In China, you can’t exist without a smartphone, because for all existential things you have to do (paying bills, buying tickets etc.) , you are forced to use the almighty wechat app. Smartphones are a tool to manipulate and to spy on the population. It is a tool utilized by the ruling class, to control the masses. I hate the future and I hate “progress”.

  • hoodatninja@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The thing that is bothering me right now is seeing “cashless” establishments. Frankly, it’s kind of discriminatory, and I do not know how you can justify denying people goods and services if they are carrying the currency of the country they live in. That does not sit right with me.

    • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      1 year ago

      San Francisco made it illegal for public facing businesses to be cashless. They deem it discriminatory towards people who aren’t able to get credit cards.

    • DirigibleProtein@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is it even legal to be cashless? What happened to “this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private"?

      • kirklennon@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        What happened to “this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private"?

        The key word is debts. When you want to buy something in a store, you owe money if you want it, but you have not incurred a debt. You can just not buy it. You and the seller start at an even place, trade goods/services for money, and end even. If you have a debt, you’re starting the transaction at a negative place and are trying to get back to even.

    • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it’s a private business then that’s their choice. It’s your choice to not give them your $. I don’t see how that’s discrimination? If they have something that you really want, then you’ll choose a cashless option.

        • QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I can’t take you to civil court if I’m claiming you won’t pay for something as you stand there waving the money in front of my face.

          On this front. If you owe them money, they must accept cash. This is why people can pay thousands of pennies at tow yards. Or if you eat at a restaurant and they bring the bill, they can’t then say they’ll only take card, they must accept the cash.

          Physical money is “…legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues.” Notice that purchases/private charges or trades are not included in that.

            • lukzak@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Wow, that’s pretty crazy to think that so many people can’t/won’t get a bank account. Are these people undocumented immigrants with no identification? Is this the same part of the population that is targeted by the ID laws for voting?

              How are those people getting money? Is it really possible in the USA to just be paid with an envelope of cash? Or is it under the table work? Or if they are poor, is there any kind of benefit/welfare from the government? Don’t they need a bank account to receive those funds?

              I’m just asking because in my country, I was able to open a bank account for free. I’ve had it for a year and I’ve never even deposited any money into it. But I have a debit card for that account. It seems impossible to me to have no access to a bank account. Even if you’re homeless, you’re still able to use your town hall as a contact address for official things.

              • hoodatninja@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Banks in the US are tricky business sometimes. They often want a lot of info (understandably) but someone does not have a home may not be able to provide some of it. They may not have a phone number, they may not have an address, they may not have either. Could also be undocumented individuals are part of it, I’m sure they factor in. Maybe someone decided to go “off grid” and stop using anything connected to the government they can and is now a mattress stuffer lol. Point is cash should always be acceptable outside of edge cases IMO.

                Or if they are poor, is there any kind of benefit/welfare from the government?

                Yes but it’s very mediocre generally unless their state/city has invested more into social programs, which is the exception and not the rule in the US. In my state unemployment insurance (welfare) is I think…237.00/wk so not even $1,000/mo (haven’t been on it in a few years now forgot exact number).

        • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Mom and Pop store shouldn’t be forced to pay for a cash register and a safe. Nor face an increase possibility of robbery looking for cash.

          Now, instead of homeless hanging out by the entrance/exit begging for change, they can hang out and beg a customer to take their $2 cash to buy them water.

          They’re not being banned from buying something they might need. They just need to be more creative.

            • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Of course you don’t like an example that goes against your bs narrative.

              Many places around the globe have been moving toward cashless purchasing. Hell, you can walk into some Whole Foods and walk out without any type of transaction. If you don’t think that level of interaction will become more wide spread… you seriously need to pull your head out of the sand.

                • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Bottom line is IMO it certainly isn’t discrimination. Homeless person with enough cash for a bottle of water that only has a cashless option can try to exchange their cash for someone to make the purchase. Now, if they have a hard time finding someone, you could argue that individual people that won’t help are being discriminatory.

                  • kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    “It isn’t that we built a system that specifically punishes and prohibits the poor and homeless. It’s those darned lazy people who won’t jump through the hurdles we installed to help them.”

      • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Homeless people usually only have cash. The kinds of places that are cashless usually don’t have goods at prices a homeless person would be purchasing something at but you can see how it’s a concerning trend. And I’m sure privacy minded individuals would prefer to use cash when possible

      • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Alright, everything you said makes sense. That might even be how it is supposed to work. But I don’t like it regardless that legal tender won’t be accepted by a merchant. It feels like a corporation having a chokehold on what you buy and from where, and instant knowledge of people’s spending habits.