Where does this Slashdot obsession with a cashless/e-gold/alternative currency come from?
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."
I don't where slashdot gets the obsession, but a lot of the hype about e-money and a "cashless society" comes from financial institutions desire to be in the business of "creating alternative currency." When you put money in a bank, the bank loans it out to other people at interest. (This, of course, is how & why the bank pays you interest to deposit money.) Many ideas for e-money basically ask you to deposit money in a bank or somewhere else (though it goes under the label of "putting money on the card") with zero interest. The French cards discussed earler today were like that, they get your cash now, you get to spend the money later. Traveller's checks are like that also --- most of the revenue comes from interest American Express collects between in the time elapsed between when the checks are bought and when they are spent. (At least traveller's checks provide some insurance --- few money cards do.) Of course, a traveller's check issuer will not typically loan the money out themselves, they will invest in financial instruments that derive their ultimate value from loans or direct investment.
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.
At least someone is making money off of it. Last time I checked, my wallet didn't pay interest on its contents. What do I care if someone else profits while I still get the same effect?
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: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]
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:1)
Re:The ./ obsession with a cashless society? (Score:2)