I think there almost needs to be a "Reacher Law", in that there should be minimal friction to participating in society aside from maybe cash and an ID.
I definitely find a default assumption of having a smartphone that's creeping in everywhere (android / iOS compatible & has an active data plan) to be increasingly cloying.
Currently, all I can do is politely decline and insist that I neither have the Play nor Apple store; I still find it uncomfortable even giving away my phone number.
I couldn't even get into my gym the other day, since they'd transitioned to app sign-in only (phasing out barcode tags); I'm forced to beg the attendant to look me up by phone number every time.
*EDIT: I hope ranting about smartphones in a cashless-ness thread isn't too off topic
It discriminates against everyone except the minority of public administrators it ensconces. It literally removes the discretion and ownership of money if you cannot physically possess it. It polarizes people involved in grey market transactions into a permanent underclass who cannot escape it, and just partial cashlessness has been used within the last several or so hours to disenfranchise political opposition. That it is being discussed seriously at all is an offensively false equivalence. The only people who are "cashless" in a cashless society are the citizens from whom the cash is taken.
The arguments back like, "I have nothing to hide," or, "cards are just convenient," aren't centerist or neutral, they are the banal nihilism of people suited to scheduling prison trains, imo.
I agree. I personally prefer paying by card 100% of the time, but cash should always be an option. I think it's fine for cash to be a little less convenient - when paying for gas, for example, the pump might only take card, and if you want to pay by cash you have to go into the store. Or a store may not be able to provide exact change and that's fine.
The thing that I noticed, at least in Italy, is that young people seem believe all the propaganda about cashless society: they really think that it is about fighting tax evasion. I am sincerely afraid of an entity that can control all of your money if you're not "good" enough: how not-good I have to be before they forbid me from living.
Money is a relationship. Private ownership of a relationship is slavery. The central bank must devalue the slave contract by 2% otherwise an accumulation of slave contracts will enslave the entire society. Our money is a time banking network and time on earth doesn't last forever, people age. The "owners of money" don't care, in fact, to them aging is the greatest sin that must be punished as it devalues their "private property". They expect the young and future born to give up their time to compensate through the time lost through aging.
You get to pick negative rates or inflation. There is no other option.
A cashless society discriminates against whomever that society wishes to discriminate against. That's the point: total central control of all exchanges of value between humans. Nothing outside of the state. It's an intensely authoritarian goal with obvious and inevitable results. It's just a matter of time before some bad* group gets in power and turns the system against you.
In addition it discriminates against anyone who finds themselves even temporarily without power for their payment device whether they are a customer or a seller.
But as the technology gets better and more reliable this gets rarer and rarer so that in the end it discriminates against those who already lack a different kind of power: social and political power. That is, the poor, the elderly, the sick, the disabled, the poorly educated, the illiterate and innumerate, those whose grasp of the local language is poor. I'm sure the list could be expanded.
I think we need to remove barriers to people getting access to the technology that's needed to function in a modern society.
In the UK, we have "basic bank accounts". These are aimed at people with bad credit history, and offer no line of credit, but do provide a debit card, which may also be used at an ATM.
How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?
I do wonder if these problems will eventually fizzle out, as more and more people have been exposed to technology throughout their lives and will be able to use it in their old age.
While there may be some arguments against a cashless society from a privacy point of view, it's hard to argue with the convenience and cost savings that you get from going cashless.
One problem with cashless is it gives a ton of power to all intermediaries, which often are duopolies. Google and Apple. Credit card companies (Visa and Mastercard). These are able to extract a significant sales tax (“fee”) from users and shut down accounts with little recourse. And the fact that it gives the government power to both monitor all transactions and immediately halt all transactions with that individual is like a massive Big Brother capability combined with a digital shackle that can keep anyone they want from moving. Can’t use public transit, can’t use micromobility bikes, can’t use taxis, can’t use airplanes, can’t use your car (how do you get gas? Pay tolls?), can’t even walk far as you can’t buy food.
