The banks want the cashless economy, here are just three reasons this would be not in most peoples best interests.

1st If you are traveling overseas and only have a card, the surcharges add considerably in costs you pay and the conversion will be done at a rate that does not advantage you but the bank.

2nd Stranded customers furious at Westpac payment system fail and ANZ app problems

Furious customers stranded in shops are lashing out at Westpac and ANZ on social media saying they are unable to pay for their goods.

Angry customers and business owners are taking aim at Westpac and ANZ, saying their payment system has dropped out on one of the year’s busiest shopping days.

Customers were stranded inside shops with no means to pay for their Boxing Day sale finds or being forced to pay with cash.

Outage-checking website Down Detector shows there has been a sudden surge in customers reporting problems accessing the payment system from about midday today.

The same website shows the ANZ App has crashed on one of the busiest days of the year for banking transactions — with customers unable to access their funds.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/banking/stranded-customers-furious-at-westpac-payment-system-fail/news-story/fa0adc4505a80c2648f8bbef682b6d02

3rd Gift cards declined on Boxing Day at Myer and Coles.

Shoppers at Myer and Coles have had their gift cards declined on Boxing Day, with a third party provider blamed for the outage.

Technical problems also plagued the Coles Group and Myer gift cards on Christmas Eve, and shoppers were left frustrated again on Wednesday as post-Christmas sales swung into action.

Boxing Day is one of the biggest days of the year for Myer, and shoppers took to Facebook to vent their frustration at not being able to take advantage of the sales with their gift cards.

"Your gift cards not working in stores on Boxing Day," one shopper wrote on Facebook. "Helpline constantly engaged, and poor retail assistants tearing their hair out."

Shoppers were complaining of gift card rejection from the start of shopping on Boxing Day morning.

The problem was fixed about 5.30pm, according to responses from Myer to customers.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/gift-cards-declined-on-boxing-day-at-myer-and-coles-20181226-p50obp.html

Let's hope that cashless is just another crackpot scheme that will fizzle out. Technology is not reliable enough, as your examples show. There would be more chance of Big Brother prying. There would be more chance of fraud. People wouldn't keep track of how much they spend - I'll bet that many people never reconcile the bank statements with their card receipts now, let alone on in a cashless future.

Sounds like another big government globalisation strategy.

>Sounds like another big government globalisation strategy.
No, nothing to do with globalization.
And it's far worse than big government - it's big INTRUSIVE government.

Must have missed some thing, I thought we had just about got there
As we blindly walk in to the next Global Financial Crisis, maybe this year we need a little cash for our daily needs

The banks might be in favour of this move to a cashless society because of the added fees. But they are not the motivators of the movement.

It's government.

Governments love the idea. Two reasons:

1. The black economy can't really exist in a cashless society so this will enhance revenues and all governments are in favour of increased revenues.

2. But more importantly, a cashless society gives the authorities a vastly greater ability to micro-manage individuals and enforce otherwise unenforceable proscriptions. For example, if you are forced to buy all your foodstuff via card, every single item you purchase will be recorded. Whatismore, their ability to enforce change will be vastly increased. Spend more than the average on grog? They'll know and eventually they'll react. Its a totalitarian wet-dream.

There was a time when crossing the Sydney Harbour incurred a fee that was paid in cash. For the sake of simplicity, the fee was the same no matter when you crossed. Then the technology allowed the government to collect the fee electronically and many people, for convenience, signed up. After a few years the government decided that electronic collection would be mandatory. For convenience alone, mind you...Nothing would change.

BUT, soon after that change was effected differential fees were introduced. Cross during peak times and incur a higher fee. A lower fee would encourage you to cross when the government thought it better.

Additionally, it allowed the government to incrementally increase the fee. When the fee was $2 it wasn't convenient to increase it to say $2.05. They had to increase it to $2.20 and suffer the electoral pain of having a 10% rise. Now however the fee can be increased in 1c increments and the motorist barely notices.

Imagine that on a larger scale. This softdrink has more sugar so a fee is added at the checkout - for your own good mind you. The GST is 10% today but 10.05% tomorrow. You've already had too much grog this month - your card doesn't work when you try to buy more.

But of coarse that'll never happen....

People got angry because the train wiring and signalling equipment
got hit by lightning. What the hell do they think happens when
lightning strikes ? There is enormous power inserted into whatever
is hit and everything around it.
The railways did not have buses waiting there for the strike.
Gord people are dumb.

