Obama open to the elimination of penny

[Conscentia]

Also, what the fuck happens after a natural disaster when the internet goes down?

There are these cool things called "checks" (or "cheques", if you're British or just like using the letter 'Q').

Here's how it works:

• You fill out the information on the piece of paper that is the check.
• You hand it to the seller.
• The seller deposits it as his/her bank or credit union.
• The seller gets money.

Pretty straightforward if you ask me.

I vaguely recall reading something in favour of abolishing cheques.

[Northwest Slobovia]

So what if you have to buy something on a government holiday? Or an unexpected expense pops up after your hour is up, or after the library is closed?

I dont get the idea that electronic payment means web transaction. In Hong Kong, you can use oyster card to pay for pretty much anything in traditional brick and mortar store. Similar concept can be introduced where customer goes and taps card on reader. Money is taken out of the account and transferred to seller's account.

This too. As YellowApple implies, there's no reason electronic transfers can't work like che[ck|que]s. With off the shelf electronics (ie, ultracapacitors) it should be possible to make the money cards work for a few transactions even if mains power is out. It just requires planning for it.

[Grenartia]

Source?

And probably not even all the poor. Not to mention that there are certain places in this country where people live where there are NO internet service providers.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/col ... 55315532/1

Yeah, just as I thought.

Yes, but they're not always open, and some people may live too far away to reasonably be expected to drive to one. Not to mention that there may be time limits on usage.

1. 82% of people have access to internet and that number is increasing. This is a non-issue.

Also, what the fuck happens after a natural disaster when the internet goes down?
These are the problems inherent to eliminating paper currency in favor of electronic currency.

2. Contact less payment card.

1. Except for the 18%.

2. And if you lose the card? Or it gets stolen?

Also, what the fuck happens after a natural disaster when the internet goes down?

There are these cool things called "checks" (or "cheques", if you're British or just like using the letter 'Q').

Here's how it works:

• You fill out the information on the piece of paper that is the check.
• You hand it to the seller.
• The seller deposits it as his/her bank or credit union.
• The seller gets money.

Pretty straightforward if you ask me.

I am well aware of what a check is. However, what was being advocated was a complete switchover to electronic currency. I saw no mention of checks still being valid.

So basically, fuck people without access to the internet.

1. Are you planning on giving up on writing because some people are blind or music because some people are deaf? I hope not, because either of those would be stupid.

The reality is that being poor, blind, or deaf sucks. We try to help people whose lives suck, but we don't stop the world for them. Since I got cash a little while ago, I know that that ATM has braille printing on it, and there's a button to press to make the ATM talk. But US currency is all the same size, so blind people are on their own keeping it straight. (They fold it in different ways, apparently.) So, we take some steps for them, but don't do without conveniences for ourselves. Not everybody has to deal with a voice-only ATM.

2. Further, in point of fact:

a) No internet, no online shopping anyway. That sucks. That means you pay more for stuff. As I said, it sucks to be poor.

b) If for some reason the US went to completely electronic-money-only, we'd be foolish to design a system that depended on something as dodgy as today's internet. So, I think the objection is silly.

1. You're comparing apples to pickup trucks.

2.A. Yes. That is why we should make life easier for the poor.

2.B. My concerns (especially those regarding natural disasters) are still perfectly valid.

[AiliailiA]

Source?

And probably not even all the poor. Not to mention that there are certain places in this country where people live where there are NO internet service providers.

There's also people who don't want internet access. (The Amish a good example.)

The Amish can barter instead then. It's probably closer to their ideals than using government-issued paper cash.

[Saiwania]

This too. As YellowApple implies, there's no reason electronic transfers can't work like che[ck|que]s. With off the shelf electronics (ie, ultracapacitors) it should be possible to make the money cards work for a few transactions even if mains power is out. It just requires planning for it.

Sounds more complicated with more overhead than just ink and paper. It is like when NASA spent $1 million to develop a pen that will write in outer space but the USSR just used a pencil.

