The article is light on details. It looks like EVC is acting as a bank but how do you enter money in the system? Example: I'm going there tomorrow (not really) with a 100 USD bill, then what? It seems I have to buy one of these vouchers http://mogaguide.com/comp_catalog/index.php?ct=1&q=2&in=2&id...
I wonder if there is a way to turn what will be left back to cash.
In any case, it's not like everybody is its own bank. There is one company doing the bank for everyone.
The legal medical marijuana people in California have to do everything with cash because they can't get bank accounts[1]. This is a sly way for the federal government to drive industries out of business that they don't like, even if they are legal on the state level. They are doing this explicitly with Operation Chokepoint.[2]
There is no such thing as legal medical marijuana. The repealing of a state statute doesn't make something "legal" when it is still prohibited by federal statute, as marijuana is. It's simply a federal offense that this administration chooses not to prosecute vigorously.
Some states do have laws that explicitly allow and/or regular marijuana for medicinal or recreational use. For example, I live in Colorado where a constitutional amendment was passed that required law makers to pass laws to setup regulations for the production, wholesale, and retail sale of the drug.
The part about the federal law is still true but as far as I know, law enforcement in Colorado is not required nor can be forced to enforce federal law.
> The part about the federal law is still true but as far as I know, law enforcement in Colorado is not required nor can be forced to enforce federal law.
But the FBI can very well decide to prosecute federal crimes in states, even if the "crime" is legal under state law.
And you can settle the charges civilly (allowable under United States Code), plead guilty, and get a discharge (no criminal record or time served).
We have a Pay-To-Play legal system. Vince Neil of Motley Crue killed a guy with his car, paid a fine, pled guilty, and served two days of jail total. He's just one example.
Cash is freedom. No one spies on what you do with your cash money.
Hopefully this electronic-only-money utopia won't get traction. We can see already with the encryption trojan programs that ask for Bitcoins/altcoins to decrypt your data - something like that wouldn't be reasonable and work on a large scale with cash.
“People are doing business without any fear of losing cash to militants or conmen,” Aden said. “The country’s telecommunications sector has undergone a rapid rise, fueled by intense competition amongst the numerous telecommunication firms that dominate the country.”
Cash is freedom to be robbed, so I don't think that will convince anyone in Somalia.
I checked my bank statement this morning. I withdrew DKK 300 ($45) on 16 January, and still have 100kr left. I have no fear of being robbed though. You should argue against Scandinavia, and some other countries in Europe.
Indeed. The problem with some hardcore libertarians, among others, is that they want "freedom" to be #1 on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and become confused or angry when others disagree. If you want people to want freedom--and you should!--you need to start by guaranteeing their basic physical safety and survival. "Live Free or Die" makes for a catchy bumper sticker, but if what you offer is the "freedom" to watch your family starve, most people would actually prefer a bit of oppression, and I can't really fault them for that.
Truth be told, "Freedom", as defined as:
n. The condition of being free of restraints.
n. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.
Would fit squarely under level 2 "Safety" needs in Maslow's hierarchy. Therefore "Live Free or Die" would essentially translate as "Level 2 Needs fulfilled, or Deny me my Level 1 needs".
Basically, hardcore libertarians feel that nothing should keep them from fulfilling their physiological needs, and the only thing that might would be government force. if Government force is stopping your family from eating (See: bread lines in Russia during CCCP), You're already unable to meet your safety needs, which will naturally lead to revolt/rebellion.
Your analysis indicates that you're stuck on the dimension of individuality vs collectivism whereby libertarian solutions would somehow be inferior to socialist ones.
The real problems in Somalia lie along dimensions of corruption and violence. The biggest gains that they could make as a society would be to reduce the value of corruption and violence as a means to an end. Possibly that reduction comes in the form of free markets that create a vibrant economy that their people become incentivized to protect. Possibly, some more socialist democratic processes could take hold that appeals to their cultural tendencies to help one another. Probably some mixture of those forces could help to create a new Somalian society.
I'm saying that if you want people to agree with your philosophy, whatever it is, you have to make it relevant to them. Frik seemed to think that Somalians should give up day-to-day security, including financial and physical safety, in order to protect themselves from hypothetical monitoring by a government that currently can't even provide basic law enforcement. In the environment Frik lives in, government monitoring is a reality and frequent robbery is not, and he naively assumes that his priorities can be applied everywhere unchanged.
Are you reply to me? I was talking about cash in general, and for your information why I care: certain parties want to limit cash or forbid cash in US and Europe.
One can only robe you the cash you have with you, and no one has all his money with him, right? But if the same guy also robes you the credit card or debit card or smartphone with contact-less payment setup, they can take all your money, or multiple times more money (and the rest over a few days if you don't act very quickly and try to contact your electronic payment provider, if possible (see bitcoin/altcoin)).
The next question, how often do you get robbed in US or Europe? Beside certain hot spots in a few areas, I never heard that this is a real big problem.
No, this article is about near cashless society that are not in Europe but in Africa.
I think you lack an understanding how cashless transactions work in Somalia. First off, no one is using a credit card in Somalia. They don't work, no one has them. Two, the article made it very clear, carrying cash is a big problem in Somalia due to crime. How contactless payments work on phones in Somalia and M-Pesa is that you have to have a code to access the funds on the phone. If someone robbed you and they get your phone, they still don't have access to your funds. You can simply go to the phone store (Or whatever they have in Somalia) and get a new SIM for your account and then have access to your funds.
I imagine that carrying cash in Somalia is extremely dangerous and well worth the "Big Brother" factor.
This was the point of "New Yen" in William Gibson's Neuromancer, in fact.
