cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/34697875
Enough people have given up cash that it seems some widespread blindness/out-of-touchness on the assault on cash. This thread is collect scenarios of cash payers being hit with fees and other disadvantages as the war on cash moves ahead. This thread is pinned in !cash@slrpnk.net.
- Internet service: the only way to get an Internet subscription that is paid directly in cash is to buy a prepaid GSM then buy top-ups from press shops, and use the phone credit to buy Internet bundles that cost around €15 for 4gb. Subscribing to a proper ISP gets the lowest price but requires paying by bank transfer. And to do that, you have to pay a fee to a 3rd-party service that takes cash and makes a transfer.
- GSM service: same problem as Internet svc. Prepaid costs more. Postpaid incurrs fees by 3rd parties.
- rail transport: online tickets are the cheapest and none of the payment methods are cash-compatible. E.g. PaySafe cards are not accepted. OTC service accepts cash but has extortionate fees. E.g. a fee of €12 added to a ticket that costs €10. Or you can be a victim of dynamic pricing, and pay cash after boarding, when prices are the highest.
- buses: Dynamic pricing fucks over cash payers. You can pay online but only using a bank-dependant variety of payment instruments. You can pay cash to the driver, but only just before departure, when the price is 4× higher than the starting price.
- basic utilities: cash refused. Must use a 3rd party transfer service to pay cash, for a fee.
Any other situations where paying cash has a penalty?
There is even a study investigating the Flix pricing.
We see such pricing methods everywhere, especially in transportation. But it has nothing to do with the type of payment but the time. You'd pay the higher price later even if you paid digital, there is no cash penalty.
I’m not sure how you are not grasping this. If there is no cash penalty, the proof you need is not that dynamic pricing exists (this actually proves my point) -- you need proof that cash payers can buy a future ticket from Flixbus using cash. Nothing in your linked article indicates that cash payers can avoid the penalty from dynamic pricing. This is only possible in Amsterdam where they have a ticket machine.
Dude, I am not here to win an argument. You are coming up with a series of allegations upon which you form your opinion, but you don't provide any report, article, or anything that fosters this opinion.
But then you criticize sources linked by other while claiming you are right.
If you are not able to provide even a glimpse of evidence of what you say, I end this discussion.
Sources exist to be scrutinised. That’s the whole point of sources -- to see what information comes from where and to assess the quality of it. But in fact I saw nothing to criticize in your sources because your sources actually supported my claims by proving that dynamic pricing is in play (which is trivially verified anyway).
I listed the cash options that incur penalties. You failed to prove that cash payers have a penalty-free option. You only had to find 1 possible cash option, and you failed. I cannot prove a negative. It’s your burden to prove the positive claim here. If you cannot come with a penalty-free cash payment option outside of Amsterdam, then we are indeed done here.