The Future of Money 439
Snuggums writes "Apparently some major forces at play in the tech money world. People like Vint Cerf, Tim O'Reilly, Andre Durand, and Cory Doctorow are teaming up with Tom Frey and the futurist think tank, DaVinci Institute, to dive into the forces at play with a Future of Money Summit later this year. They've even tapped a Nobel Prize winner and Visa founder, Dee Hock. They're hoping to answer questions like; what kind of money you'll be putting into vending machines 25 years from now; when will cash disappear; when will our current banking system become obsolete; and who gets to own money in the future?"
Hehe. (Score:5, Funny)
Apparently some english majors at play in the Slashdot world.
Re:Hehe. (Score:2, Funny)
you must be new here.....
xao
Re:Hehe. (Score:3, Funny)
"Apparently no english majors at play in the Slashdot world"?
Did George Washington and Benjamin Franklin... (Score:5, Funny)
Future of Money Summit (Score:5, Funny)
$995 per person before April 15, 2003
$1,195 after April 15, 2003 up to the day of the event.
That's not the future of my money.
It never ceases to amaze me... (Score:4, Insightful)
These conferences are primarily interesting because of the people that attend them, yet by pricing their conferences like that they are virtually guaranteeing that the only people who turn up are Sun and Microsoft's [insert conference buzzword here] evangelists, and a bunch of journalists.
Re:It never ceases to amaze me... (Score:5, Informative)
Most technical conferences give out lots and lots of free complimentary tickets to their events. That's partly why the remaining tickets get to be so expensive. If you don't receive any free complimentary tickets yourself, then it could possibly mean you're not really part of the social fabric of those communities.
I am not making an assertion, so please don't get upset, I am just making a guess based on my personal experience.
Volunteer And Gen In Free? (Score:4, Insightful)
I have volunteered at conferences including Unsenix, Interop, WWW Consortium, and others and have allways received complementary admission.
It may be too late for this one, but if you become aware of stuff in the future (> 6 Months), you might have a better chance of getting in.
Especially if you off to do a key role, such as head up registration, logistics, whatever.
Mark
Dont you know? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dont you know? (Score:5, Funny)
well just last week... (Score:3, Interesting)
I stopped using cash about 3 years ago. I keep two checking accounts and one savings account. I have a seperate check card for the second checking account and I transfer money to it for purchases (even at the grocery store just incase someone hits and extra zero and empties my account).
Once Wendy's and drug dealers take CC's I am set.
Drugs and Credit Cards (Score:2)
I read (somewhere, back in the late eighties?) that a majority of twenty dollar bills tested positive for micro-traces of cocaine
It may be true... (Score:5, Interesting)
And I tend to believe Snopes.
AS long as thay have anonomous cash (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:AS long as thay have anonomous cash (Score:3, Informative)
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/08/213
Re:AS long as thay have anonomous cash (Score:3, Insightful)
Rather than badly paraphrase his thinking, I'll just quote the introduction to "Security without Identification":
Computerization is robbing individuals of the ability to monitor and control the ways information about them is used. Already, public and private sector organizations acquire extensive personal information and exchange it amongst themselves. Individuals have no way of knowing if this information is inaccurate, outdated, or otherwise inappropriate, and may only find out when they are accused falsely or denied access to services. New and more serious dangers derive from computerized pattern recognition techniques: even a small group using these and tapping into data gathered in everyday consumer transactions could secretly conduct mass surveillance, inferring individuals' lifestyles, activities, and associations. The automation of payment and other consumer transactions is expanding these dangers to an unprecedented extent.
Organizations, on the other hand, are attracted to the efficiency and cost-cutting opportunities of such automation. Moreover, they too are vulnerable, as when cash, checks, consumer credit, insurance, or social services are abused by individuals. The obvious solution for organizations is to computerize in ways that use more pervasive and interlinked records, perhaps in combination with national identity cards or even fingerprints. But the resulting potential for misuse of data would have a chilling effect on individuals. Nevertheless, this is essentially the approach of the electronic payment and other automated systems now being tried. Although these systems will require massive investment and years to complete, their underlying architecture is already quietly being decided and their institutional momentum is growing.
