Topic: New York City Stores Must Accept Cash Council Says (Read 577 times)

It seems to me that this question can be answered first of all from the point of view of the possibility of public use of the Internet, high technologies, as well as digital assets.  A significant part of humanity consists of elderly people who not only do not have the desire to comprehend everything that the “young generation” is sick with today, but also does not have a definite opportunity for this.  In addition, you need to take into account the periphery, where people live the old fashioned way and civilization is still very weakly touched such lands.  But basically, I believe that the situation will change only after the next generational change.

You know what's interesting with statistics, that you can play it how you want with numbers.
For example, you have shown how 3.4 billion people don't have a smartphone and that would put everything on hold...

But if we were to exclude India from this, the number would drop to 2.4 billion, and you have to admit that nobody is thinking India will go cashless first.
In western countries, the smartphone penetration rate to nearly 80%, and if we take into consideration the natural change in population structure every year around 1.3% of the old population is no more and is replaced by a new generation. And besides, the new technologies don't care about what's happening in poor countries, do you see electronics manufactures stopping the production of coffee makers, microwaves, air conditioners because half of Africa is not affording one?

Yeah, right now, banning cash would be a problem even in advanced countries but in 10-20 years your kids will laugh at you how you were counting piece of paper when buying bread and the cashier was counting your change and you were walking with metal scaps in your pockets
The same happened with cars around here, nobody believes you're going to have that many old people living in the countryside and owning a car, then it was the internet, my grandma would probably laugh right now if she could see her daughter (my mom!) checking the weather on an app and not by looking at the sky.


With a card, you always have the option of a chargeback.
Getting mugged in an alley or a bus station....there is nothing you can do.
I wonder what's more traumatic, seeing that somebody bought 2000$ of sex toys with your card and you have to call the bank to cancel the charge or having a knife at your throat and losing all your rent money.

I think this is also about status, those business may not like to take cash because they think too highly of themselves and they see taking cash as something beneath them, I know it does not make too much sense since money is money regardless of its from but there are people that think like that, so I am fine with this law that is going to make those business to accept cash again, however I am not so sure how successful it is going to be as most people that I know seem to prefer to use their credit cards instead of cash.

I am very familiar with this news. Probably, I have read it somewhere over the internet. I really find it confusing why do New York is based on restos and hotels are not accepting hard cash any more. They have to understand that not all of the people are reliant on cashless transactions. Some of the people who still stay in cash transactions might be the people who were scammed, hacked by the digital crooks before and started having traumas using their cashless payment methods. Nevertheless, their approval for this law is really a very helpful one. Traditional cash must always be in present even as the alternative.

The problem is advancement is necessary but at the same time you are supposed to consider the needs of the people , some are not that advanced to use the online application for payment , considering my personal experience my father still don't understand the concept of mobile banking.
You cannot just exclude those people out , cash has been there for ages and it is right only to keep it in the following future because let's be honest guys 7.53 billion is the population and only 3.1 billion active smartphones are registered (considering how one person can own as many as they want) so more likely more than half of the people on Earth still live by the old times.

And the government are not that ready for that kind of system.

There is a problem and the fact that they can't quickly find a way or a solution to end that problem, we can conclude that they are still not ready. We can't force anything even though they are easy and efficient. If that will be giving a problem to people and the government, then it is a risk that a leader would think should be lessen or stopped.

It does not matter what any individual thinks or feels reliable but once the government applies any laws and regulations, each citizen have to follow those or they might even need to pay for violating these laws.

Cash transactions are the easiest ones but I feel like those are a lot outdated. There have been such advanced means of payments and why are we yet using cash payments everywhere? Perhaps this might be good in parts of countries where population is in excess amount as there would be a need of quick payments in these situations and I guess New York comes under the same. This might be the reason why government made cash compulsory in these parts of nation.

Actually the globe is getting digital. Cash payments are traditional means of payments but now, they are been overruled by several online applications which of course are centralized and gives the ease to the customer to pay with just a few clicks. PayPal might be the one of those digital platforms which have made payments easier.

Use of such digital wallets should first dominate the markets and after this era, we could start implying crypto payments into the monetary systems as people would come to know that being digital in terms of sending and receiving payments can actually be easier and beneficial. Let the world first experience this with the centralized digital wallets.

