Millions of people would struggle if the UK became completely cashless, report finds

Ergates

Sea_Shell said:

I think the upshot of all this is that many people still want CHOICE.   

Whether that is to use a phone, a card, on-line banking, a chip embedded in their hand or CASH.   

I don't use much cash, but I still would like the OPTION of being able to use cash, and I wouldn't like to see the back of it any time soon, personally.    Maybe in 20 years, things will have moved on even more, but I don't think we're there yet.


Maybe the whole financial system will have collapsed, and we'll have to go back to bartering for goods and services!!   



Oh and @Zanderman you are SO right there!!!
"Take phone numbers - I used to hold dozens of them in my head, for colleagues in offices all over the country. No need to now and I've forgotten my own mobile number multiple times.  Because I don't need to remember it."

You want choice - and that's fair enough, but you have to understand that choice comes with a cost.  Handling cash adds costs to running a business and maintaining the cash machine network is expensive.  At the moment enough people still use cash to make bearing that cost worthwhile for the majority of businesses, but we are approaching a point where it won't be.   What then?  Are you willing to pay extra to maintain that choice?

Ergates

Zanderman said:

But, for those of us brought up on cash, it is an excellent budgeting tool.  You have £40 in your wallet. You need it to last X days. You go shopping for groceries, you know you mustn't spend more than £Y because you need about £Z for the pub tomorrow and about £W for the cinema the next day. You spend within budget on groceries, and you remember (shock horror!) what you spent!  It's not rocket science to do this. People seem to have lost the ability to remember. Take phone numbers - I used to hold dozens of them in my head, for colleagues in offices all over the country. No need to now and I've forgotten my own mobile number multiple times.  Because I don't need to remember it. But if I did need to I would.  When just using cash I log it all in my head, like everyone (with any sense) used to before computers. Cash can, if you manage it properly, be a really good budgeting tool. You don't have to worry about whether the app shows an immediate debit or not (a regular worry in this forum). You ARE the app, and you know about the debit as it was done by you handing some money over. 

Except *none* of that is dependent on the use of cash and you could do the *exact* same thing using a card or an app.  The only difference is you don't have the remaining money floating round as little bits of metal and paper in your pocket.

There is absolutely no property of cash that helps with budgeting.  People who use cash can budget, obviously, but it's not the possession of cash that enables them to do so.

MattMattMattUK

Zanderman said:

Rob5342 said:

Zanderman said:

Rob5342 said:

libra10 said:

For everyday purchases, cash is king!  If the money isn't in your purse/wallet you can't spend it.

Cash is a great budgeting tool, and what happens when there is a problem with your bank card, or possibly lost it?  

Not everyone has the internet, many older people who have never used computers could lose their independence, having to rely on relatives or friends.

Cards have their uses, but they're not infallible.

If the money is in your account it's always down to you whether you spend it or not. You can get £x out in cash or put £x in your pot or spending account, in either case you can still get more cash out or put more money in your spending account. Cash isn't very good for budgeting as you have no idea where it went, on the other hand I can look in the app and see exactly where everything went. If there is a problem with your bank card and you've lost it then you can cancel it and not be any worse off, if you lose you cash you probably won't get it back.

Computers and the internet have been around so long now that that argument doesn't really hold any water now. An 80 year would have been 52 in 1994, a time when most office work was done on a computer.

In response to points about everyone should be using technology now, the obvious riposte is why? Why should they if they're happy with their current set-up?

From a practical point of view you can only expect things to be catered for if there is sufficient overall demand. If somebody chooses to do something an unpopular way then they can't complain if they are unable to do it in certain situations, It's like choosing to use a 126 film camera, you can't complain and say you'll struggle because boots doesn't sell 126 film any more.

That's not a valid comparison at all. 

Firstly taking pictures is not a necessity of life. Being able to pay for things is.

Paying for things might be a necessity, but being able to pay for them in cash is not a necessity, there are alternatives, indeed a minority of transactions overall are conducted with cash and by total value cash transactions are miniscule. 

Zanderman said:

Secondly 126 cameras became useless as the film cased to be made. Cash has not ceased to be made, and there is still so much demand that an official report says it shouldn't be withdrawn.   