This momentum is driving us toward a seemingly irreconcilable conflict, between organizations' need for security and the benefits of automation on one side, and individuals' need for ensured privacy and other protections on the other. But this conflict may be avoided by early adoption of a fundamentally different approach to automating transaction systems. This new approach is mutually advantageous: it actually increases organizations' benefits from automating, including improved security, while it frees individuals from the surveillance potential of data linking and other dangers of unchecked record keeping. Its more advanced techniques offer not only wider use at reduced cost, but also greater consumer convenience and protection. In the long run, it holds promise for enhancing economic freedom, the democratic process, and informational rights.
Of course the technology Chaum advocates is not the only way to conduct monetary (and other) transactions. You can be sure that there are powerful forces that would like nothing better than to have improved access into people's private business. At the very least, people should realize there are other options.
I'm Not Afraid of Ashcroft... (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, what I'm really afraid of is that my wife may be the highest bidder. "What's this? You bought a pak of cigarettes, 3 beers and a Maxim?"
Re:AS long as thay have anonomous cash (Score:5, Insightful)
Some idiots in the government recently examined all of Safeway's California customer relations management files and compiled a list of people in California who had bought hummus [weblogsky.com] of all things. You think they won't ask Barnes and Noble for a list of people who have purchased copies of 2600? The goons who are searching for hummus eaters will certainly find you. Think you have nothing to hide? Then you'll have no problem with letting them in when they show up at your door after the 4th Amendment has been legislated away!
You've probably got a big red flag next to your name in a number of databases. But maybe you can repair the damage. I suggest you get your CC out right now and use it to buy 50 copies of "A Charge To Keep" [barnesandnoble.com]. This will prove to the Attorney General that you're one of the sheep who won't cause any trouble and who deserves to keep his citizenship after PATRIOT II passes.
Next time you buy 2600, make sure you've got your tinfoil hat on first!
A bigger question. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:A bigger question. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A bigger question. (Score:2)
OTOH, I've not yet heard of a cashiers check being held, (or cash for that matter, although large deposits have to be reported
Re:A bigger question. (Score:2)
Re:A bigger question. (Score:2)
Then again stuff like Credit card and what not, go through this humoungous worldwide database... which I can only imagine is one massive flat text file. But I'm surely wrong =).
And finally, when you wire stuff between two banks, you have to basically have a period where *if* the source bank bails out of the transaction, and the destination bank has already used the cash, there is no floating cash debt - in the end, you have to remember cash is not electronic, there still is the money involved.
Re:A bigger question. (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the future of money... I don't see cash disappearing in the next 25 years. Cash is still very convenient for a numbe of purposes and I carry some with me at all times. Cash is useful for person-to-person transactions on the spot, and as a safeguard against overdrawn accounts, broken electronic wallets and the debit card / ATM / CC verification server being down. If any of these happen to you while you're checking out in the supermarket, you'll be glad to be carrying soe cash.
I think we will see a form of Internet (micro) payments such as Paypal coming into being in the next 25 years. It'll be less clunky and more fail-safe than Paypal as it will be run by proper banks and institutions. Most likely it will be seen as a regular banking transaction system, and be subject to the susual government regulations, scrutiny and taxes where applicable.
Cash is good if you're a consultant (Score:5, Funny)
A manager would rip you a new one if you constantly paid with a CC/debit card.
Re:A bigger question. (Score:2)
The cost of updating these systems (and the organisations that maintain them) would probably be horrific. I'm guessing that the value - in terms of profit - for the banks that would have to do it, rpobably just doesn't make it worth it.
The web site is scarey (Score:2)
All that is missing is the exhorting not to put your money under the bed - because that's where the commies are.
No commies under MY bed (Score:2)
Damn the Hungry Imperialists! (Score:2)
If they hunt the Boogeyman [dotplanet.com] to extinction, what will be left to frighten the children?
Thought Leaders? or Loss Leaders? (Score:3, Funny)
- Future of Money Summit [futureofmoneysummit.com]
It says "thought leaders"
Nobel prize winner? (Score:2)
Is Slashdot in the business of granting Nobel prizes now?
Re:Nobel prize winner? (Score:2)
No cash = rampant spending (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No cash = rampant spending (Score:3, Insightful)
Cash dissapear? 25 years? (Score:2)
The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:5, Insightful)
Money has been around for 3200 years [pbs.org]. Trade "I'll give you 2 sheep for one cow" has been around for thousands more.
