Cashless society

[Value Collector]

Because the banks moved it that way.
They created a problem to get their way.
It's a bad system by itself.

The customers want to use digital, there is a reason cash usage is shrinking, it’s a pain in the butt.

The only reason so many small businesses say they are trying to stick to cash is because they see it as being cheaper, but that’s because they are being subsidised.

Any way, I don’t think you are actually looking at this rationally,

 

[Bellcose]

I have to disagree with you @moXJO. I personally want it. If I wish to top up my debit card by say $1k, I want to do it today. Not wait until the next business day, drive to a bank location, park, walk through a crowded shopping centre, mess around with forms to transfer from one bank to another, then drive home and wait to see when the transfer has occurred so I can use the funds.

It may be different in rural locations when the bank can be a location for social interaction but I don't think that applies even in this large country town i.e. Canberra.

Same issue if I want to transfer funds to purchase shares. And I certainly don't want to receive dividends/distributions by cheque.

 

[JohnDe]

 

[Smurf1976]

The only reason so many small businesses say they are trying to stick to cash is because they see it as being cheaper

I'd think it's because they don't want to lose a paying customer.

Whatever it costs them to handle cash, there's still a profit from serving a customer who prefers cash payment versus having them walk out.

Also risk mitigation. If the EFTPOS fails and it's the kind of business where the product is supplied before payment (eg restaurants, hairdressers, fuel) then you've just given away a fortune if you can't accept an alternative form of payment.

 

[Value Collector]

I'd think it's because they don't want to lose a paying customer.

Whatever it costs them to handle cash, there's still a profit from serving a customer who prefers cash payment versus having them walk out.

Also risk mitigation. If the EFTPOS fails and it's the kind of business where the product is supplied before payment (eg restaurants, hairdressers, fuel) then you've just given away a fortune if you can't accept an alternative form of payment.

I am talking about the ones that accept cash and not card, they are doing that to try and avoid card fees etc or cheat taxes.

 

[moXJO]

I have to disagree with you @moXJO. I personally want it. If I wish to top up my debit card by say $1k, I want to do it today. Not wait until the next business day, drive to a bank location, park, walk through a crowded shopping centre, mess around with forms to transfer from one bank to another, then drive home and wait to see when the transfer has occurred so I can use the funds.

It may be different in rural locations when the bank can be a location for social interaction but I don't think that applies even in this large country town i.e. Canberra.

Same issue if I want to transfer funds to purchase shares. And I certainly don't want to receive dividends/distributions by cheque.

I'm saying a cash system must be properly maintained. Not ditch digital altogether in favor of cash.

 

[moXJO]

The customers want to use digital, there is a reason cash usage is shrinking, it’s a pain in the butt.

The only reason so many small businesses say they are trying to stick to cash is because they see it as being cheaper, but that’s because they are being subsidised.

Any way, I don’t think you are actually looking at this rationally,

A strong cash system needs to stay in place for national security reasons.
Personally I think you are too blasé about the dangers of digital and the way it's heading.

There's only so many times you can call out the deep seated problems if relying on such a vulnerable system alone.

The banks are currently dictating direction that the government should in fact be setting.

Just the fact Australia lost $3.1 billion to scams is insane. But it's the convenience of it, that people then become blind to the risks.

 

[farmerge]

View attachment 189026

Brilliant.

 

[Bellcose]

Just the fact Australia lost $3.1 billion to scams is insane.

More sad than insane. Part of it is psychology as most of us do not believe we are vulnerable to fraud or aware of how we can be deceived. The bad people know it and use techniques to deceive in parting people from their of money. Basically, the problem with scams is us.

As to payment systems.

Payments & Infrastructure

REFORMS: Credit Cards; Debit Cards; The ATM System; ATM Fee Reforms; Review of Card Payment Systems Reforms; Account Switching; POLICY FRAMEWORK: Payments System Board; Core Principles for Systemically Important Payment Systems; Standards for Clearing and Settlement Facilities; Legal Framework...

www.rba.gov.au

The importance of cash is known. There is not only just the frigging banks at play here although many think that.

The Cash-use Cycle in Australia | Bulletin – March 2023

The use of cash for day-to-day transactions has been declining for many years and this has implications for all aspects of the cash system.

www.rba.gov.au

Then there is the consumer.

Consumer Payments Explorer

This interactive tool allows you to explore the payment methods of Australians

www.rba.gov.au

 

[Value Collector]

A strong cash system needs to stay in place for national security reasons.
Personally I think you are too blasé about the dangers of digital and the way it's heading.

There's only so many times you can call out the deep seated problems if relying on such a vulnerable system alone.

The banks are currently dictating direction that the government should in fact be setting.

Just the fact Australia lost $3.1 billion to scams is insane. But it's the convenience of it, that people then become blind to the risks.

Even if it needs to stay in place for national security, why should it not be user pays?

I mean the electricity grid, the water supply, telecommunications system, food system, major Toll roads, airports, shipping ports etc etc are all important to national security but require the user to pay.

Mate, you are just salty because you might have to pay your way, after years of being subsidised.

 

[moXJO]

More sad than insane. Part of it is psychology as most of us do not believe we are vulnerable to fraud or aware of how we can be deceived. The bad people know it and use techniques to deceive in parting people from their of money. Basically, the problem with scams is us.

As to payment systems.