There being an "official report" does not really make much sense, most of the "research" saying that cash should stay are by companies operating the ATM network, hardly surprising they want it to stay or they no longer have a business. There is also not "so much demand" for cash, demand and usage are plummeting, just as happened to 126 film before it stopped being made. 

Zanderman said:

Rob5342 said:

Zanderman said:

Rob5342 said:

libra10 said:

For everyday purchases, cash is king!  If the money isn't in your purse/wallet you can't spend it.

Cash is a great budgeting tool, and what happens when there is a problem with your bank card, or possibly lost it?  

Not everyone has the internet, many older people who have never used computers could lose their independence, having to rely on relatives or friends.

Cards have their uses, but they're not infallible.

If the money is in your account it's always down to you whether you spend it or not. You can get £x out in cash or put £x in your pot or spending account, in either case you can still get more cash out or put more money in your spending account. Cash isn't very good for budgeting as you have no idea where it went, on the other hand I can look in the app and see exactly where everything went. If there is a problem with your bank card and you've lost it then you can cancel it and not be any worse off, if you lose you cash you probably won't get it back.

Computers and the internet have been around so long now that that argument doesn't really hold any water now. An 80 year would have been 52 in 1994, a time when most office work was done on a computer.

In response to points about everyone should be using technology now, the obvious riposte is why? Why should they if they're happy with their current set-up?

From a practical point of view you can only expect things to be catered for if there is sufficient overall demand. If somebody chooses to do something an unpopular way then they can't complain if they are unable to do it in certain situations, It's like choosing to use a 126 film camera, you can't complain and say you'll struggle because boots doesn't sell 126 film any more.

That's not a valid comparison at all. 

Firstly taking pictures is not a necessity of life. Being able to pay for things is.

Secondly 126 cameras became useless as the film cased to be made. Cash has not ceased to be made, and there is still so much demand that an official report says it shouldn't be withdrawn.

And, generally speaking, cash is not 'unpopular'.  That's the whole point - it is still in regular use by a very large number of people. Not by you perhaps but it is by lots of other people.  Which is the point of the report saying it's needed.  

Zanderman said:
And, generally speaking, cash is not 'unpopular'.  That's the whole point - it is still in regular use by a very large number of people. Not by you perhaps but it is by lots of other people.  Which is the point of the report saying it's needed.  

Actually cash is unpopular, businesses do not want to take it, the majority of the public do not want to use it, it is only used regularly by a very small percentage of people. The idea that it is "needed" is also wrong, it is not needed as there are other perfectly viable alternatives, some people pay prefer to use cash, but there is a vast difference between preference and need. 

Ergates

libra10 said:

 If you get mugged carrying cash, you lose the cash but it's a fixed amount.  Having your contactless card stolen could result in much more money being stolen before the thief is asked for the pin numbers. 

Except if you get mugged and and you're carrying cash, it's gone forever.   If you get mugged and you're carrying a card, then any transactions the mugger carries out are fraud and will be reimbursed by the bank so you don't lose the money.

MrFrugalFever

In my opinion the sooner we move to a cashless society the better. There’s not many things I’ve thanked this pandemic for, but forcing businesses to go ‘digital’ and cashless a lot sooner is definitely a positive in my book.

cash is dirty and yields no advantage to me, I’ve managed to survive several years without it and have benefited from the likes of Section 75 consumer protection along the way. It also means that the tax dodging people are less likely to dodge and actually pay their way like us normal folk.

Rob5342

Zanderman said:

Rob5342 said:

Zanderman said:

Rob5342 said:

libra10 said:

For everyday purchases, cash is king!  If the money isn't in your purse/wallet you can't spend it.

Cash is a great budgeting tool, and what happens when there is a problem with your bank card, or possibly lost it?  

Not everyone has the internet, many older people who have never used computers could lose their independence, having to rely on relatives or friends.

Cards have their uses, but they're not infallible.

If the money is in your account it's always down to you whether you spend it or not. You can get £x out in cash or put £x in your pot or spending account, in either case you can still get more cash out or put more money in your spending account. Cash isn't very good for budgeting as you have no idea where it went, on the other hand I can look in the app and see exactly where everything went. If there is a problem with your bank card and you've lost it then you can cancel it and not be any worse off, if you lose you cash you probably won't get it back.

