2022 Frugal Living Challenge

Woolsery

Primrose said:

I find The  debate about frugaldom and essential items is a very difficult one to navigate, especially when it comes to the issue of possessing a smart phone.  Although I own one and use it only on a limited basis on the cheapest tariff, I find that modern day life is increasingly forcing me to own something that I would previously co side red "a luxury"

My bank, online savings provider, my local Health Trust  and many other organisations I have to deal with now force me to use two stage verification to access their services so I,m forced to use a smart phone.  It seems that the need for security has forced many people into having to possess such an item to live a reasonably normal life so perhaps that is no longer a luxury item?

I have something to say on that too. Unless the use of smartphones becomes universal, the government won't be able to fully implement the Central Bank Digital Currency that's planned for us a little way in the future. Many 'nudges' and incentives such as you describe will be required, but eventually smartphones will become a necessity.....unless, of course, people fight back. There isn't much sign they will, since most people don't perceive a CBDC and 'programmable money' as any sort of problem.

tooldle

Woolsery said:

tooldle said:

I thought the DEFRA rule or reg was aimed at separating wild birds from 'kept flocks' as the risk of bird flu in wild birds is presently estimated to be high. Social distancing for birds. 

Well, it didn't work too well for humans.  There are now around 50 scientific studies that have concluded lockdowns and social distancing were next to useless, never mind the severe adverse effects they had on wider health and the economy which we're seeing now, yet some people remain convinced they were 'for our own good.' I could go on to add detail showing this 'collateral damage' was fully understood at the time, but the chances of my having this post removed increases with every sentence!

It makes good sense for chicken keepers to always have food and water where wild birds will not venture. There are other nasty diseases besides avian flu which may be passed between species. It doesn't make sense caging small flocks that have been used to roaming, because as I pointed-out earlier, there are other consequences that impact on their health if that's done.

I make no comment on what works or doesn’t. I state only the purpose with respect to bird flu

RateTartExtraordinaire

Woolsery said:

Primrose said:

I find The  debate about frugaldom and essential items is a very difficult one to navigate, especially when it comes to the issue of possessing a smart phone.  Although I own one and use it only on a limited basis on the cheapest tariff, I find that modern day life is increasingly forcing me to own something that I would previously co side red "a luxury"

My bank, online savings provider, my local Health Trust  and many other organisations I have to deal with now force me to use two stage verification to access their services so I,m forced to use a smart phone.  It seems that the need for security has forced many people into having to possess such an item to live a reasonably normal life so perhaps that is no longer a luxury item?

I have something to say on that too. Unless the use of smartphones becomes universal, the government won't be able to fully implement the Central Bank Digital Currency that's planned for us a little way in the future. Many 'nudges' and incentives such as you describe will be required, but eventually smartphones will become a necessity.....unless, of course, people fight back. There isn't much sign they will, since most people don't perceive a CBDC and 'programmable money' as any sort of problem.

I know this discussion isn't strictly about frugal living but it is in a way about, as many people on a tight budget use cash to be able to regulate their spending. Also as you rightly point out, not everyone has access to technology, or can use it, for example people is digital black spots and those with disabilities that affect accessibility. It would put the most vulnerable at risk of being locked out of the digital system. We are already seeing this as banks close branches or are going online only for some accounts. 

Bank of England website: We will continue to provide cash for as long as the public still want it.
How will ask us? Will their be a referendum? 

I found some very rosy descriptions on the Bank of England webpage where they have given more info about the proposal for a Central Bank Digital Currency. 

Woolsery

RateTartExtraodinaire said:

Woolsery said:

Primrose said:

I find The  debate about frugaldom and essential items is a very difficult one to navigate, especially when it comes to the issue of possessing a smart phone.  Although I own one and use it only on a limited basis on the cheapest tariff, I find that modern day life is increasingly forcing me to own something that I would previously co side red "a luxury"

My bank, online savings provider, my local Health Trust  and many other organisations I have to deal with now force me to use two stage verification to access their services so I,m forced to use a smart phone.  It seems that the need for security has forced many people into having to possess such an item to live a reasonably normal life so perhaps that is no longer a luxury item?