I remember, growing up in a more “End Times” focused evangelical denomination, they were always talking about how barcodes or credit cards are maybe like the “Mark of the Beast” number in the book of Revelation, without which you can’t make any transactions. That’s paranoia, of course, but it’s also kind of a good point. A fully cashless society using our typical methods puts a massive power into the hands of the government and a few very powerful corporations.
It also tilts the power differential in favor of employers of all sizes. a local small business coffee shop I frequent doesn’t pay super well, but they do tipping. The owner can easily keep track of how much tip money comes in and uses that as an excuse to employees that they can tolerate getting paid only $8/hour because they have tips. The employer also has control of the tip money that’s paid in cashless form, and it’s not unheard of for employers to take some of that money or withhold it. I prefer to use cash for more and more purchases, but for basically all tips, I tip in cash. (And I agree tipping in general is lame, but I don’t want to punish employees for that.)
>How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?
Manufacturing, retail. Those are just two things that I can name where I personally know people in their 50's who have no real access to computers.
>I do wonder if these problems will eventually fizzle out, as more and more people have been exposed to technology throughout their lives and will be able to use it in their old age.
I bet they don't fizzle out. Technology is always changing. At some point in their past, even the 99 year old who couldn't turn on a smartphone today was hip on the current technology of the day.
“How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?”
Oh, they saw the clerks using them in the office when they came in each week for their paychecks, and later on, engineers and maybe even other contractors bringing laptops on-site, perhaps even helped support a kid doing a CS degree, but plenty of 70 year olds today never had a work-related reason to touch one.
My dad spent 50 years doing construction. His employer did attempt to teach him how to use the laptop they got him those last few years he worked in the early 2010s, but settled on basically providing him an on-site secretary (recent college grad) to use it for him.
Not everyone worked - it is quite possible to be a young adult without having ever used a computer or phone - rare, but possible.
And even more so in a generation where many women stayed home and didn’t enter the labor market at all, or all those who worked any of the various manual labor jobs. Some restaurants still don’t have digital records of orders, etc to this day.
> While there may be some arguments against a cashless society from a privacy point of view, it's hard to argue with the convenience and cost savings that you get from going cashless.
I agree with your first sentence, but the summary doesn't necessarily follow.
The convenience and cost savings are not free. You are the product. Moving to a "modern society" doesn't need to involve enriching the marketing networks of the planet.
My dad is 78. He retired in 95 and never used a computer. He owns lots of them but can’t use them for day to day activities, preferring to go in person to pay bills and whatnot.
He loves to argue about convenience or as he sees it, massive inconvenience.
I've started to reduce my card usage as of late. This is not because I am annoyed by banks (though I am pretty annoyed of some banks) but because I think the root of all evils is MasterCard/Visa. They have a tight grip over the international/internet payments market.
I'm currently in Malaysia. They have a mobile ewallet/payment system (tng). It accepts foreigners with fairly large monthly limits (around $5500/month). I can buy TnG balance with Bitcoin/Crypto/Cash/Barter, and it's accepted almost everywhere (even more than MC/Visa).
I'm happy with this being an alternative to cash. The way I see it, companies can only be evil once they have leverage. But using multiple different systems, you take that leverage away from them. Cards have leverage on the day-to-day payments, online and international market. To take it away, use services that bypass them.
Banks still have leverage on the large transfer, wealth holding market. I'm yet to find an alternative to that (There is USDT/USDC but it's banks with extra steps. Crypto is an alternative but the volatility is too high).
- As more banks participate in ESG and experiment with what they can get away with, people may lose access to their funds if they hold the wrong beliefs or lack good social credit score. This is already in place in China and all the big banks are looking at dipping their toes into this game.
PayPal already experimented with this and back-peddled when their stock dipped as a result. A few dozen big banks in the US are now participating in ESG. Only time will tell what they dare to implement.
The chips in credit cards aren't damaged by magnetic fields. Mag stripes will eventually be discontinued. (For instance, cards from Mastercard won't have mag stripes after 2033.)
And more brittle, in at least some ways, as well. When I travel, especially internationally, I try to be prepared so that I wouldn't be completely screwed if my phone decided to die on me. Of course, stuff can always happen like your bag being snatched but I try to be in a position at least to deal with an electronic device just crapping out.
