Afaik, every bank I've signed up for was free. They just charge you if you fall under a certain limit or don't get the required deposit amount in per month. I mean if you find a bank where you can maintain a 50 dollar balance, you should be good.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
New Jersey becomes second state to ban cashless shops and restaurants
- Thread starter Slayven
- Start date
Afaik, every bank I've signed up for was free. They just charge you if you fall under a certain limit or don't get the required deposit amount in per month. I mean if you find a bank where you can maintain a 50 dollar balance, you should be good.
Some of y'all aren't aware that many banks have what is essentially a "poor people tax" for debit accounts that don't have a certain balance on it each month. It's fucked up.
For underprivileged people, it's also very difficult to even be approved for a credit card without an acceptable degree of income for creditors.
Cashless stores reek of classism and demonstrate a clear lack of empathy for poorer people.
For underprivileged people, it's also very difficult to even be approved for a credit card without an acceptable degree of income for creditors.
Cashless stores reek of classism and demonstrate a clear lack of empathy for poorer people.
I mean technically everyone does get a birth certificate and a social security card. It's just that states that have voter suppression laws aren't asking for those types of ID.
Canada did this. When I visited New York last year and got pennies I was like wtf is this.
Where do you find this bank tho? It circles back to the fact if you're poor = MUCH more work and hurdles to get things done. If you have cash, just walk into any bank, make a deposit, and have a zillion branches and ATM's at your disposal. You're poor, you have to deal with a bank with little to no footprint probably far away
You're struggling to pay rent and you go below that 50 dollars for this month, which means next month you get charged the $25 dollar fee. Now the next month you do have the $50 but can't make the $75 now it's 50 bucks you owe (plus possibly late fees) now you're getting letters in the mail talking about they want to close your account, lol
What you need to remember is that some of us come from countries where:
A single mum wouldn't be working 3 jobs to make ends meet.
She wouldn't have to pay anything for their healthcare at the point of delivery.
It's likely that there is a government mandated requirement for banks or the post office to provide basic banking facilities to everyone, partly because it makes paying welfare a lot quicker & easier, and she'd have a debit card.
Not to say I don't agree with this law.
$25 fee for dropping below the $50 balance?
That's insane
Just last month my car broke down and I had to do an emergency repair
Went negative £120
Total charge? £0.79p for overdraft interest.
Sure they are. The issue is many people don't hold on to those documents.
It's helping to set a foundation for other stores. The whole "you have a choice" deflection is getting tiresome.
THey're not banning progress though. Why do y'all keep saying this. They're simply requiring you accept cash it's not banning cashless systems.
Banning cashless, not cashless systems. All over the world most smaller retailers are adopting cashless because it helps them. Most micro business owners I know wouldn't want to be caught dead having to accept cash. To much work just to get paid. Here in Sweden, if you're a small retailer cashless is the way to go.
You can still run both though, ffs. It's not banning all POS with contactless payments and forcing everyone to use cash.
We dictate how private companies operate in the community all the time.
From discrimination, building codes, security expectations, to safety.
That is true but how many people, especially poor people who may be homeless or constantly moving at times will always have those documents accessible to them?
One of my friends in the states who does have some mental health issues (maybe adhd, maybe aspergers, going through major financial troubles) for a while had to go through many hoops because he didn't have his lisence or physical copies of his documents on him. Wasn't able to open a bank account at most branches due to poor credit score. Just trying to obtain/reclaim his physical documents was a nightmare for a number of reasons, but at least he had a smartphone so he could try to open an online account with one of those "low credit/no credit" banks. I can't even imagine what someone without access to technology or had their phone plan cut off would do in that circumstance even if they had cash on them if they couldn't buy stuff with it.
Or at least offer incentives for small businesses to do. I live in Peru and it's baffling for me to see the amount of small restaurants that won't take cards. They're probably losing a sizable amount of business because I'm sure I'm not the only one who ended up not entering because I had no cash on me.
As a small business owner cash is king for multiple reasons. I even give a discount when people pay cash.
Though I admit as a consumer most of my purchases are on my card.
Though I admit as a consumer most of my purchases are on my card.
Ugh. Hopefully this doesn't spread. We need less cash not more. What a bad decision. Hopefully in ten years such a stupid law will go away.
Regarding the bank costs... where the hell do you people bank? If you pay fees that's on you. I have a credit union account eith zero opening minimum and monthly fees and they give me a debit Visa card. I never use it but it's good to have it there. Change banks?