I remember hearing these "cashless society" arguments in 1980. I look in my wallet 23 years later, and I still have a wad of cash in there, along with a credit card and ATM card. Sure, much of my purchasing is electronic, but it's far from cashless.
Now people are again saying "We'll be a cashless society in 25 years", and I still don't believe them. I've heard it before.
It reminds me of the "computers will solve all your paperwork problems. We will be a paperless society in 25 years." Cash is not going away anytime soon just because some money-geeks think they found an alternative.
As Ivanova from Babylon 5 said:
"Every time somebody says we're coming into a paperless society, I get 10 more forms to fill out."
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:3, Informative)
I live in Northern California, and everything is wired. I buy food and groceries using my ATM card. I pay my bills using EFT or checks. When my car needs gas, all of the pumps have built in readers. Even the local McDonalds, Wendy's, and Burger Kings have card readers at the counter. EVERY store I visit, from WalMart, to SaveMart(groceries), to the dingy little corner store run by the non-english speaking Punjabi down the street, has some type of card reader capable of processing electronic transactions. To be 100% honest, I can't even remember the last time I was in a store that didn't take plastic. In many areas, the cashless society is already here for those who choose to embrace it. For everyone else, it's just a matter of time.
Kinda sucks when the power goes out though
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:5, Interesting)
In the Bay Area, I find that some of the smaller hole-in-the-wall resturants and several of the larger produce stores don't take plastic. The food at the resturants is good, and the ATM is nearby, so I keep going.
Some large places that don't take plastic: Zachary's Pizza in Oakland and Berkeley, Monterey Produce Market in Berkeley. Thousands of people go through each place every week, and the owner's attitude is "Plastic is a hassle, and 5% of purchases are fradulent, therefore I don't bother."
Phone lines/Sept. 11th (Score:4, Interesting)
Or, alternatively, when phone/telecommunications systems go down. Anyone who was in Manhattan on September 11th and the days immediately following will probably recall that many stores had either ceased accepting cards at all, or had set up special lines because only a few of their readers were working. This was due to the incredible call volumes that were jamming up the city's relatively limited numbers of long-distance circuits.
Fortunately, most of the ATMs were up and running (though a few had run out of cash, because so many people were using them where previously they'd just relied on their check/credit cards.)
I love my check card, but I'm pretty sure it won't be there for me on that occasion when I most desperately need it.
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:4, Insightful)
And taxes, my friend are the reason why the government would love to have a non-anonymous (nymous? nymful? identible?) cashless society, and every small businessman in existence would hate it. As would lovers of privacy and freedom, but that goes without saying, I hope.
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:2)
Well, I wasn't around until '84, and my wallet is still just as empty.
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:2)
I am a lazy programmer . I can write small python scripts, java applets and such, but I am too lazy to create a full blown app that anybody would pay more than 5 dollars for, especially without knowing if it catches on.
Now if there was a system that would let me easily set up an account for collecting 10 cent fees without adding 1 dollar commission to each transfer, I could try to write some mini-apps (I actually have a few ideas for a 10 cent mini-apps) and see if people buy any of them. Well, if they did I could add some features and sell the lucky app for 20 cents per licence then and get rich :-)
Well, with the current system I could ask people to send me coins in letters, but I think no one would bother, filling a secure web form is much easier.
Feel free to answer with "business model" jokes, heh heh.
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:2)
A paperless office... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A paperless office... (Score:4, Funny)
What is money? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not sure what the banking requirements for e-money schemes would be like, but banks are only required to keep a small fraction of deposits in reserve. If that applied to e-money as well it would expand the investment options for the money collected by e-money firms.
Of course, consumers understand this logic perfectly well --- why should I pay for the privilege of spending my own money? why not just use a debit card and cut out the intermediate steps? That's one reason why these ideas have been floating around since the 1980's without really catching on.
My point: a lot of hype about a "cashless society" is coming from firms with an interest in replacing the current system with one in which they effectively "issue currency" and make money off of the float, as well as from percentage based and flat fees. They don't mean "cashless"--they mean "use our cash instead of theirs."
arrrggh, I never thought it would come to this, but...
1) issue alternative currency
2) ????
