Only two states are opposed to the idea of a cashless society

midian182

Posts: 8,484   +104
Staff member
A hot potato: The advancement of technology has seen many things we once thought would last forever disappear. But one of the most controversial areas right now is the prospect of a cashless society. Different countries have different opinions on the matter, and in the US, a new study suggests only two states are opposed to waving goodbye to greenbacks forever.

Information and comparison website Merchant Machine delved into the number of countries and states that want a cashless society. This was determined by using an AI sentiment analysis tool that calculated the proportion of negative and positive geotagged tweets on the subject—not the most accurate method, but it still gives us an idea of public opinion.

Focusing on the US, where four in ten people now say they don't carry cash at all, only Alabama and Delaware were the states that felt more strongly in favor of keeping paper and coin money. Apart from those two exceptions, most states tweet positively about a cashless society at least one-quarter of the time, the most positive being South Dakota (where 39.22% of tweets are positive), North Dakota (38.78%), Iowa (38.48%) and Wisconsin (38.27%).

One of the issues with going cashless is the problems it will cause for the poorest members of society who may not have bank accounts. It's unlikely to be a coincidence that most of the positive tweets originated in states with lower rates of unbanked people. Only 4.9% of residents in North and South Dakota have no checking account, and that number falls to 2.6% in Iowa. In Alabama, which had the fewest number of pro-cashless tweets, the unbanked figure is 7.6%.

It's estimated that 6.5% of US households are without any sort of bank account. According to former Delaware Senator David McBride, many people in the state cannot obtain credit or debit cards. Delaware is also one of the several cities and states in the US where cashless stores are banned, a list that includes San Francisco and New Jersey.

The US is one of 54 countries that research deemed wants to go cashless. There were 32 countries that rejected the idea, with France being the most opposed.

The pandemic saw a large number businesses forced to go cashless, and many consumers have found they prefer it that way. Judging by the many angry posts on Facebook about not losing physical cash, it's a subject that ignites passionate arguments from people in the opposite camp, often over fears of fraud or theft.

Masthead: Igal Ness

Permalink to story.

 

dangh

Posts: 854   +1,447
I'm for cashless, but without option for government to see my account balance and stuff.
Real money is something I do not use for years, I have better control using my card or phone, and that is as well much more safe.
 

rrwards

Posts: 258   +490
Drawing conclusions from the percentage of AI-classified positive/negative geotagged-tweets that contain keywords is just about the laziest and least accurate way to design/interpret a market research "study".

Here's the list of keywords they used:
Cashless, Contactless, Google Pay, Apple Pay, Samsung Pay, Microsoft Wallet, PayPal, Alipay, Facebook Pay, Walmart Pay, Mozido, Dashlane, Veno, Zelle, Paycloud

People talking about Dashlane or Paypal or any of those in a positive light =/= they're in favor of a cashless society. What an absolutely bonkers conclusion to draw.
 

emmzo

Posts: 815   +1,251
I'm for cashless, but without option for government to see my account balance and stuff.
Real money is something I do not use for years, I have better control using my card or phone, and that is as well much more safe.
I rarely use cash myself, however with cashless you'd have to trust the government, banks to play nice and this is the thing when you trust people you don't know, they always fck up.
 

kira setsu

Posts: 447   +434
I always keep at least a 10 in my wallet, I work in tech and dont trust it enough for this idea, forget the govt, just looking at companies who cant keep their systems from breaking or implement terrible ways to pay for things should show people were nowhere near ready enough for this idea.

Just looking at how we treat tech today already shows that ways will be instantly implemented that'll hinder those at lower income levels. "oh youre phones pay system isnt working? thats because you have an expensive phone 3, the expensive phone 4 is what works here, and we dont take cash so we'll cut off that service you need, and toss a fee on it, sry, thoughts & prayers."
 

dangh

Posts: 854   +1,447
To go cashless is to become slave to the state and to any kind of chaos in infrastructure.

Internet goes out - all shops close for the duration. It's total crap.
... you do realise, that if internet goes out no shop can process any transaction (no matter if cashless or cash ones)? Only very small shops could get your cash payment, but if internet goes out, then electricity goes out as well, so they wont be able to accept cash either (they need to calculate and print receipt).
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 3,957   +7,003
Drawing conclusions from the percentage of AI-classified positive/negative geotagged-tweets that contain keywords is just about the laziest and least accurate way to design/interpret a market research "study".

Here's the list of keywords they used:
Cashless, Contactless, Google Pay, Apple Pay, Samsung Pay, Microsoft Wallet, PayPal, Alipay, Facebook Pay, Walmart Pay, Mozido, Dashlane, Veno, Zelle, Paycloud

People talking about Dashlane or Paypal or any of those in a positive light =/= they're in favor of a cashless society. What an absolutely bonkers conclusion to draw.
I noticed that too, taking a poll on twitter about going cashless ignores the majority o those who still use cash dont really like social media and want no part of being always connected.

It's like going to a dodge challenger convention to poll if the challenger is a good car. Worthless data.
As soon as we go cashless, the government can just freeze all of your assets if you commit wrongthink. It happened in Canada, and will happen everywhere else where corrupt, power hungry politicians run things. Cashless is a bad idea when put into practice.
It's a feature, not a bug. Now worship the chosen oppressed group of the day or you will never be able to buy food again!
To go cashless is to become slave to the state and to any kind of chaos in infrastructure.