Regarding the bank costs... where the hell do you people bank? If you pay fees that's on you. I have a credit union account eith zero opening minimum and monthly fees and they give me a debit Visa card. I never use it but it's good to have it there. Change banks?
That's a long way of saying they're not free. I mean, there are some free ones out there (eg Schwab) but the vast majority are only "free" if you meet their conditions all of which require money
Good on New Jersey for doing this. There are still way too many issues that need solving before we can be a cashless society. Even if we ignore the potential danger of leaving sections of society without access to any purchasing power there is still the problem of stability with cashless payment systems.
I live in the UK and in the past year alone there have been several instances where debit/credit card networks have been down for hours/days and in the case of one online bank the systems were down for WEEKS. With cashless payments yes it is convenient but I would argue that it is NOT stable enough to be a 100% replacement for cash.
Then there is an issue with the fact I am not sure if I want the private banking industry to have that much power. If I have 10 quid in my pocket, that is my 10 quid I can spend that 10 quid how the hell I want to spend it. When I do pay by card half the time I am wondering "is this gonna get through or is my bank going to reject the payment yet again or will it get flagged as a fraudulent payment and my card gets blocked till I fuck about phoning the bank to try and get it sorted".
I live in the UK and in the past year alone there have been several instances where debit/credit card networks have been down for hours/days and in the case of one online bank the systems were down for WEEKS. With cashless payments yes it is convenient but I would argue that it is NOT stable enough to be a 100% replacement for cash.
Then there is an issue with the fact I am not sure if I want the private banking industry to have that much power. If I have 10 quid in my pocket, that is my 10 quid I can spend that 10 quid how the hell I want to spend it. When I do pay by card half the time I am wondering "is this gonna get through or is my bank going to reject the payment yet again or will it get flagged as a fraudulent payment and my card gets blocked till I fuck about phoning the bank to try and get it sorted".
It probably has a lot to do with the fact that a lot of the PoS equipment are ancient pieces of shit that can cost 2K+ and then require a subscription fee to maintain plus installation, ect.
Me reading thread title: America is being backward.
Me reading the initial replies: Wtf? I expected the progressive people of Era to embrace the inevitable cashless future.
Me after reading the reasons for these replies: America is really backward.
Me reading the initial replies: Wtf? I expected the progressive people of Era to embrace the inevitable cashless future.
Me after reading the reasons for these replies: America is really backward.
Nah, you get inconvenienced, which we get around through ubiquitous ATM machines (even if there is a small fee)
People at the other end of the spectrum (literally can't afford to open a credit line), actually get screwed by cashless stores because they have no recourse to attain the goods they seek/need
Exactly. As a non-American I found both things quite amazing considering the health of the country.
And in this particular case they are outlawing the solution and not the root of the problem. Cash is ineficient and we are moving to a cashless society (I can go for months without using a single bill here). You can't fight progress. If there are social problems, solve that problem. Like offering a free card system or a biometrical cardless system (I can take money's from ATMs or make any bank transaction here without a card)
Yeah, I had my first pre-paid card when I was an exchange student and had literally no money. I got my first credit card when I was a Ph.D. student and my wage (scholarship, in fact) was way below the average wage.
NJ cannot and does not regulate US banking so until a time at which the US Senate & Presidency switch to Dem, this is the solution we have at hand here.
Where do you live?
This should be the objective but debit cards will never be a $0 cost proposition, unless subsidized by the government or merchants (who to be fair already pay a fee) under the current US system.
State banks would still be regulated by the FDIC. Although, there has been a new movement to have more state banks that are not regulated by the Federal Government to help the banking needs of the marijuana industry.
Last edited:
You don't need to regulate banks. Just offer a State Bank like system tied to the citizen social security number, for exemple.
Brazil.
I agree that most cashless systems are a problem to the lower tier incoming society, but even here is absolutely easy to get a card.
Here are a couple of points that some of you that don't live in the United States aren't taking into consideration. My state is 28th in size out of the 50 states and it alone is the size of England. Each state here is the size of an average European country so rolling things out to the entire country is a massive massive undertaking. The United States is the size of continental Europe all by itself so that has it's own logistical issues. There are over 9 thousand different banks in the united states and that's not including credit unions or other financial institutions.