3) Profit!
except that in this case ????? = collect interest.
blog-O-rama [annmariabell.com]
Article? Substance? (Score:2)
I'll consider myself informed, but forgive me for not participating in the random posts that will result.
Yesss (Score:2)
Currency exchange (Score:2)
Mostly, of course, I can spend real, American dollars to get food (or anything else). But the money my parents paid for my meal plan at my college comes to me in the form of 9 meal credits per week and 150 "Entree Plus points" per semester. The Entree Plus points work like money, except that I can only spend them at certain places that, for the most part, only sell food.
If you subtract $150 from the amount my parents paid for my meal plan, it leaves $13 or so per meal credit. So, when I go to the cafeteria and have a bowl of cereal, it costs my parents $13. Interestingly, when I go to the convenience store in a nearby dorm to cash in my meal credits for food, each credit buys me at most $4.55 worth of food.
Basically, my school has two proprietary currencies. The irony is that wherever I can use one of those currencies, I can also use real money if I so choose. Next year methinks I'll go without a meal plan. The future of money: increased ease of use through open standards.
No Nobel Prize (Score:3, Informative)
Ooops.
Re:No Nobel Prize (Score:2)
The submission is unclear as to if a Nobel prize winner will be speaking. It just says he's been "tapped". I'll leave that for others to interpret.
My answers... (Score:2)
Why should it? It's like asking, when will paper books disappear? Paperless office anyone? I don't think cash is going to disappear, it's useful.
when will our current banking system become obsolete?
Oh, I know this one! Our current banking system will become obsolete at p:30pm on the 18th of March, 2019.
and who gets to own money in the future?
What??? Could the answer be - people who provide a product or service or which others are willing to pay??
Can't these people think of some more sensible questions to ask?
They got Cory Doctorow? (Score:2)
So many possibilities. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's no technological reason why you can't have a single card serving multiple functions - from Cash to ATM to Credit to ID to License to Portfolio - and while there's an obvious efficiency advantage there are big questions about counterfeiting, privacy, theft, reliability, and infrastructure-independent person-to-person transactions.
The big question is how this would affect processes in place that control the creation and destruction of money, and whether newer systems could improve upon the existing one (money exists as a form of debt to a bank, which can create it through processes such as fractional lending). The big caveat is that banks are too rich to ever let anyone take over their business or take it in a direction they don't want. Make no mistake, they're in this for the money.
Wonder who'll be at that conference?
a problem (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
People under 18 can have checking accounts. That's how you learn how to manage money, by having a finite amount to manage, not by having some open-ended letter of credit.
Checking accounts (Score:2)
Not everywhere. I had a bad experience with this, myself. When I was about to start college, my mom went with me to get a checking account. We went to a local branch of a national chain of banks (so I would be able to access it easily at school as well as at home).
Because I wasn't 18 yet, they wouldn't let me have a checking account. Period. Not even if my mother co-signed for it.
Now, I was about to go to college. When I'm 400 miles away, I have to pay some of my own expenses, like books and non-cafeteria food. I wasn't asking for a credit card, just a way to write checks and pay my bills.
I ended up getting a checking account (with a debit card, no less) from my parents' credit union. It was the only place I found where a minor could have a checking account - and I didn't even need a co-sign. Unfortunately, they're only in my hometown - but their level of service makes them worthwhile to me. And I still remember that none of those other banks would give me an account 4 years ago.
Re:a problem (Score:2)
The credit card companies got alot of flack a few years ago (4-5) because they were directly advertising to middle and high school students to get thier own credit cards complete with middle and high school designs on the cards, just get one of your parents to sign and had it.
Re:a problem (Score:2)
You can get a debit card from your bank. The reason it's illegal to give you credit (not that anyone would anyway) is that it's illegal for a minor to enter *any* kind of contract. You could maybe get one if your folks cosigned.
Being a teenager sucks, especially if you're ready to be independent. It gets better though. Just try to enjoy being 18 while you can!
Don't need to be 18 (Score:2)
The reason it's illegal to give you credit (not that anyone would anyway) is that it's illegal for a minor to enter *any* kind of contract. You could maybe get one if your folks cosigned.
I've always been baffled by people saying "you can't get a credit card until you're 18" stuff. I had a credit card during my entire senior year in high school and I didn't turn 18 until the summer after. Maybe Mastercard made a mistake or something but it sure made buying crap a lot easier. It's possible that one of my parents co-signed -- I honestly don't remember. But I never had any problems with it. In fact, I'm now in my early 30s and I still have the same damn card! (of course, I have multiple cards nowdays).