Computers and the internet have been around so long now that that argument doesn't really hold any water now. An 80 year would have been 52 in 1994, a time when most office work was done on a computer.

In response to points about everyone should be using technology now, the obvious riposte is why? Why should they if they're happy with their current set-up?

From a practical point of view you can only expect things to be catered for if there is sufficient overall demand. If somebody chooses to do something an unpopular way then they can't complain if they are unable to do it in certain situations, It's like choosing to use a 126 film camera, you can't complain and say you'll struggle because boots doesn't sell 126 film any more.

That's not a valid comparison at all. 

Firstly taking pictures is not a necessity of life. Being able to pay for things is.

Secondly 126 cameras became useless as the film cased to be made. Cash has not ceased to be made, and there is still so much demand that an official report says it shouldn't be withdrawn.

And, generally speaking, cash is not 'unpopular'.  That's the whole point - it is still in regular use by a very large number of people. Not by you perhaps but it is by lots of other people.  Which is the point of the report saying it's needed.  

You've missed the point here. A new technology is introduced (debit card/digital camera), people like it and start to move over to it, that starts a dominoe effect where it becomes cheaper/more accepted causing more people to move over to it. Eventually the old technology becomes so unpopular that it's not worth anyone supporting it any more.

It might not be the time to go cashless yet but if people keep adopting cashless methods then eventually cash won't be worth the effort for anyone. Things always move on, we used to barter goods but nobody now would complain that Sainsburys wouldn't swap their live chicken for a bottle of beer.

Rob5342

Sea_Shell said:

I think the upshot of all this is that many people still want CHOICE.  

That's the point really. Customers and businesses will choose to do things in ways they find beneficial, if someone chooses to do something in an unpopular way then they are going to find it a lot more difficult.

AstonSmith

I still want this: I take my phone, type in an amount, tap it against person B's phone and bang. I've sent them money. No numbers. No e-mail addresses. A digital transfer as easy as cash.

I'm also still concerned about how money laundering regulations can be used to lock people out of accounts for weeks or months.

Ergates

AstonSmith said:

I still want this: I take my phone, type in an amount, tap it against person B's phone and bang. I've sent them money. No numbers. No e-mail addresses. A digital transfer as easy as cash.

I'm also still concerned about how money laundering regulations can be used to lock people out of accounts for weeks or months.

We're kind of half way there with contactless payments from phones - I don't see why that *couldn't* be done.  Probably just getting everyone to agree the standards.

Another options would be for phones to use QR codes.  You press a button in your app and it displays a QR code, I press a button in my app and it scans it and gets all the relevant details for the transfer.   Not quite as smooth, but using already existing technology.  Again though - needs a standard.

Zanderman

Ergates said:

Zanderman said:

But, for those of us brought up on cash, it is an excellent budgeting tool.  You have £40 in your wallet. You need it to last X days. You go shopping for groceries, you know you mustn't spend more than £Y because you need about £Z for the pub tomorrow and about £W for the cinema the next day. You spend within budget on groceries, and you remember (shock horror!) what you spent!  It's not rocket science to do this. People seem to have lost the ability to remember. Take phone numbers - I used to hold dozens of them in my head, for colleagues in offices all over the country. No need to now and I've forgotten my own mobile number multiple times.  Because I don't need to remember it. But if I did need to I would.  When just using cash I log it all in my head, like everyone (with any sense) used to before computers. Cash can, if you manage it properly, be a really good budgeting tool. You don't have to worry about whether the app shows an immediate debit or not (a regular worry in this forum). You ARE the app, and you know about the debit as it was done by you handing some money over. 

Except *none* of that is dependent on the use of cash and you could do the *exact* same thing using a card or an app.  The only difference is you don't have the remaining money floating round as little bits of metal and paper in your pocket.

There is absolutely no property of cash that helps with budgeting.  People who use cash can budget, obviously, but it's not the possession of cash that enables them to do so.

You're missing the point. Yes, you can do all without cash. I never said you couldn't.

The point I was making was that you CAN track spending if you use cash.  I was responding to someone who claimed you couldn't.

You're merely counter-arguing that you can budget without cash.  Which is not in dispute.