[Ovisterra]

This too. As YellowApple implies, there's no reason electronic transfers can't work like che[ck|que]s. With off the shelf electronics (ie, ultracapacitors) it should be possible to make the money cards work for a few transactions even if mains power is out. It just requires planning for it.

Sounds more complicated with more overhead than just ink and paper. It is like when NASA spent $1 million to develop a pen that will write in outer space but the USSR just used a pencil.

I've heard this story plenty of times, but I've yet to see it sourced.

[Great Nepal]

1. 82% of people have access to internet and that number is increasing. This is a non-issue.


2. Contact less payment card.

1. Except for the 18%.

2. And if you lose the card? Or it gets stolen?

1. That is very tiny and shrinking minority which will largely cease to exist in few decades.
2a. As long as the pin is secure, you are fine.
b. Then you use backup. Second card, wristband, keyring, watch, phone or if you trust technology enough chip in hand.

[Conscentia]

There's also people who don't want internet access. (The Amish a good example.)

The Amish can barter instead then. It's probably closer to their ideals than using government-issued paper cash.

· One shouldn't have to barter because the economy doesn't like one's way of life.
· The Amish are not the only technology avoiders.

[YellowApple]

There are these cool things called "checks" (or "cheques", if you're British or just like using the letter 'Q').

(Image)

Here's how it works:

• You fill out the information on the piece of paper that is the check.
• You hand it to the seller.
• The seller deposits it as his/her bank or credit union.
• The seller gets money.

Pretty straightforward if you ask me.

I vaguely recall reading something in favour of abolishing cheques.

That would be silly. Banking institutions continue to use checks internally in order to handle things like paying bills on behalf of their customers (I one time changed the biller address for Sprint in my account to my own to test this; I received a check addressed from me to Sprint with the exact amount I would have paid), and I imagine some banks / credit unions still use checks to handle monetary transactions among one another.

Not to mention that - generally - one's bank-issued debit card is linked to a checking account, so abolishing checks would have some major implications regarding how debit cards work.

[AiliailiA]

Sounds more complicated with more overhead than just ink and paper. It is like when NASA spent $1 million to develop a pen that will write in outer space but the USSR just used a pencil.

I've heard this story plenty of times, but I've yet to see it sourced.

Straight Dope should sort it out for you. From memory, Parker (manufacturers of fountain pens and so on) spent the big money fulfilling a rather modest contract for NASA ... seeing a business opportunity to sell pens that write in space yadayada ... and made their money back just fine. The taxpayer wasn't billed for the "millions of dollars".

[Grenartia]

So what if you have to buy something on a government holiday? Or an unexpected expense pops up after your hour is up, or after the library is closed?

I dont get the idea that electronic payment means web transaction. In Hong Kong, you can use oyster card to pay for pretty much anything in traditional brick and mortar store. Similar concept can be introduced where customer goes and taps card on reader. Money is taken out of the account and transferred to seller's account.

Still need to access your account. Also, your cards are still pretty fucking useless when the internet in an area is down (such as after natural disasters).

Or you, (call me crazy) pay cash! Because you actually have the money with you and you don't need a 3rd party to access it!

Mighty convenient for anyone thinking of mugging you too.

Implying that people wouldn't mug you for your card.

1. Except for the 18%.

2. And if you lose the card? Or it gets stolen?

1. That is very tiny and shrinking minority which will largely cease to exist in few decades.
2a. As long as the pin is secure, you are fine.
b. Then you use backup. Second card, wristband, keyring, watch, phone or if you trust technology enough chip in hand.

1. I don't call nearly 1 out of 5 people a 'very tiny minority'.
2A. Granted...
2B. And if you can't afford all that?

I dont get the idea that electronic payment means web transaction. In Hong Kong, you can use oyster card to pay for pretty much anything in traditional brick and mortar store. Similar concept can be introduced where customer goes and taps card on reader. Money is taken out of the account and transferred to seller's account.