When the crash comes this year or next, they will have no money worries
because there wont be any. The dogs seem to be barking in the street
that will be a crash later this year. One symbol that some are worried
about is that the US's interest bill is larger than the defense budget.
Most of those nominally in the know are concerned about various ratios.
It does seem many of those ratios such as GDP/Debt are in a bad space.
Could we end up a bit like Venezuela ?
Yes, I know Aiden, we can just issue more, or is that what Zimbabwe did ?

Bazz in total agreement people think a fairy looks after them
And that crash can not be avoided lets hope those who assured me in threads about it remember they said it would not come

Bazz,
Lightning happens. Railway signalling systems should be designed to withstand (or at least quickly recover from) lightning strikes.

Zimbabwe and Venezuela both had official currency values set by the government, which effectively meant they had limited credit. In both cases the government spent too much, the country lost the means to guarantee the currency value, and the currency collapsed.

Such a collapse is impossible here where the currency value is set by the market. We can always issue as much as we need.

We couldn't shop for two days when lightning struck some tower. First, because the eftpos didn't work & the next day the roads were flooded. Luckily, the power stayed on & all the coolers kept working.
Just to think that most of our internet is in the hands of people in other countries is enough to make anyone shudder.

Lightning strikes so we want every thing built bullet proof?
The very lard heads Bazz has spoken about would then tell us it cost too much
A few years ago a tsunami warning went out for the NSW coast, Bazz,s people flocked to the beach with chairs to watch it come to the beach they sat on
Right now someone is getting the blame for every thing
Someone should fix it, unless it is a road half the world calls for it to be fixed then abuses those fixing it for not doing it at some other time

Bazz,

Good comment. Heaven help those owing money when the whoopsy hits the fan.

"Such a collapse is impossible here where the currency value is set by the market."

Aidan's right. We can't have that type of collapse. Our collapse will look quite different. Instead of the unofficial market recording the decline in the currency, we'll have what Aidan laughingly calls a series of competitive devaluations. The same net effect but it'll look more controlled.

We'll end up in roughly the same place but via a different path.

Of coarse, since the decline will be less chaotic, there will be a chance that we'll come to our senses and recognise that irresponsible borrowing against the future is an unsustainable ponzi scheme promoted by those who refuse to have their spending limited by mere reality.

Lightning strikes so we want every thing built bullet proof?
Belly,
No, we just need cash in case for when lightning strikes again.

mhaze
>Our collapse will look quite different.
We won't collapse at all. Even if the market decides we're worth less than before, it will be business as usual.

>Instead of the unofficial market recording the decline in the currency, we'll have what Aidan laughingly
>calls a series of competitive devaluations. The same net effect but it'll look more controlled.
No. A "series of competitive devaluations" implies a non continuous process, as a country with a managed exchange rate would do if it saw the trouble ahead and sought to avoid it.

What we'd have instead is market led competitive devaluation, which is similar but far less inflationary. Importantly it is self limiting - if our dollar goes down, it makes us more internationally competitive - our exports get cheaper so we'll sell more, and our imports will get more expensive so we'll buy less. Of course this isn't how we want to make ourselves more internationally competitive, but it's a lot better than trying to achieve the same result by slashing wages.

>We'll end up in roughly the same place but via a different path.
Now that I've explained it, can you see how idiotic that comment is?

While the thread is about some thing else that crash is coming
Household debt, house prices in decline, a fact interest rates must rise again
only the time is unknown

Do try to grow up Aidan, & use a bit of common sense. Your posts sound like some kid who has just finished a Uni economics course, & actually believed your lecturers had some idea of which way was up.

Did they tell you "if our dollar goes down, it makes us more internationally competitive our exports get cheaper so we'll sell more." Nice idea, what do you suggest we should sell. How about cars? Ops, we don't make them any more, our labour costs killed those. OK, TVs & electrical stuff. Hang on, we don't make them any more either.

More coal & Iron ore then, great idea, if we weren't selling all we can dig as quickly as we cab dig it. Then if someone wants to open a new mine, the greenies make it so hard & long winded a process only a fool would do it.

We sell all the wheat & other broad acre crops we can grow, & are now importing fruit & vegetables as costs make ours are too expensive. We have to export our livestock live, as our abattoir costs are totally non competitive. Hell even with the longest coastline in the world, we have to import our fish, due to some greenie induced stupidity.

