Thailand going cashless. Are you for or against it?

[moogradod]

4 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

I agree 2030 looks unrealistic. I think as you age you have to force yourself to stay tech savy otherwise you will struggle in the future, unfortunately most older people don't 

I think you do not need to be always a first (or even second) mover to be able to survive. Its more of a gut feeling but I think humanity makes itself to much reliant on technology. There should always be a backup, Nearly everything in todays world  is somehow reliant on electricity. But there are scenarious imaginable where you do not have any for a prolonged time which would evoke an unimaginable disaster.

[Photoguy21]

What about tourists that come on holiday? Do they have to use their home country credit card and ripped off with the rate they will receive?

How do you buy a car or house with a credit card? These are big expenditures and require a bit more than a credit card allows. Most people with bank accounts here have a Debit card with limitations of daily usage. How is that going to be handled?

Edited November 24, 2022 by Photoguy21

[brianthainess]

I couldn't even vote 'against' on this site. In the land of constant power cuts and internet outages i'll stick to cash thanks. 

[Photoguy21]

1 minute ago, brianthainess said:

I couldn't even vote 'against' on this site. In the land of constant power cuts and internet outages i'll stick to cash thanks. 

If you cant scratch a window with it I dont want it

[Bluespunk]

Times have moved on, just move along with them.

 

It's now the norm and you can't stop it.

[phetphet]

2 hours ago, bob smith said:

I think that is the excuse they are giving to implement these new cashless measures. i dont believe that is their sole motivation though. more like tracking it's citizens because, well, why not?

As I have said in other posts about this. The government want it for the control it gives them. The banks want it because it saves them a fortune in staff, paying rent for branches etc. Businesses want it because it reduces theft, counting money and other costs.

 

I like the option of having the two systems working alongside each other.

 

I too have been refused a sale due to certain shops being cashless. Both here and in London.

I have also managed to negotiate discounts on purchases for cash.

 

To be honest. I don't feel comfortable if I haven't got a bit of spare cash around me for the unexpected.

Even landing back in London last week. I wouldn't like to have arrived with just cards and no readies.

 

For those that would like a cashless society, I suppose there is one thing. if it does become reality, they will never see a run on the banks in a crisis.

 

[farmerjo]

Against.

It is just another people shuffle issue tearing society apart.

Take the workers out of a branch where they communicate with locals and lock them up in a call centre.

City populations grow and rural area's die.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Unless you have something to hide I don't see the problem 

Look harder.

[seedy]

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Unless you have something to hide I don't see the problem 

Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say.

Edward Snowden

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Times have moved on, just move along with them.

 

It's now the norm and you can't stop it.

Sooo, you think absolute control by government is a good idea then?

Don't give me any of that "safeguards" BS. Governments change. Laws change.

Want to be like China?

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooo, you think absolute control by government is a good idea then?

Don't give me any of that "safeguards" BS. Governments change. Laws change.

Want to be like China?

Nope, but if businesses and the like want to go cashless then there is little you can do about it.

 

All hyperbole aside, see your post, it's the way it is and most people I know actually prefer paying by phone/card.

 

Me, couldn't care less either way...but them I'm not big on conspiracy theory paranoia and BS.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, moogradod said:

I think you do not need to be always a first (or even second) mover to be able to survive. Its more of a gut feeling but I think humanity makes itself to much reliant on technology. There should always be a backup, Nearly everything in todays world  is somehow reliant on electricity. But there are scenarious imaginable where you do not have any for a prolonged time which would evoke an unimaginable disaster.

That made me chuckle. The same people that would accept cashless are the ones pushing the "climate change" thing, and if there is one thing for sure, when the transmission infrastructure  gets flooded or burnt it's not going to work very well.

So, lets imagine that you wake up one morning and the phone doesn't work, or it got stolen or something, how are you going to pay for your public transport to work, or buy lunch or a beer after work?

[hotandsticky]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

That made me chuckle. The same people that would accept cashless are the ones pushing the "climate change" thing, and if there is one thing for sure, when the transmission infrastructure  gets flooded or burnt it's not going to work very well.

So, lets imagine that you wake up one morning and the phone doesn't work, or it got stolen or something, how are you going to pay for your public transport to work, or buy lunch or a beer after work?

 

 

No one said we should eliminate cash..............................but cashless should be the favoured option.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Nope, but if businesses and the like want to go cashless then there is little you can do about it.

 

All hyperbole aside, see your post, it's the way it is and most people I know actually prefer paying by phone/card.

 

Me, couldn't care less either way...but them I'm not big on conspiracy theory paranoia and BS.

I prefer to learn from history. The Nazis would have loved that technology. Don't believe the Nazis or similar will happen again? Good luck with that.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

No one said we should eliminate cash..............................but cashless should be the favoured option.