Second, no one wants to give the government and coporations that much power over their financial health. If everything goes cashless it is far too easy for intent or accident to effectively cut a person off from society. We have already had threads here about people being in distress because of a bank or credit card issue; wht do you think will happen when someone cancompletely cut you off from the ability to access your money or your services. If cashless is aloowed to go "wide", it WILL happen to someone. Many of you are being short-sighted and expecting governments and corporations to be both extremely competent and benevolent.
Second, no one wants to give the government and coporations that much power over their financial health. If everything goes cashless it is far too easy for intent or accident to effectively cut a person off from society. We have already had threads here about people being in distress because of a bank or credit card issue; wht do you think will happen when someone cancompletely cut you off from the ability to access your money or your services. If cashless is aloowed to go "wide", it WILL happen to someone. Many of you are being short-sighted and expecting governments and corporations to be both extremely competent and benevolent.
Brazil is saddled with some highest real interest rates in the world. The banks/credit networks make their money elsewhere. That is not to say that the banking industry did not resist the hard cap on debit transaction fees last year.
Wouldn't a more prudent course of action be to target legislation towards banks for their predatory practices? Mandating access to free accounts for those under a certain income level or other similar things for banks with physical or online presence within the state?
WRONG.
Online retailers can't accept cash because there's no literal way for them to do so.
In person, cash is a perfectly viable option between two parties.
They can't without picking up the cost or offering incentives for doing so.
Oh yeah we'll get right on that, we nearly forgot it was that easy.
I agree. That is not I am saying that we have a perfect system (it is far from it) but other countries in Europe found other ways too. It is a mater of addressing the issue before it becomes more prevalent.
A cashless system can be really useful in certain high incoming areas, offices and campi. To not allow that is a problem too. Plus I don't think companies would install cashless systems on areas where cash is prevalent, they do not want to lose money.
Nothing is preventing the implementation of cashless systems anywhere.
Hm, but there is cost and additional liability with having cash on premises too, right? Is the state picking up that tab to deal with increased costs there?
I mean if there are no other options, then I guess I get it. But it seems like this doesn't even begin to address the actual root of the problem. And that is the fact that banks are basically allowed to get away with whatever they want with zero real consequences.
Having worked in retail banking for a few years, there's still people who slip through the cracks.
My branch was located right next to a county jail and a homeless shelter.
Accounts often close due to mismanagement, negative or zero funds. Do that enough and you won't be eligible to open an account.
People will get locked up and their accounts will be closed. Homeless people often have unsteady work and don't have much time to be running money through a bank.
We required a minimum to open an account. Often people needed that money to be able to eat and grab a bus. So many people also came in with those pay cards that charge all kinds of crazy fees.
Free accounts should be the case for everyone. You're right. If the banking sector is going to prop itself up as an essential part of the economy where pretty much all financial transactions have to run through them, then there should be some community expectations.
The amount of people I saw with nothing to their name was disheartening. I'd frequently talk to customers who had no idea their account closed months back. And to some of us, it can blow your mind that someone is unaware of the status of their bank account for so long. But it happens a lot.
Last edited:
Prudent yes but under this current administration highly unlikely.
Except, you know, the fact that we're talking about 10k banks spread out over the landmass the size of all of Europe with 50 different banking conventions and regulations. Piece of cake.
I don't like using the homeless to further your goals. If the goal is to help homeless then actually take steps to get the homes and the help they need. This lip service about cashless stores is an absolute joke.
I'm not sure how going fully cashless is supposed to help small businesses in America, though.
In my experience small businesses are the places that are still cash only because very small businesses in lower income neighborhoods often do business in small increments where the merchant's fee paid to the bank for the credit card use wouldn't be worth it for the amount tendered.
This law addresses the system we currently have. What people seem to be saying is the law shouldn't happen and we should just change bank regulation federally really fast and let the poor not be able to pay for things in the meantime.
I think you're misunderstanding my point. Forcing companies to accept cash doesn't prevent the implementation of cashless systems anywhere.
So either solve homelessness completely or otherwise do nothing to help them?
I'd imagine most cashless stores exist in wealthier areas. Stereotypically in my head, I'm imagine some Soy Froyo store that requires payment through a clover device on an Ipad.
How is this helping them? A better solution is to force banks to have free chequeing. Make it tiered even where it can only have 2k in the account at any given time if you want. You build up a homeless person's life not make it the same and adjust things to keep it the same. Idiot governments will still be idiots because they'd rather toss a bandaid instead of doing anything productive for the homeless.