GMD
Re:a problem (Score:2)
also there was already an cash-card expirement sort of in finland, where you would have cards you could load up at atm. though theres been little fuss about it lately, since only few places got the machines needed for it's operation (best place to use it was mcdonalds), and now with visa electron everywhere theres no point in using the 'old' cashcard system.
visa electron verifies that the money is on the account before every transaction so there is no credit issues with it. and it works around the world easily as well..
The future of money is already here... (Score:5, Interesting)
I already rely on cash only as much as absolutely necessary. With a debit card, I can pay for any credit card transaction directly out of my checking account, and more and more places are accepting credit cards every day. Hell, in bigger cities, you can even use a credit card in places like a Jack in the Box drive thru. In 25 years it'll be even more pervasive.
Some places now are even supporting debit cards directly and require me to enter my PIN... all the better, that extra layer of security is a little comforting. If my card is ever stolen though, I'm limited in liability to $50, thanks to credit card laws that apply even though it technically isn't a credit card, and I keep a little nest egg tucked away in an unrelated account to tide me over while the bank tracks down and fixes any unauthorized use of my main account.
Sure, it's not exactly a model of privacy since every purchase I make is logged on my account, but I consider the security of my money more important as a real issue than the nebulous fear that someone, somewhere is going to exploit the fact that I like buying cheeseburgers for lunch.
Re:The future of money is already here... (Score:3, Informative)
Here's an example. Your paycheck is deposited, putting your account at $1500. The next day, someone goes and fradulently buys some stuff, say $1500 worth. Your account balance is now $0. If you report the incident, your balance will still be $0. Not until everything is tracked down will you get your $1500 back. In the meantime, I hope you have some savings, since your rent and phone bill will still come due.
Solution? Always use a credit card. In that case, it's the bank's money that's gone missing. And, suddenly, they're much more interested in recovering it.
Re:Waiiit.... (Score:2)
My main checking account, yes. My main savings account doesn't have debit card access, and I have a secondary checking account with my nest egg in it and a debit card just in case something happens to the debit card for my main checking account (so I don't get stranded at a resturant without a means to pay, for instance).
Is it me? (Score:2, Funny)
http://www.futureofmoneysummit.com/advisoryboard.p hp [futureofmoneysummit.com]
Quark Would Be Pleased (Score:2)
What is BEHIND that money... that is the question. (Score:5, Interesting)
E-money is the ultimate form of Fiat if you ask me. All fiat has a history of corruption and collapse (the american dollar and other world currencies are heading that way as well). Fiat money is the money of the statist, since it allows those in charge of the press to create as much money as they need, while dilluting what the rest of us hold.
The question isn't "what form will money be in", the question should be "what assets will back our money". I don't care if its in the form of rice crispies, as long as it is backed by an asset (gold, food, land, space rocks) and has real value.
Inertia (Score:2)
But still will be based in the way we see money today, even if exist better conceptual ways to give value to work, ideas, etc, the actual economy is very based in the money per se, not in actual value of things.
The other thing I believe that could change (maybe in more than 25 year) is some way of unified money and values around the world, that the same product cost the same anywhere (in similar amount of hours of work or something like that, no mean US dollars)
Money: The Abstraction, The Asset (Score:2)
Where will the idea go from here? Well, we have to ask ourselves what the problem with the money system is for that. We have gotten off of the gold standard (or other standards, for other currencies), so there is nothing but consumer confidence holding up any currency's value now. The only steps to be taken from here are to further consolidate world currencies into a single, accepted currency.
But will it be the dollar or the euro, and will wars be fought over it? I have a feeling that many stubborn states with long-established monetary systems will never be friendly to the idea of a universal monetary unit, especially one that emphasizes the weakness of their economy.
Gah... I could ramble on and on. I'll stop here though. :-)
Dee Hock (Score:5, Informative)
It's worth reading Dee Hock's writings. He sounds like a collectivist nutcase at first. But this is the guy who designed how Visa, the organization, works. He got all the big banks to sign on. And he was a mid-level guy at a small bank when he did it.