I have something to say on that too. Unless the use of smartphones becomes universal, the government won't be able to fully implement the Central Bank Digital Currency that's planned for us a little way in the future. Many 'nudges' and incentives such as you describe will be required, but eventually smartphones will become a necessity.....unless, of course, people fight back. There isn't much sign they will, since most people don't perceive a CBDC and 'programmable money' as any sort of problem.

I know this discussion isn't strictly about frugal living but it is in a way about, as many people on a tight budget use cash to be able to regulate their spending. Also as you rightly point out, not everyone has access to technology, or can use it, for example people is digital black spots and those with disabilities that affect accessibility. It would put the most vulnerable at risk of being locked out of the digital system. We are already seeing this as banks close branches or are going online only for some accounts. 

Bank of England website: We will continue to provide cash for as long as the public still want it.
How will ask us? Will their be a referendum? 

I found some very rosy descriptions on the Bank of England webpage where they have given more info about the proposal for a Central Bank Digital Currency. 

As someone in a digitally dodgy place, I'm glad I still have the fall-back position of 'other means' when the signal doesn't get through. You raise some good questions too.

I will only add that the new Bank of England logo shows Britannia without her usual pile of coinage, so she's obviously 'gone digital!'

YoungBlueEyes

Gawd the things you don't notice 'til they're pointed out to you.... 

Primrose

The question of the abolition of cash is a really serious one for the poor and also for charities.    We,re involved with various small local charities who are funded mainly by small amounts of cash at fund raising cake sales, raffles and similar functions. Many of their supporters won't pay small amounts by a bank card because they still only use cash.  Already the banks are often refusing cash deposits from charities and closing branches where these deposits can be made so they,re highly complicit in the move to get cash abolished. - for their own profit of course.  It  really annoys me when I read their pseudo sympathetic comments about "supporting ordinary people".  This is just about making life easier for themselves and making moves to increase their profits and reduce counter staff

Not long ago the Swedish government had to introduce an act of Parliament making it illegal for the use of cash to abolished due to the harm its absence was causing to certain sectors of society.  Our government needs to do the same before the tail of  commercial society starts wagging the dog.

Woolsery

tooldle said:

Woolsery said:

tooldle said:

I thought the DEFRA rule or reg was aimed at separating wild birds from 'kept flocks' as the risk of bird flu in wild birds is presently estimated to be high. Social distancing for birds. 

Well, it didn't work too well for humans.  There are now around 50 scientific studies that have concluded lockdowns and social distancing were next to useless, never mind the severe adverse effects they had on wider health and the economy which we're seeing now, yet some people remain convinced they were 'for our own good.' I could go on to add detail showing this 'collateral damage' was fully understood at the time, but the chances of my having this post removed increases with every sentence!

It makes good sense for chicken keepers to always have food and water where wild birds will not venture. There are other nasty diseases besides avian flu which may be passed between species. It doesn't make sense caging small flocks that have been used to roaming, because as I pointed-out earlier, there are other consequences that impact on their health if that's done.

I make no comment on what works or doesn’t. I state only the purpose with respect to bird flu

My comment implied that if the powers that be could get it wrong for humans, then it's possible the avian flu measures might not be right either, especially in relation to small flocks. Personally, I believe the chance of them infecting my little flock is very small, but I've no objection to putting a net over the run if that's what it takes to keep DEFRA happy. However, this thread is about frugal living, and it costs a fair amount to cover a free-range sized run with netting.

Auntycaz

it also annoys me how some supermarkets have changed their discounts so you have to use their apps to get discounts. I think having a loyalty card should be enough. My mobile is used just for texting and calls, especially in case we have a power cut as my home phone is now through the internet. 

newlywed

I actually prefer the loyalty cards being on my phone… I never forget to take my phone with me and rarely take a purse now. Not taking a purse means an easier answer to those begging as well. Sorry, no cash.

YoungBlueEyes

Re cash. I can't remember the details now but at a place I used to work (pub/restaurant, not a chain jobber) the boss used to complain about people paying in cash because it was literally costing him. When he went to the bank they'd only take so much before they made him get a different type of account (.....?) so he could bank the takings. They only accepted a little cash per transaction, so his choice was bank all the takings and pay a fee for the privilege of going over their little limit, open an account that'll accept any amount of cash - which had a monthly fee, or bank daily - which was a 40 mile round trip cos they'd closed the local branch.

I'm pro cash myself, that was just an illustration from the other side of the coin (ba dum tsch!)