothing I’ve said is “my idea”, but how things actually are outside of your house.
Username checks out.
Let me just pull my phone out, download this money transfer app with an abysmal privacy policy. Now let me register an account and input every personal detail known to man. What’s this? I need my government issued ID? I’ll inform the beggar I’ll just pop to my house to grab it. Got my ID, now I’ll complete a liveness test because god forbid that I might be a robot. I may as well send them an ass swab because they need to “know their customer” so well. I just need to link my bank account and enter an OTP that’ll take 5 more minutes to arrive. Finally, I can donate to the beggar after messing around with a poorly printed QR code on a cardboard sign.
OR I can just pull out my wallet and hand them a $10 note. I’m going to pick the 10 second process with fewer steps over the 30 minute process any day of the week. Having options is important, especially if your phone dies for whatever reason. A cashless society is just a way for card companies and payment processors to continue making a quick buck in the name of convenience. Both card and cash have their uses, and it should be up to the consumer to decide which to use.
lol. no.
No, that is not correct. Global outage shows the dangers of centralized systems would be a better headline. Monero Worked all day throughout the entire outage with no problems.
Define “worked” in this context. You mean their own infrastructure didn’t crash? You certainly didn’t pop down to the store and buying anything useful with Monero 😂
Not that day I didn’t, but I have bought Domino’s several times this month, and I bought my groceries at the beginning of the month.
deleted by creator
There are businesses that specifically sell gift cards to retailers for Monero and when possible I search out and purchase from retailers who accept Monero. Https://monerica.com and https://xmrbazaar.com help with that.
deleted by creator
My point was more that using Monero as an example is probably not the best way to cryptobrah an illustrative point.
deleted by creator
Because you can’t just go and buy real world goods at will as with cash. If there’s ever a Carrington Event, your Monero is worthless in an emergency.
deleted by creator
Lol. How is your crypto gonna work without global peers and internet, friend?
Even central currencies can work if you can make offline and peer to peer payments.
Not easy to pull off cryptographically, though.
True, but do you really expect them to let you use a central bank digital currency peer-to-peer and not have some way of revoking your access to it? If so, you’re absolutely nuts, LOL.
Does Taler do this?
I remember reading it in its docs. It probably does, but it is sure it was planned
… And if the systems you actually interact with go down, you can get fucked as well.
If you want to buy food with Monero and the payment processor for the local shop doesn’t work, even if it’s a local machine sitting in the back office, you still can’t buy anything.
A local machine sitting in the back office, acting as a payment processor, is much easier to access and fix than the Visa Network.
Not for you. And certainly not for the staff working in the shop.
Currently, you’re bartering with copious amounts of copium.
Monero isn’t bad but I don’t think it is great for easily buying things. At the end of the day trying to use two different currencies is hard. Also Monero gets a bad name because it is used primarily for illegal transactions. It is simply two complex and has no accountability
The fact that it’s used for crime means that it actually does what it’s supposed to do and keeping people private. Shoes are also used by bank robbers and we don’t ban shoes. Monero is a tool the same as a hammer or a shoe or a car or a gun.
The problem is that it has zero accountability. Shoes, cars, cash and guns are all physical. At the end of the day someone can inspect your shoes or prevent you from taking a gun inside of a theater. Monero allows payments from anywhere and completely anonymously. You can get rid of it as it is decentralized but you can just not use it especially since cash is easy, private and secure.
That is not correct, either. The outage even took out decentralized platforms.
Which decentralized platforms did it take out?
Maybe they are talking about the cash registers running Windows?
cashless society is a really stupid idea. it’s not worth sacrificing privacy and stability for a tiny bit of convenience.
I don’t understand why we can’t have multiple forms of payment. I’ll keep cash and cards so I have options
Same here. In a more general way, I don’t understand why people can’t simply let things coexist in peace. Just because one doesn’t like or use something, doesn’t mean that others shouldn’t. I’m getting tired of that behavior in our society, to be honest.
Need to send a friend some money? How about you download this proprietary app made by some random company who takes a cut out of the middle. Cash is so outdated we need to use phones for no reason
People are shilling something they don’t understand and the regime is taking advantage of their poor education and impulses.
Adults need to adult. Use cash and educate people around you about risks of cashless.
Prolly a futile fight but what are we gonna do, give up? Fuck that
Doing my part.
I agree. If every of us would do their homework right.
Doing my part.
Does anyone actually want a cashless society though?
I don’t carry cash for the same reason I don’t carry my socket wrench. I use it for specific things at specific times but I don’t need it day to day. That doesn’t mean I think socket wrenches should be outlawed.
Governments love the idea. It’s much easier to collect taxes or punish dissidents in a cashless society.
