Why Americans do not pay off credit card debts

[HoreTore]

If your money doesn't exist except at the pleasure of the government and a group of banks that are in cahoots with the government, then all you're getting is an allowance with plenty of expectations to go along with it.

The system you are describing here is the system we currently have, GC. Our money do not exist as such except at the whims of those keeping them real, which is the government and the banks. You are getting an "allowance", and there are expectations as to what you do with it.

What about people who don't want bank accounts?

Do I care? No.

What about people who want to remain anonymous with their transactions?

Do I care? No.

Would you label them all (...) proponents of the black market?

Yes. It's time for people to realize what the consequences of their actions are. The majority of transactions involving cash are illegal, and the percentage is higher the higher the value of the note is.

Hurting the economy should never be a criminal act by itself. If I want to take my money out of the system, and the system is hurt by that, then that sucks for the system. I should still be able to do it.

What you're saying is that you should be free to poison the village well, as the well should have safeguards against people poisoning it.

I disagree.

[rvg]

Credit cards are great, provided that you pay them off on time.

You get to enjoy lots of free stuff, discounts, cashback bonii, etc.

[HoreTore]

Credit cards are great, provided that you pay them off on time.

You get to enjoy lots of free stuff, discounts, cashback bonii, etc.

This isn't the issue though; it's that Americans seem to think it wise to have cash in the bank AND a credit card debt. At the same time.

[rvg]

This isn't the issue though; it's that Americans seem to think it wise to have cash in the bank AND a credit card debt. At the same time.

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea of Americans seeing "wisdom" in that.

[HoreTore]

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea of Americans seeing "wisdom" in that.

See linky in OP.

EDIT: And also see my question regarding the correctness of said linky.

EDIT2: here's another one. This one doesn't deal with the issue specifically, but it provides a lot of information on it even though the questions posed are irrelevant to this issue.

In short: HoreTore is puzzled.

[Husar]

I used to do that too when I was younger.

Then I started using that thingy inside my cranium, and it worked fine. I check my bank account a couple of times a month to pay bills and make sure all the electronic payments are correct, yet I always know how much is in my account, give or take a couple of hundred(NOK).

Also, this will become a non-issue once you get used to the new system. Or are you still calculating prices in marks?

No, I calculate prices in Euros. And I can check my bank account, and I do check my bank account, but I still prefer to make smaller payments in cash, I don't want to get out my card to buy some chewing gum and enter the pin etc. It is much faster, more convenient ands cheaper to use cash in such a situation. Cash is actually probably still the preferred payment methods in supermarkets here. And as I said, they do not allow small card payments anyway due to the fees banks demand for each electronic transaction.
I also do not like automatic cash registers because I like to interact with other craniums.

The problem isn't so much that you want more options, the problem is that giving you that option puts those who have to handle your cash in completely needless peril. You're also fueling the black market.

And the internet fuels copyright infringement.

[HoreTore]

Well then you're something of an authoritarian. That's fine, but I'm not. I think the principle behind cash is valid, and giving it up "just because" is a win for the big man against the little man.

The risk of illegal transactions is the price of monetary freedom. Freedom carries risk. Do away with the risk, and you do away with the freedom.

I can't see how you can appeal to freedom when the doomsday scenario you paint is exactly the scenario we have with our cash today.

I can't make any sense of your last sentence.

The only differences between an economy with physical money and an economy with non-physical money, is that the latter is more efficient, safer and easier to handle.

[HoreTore]

No, I calculate prices in Euros. And I can check my bank account, and I do check my bank account, but I still prefer to make smaller payments in cash, I don't want to get out my card to buy some chewing gum and enter the pin etc. It is much faster, more convenient ands cheaper to use cash in such a situation. Cash is actually probably still the preferred payment methods in supermarkets here. And as I said, they do not allow small card payments anyway due to the fees banks demand for each electronic transaction.

Germany should enter the 21st century, then.

The reason why some German companies might lose money on small debit card transaction has nothing to do with the transaction itself, by the way. That's caused by the price list provided by the banks, and that list is largely arbitrary and based mostly on habit. Change the habits, and the prices will change.

