Cash now used for fewer than half consumer payments...

[countryboy]

I can't answer personal questions for other people. Just my two cents. Talking about changing banks in a thread about cash payment? That's big leap, even though it might not seem like one.

Then why did you jump in with a non answer to a question I asked another poster? :roll:

 

[joG]

They can and will only do that in the event that levies need to be put on your account for such things as back taxes, unpaid child support, unpaid debt, etc. And those can only happen with a judgment. The government can't block your account for no reason. Only a judge can, and only with verifiable just cause. If you owe a private creditor money or the government money, te process to freeze your account is a long one. It's your responsibility to know if you owe money.

By the way, they don't prohibit further transactions on your account. You can still put money in the account.

The thing is that there can be either misuse or mistakes made. As long as cash can be used for payments, you can keep a stash in the house and hold out for the time it takes to correct the mistake.

 

[joG]

Like I said, time to fire your bank. This has more to do with their incompetence than the government.

You mean that the bank should resist the government order?

 

[tres borrachos]

The thing is that there can be either misuse or mistakes made. As long as cash can be used for payments, you can keep a stash in the house and hold out for the time it takes to correct the mistake.

Tell me what mistakes would show you owe years worth of back taxes and they made every effort to collect them without any success.

 

[countryboy]

What? You can't get a judgment to freeze an account over a "dispute with the city you live in over a payment in connection with a house purchase". Accounts can only be frozen if you owe someone money, and the lawyers present to a judge, and a judge sees a legitimate cause and can verify that you legitimately owe someone else money.

And because of the BSA laws, the bank itself has the right to close your account if it sees suspicious activity. The government doesn't tell them to do it. The bank has to file an SAR (Suspicious Activity Report) when they do it. They also don't do it lightly.

He has claimed in the past that his bank locked his account for simply trying to make an online payment. I think he was trying to use a credit card. In any event, if this happened to me, I would chew my bank out and tell them to make sure it never happened again, if it continued to happen, I'd switch banks.

The only thing even remotely similar I've had happen was for a credit card company to lock my account for multiple fairly large purchases I made while working out of state. I appreciated it, and a simple phone call straightened it out.

 

[joG]

What? You can't get a judgment to freeze an account over a "dispute with the city you live in over a payment in connection with a house purchase". Accounts can only be frozen if you owe someone money, and the lawyers present to a judge, and a judge sees a legitimate cause and can verify that you legitimately owe someone else money.

And because of the BSA laws, the bank itself has the right to close your account if it sees suspicious activity. The government doesn't tell them to do it. The bank has to file an SAR (Suspicious Activity Report) when they do it. They also don't do it lightly.

I suspect that the laws are different from State to State and from country to country. Having started with a general statement of warning that allowing the government to create a cashless economy has certain dangers attached, I do not see your argument.

 

[countryboy]

You mean that the bank should resist the government order?

Either you are being fed a line of BS, or there's something you are leaving out of the story.

 

[tres borrachos]

I suspect that the laws are different from State to State and from country to country. Having started with a general statement of warning that allowing the government to create a cashless economy has certain dangers attached, I do not see your argument.

The laws are the laws. My argument is that you have not made any argument to show that banks close or freeze your account accidentally. They don't. A judge has to see a massive amount of evidence before issuing the order.

If you have had your accounts closed because you're a delinquent payer, there is your reason your accounts were closed.

 

[joG]

Lets hope you never live in paralyzing fear of mathematically improbable situations.... too late

It is not a mathematically improbable and actually seems to happen quite often by mistake. I know of three cases in Germany.

And as my comment was directed to the danger of misuse of power, which a cashless economy would mean for the government, it seems rather odd that your response would be directed as it is.

 

[tres borrachos]

He has claimed in the past that his bank locked his account for simply trying to make an online payment. I think he was trying to use a credit card. In any event, if this happened to me, I would chew my bank out and tell them to make sure it never happened again, if it continued to happen, I'd switch banks.

The only thing even remotely similar I've had happen was for a credit card company to lock my account for multiple fairly large purchases I made while working out of state. I appreciated it, and a simple phone call straightened it out.

His story keeps changing. And a bank won't close your account because you're trying to make an online payment. Banks are very cautious about these things. The consumer protection laws make it extremely hard to deny someone access to his money. The process is exhausting, very legal, and very thorough. That poster is not telling the truth.

Yup, your credit card story is quite common, and it's for the cardholder's protection. CC companies are supposed to catch potential fraudulent use. If you are shopping in Tulsa, and then 20 minutes later your card is used in San Diego, that's a huge flag. We want them to catch those things.

 

[tres borrachos]

It is not a mathematically improbable and actually seems to happen quite often by mistake. I know of three cases in Germany.

And as my comment was directed to the danger of misuse of power, which a cashless economy would mean for the government, it seems rather odd that your response would be directed as it is.

Germany? WTF? Now you're talking about Germany?

 

[joG]

Tell me what mistakes would show you owe years worth of back taxes and they made every effort to collect them without any success.

One case I saw was the demand by a city official to pay a fee for a large transaction that had been planned but was canceled. The lawyer had sent notice and the notice was on the desk of the bureaucrat that blocked the accounts. It took two weeks too correct the mistake.

Were the situation as in turkey right now, that would be a fine way to put pressure on a political opponent. And that the IRS has been said to have been misused by politicians in this country is no secret.