It is actually alright that cash has to be accepted, but we need more options, cash is fine, credit cards and debit cards are fine, back in the day there was check (or cheque, don't know how people write it, but that piece of paper you write money and give to others to withdraw), nowadays we have to actually improve that number and add in crypto to that as well, I know there can't be a law that says "you have to accept bitcoin" because it is both new and governments really don't really care about the bitcoins situation but in order for adoption to increase there needs to be some sort of incentive as well.

Why would a shop that is forced to accept cash would just feel like they should offer option of bitcoin if they don't know what bitcoin is properly? We need to increase bitcoin as an option and not focus on diminishing dollar.

It is said that usually credit cards are being hacked, maybe that is the reason.

Though this would be hard for some since people usually do not want to bring any cash with them so they can travel without worrying with it. It might be the case but they need to follow this new law. It is not that they are not open to new technologies but there is a problem at hand.

It seems to me that the rejection of cash will be rushed. I have nothing against it. But there are many other people who do not have the opportunity to have a debit card.
But I agree that cash is a bit outdated. Therefore, I think that in the near future, people will use stablecoins. Bitcoin is not quite suitable for this because of the changing price.

But tangible cash is still required because digital money or wallet can be hacked easily if the security of that account is weak. People is required to keep their account highly secured so that people will be comfortable using digital money. The digital and tangible cash have cons like it is both can be stole by another people, it is very hard to safe if what is the most preferable way of transacting money. It is good that New York make some way like accepting only digital money, but it is unfair for those people who live in that and used to pay with cash. The thing they do will only benefit the immigrants who have nothing to do to convert their money.

This probably has more to do in terms of trying to preserve the legal tender status of fiat that underlies its value more than anything else.

We're seeing similar things in China as society edges closer and closer towards a completely cashless one. The government and central banks are reluctant to give up control in terms of the operation of monetary policy, which can be severely hindered by many private providers of remittance services.

So it's certainly not surprising news by any measure. In fact, it's quite expected.

That might have something to do with the fed coming down on them for killing off any trends.  The federal reserve is a business of making this paper so I'm sure they  have every reason to lean on people that support moving away from paper.  I mean that is there business model so no doubt they will curb moving away from it.

There is no doubt that in the future all the purchases will be made using digital currencies but we are still far away from reaching that day, there is still a lot of poverty around the world and most of those people do not have access to electricity or the Internet and I doubt this is going to change dramatically during the next years so businesses should accept cash until we come to that point in time, but also for all of us that care about our privacy this is a good law that allow us to retain some privacy in a world that seems to be against it.

Well it's good that the argument they made is that it discriminates against the poor, that will make it harder for businesses to argue against it since they'll be called anti-poor.

Businesses in general would prefer that all purchases are made using credit cards and other electronic payment - no money that can be stolen by staff or robbers and no need for them to physically deposit the earnings in the bank.

In the meantime, this meant the few people who are paranoid of cash disappearing would still be able to use them.

It's kind of sad how this is going on right now. Most officials see cryptocurrencies, even digital currencies in general as a nemesis of the state. They see this modes of payments as something that could cause an economic collapse that is why they're trying everything in their power to stop it's progress. They're trying to ban these innovative currencies indirectly or directly empowering the 1% of people that are on top of the money ladder.

providing services to receive fiat currencies, is an effort of the government to protect its people, making it easier for the people in terms of payment methods, perhaps this effort to encourage economic improvement so that more smoothly. but I think one day will use a full digital system

Technology is good and cryptocurrency is good and they make things to be really fast. But seriously, I don’t know why some people here are fond of posting hate topics about cash. You have chosen to make use of cryptocurrency and no one is disturbing you or saying about it and you’re using it freely, why then is it a pain in your ass that others have decided to be making use of cash?

You should focus on what’s best for you and stop minding what others wants to be using, it’s simply none of your business, same way what you are using is none of their business. Among me and my friends and family, I am the only that’s making use of cryptocurrency, because they are not interested in it. I don’t say anything about it to them and they also don’t care what I use, and yes they all know about cryptocurrency but they are just not interested. As simple as that.

Most of the time the hate comes from the governments themselves, if all transactions were made using a digital medium then they will have a way to monitor everything that you do, this particular news about New York saying that stores needs to give the option to accept cash as well to their customers is very interesting because it goes against decades of efforts to try to push people to use digital options and it could be the beginning of a new tendency.