Inasmuch as they can understand a payment card equally well. They don't understand acquisition of [cash] money, but equally don't understand why the magic plastic rounded-rectangle works. They can use a payment card more easily than cash in my limited experience (as a parent and uncle).
The fundamental problem with this regressive "discrimination" framework is that it divides people into a dichotomy of "having agency" and "having no agency", and then focuses the analysis on those with no agency while ignoring the concerns of those with agency. Essentially it asks the wrong question, stands in for real discussion about societal problems from such things, and allows real issues to be handwaved away as those with agency just needing to choose to "get with the program".
I am 100% dead set against "cashless society", not because I am "unable" to use anything else, but because it is less private, less empowering, and outright less convenient. Sure, I'll sometimes give in to the financial surveillance industry to get money back, or to make returns easier, or to do online purchases, or to avoid trading fomites during Covid. But ideally I want to transact in cash. Make the decision to spend a given amount of money exactly once, and not suffer the same transaction multiple times as I see my agglomerated statements at the end of the month.
With friends, no fucking Paypal, Venmo, Zelle, or whatever fly by night crap is popular this week that undoubtably forces some nonconsentual "terms" at me. Never mind creating yet another insecure account that has to be checked every month lest I end up responsible for a company's negligence. Cash - we settle and then we forget about it. Sometimes it's higher, sometimes it's lower, most of the time it evens out, sometimes it doesn't but we assume it does and move on with our lives.
Like maaaaaybe in the far future if phones are ever personal computing devices that represent individuals, and we have the security properties granted by systems like Monero, and software designed for end users and not surveillance companies, then I'd be happy to settle with digital money. But it's foolish to jump the gun and pretend that any of the junk currently being pushed by surveillance companies represents that sort of idyllic future in any way.
There's a period when you don't have all the required paperwork, and it's really hard to open a bank account, or sign up for payment services.
Many banks in Germany use the same ID verification tool, and it does not recognise all passport types. Some banks require a residence permit or registration certificate, both of which can be hard to get.
If you have a bank account, it can still be shut down or restricted because of your government back home. This happened to Americans in 2019 and to Russians recently.
It's also a pain for visitors who need to join the system.
At last, phones get lost or break. When I lost mine, it took me two weeks to regain access to everything, in part because of 2FA catch-22s. At least I had money to replace it.
For those not in the know, what happened in 2019 with Americans? A quick search showed something about N26 bank leaving the US but not much else about it.
The poor, I can understand, when they don't have bank accounts.
But the elderly? If you're receiving social security checks and paying utility bills, surely you have a bank account and a debit card?
> The elderly are less able to manage cashless payment methods, especially without transition support. If local authorities or utility companies do not support cash...
Since when have utility companies ever accepted cash? The elderly have spent their whole lives paying utilities by check. And they've been using ATM cards for decades. If they can use an ATM card they can use a debit card, since they're the same card.
This article throws "elderly" into the headline but gives zero actual evidence for that group.
Actually this is a pretty interesting question. I ended up looking this up, per Brookings [^1]:
> check-cashing outlets provide a range of convenient payment services in one location. They cash paychecks, sell low-cost money orders with stamped envelopes for making long-distance payments, and serve as agents for utility bill payments and electronic money transfer services, such as Western Union
So unbanked people have to use (often high-cost) proxies to participate in these sorts of economies. Probably contributes to their unbanked status since it's hard to save enough to open a checking account when fees constantly eat into savings.
As to the point about elderly, according to the FDIC survey [^2], the under/un-banked rates among older age groups is actually lower than, say, the 25-34 year old age group. However, I think OP's post still stands because 1. If your retired being unbanked is arguably worse, as if you have to use the previously mentioned check-cashing outlets, you're going to eat through any savings you have a lot faster, and 2. there's a technological argument as well, and if smartphone adoption becomes more and more a requirement towards accessing finances, then technical literacy rates become a new barrier and that tends to be associated with younger populations.
There's a difference between cashless and technology/smartphone only.
You can have a cashless society that still uses checks, debit cards, credit cards, money orders, cashiers checks, wire transfers etc. All these can be managed or used by visiting a local branch or with a phone call.
