Should the ability to pay in cash be a constitutional right?

[breadisfunny]

Yes! You are right! There is also one other matter! Cars! Criminals use cars too! They may escape after robbery with a car! It is a tool of criminals and should be banned!

that point went completely over your head. thats a pretty shitty comaprison you have there. mind cleaning that up?

[TITAN308]

Shitty comparison or not, but if we banned anything that is commonly used by criminals we would not have a whole lot of things.

Do you want to be a nation of laws that are dictated by criminals or free men?

[GennGreymane]

Shitty comparison or not, but if we banned anything that is commonly used by criminals we would not have a whole lot of things.

Like air. Criminals need it to exists soooo....

[TITAN308]

Like air. Criminals need it to exists soooo....

Well I wouldn't stretch that far.

I was thinking;

- cars
- common construction tools
- rope
- backpacks
- head accessories (skull caps, baseball hats, ski masks)
- gloves

etc etc

[vindicatorx]

How about the right of buyer to have privacy?

shop elsewhere then

[GennGreymane]

Well I wouldn't stretch that far.

I was thinking;

- cars
- common construction tools
- rope
- backpacks
- head accessories (skull caps, baseball hats, ski masks)
- gloves

etc etc

I just totally imagined the most cartoony bank robbery..... when most just seem to be guys with pantyhose on their heads with weapons or using a hoodie instead od pantyhose.

[kendro1200]

ive been wondering for a while now how long it would be before banks started selling off our shopping habits to advertisers the same way google and company did. there must be some federal policy holding them back. by now i figured google would have opened a banking institution with the premise that they dont charge you anything, but spy the shit out of you and advertise accordingly.

The main reason banks don't is that banks make money off our money. We drop off money with them and they give us credit, they take our money and invest it to make themselves money. They wouldn't want to do anything to scare away customers because honestly the money they could make selling our buying habits is trivial to the money they make by using our money.

[Alydael]

What about a businesses' constitutional right to not accept cash? Or, rather, their right to accept the form of payment they chose for the product or the service rendered?

The two exceptions should be the government and banks. The government because they print the cash, so they should accept it and banks because they are a financial institution.

I don't care if cash goes the way of the dinosaurs, but they do need to figure out a better security system to avoid: identity theft, credit card/ debit card theft, etc. If they do away with cash, as the system is now, there will be an instantaneous massive case of electronic theft. The hackers will be salivating just waiting for the government to do away with cash.

[TITAN308]

So maybe I am totally off base;

But...

Large organizations (like banks or government) want to promote the use of electronic funds over cash.

Can we take a wild guess which of one of these two choices don't make them any money? lol

More to the point, which one of the two is far more harder to track than the other? /tinfoil hat

[Deleted]

I think being able to make (legal) anonymous purchases is important. In a ideal world cash wouldn't be required to do that, but in reality its probably the only way.

Getting rid of cash would make money theft and illegal purchases a lot harder though, so that would be a big plus. So i guess with enough privacy guarantees by law i could support getting rid of cash.

[Deleted]

It's not really an important discussion, there really is no reason other than being able to keep fraud alive in businesses.

- - - Updated - - -



I personally am immune to advertisement, I haven't bought a single product in my life after my teenage years because of advertisement.

I don't think you know what advertisement is

[Masark]

how do you think money laundering works?

With bank accounts, not suitcases of bills.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSBC#Money_laundering

[Caolela]

I'm 24. And I only pay in cash if I have no other option and I can't think of 1 reason to not pay digitally.

Your age is not important to the topic, whether you're 24 or 74.

The Deputy Economy Minister in the article just gave you the reason:

“We don’t want someone to be able to track digitally what we buy, eat and drink, what books we read and what movies we watch,”


It is a backdoor invasion of privacy, which eventually can be used against you.

[Cyberowl]

So maybe I am totally off base;

But...

Large organizations (like banks or government) want to promote the use of electronic funds over cash.

Can we take a wild guess which of one of these two choices don't make them any money? lol

More to the point, which one of the two is far more harder to track than the other? /tinfoil hat

I don't think banks are making a secret out of that... Economically speaking money in banks is far more preferable though. Makes it easier for the FED to control the cash flow and deposited money is reloaned. And it's more comfortable, too. Just look at what happened in early 2015 in Greece, the banks needed some heavy refinancing after the trust was gone.