Payments & Infrastructure

REFORMS: Credit Cards; Debit Cards; The ATM System; ATM Fee Reforms; Review of Card Payment Systems Reforms; Account Switching; POLICY FRAMEWORK: Payments System Board; Core Principles for Systemically Important Payment Systems; Standards for Clearing and Settlement Facilities; Legal Framework...

www.rba.gov.au

The importance of cash is known. There is not only just the frigging banks at play here although many think that.

The Cash-use Cycle in Australia | Bulletin – March 2023

The use of cash for day-to-day transactions has been declining for many years and this has implications for all aspects of the cash system.

www.rba.gov.au

Then there is the consumer.

Consumer Payments Explorer

This interactive tool allows you to explore the payment methods of Australians

www.rba.gov.au

Rba is not the government.
Quickly skimmed some of the articles and agree on some points. However my argument is that: putting up barriers to cash no matter how small further deteriorates cash usage. Which in turn makes the whole thing more vulnerable.

I'm not against digital. I'm also not for a perfectly run economy which has no black markets or cash economy. You need these things to some degree.

 

[moXJO]

Even if it needs to stay in place for national security, why should it not be user pays?

I mean the electricity grid, the water supply, telecommunications system, food system, major Toll roads, airports, shipping ports etc etc are all important to national security but require the user to pay.

Because it's for the good of society and banks have backing by the government.

Mate, you are just salty because you might have to pay your way, after years of being subsidised.

 

[Value Collector]

Because it's for the good of society and banks have backing by the government.

You are not even making sense.

All of those industries I mention have the backing of the government.

And as I said the banks pay a special tax for the government guarantee (which is for their customers, not them).

There is no good reason why the users of cash shouldn’t pay for it, just like digital users pay.

 

[Value Hunter]

You are not even making sense.

All of those industries I mention have the backing of the government.

And as I said the banks pay a special tax for the government guarantee (which is for their customers, not them).

There is no good reason why the users of cash shouldn’t pay for it, just like digital users pay.

By definition at least one form of payment has to be fee free otherwise the advertised price is by definition false since you cannot actually access the advertised price. So by that logic if cash users must pay a fee then card payments must be free. Are you advocating card usage is free while those using cash pay?

 

[Value Collector]

By definition at least one form of payment has to be fee free otherwise the advertised price is by definition false since you cannot actually access the advertised price. So by that logic if cash users must pay a fee then card payments must be free. Are you advocating card usage is free while those using cash pay?

You aren’t making sense either, both cash and credit card users can go to McDonalds and buy a Big Mac for the same price, even though McDonald’s incurs credit card costs and cash handling costs.

Just like both people pay the same for the Big Mac even though one pays a $99 annual fee in their credit card and the other pays a $3 fee per withdrawl.

—————-
The cash handling costs and digital payments costs can both be built into the advertised price for the seller, and the bank fees for the buyer without changing the price either is charged at the till.

—————-
I don’t think businesses should be charging extra fees for either cash or card, it should all be built into the price, transaction costs is a cost of doing g business.

In the 12 years I owned a business, I never charged anyone a credit card fee. I understood both cash and card cost me money, and I preferred card.

 

[Value Hunter]

You aren’t making sense either, both cash and credit card users can go to McDonalds and buy a Big Mac for the same price, even though McDonald’s pays both credit card fees and armed guards fees.

Just like both people pay the same for the Big Mac even though one pays a fee $99 annual fee in their credit card and the other pays a $3 fee per withdrawl.

—————-
The cash handling costs and digital payments costs can both be built into the advertised price for the seller, and the bank fees for the buyer without changing the price either is charged at the till.

—————-
I don’t think businesses should be charging extra fees for either cash or card, it should all be built into the price, transaction costs is a cost of doing g business.

In the 12 years I owned a business, I never charged anyone a credit card fee. I understood both cash and card cost me money, and I preferred card.

You cannot compare annual credit card fee to an ATM withdrawal fee because credit cards give you points (whereas cash does not) plus you can get debit cards which are fee free.

 

[Value Collector]

You cannot compare annual credit card fee to an ATM withdrawal fee because credit cards give you points (whereas cash does not) plus you can get debit cards which are fee free.

Sure you can, because firstly the annual fee is only part of the income the bank generates to cover the system costs, the other part is paid by the operator of the credit card terminal.

Secondly, the cost of handling those credit card transactions are much lower than the costs of running ATM withdrawals, so you expect the over all fees paid by the card user to be lower than the cash user once each is paying their way.

 

[Value Collector]

@Value Hunter But can you atleast see my point that having an atm withdrawl fee doesn’t affect the price that is charged to the consumer? So your point about having to have one type of transaction fee is obsolete, because you can have all the transaction fee free

 

[moXJO]

You are not even making sense.

All of those industries I mention have the backing of the government.

And as I said the banks pay a special tax for the government guarantee (which is for their customers, not them).

There is no good reason why the users of cash shouldn’t pay for it, just like digital users pay.

Nope it's not a regular business. Your examples were dogsht and you are now having a hissy fit.

The government would move quickly to shore up banks due to the societal effects if they fell over. They are protected to a greater degree than any other business and that "special tax" they pay is because of that. If anything it only proves it more.

 

[Value Collector]

Nope it's not a regular business. Your examples were dogsht and you are now having a hissy fit.

The government would move quickly to shore up banks due to the societal effects if they fell over. They are protected to a greater degree than any other business and that "special tax" they pay is because of that. If anything it only proves it more.

yes, so any help they get (which they haven’t so far used), is paid for already by that tax they pay, what is your point?

Are you saying they don’t have the right to charge for services they supply??? That’s pretty dumb