And the internet fuels copyright infringement.

True, and I fully support copyright infringement.

[HoreTore]

It is not complicated. With physical money, anonymity is a real option. Without physical money, it is not a real option. That's a pretty clear-cut privacy issue, and the only difference between you and me is that you think that this element of privacy is not worth it. I could not disagree more, end of argument. What's not to get?

The privacy issue is the one and only somewhat valid concern I have heard, but you didn't make that the focus of your argument, GC

But this is an area where we disagree. I believe the purpose of currency is to provide for efficient transactions and government oversight, not protect anonymity. I see that some people swap those around, but I disagree strongly.

[Husar]

Germany should enter the 21st century, then.

We still have some areas with 56k internet, but if you want electronic money, why not bitcoins? They're electronic, secure and have the privacy aspect. Wonderful. They can also fuel the black market, despite being electronic.
Card payments still take longer than cash, I see no reason to switch. There are newfangled ways of making them faster and more insecure, but the latter part is another reason I do not like those. There is also a good reason why you can buy the equivalent of tinfoil hats for wallets and it's not a conspiracy.

The reason why some German companies might lose money on small debit card transaction has nothing to do with the transaction itself, by the way. That's caused by the price list provided by the banks, and that list is largely arbitrary and based mostly on habit. Change the habits, and the prices will change.

So you are basically saying we should trust companies with arbitrary business practices even more than we already do?

True, and I fully support copyright infringement.

And I fully support the black market.

[HoreTore]

But as for your poisoned well, Privacy enables people to do things that the government might not know about, and some of those things might be illegal.

The poisoned well had nothing to do with crime as such or privacy issues.

The issue with taking money out of circulation, large amounts of it, is because the government/banks will make up for it by printing more money to keep the money supply stable. A sudden reintroduction of a large amount of previously stashed money will be like the government going Zimbabwe and printing crazy money, ie. hyperinflation.

In theory.

[HoreTore]

We still have some areas with 56k internet, but if you want electronic money, why not bitcoins? They're electronic, secure and have the privacy aspect. Wonderful. They can also fuel the black market, despite being electronic.

Because bitcoins are nonsense. Chiefly because they are not based on work.

Card payments still take longer than cash, I see no reason to switch. There are newfangled ways of making them faster and more insecure, but the latter part is another reason I do not like those. There is also a good reason why you can buy the equivalent of tinfoil hats for wallets and it's not a conspiracy.

The newfangled phone option is no less secure than cash.

So you are basically saying we should trust companies with arbitrary business practices even more than we already do?

Even more? No. The same level of trust; nothing will actually change in that regard. The money charged by the bank does not represent the real value of the transaction, but rather the market value of the transaction. That basis will be the same whether we have physical money or not.

And I fully support the black market.

Report to your nearest tax collector.

[HoreTore]

In theory indeed! But the example I gave was a singular person taking money out and putting it in a mattress. Something that is uncommon, generally useless, but very much a symbolic point of freedom for some. Hyperinflation is hardly a risk here.

Both true and false. One person doing it will never be a problem. Get 300 million doing it, and suddenly that adds up.

It's like everyone in a country deciding to withdraw all of their money at the same time: every bank would go under instantly.

The "in theory" part was added because of the unlikelihood of this ever occurring. Still, it has happened from time to time when an economy goes under, usually pre-empted by a government ban on bank withdrawals. Happened in Russia under Yeltsin a couple of times after a few banks went under.

and you come down on the authoritarian side of it.

I usually do when discussing anonymity, as I largely consider the question irrelevant.

[HoreTore]

300 Million Americans don't even have bank accounts, so the question is moot. You're disputing a symbolic act of freedom by throwing moot points at it.

It is good that you consider anonymity an irrelevant question, but I don't see it that way. Furthermore, I see your consideration as largely irrelevant.

I see that anonymity is all the rage amongst internet libertarians these days, but I'm more fond of discussing Marx I'm afraid... I also have a casual disregard for symbolism of any kind.