Internet goes out - all shops close for the duration. It's total crap.
Again a feature. Shut off the internet, no more dissent! They'll starve if you let it go a few weeks.
I rarely use cash myself, however with cashless you'd have to trust the government, banks to play nice and this is the thing when you trust people you don't know, they always fck up.
Nobody should trust their government. Ever. Anyone who has power over you must never be trusted, unless one wishes to be abused.
 

Uncle Al

Posts: 9,363   +8,581
The simple fact is that many, many small businesses simply cannot afford the equipment, or the rates even if they were just a quarter of a cent per transaction and there are a lot of people that don't want that kind of tracking of their money. While states, who benefit from the accounting and taxing, might like it, a very large part of the population won't and in more remote states it simply isn't practical. Simple transactions by cash would not happen and I wouldn't be surprised to see a large influx of bartering occur, which would eliminate ANY taxation on transactions by state or the Fed ....
 

PEnnn

Posts: 1,010   +1,361
As soon as we go cashless, the government can just freeze all of your assets if you commit wrongthink. It happened in Canada, and will happen everywhere else where corrupt, power hungry politicians run things. Cashless is a bad idea when put into practice.

So not-cashless means you keep ALL your money under your mattress?? You don't have a single bank account??

How is cashless any different from having your money in the bank??
 

Dunkerton

Posts: 78   +166
I agree, I only have a little bit of cash physically... or do I? It's the threat of people having their wealth in a physical form as opposed to digitally, controlled by a bank. It's the possibility of us being able to purchase things outside of the digital, logged system. Same with the right to bear arms, it's the mere possibility that someone can defend themselves from corrupt power. See Hong Kong for an example. This conversation makes me realize I need to have more physical cash and physical equity.
 

Dunkerton

Posts: 78   +166
So not-cashless means you keep ALL your money under your mattress?? You don't have a single bank account??

How is cashless any different from having your money in the bank??
I meant to reply, see my previous post lol my bad
 

dangh

Posts: 854   +1,447
Ultimately, cashless society is just another beautiful euphemism for government control. Digital assets do not exist.
Banknotes without government control (or support) are simply a paper with faces on it, worth as much as firestarter material.
You can go back to golden coins where worth of the coin is backed up by its weight, but that would be bit cumbersome.
Cashless is fine, but government should not be able to have access to your private information, and your account is your private stuff.
 

Axle Grease

Posts: 286   +233
Irrespective of the method by which we buy stuff, the government knows how to rot away the value of any savings. Doesn't matter if it's in the form of paper money squirreled away in an impenetrable safe, or in digital form in a savings bank. . On the matter of the government usurping one's account which is a very legitimate fear in some countries, there is the option of buying stable coins which are always very popular.
 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 1,094   +2,019
Rumor was, folks in charge have been pushing the agenda of going cashless for a while. The idea that covid was pushed so hard to scare people that companies actually started to refuse the use of cash as a legal tender and would only take electronic payments helped push the scale over the top for getting our society in the States closer to going cashless.

Cashless means closer to chipping and linking things together. It'll also mean another push from Biden (or those that follow and want the same thing) to be able to see how much money you have and how you're spending it.

I personally don't use cash that often and sometimes I even forget I have it on me.....I've honestly been walking around with a couple hundred in cash in my wallet for the past few month and I forget its in there. But just because I don't use cash that often, doesn't mean I want it gone. I think that would be a bad move.

Think what you want, but you'd be naïve to think the government wants your best interest and that those in charge would actually give a flip about what you want.
 

EdmondRC

Posts: 448   +655
I think people do not understand what is really coming and what the WEF is talking about out in the open (just imagine behind closed doors). The future government issued crypto-dollars will be completely controllable. The next "crisis" and they will be able to lock down where you spend your money, what you spend it on, who you donate it to, etc. The cashless society that is being planned is not the same as carrying a debit/credit card as most of these people assume. The cashless society of the future is a completely centralized and micro-controllable currency that will literally be able to keep your from buying gasoline or steak if you've used up all your "carbon credits" for the month. It is the future of communism and totalitarianism, the ultimate form of social control. And of course it will be implemented because of some crisis, some major fraud like FTX or something along those lines where people will again willingly give the government control over their lives in exchange for a perception of "safety". It doesn't really do any good to talk about it though, too many people already beleive in this future dystopia. The past speaks loudly, centralized governments always trend toward totalitarianism and eventually bring systemic oppression on all but the elites. We are getting very close to that, but this time on a worldwide scale.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 3,957   +7,003
So not-cashless means you keep ALL your money under your mattress?? You don't have a single bank account??

How is cashless any different from having your money in the bank??
If I have a $20 bill in my hand, I can buy food or goods with it. I dont need a bank account, a credit card, or even electricity to do it.

The threat of being able to do that keeps the dollar in check from running away or being locked down. We've already seen banks willing to shut down peoples accounts for wrong think, and the only way those people got by was cash donations (the canadian truckers are a great example).

In an all digital world a single use of the ban button can and will destroy lives. One crisis, one bad actor is all it takes to screw everybody.
 

Hodor

Posts: 430   +304
So, if I visit a working girl that offers exotic massage I'll have to move my crypto to her account? Which will make the transaction encoded forever in the global ledger.

Yeah, who wouldn't want that kind of "privacy".