The only remaining real-cash currency, used mostly for illegal trade but still very much sought after because was not traceable by anyone (and had incredibly favourable exchange rates with electronic money)
That's just not true. People pay by cash all the time in Denmark. I happened to read this in line at a Danish supermarket and people were paying with cash as much as with cards while I was paying attention.
Cash was 40% of transactions, 25% of total value in 2012. [1]
Since then, to July 2015, there's been a 25% increase in card payments, but only a 12% increase in total value [2], so smaller things must be being paid for by card.
Contactless cards were only introduced in Denmark in 2015, and payment by mobile phone in 2013 [3].
So yes, it's normal. But it's not the most common form of payment, and I've been asked by a guy selling sausages from a wagon to use a card when I offered cash.
No question, we're quickly moving away from physical Kroner. There's also political and especially business pressure to get rid of them. However, it's not true that they're obsolete or somehow similar to new yen.
I think it's a point worth emphasizing because going cashless is a huge decision, especially the way we're moving towards in Denmark. There's a discussion to be had around it and if we just accept that it's inevitable or has already happened then that kills that discussion before it's even taken place.
Presumably, that works the same way as the people buying cannabis in Christiania — I briefly lived close to Christiania. The cash machines next to the metro station are the only ones where I've ever seen a queue, sometimes 4-5 people waiting at each one!
Forcing everyone to use e-money only has a few drawbacks. There will always be things that you don't want to be associated with - even if prostitution is legal in your country, if you are married you would prefer this transaction to be untraceable, I suppose.
Another possible drawback is that once money is only available through "controlled" sources, you could find yourself subject to redlining (see: http://www.engadget.com/2015/12/02/paypal-square-and-big-ban...).
So while I find e-money convenient and practical, I do not think that society would be "better" if physical money went away.
"We can see already with the encryption trojan programs that ask for Bitcoins/altcoins to decrypt your data - something like that wouldn't be reasonable and work on a large scale with cash."
Well, if everyone would drive with horses, there wouldn't be deadly high-speed traffic accidents.
You have it backwards. Horses aren't forbidden, you can still use them on the road. The horror, you can even still walk by foot on the road (near the side).
Some wealthy parties nowadays try to convince certain players to forbid cash.
[edit: disclaimer: of course depending on states law, horses/cars/pedestrians/trains/what-ever are forbidden or allowed on certain autobahn/freeway, railroad, subway, etc. The point was about forbidding cash for the sake of forbidding cash, just to track all your money movement, to be transparent. As a consequence you have to be very careful and loose your freedom. That would be like going back to Soviet Russia or similar times, were the trust is gone.]
> Cash is freedom. No one spies on what you do with your cash money.
You need to physically visit the other party, so it isn't black and white necessarily the best option.
> We can see already with the encryption trojan programs that ask for Bitcoins/altcoins to decrypt your data - something like that wouldn't be reasonable and work on a large scale with cash.
Before Bitcoins, it was possible by using wire transfers. This only won't occur if you have a fictional purely cash society.
>> Cash is freedom. No one spies on what you do with your cash money.
> You need to physically visit the other party, so it isn't black and white necessarily the best option.
Some parties, want to limit cash or downright forbid cash. Then there is no option anymore, think about that. I am all for options and fine with electronic money for web transaction, but removing cash from our society would be a very very bad move. That would lock us in to banks and telecom companies and states. No freedom. Not good.
For those who don't know, there are countries that allows government or companies to take away money from your bank account without your consent if they prove you own them money. I know this may sounds strange and you will properly be thinking that is fine, but there are variety of reasons why you don't want that.
Yes, and your wages can also be garnished if you don't have a bank account so I don't see how cash solves this "problem." And it isn't just companies and governments, individuals also have the power to garnish wages and bank accounts.
half of my week has been setting up wage garnishments for people based on liens my customers have filed. I can confirm what the parent says is true in US/Canada/UK/NZ/AU jurisdictions.
People -- the government specifically -- does, indeed, monitor some things you do with your "cash money", including treating merely travelling with a large quantity of it as something inherently suspicious.
Why don't you try to proxy it by setting up an interview with him. Come to HN with the story of "I'm going to interview the Minister of Telecom in Somalia: What should I ask him?"
Collect the questions and then later post the full interview somewhere that you can then reference in another post to HN.
I'm very interested in finding out how to pay people in the third world as well as others with no bank account (10% of Americans don't have one). Please see if he will answer questions. I want to know how it works, how widespread it is in Africa, if they are rolling it out in other countries etc.
What's your questions about Americans without bank accounts? I grew up poor so I knew plenty of people growing up without bank accounts. I can answer most questions.
Surprised this would not attract interest - did you raise this previously in another post? Agree with the other replies to your comment, I would have thought there could be considerable interest here if managed correctly. I imagine a brief introductory piece for what the scope of his work is as minister and what he's happy to talk about, posted as an Ask HN with an offer to send questions to the minister directly would be potentially very interesting.
The U.S. has been a cashless society for generations. Few people even know what cash is. They think federal reserve notes are cash. They are not.
Alaska has cash in circulation and you can spend it at any business, though the scales are out of sight until you break out the cash. They can make change in cash or federal reserve notes.
Federal reserve notes are the middle ground between digital currency and cash. I've never seen anyone spend cash in the lower 48.
I'm sure that Somali currency is not cash either.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
[LEWIS CARROLL (Charles L. Dodgson), Through the Looking-Glass, chapter 6, p. 205 (1934). First published in 1872.]
In any case, it's not like everybody is its own bank. There is one company doing the bank for everyone.