(also, there are more people in the world than muricans, ya know )

[Husar]

Because bitcoins are nonsense. Chiefly because they are not based on work.

As though any of our money were based on work in any way.
Especially given that the people with most of it hardly worked for all of it.
And even if BitCoins are just a commodity, if they are a commodity accepted for trade then they are a suitable replacement. I could also buy ciggies by trading in water or milk if the store owner accepts it, but bitcoins are more convenient and more likely to gain acceptance.
I'm not aware that the government can force us to trade only with government-issued money, especially given that pretty much all of it is issued by private banks.
I also happen to think that bitcoins are nonsense, but if you take my paper money away, they're the closest option and the only one you leave me.

The newfangled phone option is no less secure than cash.

Maybe, but I do not have a newfangled phone that would support it since I cannot afford one at the moment. Forcing people to buy newfangled phones is a waste of resources, bad for the environment and fosters inequality. And it forces parents to either give their fancy expensive phones to their children or buy phones for them if their children want to go buy some chewing gum. That's both idiotic and incredibly impractical and also more waste of resources.

Even more? No. The same level of trust; nothing will actually change in that regard. The money charged by the bank does not represent the real value of the transaction, but rather the market value of the transaction. That basis will be the same whether we have physical money or not.

But our banks will also know where we shop, potentially even what we buy there. You can say I'm a conspiracy nut, but then you have to explain why companies actually want that information and openly pay people to get it. At the moment I can choose whose bonus program I take part in, who gets to collect what information, at least to an extent. But when my bank has all the info centralized, you know, what's going to stop them from making some extra profit by selling it? The government didn't even stop them when they laundered money for terrorists and drug cartels...

Report to your nearest tax collector.

As soon as you hand yourself in for copyright infringement.
I'm also not sure whether purely moral support is actually illegal. Thoughtcrime?

[HoreTore]

Anonymity has been all the rage since Eric Blair decided to write by the name of Orwell, and long before that I'm sure. Throwing labels around doesn't make your argument any less authoritarian. (oops, a label!)

Yet another of my pet peeves: 1984 isn't about privacy or surveillance... It's also in favour of socialism.

[Gilrandir]

Unless you're talking about a black market operation, these places will have no problems adjusting to a paperfree economy.

You certainly have no experience of shopping in Ukraine, which explains your naivety in this issue. I, for example, NEVER buy meat at supermarkets. At the market it is cheaper, fresher and locally produced while at the supermarket it is more expensive; it usually stays there for quite a time and when it gets "unfresh" they have ways to make it look and smell fresh again; and it is usually imported from Brazil or Poland or other such places (and I'm not sure that it is imported legally, which may happen as often as not or that it is not infected by some plague or anthrax and sold at next to nothing to some astute Ukrainian businessmen who then bribed sanitary inspection which allowed it to be sold). It is pretty much the same with other "raw" foodstuffs which can be produced by local farmers. The latter come to the market to sell their wares from the sticks and certainly sell them cash down. You may call it blackmarket, I call it direct delivery of home made products.
Also living in Ukraine you must be always prepared for various what-ifs. What if electricity is switched off? What if the supermarket card reading facilities are out of order? What if your bank goes broke? And latest developments in Eastern Ukraine bear me out: people there may have some money on their bank accounts but bankomats don't work, electricity supply is intermittent and in view of this supermarkets work for cash. Do you suggest they should eat their cards?
Conclusion: living in Ukraine is fun.

Feel free to live under a stone if you wish.
The rest of us, however, want more efficiency, reduced costs and generally less hassle.

It feels more natural and healthy under a stone. In fact, you may view it as preparation for the running-to-the-hills manouver you advised me to take.

Then I started using that thingy inside my cranium, and it worked fine. I check my bank account a couple of times a month to pay bills and make sure all the electronic payments are correct, yet I always know how much is in my account, give or take a couple of hundred(NOK).

The described procedure fits excellently into what you call "less hassle".