Well, our own government has never said anything about it. If they did propose it I guess our democratic process would find the best way forward. The same could be said of a great many things that will never exist.
Also collecting taxes ought to be easy and fair. If no one cheats then no one pays too much if they do not cheat. Besides that, there’s plenty of other measures that can be applied in 2024 to diminish tax evasion.
It’s now illegal in many parts of Europe to make large cash transactions.
… but how could someone buy a new Audi during a blackout ?
The right to have cash is granted on a constitutional level in the EU, all 27 member states would have to agree to get rid of cash.
Maybe if somebody needs something we could just give it to them.
Socialist scum.
What are you going to say next, that housing is a human right? That food and water should be free? That the economic surplus should first go to the people in need?
You forgot your /s.
Socialism!!! 🤮🤮🤮🤯🤯🤯🤢🤢😷🤒
Think of the shareholders!!!
Agreed. I would love to see a law requiring businesses to accept cash where possible. That sort of law already exists at state and local levels in the US, would like to see it adopted in the UK.
There already is a lawyer in the UK that says that.
Interestingly, the EU is moving in the other direction, with many places requiring that you accept card payments, with cash being optional.
One would think that there would be more than just one lawyer who says that… Oh well… :)
I think it is important to have cash as a backup.
A couple of years ago there were some issues with card reading terminals in Germany. Due to a faulty security certificate these card reading terminals were not operational for about a whole month. Many stores were affected, because they almost all use ones from the same manufacturer. The only reason why it wasn’t such a big deal was that people were carrying cash around anyway and were able to switch the method of payment easily. Having cash worked as a backup.
Bitcoin wasn’t down. Hasn’t had a single hour of downtime or hack since it started 15 years ago in 2008. No bank holidays. Clear and transparent supply, 100% open source code. Not run by any single government, corporate board, or CEO. Sends money across the globe in under a second for pennies in fees, all you need is a phone. Powerful stuff.
I see this comment every now and then, and it always forgets the cost of the transaction, confirmation time, and of course, the need for miners to exist to process these confirmations/transactions. The energy cost is extraordinary, and the end user is taxed for the use of their own dollars.
It’s not really feasible on a broad scale. Bitcoin is a holding stock, not a valid currency. Its value only increases because it manufactures its own scarcity. And as its scarcity increases, it naturally moves toward centralization since mining becomes too large an activity for the individual to reap any benefit. You can argue for proof of stake to eliminate the need for mining, but then you open the doors to centralization more immediately.
I see this comment every now and then, and it always forgets the cost of the transaction, confirmation time
With Bitcoin lightning the confirmation time is under a second and you pay pennies in fees as you don’t make the transaction on the main chain. Even main chain is like $1.50 for a 10 minute confirmation time which for many transactions like an international wire is still a great deal.
The energy cost is extraordinary, and the end user is taxed for the use of their own dollars.
The energy cost to maintain the base chain is <1% of global energy use, mostly from renewables at off-peak hours since miners have to chase the cheapest electricity. Remittance services and other funds transfer companies also use energy and human capital to move value around, it’s not free. A single on-chain tx can open a lightning channel which can contain and secure trillions of transactions off-chain. Processing these transactions takes the energy equivalent of sending an e-mail. Users are “taxed for the use of their own dollars” in regular currency as well. Who pays that tax and the amount of that tax varies by context.
It can’t scale
In the last two months alone, Nostr users (decentralized twitter clone like Mastodon) sent each other 3 million tips over Bitcoin lightning. It absolutely scales. And there is plenty of more room to grow.
Its value only increases because it manufactures its own scarcity.
Its value also comes from its use as a transactional network and from it’s political neutrality geopolitically speaking. And from the known supply which nobody can manipulate. It’s not purely scarcity.
naturally moves toward centralization since mining becomes too large an activity for the individual to reap any benefit
And yet mining is still distributed globally. Any person, company, or country with spare energy resources can buy an ASIC and mine. Mining pools have become more centralized, but a lot of work has been done on that in recent years and that trend is reversing as a result.
Bitcoin lightning is absolutely hilarious. Your solution to Bitcoins problems is - not using Bitcoin. Wow, galaxy brain move.
The energy cost to maintain the base chain is <1% of global energy use, mostly from renewables
Yeah, that’s bullshit. First of all, 1% of energy use for a network that serves a few million transactions per day is really bad. A single 1kW node in Visa’s datacenter churns through that in an hour.
Second, it’s not renewables. It’s everything they can get for cheap. And that’s often enough coal, gas, oil. Also, they’re driving up power demand as a whole, which means fossil energy is actually needed longer.
Bitcoin lightning is absolutely hilarious. Your solution to Bitcoins problems is - not using Bitcoin. Wow, galaxy brain move.