This too. As YellowApple implies, there's no reason electronic transfers can't work like che[ck|que]s. With off the shelf electronics (ie, ultracapacitors) it should be possible to make the money cards work for a few transactions even if mains power is out. It just requires planning for it.

Still doesn't mean shit when the internet is down.

[Minoriteeburg]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/col ... 55315532/1

Yeah, just as I thought.

1. 82% of people have access to internet and that number is increasing. This is a non-issue.


2. Contact less payment card.

1. Except for the 18%.

2. And if you lose the card? Or it gets stolen?

There are these cool things called "checks" (or "cheques", if you're British or just like using the letter 'Q').

Here's how it works:

• You fill out the information on the piece of paper that is the check.
• You hand it to the seller.
• The seller deposits it as his/her bank or credit union.
• The seller gets money.

Pretty straightforward if you ask me.

I am well aware of what a check is. However, what was being advocated was a complete switchover to electronic currency. I saw no mention of checks still being valid.

Well if you had one of these epic natural disasters that is what you could do. Use a check.

[Marcurix]

$10 million saved by cutting the penny means $10 million not cut from somewhere else to balance the budget.

[Saiwania]

Well if you had one of these epic natural disasters that is what you could do. Use a check.

Well, my argument is that it would be foolish to discontinue physical cash for the same reason abolishing checks would be, in that people still have a demand for physical currency.

[Grenartia]

Yeah, just as I thought.



1. Except for the 18%.

2. And if you lose the card? Or it gets stolen?



I am well aware of what a check is. However, what was being advocated was a complete switchover to electronic currency. I saw no mention of checks still being valid.

Well if you had one of these epic natural disasters that is what you could do. Use a check.

Paper is easier. Doesn't require writing shit down, which takes time.

Not even mentioning that what's seeming to be advocated here is abolishing checks as well.

[Northwest Slobovia]

2. And if you lose the card? Or it gets stolen?

Now you're just being silly: What happens when you lose your wallet?

1. Are you planning on giving up on writing because some people are blind or music because some people are deaf? I hope not, because either of those would be stupid.

The reality is that being poor, blind, or deaf sucks. We try to help people whose lives suck, but we don't stop the world for them. Since I got cash a little while ago, I know that that ATM has braille printing on it, and there's a button to press to make the ATM talk. But US currency is all the same size, so blind people are on their own keeping it straight. (They fold it in different ways, apparently.) So, we take some steps for them, but don't do without conveniences for ourselves. Not everybody has to deal with a voice-only ATM.

2. Further, in point of fact:

a) No internet, no online shopping anyway. That sucks. That means you pay more for stuff. As I said, it sucks to be poor.

b) If for some reason the US went to completely electronic-money-only, we'd be foolish to design a system that depended on something as dodgy as today's internet. So, I think the objection is silly.

1. You're comparing apples to pickup trucks.

Not at all. You're saying the majority should do without something because a small minority can't use it. I'm pointing out that many different minorities do without plenty of things already, and the majority happily continues to use them anyway.

2.A. Yes. That is why we should make life easier for the poor.

I'm willing to lower the barriers to gainful employment to make it easier for them to get jobs. Need transportation to get to work? Fine, here's a subsidy. Need training for a job? Fine, here's a subsidy. Need daycare for your kids so you can work full time? Fine...

Oh, that's not what you meant...

But, if we a) have gone to e-money and b) are giving subsidies to the poor, then, um, yes, it would seem silly to design an e-money system that prevents them from getting the subsidy. My understanding is that the US government already provides most subsidies via electronic payment cards or direct deposit into bank accounts, so I guess I guess they've found a way to make that work.

[Minoriteeburg]

Well if you had one of these epic natural disasters that is what you could do. Use a check.

Paper is easier. Doesn't require writing shit down, which takes time.

Not even mentioning that what's seeming to be advocated here is abolishing checks as well.

Checks are made from paper last I checked. And no we were talking about dollars and cents earlier. I saw no mention of checks.

[Northwest Slobovia]

This too. As YellowApple implies, there's no reason electronic transfers can't work like che[ck|que]s. With off the shelf electronics (ie, ultracapacitors) it should be possible to make the money cards work for a few transactions even if mains power is out. It just requires planning for it.