I don't care if people want to go cashless, as long as I can use cash.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

No one said we should eliminate cash..............................but cashless should be the favoured option.

Can someone tell me what happens when they can't use cashless eg card or phone gets stolen/ lost/ breaks/ flat battery?

Cash never gets a flat battery.

 

It's good to see from the poll that the cashless are losing big time. It's not even close.

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by thaibeachlovers

[JayClay]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Can someone tell me what happens when they can't use cashless eg card or phone gets stolen/ lost/ breaks/ flat battery?

The same thing that happens if your wallet gets lost, stolen or forgotten at home; you can't have the product or service for which you wish to pay for.

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, Hummin said:

voted For
 

I love to just swipe the card and only once and awhile need to press the pin code, or using a bank app tranfer. Money is a hassel to carry around as well dirty. 
 

 

If push came to shove, I would prefer a card over a smartphone. Mainly because, provided one uses a Faraday cage, it's hard to skim a card. IMO anything goes with a phone, can you imagine how many hackers are out there trying to break in?

Cash will always be king for me, out of the reach of nosy governments. One can only lose as much cash as they are carrying.

[hotandsticky]

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

 

It's good to see from the poll that the cashless are losing big time. It's not even close.

 

 

 

Just shows how many old b4stards there on this forum! ????

[hotandsticky]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't care if people want to go cashless, as long as I can use cash.

 

 

I have no issue with that, I would certainly want to retain that option  -  bit don't whine when something costs you more when paying for cash.

[lopburi3]

1 minute ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

Just shows how many old b4stards there on this forum! ????

Yes - we of common sense.  

[Lucky Bones]

2 hours ago, Old Croc said:

It's possible to pay instantly by waving a card in front of a reader, your receipt is in your bank statement. It's much quicker than using dirty old banknotes (read about contaminates on currency and your chances of being labelled a cocaine user if swabbed).

These days you can even start your car without removing your key from your pocket. The technology exists, and is in use now, for instant payments without time wasting by first collecting, then passing on currency and collecting change.

Ah. The old "filthy lucre" story.????????

[Lacessit]

6 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

I have no issue with that, I would certainly want to retain that option  -  bit don't whine when something costs you more when paying for cash.

When did paying more if one used cash happen?

IME, laying down cash 5-10% less than the price asked on the table was quite a successful strategy when buying something.

[Lucky Bones]

1 hour ago, moogradod said:

I think you do not need to be always a first (or even second) mover to be able to survive. Its more of a gut feeling but I think humanity makes itself to much reliant on technology. There should always be a backup, Nearly everything in todays world  is somehow reliant on electricity. But there are scenarious imaginable where you do not have any for a prolonged time which would evoke an unimaginable disaster.

Fair call.

My Pop (RIP) was a magician auto mechanic from his Hillman Humber through to Cat D9's & mining haul trucks etc.

He knew it was time to retire when he dropped a few spanners and they never hit the ground, caught up in "technology" (another thing to break down.)

 

IT, Apps etc are not totally dissimilar.????????

[hotandsticky]

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

When did paying more if one used cash happen?

IME, laying down cash 5-10% less than the price asked on the table was quite a successful strategy when buying something.

 

Yes, Marks & Spencer loved that one.

 

 

Now come back to the real world................ that would exclude Thailand, so you may not see it in your lifetime - but understand the costs of money transmission and you will understand why cash transactions could cost more.

[Chelseafan]

4 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Unless you have something to hide I don't see the problem 

I have something to hide ????

 

I asked my local decorator to repaint the outside of my house (UK) and he quoted £400 which is the market rate for this area but he could do it for £330 cash. Now I know he isn't declaring this to the tax man but I'd much prefer to pay the lower amount.

 

With a cashless society you are at the mercy of the banks. They can quite easily put up their transaction charges to the retailer which in turn will push up the cost of goods.

 

I prefer cash, it's tangible, I know how much I have to spend because it's in my wallet rather than a number in my bank account.

 

 

 

 

[Liverpool Lou]

4 hours ago, Real Name Hidden said:

Means waiting in line longer for these transactions to clear

Yes, sometimes it takes seconds.

[Liverpool Lou]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

They are there to serve us, not spy on us and decide when we can have access to our money.

They don't decide "when we can have access to our money"!

Edited November 24, 2022 by Liverpool Lou

[Liverpool Lou]

4 hours ago, Lemsta69 said:

Meh. This topic was covered a week or so ago. Find something else to moan about mate. Or better yet just haud yer wheesht.

Well said!

[Liverpool Lou]

4 hours ago, bob smith said:

errr, if you dont like it then why are you commenting?

Perhaps because started it on a public forum that has no other purpose than to attract comments!