So tell me Aidan, in other than broad sweeping fool statements, just what exports would a lower dollar encourage? Come on, speak up or stop it with the grandiose bulldust.

Thanks Hasbeen. I was struggling to keep my response under 350 but you've covered half my points.

Aidan,

"Now that I've explained it, can you see how idiotic that comment is?"

You haven't explained it, you made a series of unsupported assertions that are mere hopes about how things would work out.

"No. A "series of competitive devaluations" implies a non continuous process, "

Why does it imply that? In the real world devaluations even of floating currencies goes in stages. eg we didn't get to US0.70 from parity in a smooth flow but by a series of drops followed by a hiatus, followed by further drops.

"but it's a lot better than trying to achieve the same result by slashing wages."

Well no one was talking about slashing wages but nice deflection. But now that you raise it, a devaluation isn't better than slashing wages, its the same. Slash wages and people must buy less. Devalue and prices of imports rise - people buy less. Not only that but things we don't import become more expensive because (1) input costs rise and (2) supply potentially decreases as producers sell more overseas.

Aidan, I get that you and your ilk want to avoid the discipline of not borrowing against the future - spend now, let someone else worry about it later. But the bill will come. It will come in the form of higher inflation, higher interest rates and reduced living standards. At some point, either discipline will be imposed (and those doing so will be tagged as cruel) or spiralling economic decline will ensue. Venezuela is worst case. But Greece is very much on the horizon.

Hasbeen yes we no longer make electrical s here
We in truth could never match wages and other costs from our now producers
Do we want to? or do we still think paying a living wage is preferred over working poor
World trade
Two words not swear words, we gain in some areas and fall in others
IF we did not have it? could not export our coal and minerals
Wool? grains?
Banana Republic would not cover it

We in truth could never match wages and other costs from our now producers
Belly,
Ok, you were one of those fighting for ever increasing wages so, in your expertise what is the solution ? A Labor Govt ? If so, how ?
What could they do now they couldn't manage after all their years in power ?
No smart-ar$e reply, a real answer please.

Hasbeen, mhaze, surprisingly Belly - Good call on the economics. There are too many people. Any large area of productive land should be able to support the people living on it. Then import/ exports/ forex are irrelevant.

Hasbeen,
Exports do not need to be centrally planned! We can do what we're good at and export what we're competitive in. You can find a list of our biggest exports at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exports_of_Australia

I know you know that our agricultural production is limited by what's economic, not what's technically possible to grow. So I don't know what point you're trying to make. Do you doubt our agricultural exports rise when our dollar falls?

________________________________________________________________________________________

mhaze,
Sorry, I hadn't realised you were still stuck on the basic stuff. It's probably going to take a while to explain, so let me know when you think something I say doesn't make sense.

Currency trading is a continuous process even though it isn't smooth. But even though it's chaotic, it's much smoother than managed devaluations would be.

>Well no one was talking about slashing wages but nice deflection.

It wasn't meant as a deflection. There are people on this board who think that will be our only option.

>But now that you raise it, a devaluation isn't better than slashing wages, its the same.
NO IT ISN'T!
People (and businesses) have existing financial commitments. Slashing wages makes it much harder to meet them. A lower dollar does not.
(tbc)

mhaze (continued)
>Aidan, I get that you and your ilk want to avoid the discipline of not borrowing against the future
The problem is you think borrowing is against the future, when it's actually FOR the future.

Think about it another way: how low would interest rates have to go before you consider taking on more debt to be a better course of action than paying it off?

>- spend now, let someone else worry about it later.
Quite the reverse: when it's spent is the time to worry about it. Deficits and surpluses matter, just not in the way you think they do.

>But the bill will come. It will come in the form of higher inflation,
Higher inflation is a likely outcome if the deficit's too high (though government spending's no more inflationary than private spending) but it's not a result of debt.

>higher interest rates
More debt won't make the RBA board set interest rates higher.

>and reduced living standards.
Economic downturns, resulting from too little spending, are a much bigger threat to living standards.

>At some point, either discipline will be imposed (and those doing so will be tagged as cruel)
>or spiralling economic decline will ensue.
The "fiscal discipline" you so admire is the MAIN CAUSE of economic decline. When there's too little money, there's too little opportunity for businesses to make money, and they wind back production and sack employees. Hence the huge contraction of the Greek economy when they ran out of money.

>Venezuela is worst case. But Greece is very much on the horizon.
Greece had surrendered its financial sovereignty when it joined the Euro, so its credit was limited. Unlike Greece and Venezuela, Australia has unlimited credit.

