Ever since POS hacks on Target and other retailers I've completely switched to cash only. Not only can't you be tracked, something I'm not sure I care about, but it reduces the chances of somebody stealing your card info.
And I only use wells fargo ATMs, because they have a nice green glowing card input, so you know nobody put a malicious card scanner on the ATM.
It's a complete reversal from a few years ago where I wouldn't carry cash and wouldn't go anywhere that was cash only. Going cash only also reduces the fees for stores where you buy things.
Cash is the way to go, despite all of our technology.
Many people are responding that you're making a mistake because cash is useful after having been stolen. Clearly this is true. But it is a mistake. Multiply the probability of being mugged in a year by the amount of money you carry. That's the expected loss over that year. Is your privacy worth that? If so, carry cash.
As for "chargeback insurance", I'd recommend taking responsibility for your own actions. If you buy crap from a merchant, that's between you and the merchant. Argue with him; don't buy more from him. The bank isn't a party to that argument. That should be enough to discourage such behavior. Additionally, they may have to pay the merchant and you. That's what the fees are for.
Insurance against theft, fraud, any transaction based deception you are now unprotected against. Once you have handed over cash, it'll take a herculean effort to get that back.
On the other hand, when someone mugged me for my card, I cancelled it a few minutes later and had a replacement within 2 days. I lost nothing but my pride and my wallet.
Science proves that you tend to spend less money when you pay with cash, especially on unplanned and/or impulse purchases. I guess the psychology of actually handing something over then having less of it afterwards makes people think twice about if they really need to spend the money. Also getting extra cash when you over budget has an extra step (trip to bank/ATM) so you're probably more likely to stay in budget or to rethink if you really need that over budget purchase.
But your risk exposure is much much higher. When a mugger steals $70 from me, my maximum exposure is $70. There is no way that mugger can use those bills to extract any more money from me or as a launchpad for fraud. When a mugger steals my card (and then commits a little fraud) my maximum exposure is my bank account + overdraft + other accounts I have with the same bank + whatever loans they could get.
When a mugger steals my card (and then commits a little fraud) my maximum exposure is my bank account + overdraft + other accounts I have with the same bank + whatever loans they could get
Your practical maximum exposure is zero, if you follow the correct process. Call your bank and report the stolen card. Any transactions will be undone and the bank will take the hit, in the name of keeping the public's faith in the banking system. This is an ordinary business day for the bank.
As someone who was just caught up in the Target breach through his debit(gasp!) card, and had a random Londoner or Londoners go on an $1400 internet shopping spree for designer jeans and hair extensions, I was liable for exactly $0.00 of it.
It was annoying to rearrange my automatic bill paying, but that's what I get for only having one checking account.
"A credit card is not sufficient ID for a loan or withdrawl"
Not completely no. A little fraud is normally necessary. A little social pressure, just one person not following proper security procedures. Note how Jeremy Clarkson published his credit card number to prove that leaking credit card numbers wasn't a security issue, and someone promptly withdrew £500 from his account (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7174760.stm). I understand that the bank takes the hit in cases like that, but in the meantime you are out of pocket of far more money than you were carrying in cash.
My point is there is a non-0 (albeit small) risk that they do get something from it. And then its a hassle to sort it out (check statements carefully for the next few months, phone bank on any suspicious items). I realize I ought to be doing that anyway, but it normally falls so low on the priority list I end up checking once every 3 or 4 months.
Clarkson did not publish his credit card number afaik, he published his bank account number and is a public personality where his personal details are easy to find.
That's not really relevant, and you don't check statements, you phone them and they send you an entirely new card and deactivate the old one.
Yes but now there is a record of every single thing you've ever bought. Of course for most people this probably doesn't matter too much. But some people do value privacy.
You could go half-way and leak a very biased sample of data. Some people are terrified that there might come a day where our health insurers monitor the junk food we buy via our credit card purchases. But why not just buy junk food with cash and healthy food with a credit card.
How much would you pay for insurance that covered up to a $200 loss which is likely to happen at least once every 15-20 years?
Being robbed is not a financial worry for people who aren't living check to check. It's a worry about getting shot, and I don't think bitcoin protects you from that.
Cash is also great for when you want to lose that debt addiction. A good practice is to approximate your cash needs for a week and withdraw the according amount.
If you really spend everything before the week is over, you will feel it. I did this 5 years ago and I've never been in debt since.
Personally I think I'd prefer to be attacked digitally and have some protection about unauthorised transactions from my credit card company. Identity fraud however is not pleasant.
But I would rather that than to be mugged at knife-point because people holding large amounts of cash is a quick win for criminals.
Muggers don't have x-ray vision. They can't see that you don't have cash. They're going to mug you no matter what. I don't walk around with a ton of money. If I get mugged I lose a few bucks. If you get mugged you have to go cancel your cards and go without them until you get new ones or go to your bank and deal with all kinds of hassles.
To the muggers it's all about return of investment. If everyone carries cash, muggers will find more people with cash and find it worth the risk. If no-one carried cash, they'd probably give up and try to steal bank card details from large retailers instead.
The same goes for smartphones and tablets. If they are easy to sell on after stealing, crime will go up. Making the items useless if stolen removes the incentive.
I have been mugged. I lost all the cash that was in the wallet. I phoned up my card company and they immediately cancelled the cards and replaced them within a couple days.
They typically charge the retailers a few %. That few % is also represented in the cash price as very few places these days have surcharges for credit card payments.
The vast majority of the world is dangerous. Please don't assume you are the rule, not the exception. There are half a million or more robberies every year in the USA.
Lot's of exaggerating claiming going on there in your posts. Then you position into some kind of analysis of what I'm assuming and finish with some kinda point totally lost way down five posts later in this argument. I'm guessing you like using cards. You go use them. I'm gonna use cash. I've been buying stuff at target all year and I didn't have to go cancel my credit card or worry about it having charges I had to dispute.
And I only use wells fargo ATMs, because they have a nice green glowing card input, so you know nobody put a malicious card scanner on the ATM.
It's a complete reversal from a few years ago where I wouldn't carry cash and wouldn't go anywhere that was cash only. Going cash only also reduces the fees for stores where you buy things.
Cash is the way to go, despite all of our technology.