Plenty of people still pay their rent with checks and I've never been at a sit down restaurant in the US where I could pay with Apple/Google Pay but I can of course use my CC/Debit Card.
All of the methods listed above work without power as one commenter suggested would be an issue. Its really not...
Overdraft fees are egregious but they're also something you can opt out of and is just another form of credit.
All you need to participate to this degree is a bank account that offers a debit card which is accessible and possible to the vast majority of the population including the elderly - they're not hoarding all their cash under their mattress. In the US to open an account at any major bank is an ID and maybe an initial deposit whether that be a cash/check/incoming transfer etc.
It has never been easier to go to a library/school/friend's place and sign up for a free bank account that will ship you a debit card that will also reimburse you for ATM withdrawal fees.
The group that should really be the focus is the underbanked - often those less fortunate.
Including seniors in this category of 'discrimination' feels odd - I know of some who have no problem paying their bills, shopping, living life etc without a smart phone or computer.
Society can't be beholden to the past forever - progress is made and individuals have to choose to participate if they want to use new things that are accessible only through certain tools.
This isn't any different from when we moved from the telegraph to the telephone - you had to go and buy a landline to participate. The same is true of getting a passport to fly/sail to different countries as countries also further add requirements for updated passports and IDs (a la Real ID requirements in the US).
I've never witnessed this. I still do not own a smartphone. I am actually about to activate one for the first time but I have never needed a phone for anything other than calling or texting someone. I admit that texting on my T9 keypad is a PITA but I rarely text. I had a couple throw-away phones with keypads that were nice but they are hard to find sidekick, etc...
What specific services do you depend on that require a smart phone?
Yes. Absolutely. It also is more error prone and a dangerously distopic way for governments or corporations to target an individual since governments only seem to get stronger through surveillance and the codification of emergency powers that become permanent.
I love the convenience but it needs to be an option, not an obligation.
Digital currencies that are functionally equivalent to cash are now possible, using agent-based systems. The zero-knowledge proofs and homomorphic encryption is scalable, if only a pseudo-random subset of the nodes need to prove the transfers are correct.
Anything less privacy- and liberty-conserving is a strict downgrade from cash.
Why should anyone prefer some band of zealots controlling their financial lives?
>if only a pseudo-random subset of the nodes need to prove the transfers are correct
How is the pseudo-random subset selected, assuming the presence of an adversary controlling part of the transaction data and a significant percentage of nodes?
The people arguing for a cashless society should come to China. A rare protest happened during the party Congress here and hundreds of thousands of WeChat users who shared the photos were banned from the platform. For those who dont know, Wechat is an essential app and service in China used for everything from identification and payments. This is what you are promoting.
Also discriminates against folks that would like a semblance of privacy as well. Been trying to get rid of my smartphone while every service and product around is trying to make it the only option.
Related, last night I started watching this B-movie on Netflix, called "Johnny Mnemonic." (Had never seen it despite being a Bill and Ted fan.)
From the 90s but set in 2021. In it there is a criminal underbelly consisting of folks who reject oppressive technology called the "Lo-Teks" ... and I thought wait a minute, that's me! That's my gang. Even get to hang out with Ice-T. :-D
I'm running into this. A family member is in the hospital, but she took care of all the bills and whatnot. Her husband is having a very hard time figuring out how to pay bills, etc. I've been helping him out but the situation is teaching me how hard it is to do things for someone outside of technology these days.
[+] [-] trylfthsk|3 years ago|reply
Currently, all I can do is politely decline and insist that I neither have the Play nor Apple store; I still find it uncomfortable even giving away my phone number. I couldn't even get into my gym the other day, since they'd transitioned to app sign-in only (phasing out barcode tags); I'm forced to beg the attendant to look me up by phone number every time.
*EDIT: I hope ranting about smartphones in a cashless-ness thread isn't too off topic
[+] [-] motohagiography|3 years ago|reply
The arguments back like, "I have nothing to hide," or, "cards are just convenient," aren't centerist or neutral, they are the banal nihilism of people suited to scheduling prison trains, imo.
[+] [-] post-it|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] annyeonghada|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] imtringued|3 years ago|reply
You get to pick negative rates or inflation. There is no other option.