Indy wasting time is a hobby of mine at this age so lets try it
Wasting?
Yes anything I say will not please you
First unionism is not about hating the boss
Not about class warfare, unless its the thugs and mugs unions, CFMEU for a start
Fair days pay for a fair days work
Some early British industrialists seemed to agree, the built housing for their workers even churches
Workers wages should feed and house them and let them educate and look after the kids
Your seeming wish , ever lower wages results in a lower class for workers
Equity in all things, a life worth living, is not evil
The old fair go mate could write reems of pages about why fair wages is a must but as I said at the start you will not believe it

A lower dollar means increased cost of international debt, and imports, lower profits for exporters. Flow of money theory- standard Milton Friedman Macro-Economics- I think there was some Ricardo thrown in too.

Anyway- too much Australian reliance on the International Markets appears to expose it to International Instability. Some call this "Fortress Australia"- we call it "common sense".

Borrowing can be useful if the activity it finances brings a greater return than the InterestRate + Effort.

It's also interesting to draw circles around Australia and look at the net exports. Immigration is interesting in this regard- let us suppose that immigrants bring money from outside Australia to buy a house (not saying that this happens but- just suppose) this looks like a net export on paper but there are hidden costs. Some would choose to label these costs as insignificant but others would not.

To me this sort of example seems to indicate it's not just the money that is important- it's important to look at the Micro-Economics / Micro-Culture to see where the money is coming from as well as the costs.

Anecdotal reports seem to indicate that the Australian property market diverts capital away from the rest of the economy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_property_bubble
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/correlation-inflation-houses.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Australia

Perhaps if the money is earned and borrowed in Australia- property inflation could perhaps be seen as a zero sum. There are some interesting effects when there is exposure to international markets such as lending, etc. This is one reason why an "Economic Fortress Australia" attitude is necessary to protect Australia.

Thanks for the link on exports Aiden... see below...

# Trade Item Value (A$ million) % share of 2016
1 Iron ore & concentrates 53,757 16.3
2 Coal 42,270 12.8
3 Tourism Satellite Account 34,222 11.0
4 Education[a] 22,404 6.8
5 Gold 18,857 5.7
6 Natural gas 17,912 5.4

I find the comparison between Pre/ Post-Industrialization illuminating on how economies function under different regimes. I believe there are advantages and disadvantages in both- but neither has all the answers- despite what some might say. Both Capitalism and Communism are Post- Industrialization systems. Perhaps hybridization might give much of the answer. Perhaps the same is true of Social Systems.

Canem,
>A lower dollar means increased cost of international debt,
True but largely irrelevant. Australia's Federal government has a policy of only borrowing in Australian dollars. That's mostly also the case with state governments - and the exceptions are well hedged with CFDs. Commercial banks, which do have significant foreign currency debt, are also careful to hedge it against currency fluctuations.

>and imports,
That much is true.

>lower profits for exporters.
How so?

>Borrowing can be useful if the activity it finances brings a greater return than the InterestRate + Effort.

That's true, but what counts as "return" for the public sector is more complicated than it is for the private sector.

I accept that our economy is too reliant on the property market, but I don't think Fortress Australia is a good solution. Instead I think we should take a leaf out of Ricardo's book and put a significant tax on unimproved land value.
IIRC Ricardo wanted to set it at a rate which kept land values stable, with the objective of replacing all other taxes. I'd prefer it to be phased in gradually (over several decades) to an ultimate rate of between 2% and 5% – enough to dampen property speculation but not kill it off completely; not enough to replace all taxes, but enough to replace GST and Stamp Duty.

Aiden-

>lower profits for exporters.
How so?

Answer- Sorry you are correct on this item - I missed the second order effect

The problem with Macro-Economics and Global-Economics is it is dealing with the Economic issues at the wrong scale and so disenfranchises the public. It contradicts self determination. This cannot be understood from within Economic theory- it needs an understanding of the history of pre/ post industrialism. But if all you have is a hammer everything is a nail. Economists would be wise to learn history.

Fair days pay for a fair days work
Belly,
Where does the bulk of tax money go ? The Public Service & it's Superannuations.. Is that what you call a fair day's pay for a fair day's work ?

We need profit but 99% of people don't know the limits for profit. That's what makes the wheels of economy wobble & juding by the state of australian industry several wheels have already come off.