If your money doesn't exist except at the pleasure of the government and a group of banks that are in cahoots with the government, then all you're getting is an allowance with plenty of expectations to go along with it. The concept of ownership is pretty important. What about people who don't want bank accounts? What about people who want to remain anonymous with their transactions? Would you label them all criminals, and proponents of the black market?

Hurting the economy should never be a criminal act by itself. If I want to take my money out of the system, and the system is hurt by that, then that sucks for the system. I should still be able to do it.

That's what I think. One who advocates and defends caring governments and obliging banks is too naive to consider them such. They will skin you to the bone without batting an eyelid for their own profit and will never stay in the red. So why should I worry about their plans to squeeze more money out of too trusrful citizens who are naive enough to think that they do it out of charity exclusively to pease us to the utmost?

[HoreTore]

You certainly have no experience of shopping in Ukraine

Meh, don't worry; you'll join us developed countries eventually.

[Husar]

Meh, don't worry; you'll join us developed countries eventually.

Do you only eat processed factory food then?

[Gilrandir]

Meh, don't worry; you'll join us developed countries eventually.

In this case I'm afraid one scabbed sheep will eventually spoil the european flock and you will either run for the hills or have me teaching you survival in the mess Ukraine will land you into.

[Gilrandir]

And those new-fangled electronic things will have you end up with chips under your skin.

Hore Tore said this was still to come some time ahead:

http://www.lowcards.com/france-tests...chnology-14463

[Slyspy]

If you have credit available then it may be wise to make use of it, so long as you can continue to pay off the interest.

[HoreTore]

Do you only eat processed factory food then?

That would depend on your definition of "factory". But, yeah.

Hore Tore said this was still to come some time ahead:

http://www.lowcards.com/france-tests...chnology-14463

1. Look at the second word in the title.
2. This is about fingerprints, not fingerchips. Are you saying it's spooky that we're all born with fingerprints...?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

That would depend on your definition of "factory". But, yeah.



1. Look at the second word in the title.
2. This is about fingerprints, not fingerchips. Are you saying it's spooky that we're all born with fingerprints...?

Of course! Barcodes are so much easier to scan, I simply cannot understand why this has not been updated. If WOT can actually give the Stalingrad map to Americans, surely we can get past such analog crap as fingerprints!

[HoreTore]

Do you only eat processed factory food then?

Of course! Barcodes are so much easier to scan, I simply cannot understand why this has not been updated. If WOT can actually give the Stalingrad map to Americans, surely we can get past such analog crap as fingerprints!

Hmmm.... Are fingerprints actually analog, though?

[Sarmatian]

If you have credit available then it may be wise to make use of it, so long as you can continue to pay off the interest.

In what way it is actually wise?

I can only imagine two scenarios where it would be wise:

1) Emergency

2) To increase your income

Anything else is not only unwise but stupid.

[HoreTore]

Its about a lot of things, man. How is it not about privacy and surveillance?

Surveillance is a very minor player in the book. It's just one of the tools of Big Brother.

The critique of nationalism and group dynamics is far greater. But those are things we enjoy, so let's not focus on that.

[Sigurd]

You shouldn't really discuss banks and money transactions with a Norwegian. Our banks are on the bleeding edge technologically.
We expect that when paying our bills via the net, the money will be withdrawn from our account immediately.
We like to pay for our €0.5 lollipop with a debit card - with no questions asked.
We no longer carry cash around - and quite like our small card-sized wallets.
Parking in the city is payed via an app on the phone or a debit card at the nearest parking meter.
We order a whopper menu via an app on the phone and pick it up at the nearest burger place.

Its only when going abroad that we realize how awkward these things are for the rest of the world.

[Beskar]

I remember using my card to pay for bus fare in Sweden.

Though now, cards over here allow you to simply touch the reader and it is paid for instantly (up to £20) to bring a lot of that convenience over here.

[HoreTore]

I remember using my card to pay for bus fare in Sweden.

It frustrates me to no end that one of the local bus lines don't accept cards.

The regional one doesn't accept cash, though...