[+] [-] superkuh|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kwhitefoot|3 years ago|reply
But as the technology gets better and more reliable this gets rarer and rarer so that in the end it discriminates against those who already lack a different kind of power: social and political power. That is, the poor, the elderly, the sick, the disabled, the poorly educated, the illiterate and innumerate, those whose grasp of the local language is poor. I'm sure the list could be expanded.
[+] [-] daveoc64|3 years ago|reply
In the UK, we have "basic bank accounts". These are aimed at people with bad credit history, and offer no line of credit, but do provide a debit card, which may also be used at an ATM.
How are there 70 year olds today that worked throughout the 90s and 2000s without coming across a computer?
I do wonder if these problems will eventually fizzle out, as more and more people have been exposed to technology throughout their lives and will be able to use it in their old age.
While there may be some arguments against a cashless society from a privacy point of view, it's hard to argue with the convenience and cost savings that you get from going cashless.
[+] [-] Robotbeat|3 years ago|reply
I remember, growing up in a more “End Times” focused evangelical denomination, they were always talking about how barcodes or credit cards are maybe like the “Mark of the Beast” number in the book of Revelation, without which you can’t make any transactions. That’s paranoia, of course, but it’s also kind of a good point. A fully cashless society using our typical methods puts a massive power into the hands of the government and a few very powerful corporations.
It also tilts the power differential in favor of employers of all sizes. a local small business coffee shop I frequent doesn’t pay super well, but they do tipping. The owner can easily keep track of how much tip money comes in and uses that as an excuse to employees that they can tolerate getting paid only $8/hour because they have tips. The employer also has control of the tip money that’s paid in cashless form, and it’s not unheard of for employers to take some of that money or withhold it. I prefer to use cash for more and more purchases, but for basically all tips, I tip in cash. (And I agree tipping in general is lame, but I don’t want to punish employees for that.)
[+] [-] Loughla|3 years ago|reply
Manufacturing, retail. Those are just two things that I can name where I personally know people in their 50's who have no real access to computers.
>I do wonder if these problems will eventually fizzle out, as more and more people have been exposed to technology throughout their lives and will be able to use it in their old age.
I bet they don't fizzle out. Technology is always changing. At some point in their past, even the 99 year old who couldn't turn on a smartphone today was hip on the current technology of the day.
[+] [-] MandieD|3 years ago|reply
Oh, they saw the clerks using them in the office when they came in each week for their paychecks, and later on, engineers and maybe even other contractors bringing laptops on-site, perhaps even helped support a kid doing a CS degree, but plenty of 70 year olds today never had a work-related reason to touch one.
My dad spent 50 years doing construction. His employer did attempt to teach him how to use the laptop they got him those last few years he worked in the early 2010s, but settled on basically providing him an on-site secretary (recent college grad) to use it for him.
[+] [-] sneak|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bombcar|3 years ago|reply
And even more so in a generation where many women stayed home and didn’t enter the labor market at all, or all those who worked any of the various manual labor jobs. Some restaurants still don’t have digital records of orders, etc to this day.
[+] [-] mixmastamyk|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] psychlops|3 years ago|reply
I agree with your first sentence, but the summary doesn't necessarily follow.
The convenience and cost savings are not free. You are the product. Moving to a "modern society" doesn't need to involve enriching the marketing networks of the planet.
[+] [-] prepend|3 years ago|reply
He loves to argue about convenience or as he sees it, massive inconvenience.
[+] [-] Nimitz14|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] csomar|3 years ago|reply
I'm currently in Malaysia. They have a mobile ewallet/payment system (tng). It accepts foreigners with fairly large monthly limits (around $5500/month). I can buy TnG balance with Bitcoin/Crypto/Cash/Barter, and it's accepted almost everywhere (even more than MC/Visa).
I'm happy with this being an alternative to cash. The way I see it, companies can only be evil once they have leverage. But using multiple different systems, you take that leverage away from them. Cards have leverage on the day-to-day payments, online and international market. To take it away, use services that bypass them.