Few people outside the banking industry understand what Visa really is, let alone how it's organized and governed. Internet people should. It's a good model for shared infrastructure, like Internet backbones.
Visa is a major corporation organized as a cooperative. Its members, and owners, are banks. Visa sets standards and runs the backbone network that transfers credit card transactions between banks. Visa doesn't issue credit cards or do financial transactions itself.
The details of how that works politically are complex. Yet it does work, and a lot better than, say, ICANN. I'm not going into how it's done; read Dee Hock's book.
All your privacy are blong to us.. (Score:3, Interesting)
So long as it's anonymous (Score:2)
I am leery of replacing money with anything else. Money, cold cash, is anonymous. One can purchase something without a paper trail pointing at you. Credit cards, check cards...they all scream your name and just give fodder to databanks that can be used to profile you, violate your privacy, or feed the tyranny of the Patriot Act I and II. No thank you.
If you insist on replacing money with something else, that something else better include an anonymous form equivalent to cash or it just wont cut it.
Paper cash already a minimal part of economy (Score:2)
As for banking, there will continue to be a roll for credit extension agencies for years to come. The fractional reserve system of banking is both a source of great potential peril and great potential growth in the economy - our entire system of lending based on it. It extends all the way back to the Fed, which by law is empowered to create cash accounts out of thin air to redeem treasury notes from lending institutions.
Anonymous eCash (Score:2, Interesting)
The whole draft is very interesting reading, but this is one of the most interesting parts. This is what I'm hoping the future of money will be like. The best part is we don't have to rely on "powerful people making powerful decisions" in order to implement it.
One step closer (Score:2, Interesting)
I had $300 in my wallet. Someone told me I was "crazy to carry that much around". IN fact, it's not much at all in the grand scheme of htings.
Open Source Money (Score:3, Funny)
Announce the creation of one billion units of open source money. These units grow at 3 percent per year, so they are called Threeps.
Publish certificates for these threeps, and, check this, publish BOTH keys for the certificates because they are made from some open source PRNG seeded by a prominent trans infinite number like Pi or the square root of root or Pi XOR the square root of two etc.
The neat bit of this is anyone can verify the keys but can only change them by changing the value of Pi etc.
Issue a new certificate every day for new Threeps such that after one year there's one billion, 30 million of them.
In order to do this you multiply the current amount of threeps by 1.03 to the 365 root which is
Continue as necessary.
Note - if this doesn't work, that is, if someone shoots a hole in it, lets fix it and impliment it anyways.
Banking systems (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Who gets to own money in the future? (Score:2)
Valuables? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who gets to own money in the future? (Score:3, Insightful)
Money is not just money. There's a whole fucking market behind it.
This guy is right. (Score:2)
All joking aside, there is a huge economic/financial impact on the control of actual money entering and leaving the market. It's called Monetary Supply and the Fed controls it very well (to keep inflation etc away). Intermediaries and Markets was by far the most difficult Finance class I took in getting my degree (probably because Dr. Stanhouse is a leader in the nation in studying this topic, he's at OU from Notre Dame I believe).
Re:Who gets to own money in the future? (Score:2)
Re:Banks (Score:2)
Re:Banks (Score:5, Informative)
The only reason more people aren't aware of this is that government has been in the pocket of the credit card companies for a long time - that's why it's illegal for the retailer to actually put the amount you're paying to Visa or Mastercard on the bill, where it belongs. Some have gotten around that by offering a "cash discount", but it's a legal grey area.
Credit card companies are the worst of finance industry, and that's really saying something.
There's overhead to maintaining a cash system too, of course, borne by the government that prints the cash (and polices counterfeiting, etc). But I really wonder how much extra we'll be paying in assorted "service charges" with every new electronic-cash scheme that comes along. If it's coming from banks and other financial empires, you can assume you're being bilked, because the only reason they ever have to offer a new service is to find a new way to skim your money.
People complain about paying taxes all the time; what I object to is bank charges. And the "take your business elsewhere" is ridiculous - they're all the same (even credit unions are only marginally better these days).
Hate to tell you this but you pay the fee (Score:2)
Not to mention if they do adjust the rate you don't get a "discount" for buying with cash as that doesn't give the store any benefit (people would avoid using cards there).
Re:Banks (Score:5, Informative)
The fee for using a credit card is 3% MINIMUM, and only a large retailer can get that rate. For small businesses it's more like 10%!