Bitcoin lightning is Bitcoin. It’s a smart contract on the Bitcoin main chain. You move Bitcoin “into” lightning by sending it to that smart contract, you move it “out of” lightning by having that smart contract close. It inherits the security of Bitcoin main chain while getting the transaction speed of off-chain.
Agree to disagree about the rest. Energy use like carbon footprint is about “where you draw the box”. Off-peak demand is the cheapest power available, and it tends to be renewable. That trend continues to escalate.
Oh yes, it is also feels so good that the richer have priority on transactions because they can pay exorbitant fees while you sometimes need to wait more than a month for a transaction to be confirmed.
I had to make a transaction to a private tracker and I don’t want to go through it never again.
The only crypto that is kind if useful is Monero and that’s because it is really private and anonymous. The problem with private and anonymous is that is ends up becoming a tool for crime.
I really like Talers approach with protecting the buyer not the seller. From a mass surveillance and advertising perspective they only see half the picture which makes the deep surveillance hard. Also it keeps businesses honest and supports rule of law.
As long as you ignore its problems it’s great. I’m sure you do.
Meanwhile the rest of us who don’t live in cloud Cuckoo land have to deal with your shitty system that takes 45 minutes to process a transaction and requires the burning down of several rainforests per transaction. So we can see it is probably not a good idea.
45 minutes to process a transaction and requires the burning down of several rainforests per transaction.
Don’t listen to people who are critical of a thing if they clearly don’t even understand the basics of how it works. On main chain, a Bitcoin transaction typically take up to ten minutes (the time between blocks). It can take longer if you set a super low fee, but you can guarantee your payment goes into the next block by paying an average fee, usually around $0.75. Your wallet does this all automatically.
On lightning where most transactions occur these days (secured by main chain) transactions settle fully in under a second. Do your own research.
Besides, we all know Bitcoin only takes a single rainforest per transaction, it’s been that way since the great rainfork which is ancient history at this point.
I’ve had bitcoin transactions that literally took several days to process. This was also using an average fee. The more people using bitcoin, especially to handle common every-day transactions, the worse this problem would get.
I’ve had bitcoin transactions that literally took several days to process. This was also using an average fee.
I use Bitcoin regularly, this has literally never happened to me. If your transaction took days either you accidentally set a super low fee or your wallet was bugged somehow. Generally speaking the only way an “average fee” transaction takes more than a block or two is if you pay an average fee right before a rare massive fee spike, in which case, you can do a “replacement” transaction by upping the fee or just wait. Look up “average Bitcoin transaction fees” if you want to see rarity and size of fee spikes.
A handful of minutes or hours in a high-fee scenario, btw, is still much faster than ACH or international wires. Even if the money appears to move that quickly with traditional banking, full settlement is often measured in days to weeks, ask any vendor whose had a chargeback or anybody whose tried to “withdraw” from their Venmo right after depositing to it. Bitcoin’s main chain and Fedwire (used to settle liquidity between US banks) have equivalent daily transaction capacity.
You can open a lightning channel with a single on-chain transaction. That lightning channel can stay open for years and process trillions of transactions, instantly, for pennies in fees. If you need a transaction done quickly, you shouldn’t be sending it on main chain to begin with.
Long-term the vision is for folks to be using lightning or other L2s for everyday transactions, not main chain. Most Bitcoin transactions by transaction count are already on lightning. Lightning has been out for 5+ years now. It works well and gets better every year.
This is why Taler was created. It is a payment system not a payment form
“under a second for pennies in fees”
LOL you either kidding yourself or had never transfer Bitcoin.
At a high demand time, it could take hours to complete a transaction (if it even went through at all) and with an outrageous fee up to dozens of dollars.
Bitcoin has never been known for time efficient nor competitive fees (except for maybe in the beginning when nobody uses it).
At a high demand time, it could take hours to complete a transaction (if it even went through at all) and with an outrageous fee up to dozens of dollars.
Bitcoin has never been known for time efficient nor competitive fees (except for maybe in the beginning when nobody uses it).
At least you admit people use it. Bitcoin lightning enables transactions in under a second for pennies in fees, it’s been around for 5+ years. Your information is outdated. In the last two months, Nostr users alone (decentralized twitter clone like Mastodon) sent each other 2.6 million tips (individual transactions) over Bitcoin lightning. None of that requires an on-chain transaction, none of it required high fees. It works. It scales. It continues to improve.
There is so much wrong with that firehose of nonsense you just said I don’t have time to correct it all. So I’ll focus on this one point:
Bitcoin may not be run by “a single government” but it is run by a small group of billionaires. You’re a fool if you believe widespread adoption of it can improve things for regular people.
Crypto won’t scale
The computational requirements are high and its value fluctuates way to much. Also bitcoin isn’t even private and you are basically shouting to the world every time you make a payment.