Still doesn't mean shit when the internet is down.

Why do you say that? Stores can take cash when the net is down, why couldn't they take electronic payment too? There's no reason to assume all transactions must be processed online in real time. Store and forward will work just fine if the electronic payment system is designed for it. If I were designing an e-money system, you could bet your ass I wouldn't assume the net was up all the time to make it work.

[Conscentia]

Paper is easier. Doesn't require writing shit down, which takes time.
Not even mentioning that what's seeming to be advocated here is abolishing checks as well.

Checks are made from paper last I checked. And no we were talking about dollars and cents earlier. I saw no mention of checks.

What was proposed was total digitalisation.

[Great Nepal]

Still need to access your account. Also, your cards are still pretty fucking useless when the internet in an area is down (such as after natural disasters).

Then the details are stored in a computer and payment taken out at earliest possible time.

1. I don't call nearly 1 out of 5 people a 'very tiny minority'.
2A. Granted...
2B. And if you can't afford all that?

If you cant afford wristband or keyring, currency transaction is not likely to affect you. Also with social welfare systems in place in most nations, state will give you a wristband or keyring if you cant afford it. That should cost no more than £20.

[Saiwania]

My understanding is that the US government already provides most subsidies via electronic payment cards or direct deposit into bank accounts, so I guess I guess they've found a way to make that work.

Because there are ATM machines where you can convert digital to physical currency if you need to. If that goes away, guess what? It no longer works.

[Dyakovo]

Sounds more complicated with more overhead than just ink and paper. It is like when NASA spent $1 million to develop a pen that will write in outer space but the USSR just used a pencil.

I've heard this story plenty of times, but I've yet to see it sourced.

That would be because its bullshit.

[AiliailiA]

The Amish can barter instead then. It's probably closer to their ideals than using government-issued paper cash.

· One shouldn't have to barter because the economy doesn't like one's way of life.
· The Amish are not the only technology avoiders.

One shouldn't have to use cash because "the economy doesn't like one's way of life".

Yet weirdly, those people do use cash instead of bartering. Geez, just like with cash they'll get used to it. The only real beneficiaries of anonymous cash (this is the main distinction between electronic cash/cheques and paper cash) are in fact criminals.

Criminals benefit more than anyone else from being able to buy and sell anonymously. Don't think that I'm thirsting to lock more people up: we can actually have fewer laws and we can punish each detected crime much less harshly, if we can just get clearup rates for property crime up to the 80-90% level of homicides. A less harsh punishment would actually be a more effective deterrent if it were only more certain to happen.

I will address the issue of privacy (of the citizen, from their government) when I return. I don't dismiss it entirely, but it's complicated and I'm done for the day.

EDIT: I thought I was done for the day. It's hard to quit when a thread goes like this one does.

[Minoriteeburg]

Still doesn't mean shit when the internet is down.

Why do you say that? Stores can take cash when the net is down, why couldn't they take electronic payment too? There's no reason to assume all transactions must be processed online in real time. Store and forward will work just fine if the electronic payment system is designed for it. If I were designing an e-money system, you could bet your ass I wouldn't assume the net was up all the time to make it work.

^This.

Also most of the major data centers that store all of the transaction information have backup generators so that they stay online when the power goes out.

Unless if we are having a Day After Tomorrow situation, they most likely won't be shut down.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Still need to access your account. Also, your cards are still pretty fucking useless when the internet in an area is down (such as after natural disasters).

Then the details are stored in a computer and payment taken out at earliest possible time.

1. I don't call nearly 1 out of 5 people a 'very tiny minority'.
2A. Granted...
2B. And if you can't afford all that?

If you cant afford wristband or keyring, currency transaction is not likely to affect you.

You could also point out that anyone who can't afford the single dollar items is most likely receiving government services to survive, or bumming on the street. That's a poverty issue, and won't be HARMED by changing from coin to pure denim currency.