 

[countryboy]

His story keeps changing. And a bank won't close your account because you're trying to make an online payment. Banks are very cautious about these things. The consumer protection laws make it extremely hard to deny someone access to his money. The process is exhausting, very legal, and very thorough. That poster is not telling the truth.

Yup, your credit card story is quite common, and it's for the cardholder's protection. CC companies are supposed to catch potential fraudulent use. If you are shopping in Tulsa, and then 20 minutes later your card is used in San Diego, that's a huge flag. We want them to catch those things.

Yep, I thought it was very reassuring. I love how you can set credit card accounts to send out various alerts too. Every time I make a purchase at my tile supply house, I get an email on my phone while I'm standing there. Very cool.

 

[Celebrity]

Then why did you jump in with a non answer to a question I asked another poster? :roll:

I quoted your post in my response and I didn't answer your question.

 

[tres borrachos]

One case I saw was the demand by a city official to pay a fee for a large transaction that had been planned but was canceled. The lawyer had sent notice and the notice was on the desk of the bureaucrat that blocked the accounts. It took two weeks too correct the mistake.

Were the situation as in turkey right now, that would be a fine way to put pressure on a political opponent. And that the IRS has been said to have been misused by politicians in this country is no secret.

Geezuschristonacracker. A city official can't demand a fee and the bank freezes an account. A city official has no jurisdiction. Only a judge can do it. Your post is a blatant lie.

The IRS has to prove you owe back taxes to a judge. They can't just say "I hate joG so freeze his accounts!". WTF?

 

[Crovax]

It is not a mathematically improbable and actually seems to happen quite often by mistake. I know of three cases in Germany.

Well theres your problem

And as my comment was directed to the danger of misuse of power, which a cashless economy would mean for the government, it seems rather odd that your response would be directed as it is.

Having some cash as a safeguard for emergencies is smart, using cash for daily transactions because you are afraid of banks and the govt is silly and childish.

 

[joG]

Either you are being fed a line of BS, or there's something you are leaving out of the story.

What do you mean? I cannot believe that you do not see the risk, if a government is allowed to eliminate cash and only electronic payments are possible. If you cannot see the problem, I hope you have never really thought about it.

 

[tres borrachos]

Yep, I thought it was very reassuring. I love how you can set credit card accounts to send out various alerts too. Every time I make a purchase at my tile supply house, I get an email on my phone while I'm standing there. Very cool.

Citibank sends texts to me when they think there may be a fraud. I love it!

 

[joG]

The laws are the laws. My argument is that you have not made any argument to show that banks close or freeze your account accidentally. They don't. A judge has to see a massive amount of evidence before issuing the order.

If you have had your accounts closed because you're a delinquent payer, there is your reason your accounts were closed.

Sure.

 

[Henrin]

I would have imagined this happened some years ago now.

Oh and yes, a digital monetary economy would be open to government abuse. The reason for this should be obvious to everyone. With tangible currency the government has little control of the currency once it leaves their fingers as they can't freely access it at any time, while in a digital monetary economy the government can access it whenever they please and can simply pass a law to block your access to your currency without requiring law enforcement to take any kind of action.

 

[joG]

Germany? WTF? Now you're talking about Germany?

Well, the comment that started this fiber of the thread was a general comment on the dangers of removing physical cash from the economy. That means a theoretical discussion and examples from any jurisdiction would demonstrate the theoretical and actual risk.

 

[tres borrachos]

Well, the comment that started this fiber of the thread was a general comment on the dangers of removing physical cash from the economy. That means a theoretical discussion and examples from any jurisdiction would demonstrate the theoretical and actual risk.

If you had an account frozen, you were either past due on a debt, your taxes, or child support. A city council member can not by law freeze your account. He has no access into the bank's core platform to do it. The bank can not do it by law because he tells them to.

You want to keep cash in your mattress, go ahead. No rational person would do it unless he is a deadbeat.

 

[joG]

Geezuschristonacracker. A city official can't demand a fee and the bank freezes an account. A city official has no jurisdiction. Only a judge can do it. Your post is a blatant lie.

The IRS has to prove you owe back taxes to a judge. They can't just say "I hate joG so freeze his accounts!". WTF?

Remember that we are on a general level here. If you are unable to handle that, so be it. But the initial comment was about the UK payment system and not the US one, if I remember correctly. And in a country very close to the UK the exact thing happened at least three times that I told you about. Also, it is very naive to think that such cannot happen to someone n the US. It would be relatively easy to persuade a judge, if the documents are wrong, as they were in the German case I described above.

 

[joG]

Well theres your problem



Having some cash as a safeguard for emergencies is smart, using cash for daily transactions because you are afraid of banks and the govt is silly and childish.

That is exactly the point. Holding cash is smart. But if the economy is cashless.... And as I said, I believe it to be exceedingly naive to think that the state is benevolent.

 

[tres borrachos]

Remember that we are on a general level here. If you are unable to handle that, so be it. But the initial comment was about the UK payment system and not the US one, if I remember correctly. And in a country very close to the UK the exact thing happened at least three times that I told you about. Also, it is very naive to think that such cannot happen to someone n the US. It would be relatively easy to persuade a judge, if the documents are wrong, as they were in the German case I described above.

Your posts had nothing to do with the OP. You responded to a poster who said he would not use cash as his primary method. You went on a dishonest rip about the government closing bank accounts and made up all sorts of untruths while doing it. You invited the criticism of your dishonest posts.