Crypto won’t scale
And yet every year, for 15 years, the transaction capacity has continued to increase. Networking protocols (TCP/IP, SMTP, etc) also didn’t scale to “internet scale” in the first 15 years. They just kept adding new layers to the stack and optimizing it until it did. Just like Bitcoin added Lightning, Taproot, etc to improve scaling.
In the last two months, Nostr users alone (decentralized twitter clone like Mastodon) sent each other 2.6 million tips (individual transactions) over Bitcoin lightning. None of that requires an on-chain transaction, none of it required high fees. It works. It scales. It continues to improve. Lightning has capacity for trillions more transactions because capacity is not tied to chain space.
Also bitcoin isn’t even private and you are basically shouting to the world every time you make a payment.
Bitcoin is pseudonymous. If you make a wallet, nobody knows you own that wallet unless you tell them (or a third party like an exchange), but the balance and transactions on-chain are visible. There are ways to make your transactions more private, like coinjoin, you can have multiple addresses with multiple coins.
With lightning, transactions are opaque except to you and any nodes you route through, because lightning transactions don’t go on chain. This also means nobody knows your current balance. If you make a transaction between two lightning nodes that share a channel, nobody knows that transaction was made outside of those two nodes. Privacy continues to improve, see BOLT 12 for the latest upgrades in this area.
deleted by creator
One of the biggest rules in IT is always have a backup.
A cashless society has no backup.
The backup with a crypto, such as Monero or Bitcoin, would be to print out a paper wallet and then load the money onto it. LOL.
- take “this”… 2… 3…
- profit
Then don’t get rid of cash. We can do both you know
What good is cash gonna do if the networked cash register doesn’t open anymore?
They have paper and pens that they can track their transactions until the system is fixed.
Somebody’s never worked retail. Yeah, there’s no way they’ll do that. Maybe at a small independently-owned store? Otherwise, there’s no way they’re even allowed to do that!
How are you getting change?
Use exact change?
If we’re going cash only, I’m bringing those coins too.
They can do that anyway. It’s called credit.
Simply not allowed for a lot of businesses in my country, either by the government or corporate.
A cashless society is so stupid beyond words. In order to create one you must also create a full surveillance society to protect it, and even that would be ineffective to stop it from being hacked.
Just to be clear we are a mostly cashless society and the majority of currency is not physically in existence around the world and somehow it manages to be protected by and large.
The difference is that if someone decides to freeze your cashless bank account they can by a mouse click and you’re destitute. Whereas if that happens in a cash-based society they have to come and get it from you.
Good thing jobs pay in cash, oh wait, only shady jobs do that.
well that is sorta my point. I keep some cash on hand but the majority of my money gets auto deposited and debited from there when I pay bills. If someone steals the majority of my money and I have somelike 1 to 10 percent its not a much better situation than them stealing all of my available funds. I mean it is which is how come I do keep a bit of cash on hand.
How many hacks that generated infinite money have you seen?
Get a conservative business-focused person into the government and watch them give infinite money to business in the form of subsidies, bailouts, and tax breaks.
All presidents since at least Reagan and Prolly all of them but FDR has been pro corporate welfare and each one rewarded his oligarchs with generous subsidies…
Call it chips act or aca or covid relief etc… These are transfers from us treasury to the owner class.
This is not a party politics issue, this is the regime policy
Just 1, but it seems to repeat ad infinitum:
Be born rich.
Totally. My petrol station allowed me to pay in seashells while everyone else were just standing around complaining, was kinda nice
Sand dollars?
deleted by creator
I…
I have so many questions
deleted by creator
It would be fine if not everyone had the same exact setup. Also you can have cashless payments why still supporting cash. They aren’t mutually exclusive
Also you can have cashless payments why still supporting cash. They aren’t mutually exclusive
Yes, but “cashless society” means one devoid of cash payments. Some countries are talking about getting rid of cash entirely. Cash payments and digital payments both being used in concert is what we have now, there would be no need to “transition to a cashless society” from that to that again, the difference is they want to end cash, entirely, all of it, gone, only digital payments. Thus making “cash” and “cashless society” quite mutually exclusive, actually.
I don’t want a cashless society. That’s a European thing for the most part.
I want a debit card alternative that doesn’t have the same draw backs. I want a solution that doesn’t require proprietary banking apps to use.
I agree, the more widely accepted alternatives both physical and digital the better imo. I’m just saying, when people say “cashless society” they’re talking about that not about what we want.
Me, wanting to abolish currency entirely…
The economy is so fucked i essentially interact with friends and family on a barter system anyway. I bake them cookies and cakes and they let me use their laundry machines.
I live outside of time, outside of currency…
No kings, no presidents, no senators… Just… Coreys.
I’ll pay with gold bars