Running a small business in Central California, I had an account with Cardservice Intl [cardservice.com] and paid 1.59%, with an annual volume somewhere around $80,000-100,000. 10% is simply rediculous, and it's a good idea a credit card merchant account isn't that expensive!
that's why it's illegal for the retailer to actually put the amount you're paying to Visa or Mastercard on the bill.
It's not illegal - it's just against the contract that you sign to get your merchant account. The contract actually says that you won't charge extra for credit card transactions.
You won't go to jail, but you might lose your merchant account!
Re:Necessary gold standard link (Score:2, Informative)
I think you meant to say that the gold standard was generally a good idea, keeping politicians from manipulating the value of money. Other than that, thanks for the link.
+5 funny! (Score:2)
Re:+5 funny! (Score:2)
Re:+5 funny! (Score:2)
In case you haven't noticed, the terrorists are generally from those fucked up third world countries, and they attack the modern world because of jealousy and ignorance. Who the hell would want to attack Cuba? There's nothing left to attack! What about North Korea. What are they gonna get, a few bundles of sticks? And China? Shit, you chew gum the wrong way in China and the gov't locks you up forever and throws away they key. Oh yeah, all really good terrorist targets.
And if you lie your life by how much you're liked by other people, then you have a pretty fucked up self-image. Get some psychological help.
Mod parent up - Funny! (Score:2)
Re:Mod parent up - Funny! (Score:3, Insightful)
Humans have evolved to be flexible; in fact, human bodies and brains evolved in concert with human societies. That's why people can adapt to live in a highly socialist system, or a highly capitalist one, or any of a million other alternatives.
What you seem to be calling human nature is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Create an economic system that depends entirely on the pursuit of self-interest, and people will behave in self-interested ways. Create one where people work together, and they'll work together. Pretty obvious really.
Socialist systems have all sorts of problems, but exploitation by the selfish or lazy rather notably isn't one of them, precisely because that sort of behaviour isn't fostered. Capitalist systems have a whole other set of problems, many of which are related to selfish behaviour, because that's the basis of the whole system.
There's ample room for criticism of any system, but to think you can live immersed in one world and be able to reasonably comment on the people and workings in another is absurd. Go live in Sweden for a few years and your point of view might be worth listening to. You'll certainly have a better conception of "human nature".
Re:We already know (Score:2)
Time to move on, dude.
Re:We already know (Score:2)
The rising gap between rich and poor in so many countries is significant - in the past it has always preceded civil unrest and eventually revolution.
Communism is a failed experiment, but what people forget is that the problems it was trying to solve were real. And they're still with us.
Re:Everything for Free (Score:2)
Now, in such a world where money is not needed, what is the incentive of working? We start partying all day. Now, who cooks the food? Builds the shelter? Take care of the sick? Maintain power plants? Create entertaining music, shows, and games? No one, so the stuff is not unlimited.
Now, we could create armies of AI robots to do our construction work and our entertainment and such. Then they would get mad, start their own country, maybe call it '01' and then we fight and they turn us into batteries and hook us up to a big computer simulation of the late 90s, maybe even call it something like 'the Matrix'.
Ok, that last paragraph was off topic, but this is the same problem with any 'utopian' society. Without the possibility of inequality through different amounts of effort, there is no motivation to do anything.
Re:Everything for Free (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure there is.
It's called "self-actualization", and sits at the top of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
Would some people start partying all day? Damn straight. Others would sit down and do some serious thinking and writing, others would work on creating fantastic pieces of art, architecture, or what have you, and yes virginia, some people would choose to cook.
What, after all, is the motivation to post on Slashdot? It's certainly not advancing your career or your knowledge. Hell, you're lucky if *reading* Slashdot advances your knowledge, but we do it anyway.
Now I'll admit that even while some people might still be happy to take care of the sick and maintain power-plants, the numbers would probably be far fewer, but that's where the nanotech and robotics come into play.
You mean growth in M3, not actual price inflation (Score:5, Interesting)
What you are referring to is the growth in the money supply through the Fed down to the fractional reserve banks. M3 money has grown by leaps and bounds in the Greenspan era. This and only this is the source of the stock market bubble.
Re:Every other country has solved this. (Score:3, Interesting)