Banks still have leverage on the large transfer, wealth holding market. I'm yet to find an alternative to that (There is USDT/USDC but it's banks with extra steps. Crypto is an alternative but the volatility is too high).
[+] [-] jleyank|3 years ago|reply
- barter economy when the power or network or website goes down.
- all transactions tracked.
- can have your money disabled by a 3rd party.
- transaction fees, particularly when traveling internationally.
- magnetic fields suck. Plastic gets brittle.
[+] [-] LinuxBender|3 years ago|reply
- As more banks participate in ESG and experiment with what they can get away with, people may lose access to their funds if they hold the wrong beliefs or lack good social credit score. This is already in place in China and all the big banks are looking at dipping their toes into this game.
PayPal already experimented with this and back-peddled when their stock dipped as a result. A few dozen big banks in the US are now participating in ESG. Only time will tell what they dare to implement.
[+] [-] TEP_Kim_Il_Sung|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DerekL|3 years ago|reply
The chips in credit cards aren't damaged by magnetic fields. Mag stripes will eventually be discontinued. (For instance, cards from Mastercard won't have mag stripes after 2033.)
[+] [-] bombcar|3 years ago|reply
Everything else may be more convenient in various ways, but it’s more complicated, too. And with unexpected things that can happen.
[+] [-] ghaff|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pbhjpbhj|3 years ago|reply
Inasmuch as they can understand a payment card equally well. They don't understand acquisition of [cash] money, but equally don't understand why the magic plastic rounded-rectangle works. They can use a payment card more easily than cash in my limited experience (as a parent and uncle).
[+] [-] mindslight|3 years ago|reply
I am 100% dead set against "cashless society", not because I am "unable" to use anything else, but because it is less private, less empowering, and outright less convenient. Sure, I'll sometimes give in to the financial surveillance industry to get money back, or to make returns easier, or to do online purchases, or to avoid trading fomites during Covid. But ideally I want to transact in cash. Make the decision to spend a given amount of money exactly once, and not suffer the same transaction multiple times as I see my agglomerated statements at the end of the month.
With friends, no fucking Paypal, Venmo, Zelle, or whatever fly by night crap is popular this week that undoubtably forces some nonconsentual "terms" at me. Never mind creating yet another insecure account that has to be checked every month lest I end up responsible for a company's negligence. Cash - we settle and then we forget about it. Sometimes it's higher, sometimes it's lower, most of the time it evens out, sometimes it doesn't but we assume it does and move on with our lives.
Like maaaaaybe in the far future if phones are ever personal computing devices that represent individuals, and we have the security properties granted by systems like Monero, and software designed for end users and not surveillance companies, then I'd be happy to settle with digital money. But it's foolish to jump the gun and pretend that any of the junk currently being pushed by surveillance companies represents that sort of idyllic future in any way.
[+] [-] nicbou|3 years ago|reply
There's a period when you don't have all the required paperwork, and it's really hard to open a bank account, or sign up for payment services.
Many banks in Germany use the same ID verification tool, and it does not recognise all passport types. Some banks require a residence permit or registration certificate, both of which can be hard to get.
If you have a bank account, it can still be shut down or restricted because of your government back home. This happened to Americans in 2019 and to Russians recently.
It's also a pain for visitors who need to join the system.
At last, phones get lost or break. When I lost mine, it took me two weeks to regain access to everything, in part because of 2FA catch-22s. At least I had money to replace it.
[+] [-] yardstick|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nonrandomstring|3 years ago|reply
Probably preaching to the choir, but I briefly participated in a documentary of sorts which may be of interest [1].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtM6tud8n1I
[+] [-] davzie|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] crazygringo|3 years ago|reply
But the elderly? If you're receiving social security checks and paying utility bills, surely you have a bank account and a debit card?
> The elderly are less able to manage cashless payment methods, especially without transition support. If local authorities or utility companies do not support cash...
Since when have utility companies ever accepted cash? The elderly have spent their whole lives paying utilities by check. And they've been using ATM cards for decades. If they can use an ATM card they can use a debit card, since they're the same card.
This article throws "elderly" into the headline but gives zero actual evidence for that group.
[+] [-] lofatdairy|3 years ago|reply
> check-cashing outlets provide a range of convenient payment services in one location. They cash paychecks, sell low-cost money orders with stamped envelopes for making long-distance payments, and serve as agents for utility bill payments and electronic money transfer services, such as Western Union
So unbanked people have to use (often high-cost) proxies to participate in these sorts of economies. Probably contributes to their unbanked status since it's hard to save enough to open a checking account when fees constantly eat into savings.
As to the point about elderly, according to the FDIC survey [^2], the under/un-banked rates among older age groups is actually lower than, say, the 25-34 year old age group. However, I think OP's post still stands because 1. If your retired being unbanked is arguably worse, as if you have to use the previously mentioned check-cashing outlets, you're going to eat through any savings you have a lot faster, and 2. there's a technological argument as well, and if smartphone adoption becomes more and more a requirement towards accessing finances, then technical literacy rates become a new barrier and that tends to be associated with younger populations.
[^1]: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/bringing-unbanked-househo... [^2]: https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf
[+] [-] MichaelCollins|3 years ago|reply
Did you actually check? Mine do accept cash.
[+] [-] bern4444|3 years ago|reply
You can have a cashless society that still uses checks, debit cards, credit cards, money orders, cashiers checks, wire transfers etc. All these can be managed or used by visiting a local branch or with a phone call.
Plenty of people still pay their rent with checks and I've never been at a sit down restaurant in the US where I could pay with Apple/Google Pay but I can of course use my CC/Debit Card.
All of the methods listed above work without power as one commenter suggested would be an issue. Its really not...
Overdraft fees are egregious but they're also something you can opt out of and is just another form of credit.
All you need to participate to this degree is a bank account that offers a debit card which is accessible and possible to the vast majority of the population including the elderly - they're not hoarding all their cash under their mattress. In the US to open an account at any major bank is an ID and maybe an initial deposit whether that be a cash/check/incoming transfer etc.
It has never been easier to go to a library/school/friend's place and sign up for a free bank account that will ship you a debit card that will also reimburse you for ATM withdrawal fees.
The group that should really be the focus is the underbanked - often those less fortunate.
Including seniors in this category of 'discrimination' feels odd - I know of some who have no problem paying their bills, shopping, living life etc without a smart phone or computer.
Society can't be beholden to the past forever - progress is made and individuals have to choose to participate if they want to use new things that are accessible only through certain tools.
This isn't any different from when we moved from the telegraph to the telephone - you had to go and buy a landline to participate. The same is true of getting a passport to fly/sail to different countries as countries also further add requirements for updated passports and IDs (a la Real ID requirements in the US).
[+] [-] mdp2021|3 years ago|reply
Loss of anonymity in transactions is not «progress». It is the opposite.
> if they want to use new things that are accessible only through certain tools
The issue is with "things being from some point on accessible only through certain tools*.
[+] [-] ouid|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] balderdash|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ghaff|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LinuxBender|3 years ago|reply
What specific services do you depend on that require a smart phone?
[+] [-] bombcar|3 years ago|reply
Another store has online only coupons and just killed using checks, too. They do have a free ATM at least.
[+] [-] grecy|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] isaacremuant|3 years ago|reply
I love the convenience but it needs to be an option, not an obligation.
[+] [-] pjkundert|3 years ago|reply
Anything less privacy- and liberty-conserving is a strict downgrade from cash.
Why should anyone prefer some band of zealots controlling their financial lives?
Perhaps the elderly are just … wiser?
[+] [-] trevyn|3 years ago|reply
How is the pseudo-random subset selected, assuming the presence of an adversary controlling part of the transaction data and a significant percentage of nodes?
[+] [-] georgeplusplus|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mixmastamyk|3 years ago|reply
Related, last night I started watching this B-movie on Netflix, called "Johnny Mnemonic." (Had never seen it despite being a Bill and Ted fan.) From the 90s but set in 2021. In it there is a criminal underbelly consisting of folks who reject oppressive technology called the "Lo-Teks" ... and I thought wait a minute, that's me! That's my gang. Even get to hang out with Ice-T. :-D
[+] [-] scarface74|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Spooky23|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] clord|3 years ago|reply