this is also jt.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Pole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: ".anticapism" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 6:23 AM Subject: Cashless society > "Welcome to a World without Money" ran the headline of a full-page > feature article in the "Daily Mirror". But it wasn't an article on > Socialism or anything like it. Written by Tanith Carey, it was about an > experiment in Swindon where people will pay for things by using a > special smart card instead of notes and coins or cheques or even > ordinary bank and credit cards. > > Tanith Carey describes what the experiment will involve: > > "Imagine going on a shopping spree and never having to shell out a > penny for your purchases. Groceries at the super-market, a new outfit, > even a burger on the way home - all yours without ever opening your > wallet. There are no bills to sign, no rooting around in your back > pocket and no reaching for change in the bottom of your purse. In fact > not a note changes hands. Instead, everything is taken care of with a > simple swipe of a card." > > If ever this was to be adopted universally the result would be a > cashless society, not a moneyless society which would be something > quite different. > > A cashless society would be one in which we no longer used paper notes > and metal coins to pay for things; in other respects things would stay > the same. A moneyless society, on the other hand, would be a society in > which the whole concept of money - as a unit in which prices are > expressed and as a means of payment - would have become redundant > because the things we need to live would not have prices and would no > longer be bought and sold. It would be a radically different society > from today. > > Most people tend to see money as giving access to wealth. Indeed it > does, on condition that you have some. But from another angle it can be > seen as a means of excluding people from wealth - from the wealth we > need but can't pay for because we haven't got the money. Money, in > other words, only gives conditional and restricted access to wealth. It > is a means of rationing - it only gives people access to what they can > pay for - and the workings of the capitalist system distribute these > rations to people in very unequal amounts. > > Cashless society > > The idea of a "cashless society" was first promoted by the banks in the > 1960s as a way of encouraging people to use cheques and so open bank > accounts. In those days most people still received, each week or > fortnight, a pay packet in the literal sense - an envelope containing > cash. This you put in your wallet or purse and spent to meet your needs > over the next week or fortnight; if you wanted to save something you > had to take it as cash to a bank or building society or to the Post > Office. > > The banks' scheme to increase their business worked and today most > people have a bank or building society account and are paid either by > cheque or by a direct transfer to their account. People now pay for > many more things than they used to by cheque, with the result that the > need for cash - circulating notes and coins - has declined and an > approach towards a cashless society made. > > A cheque is basically an IOU, a promise to pay the payee (the person or > business it is made out to) a sum of money at a later date, when it is > presented to their bank in fact. This, too, takes place without the > need for any physical transfer of cash. It does, however, involve the > physical transfer of the cheque and the feeding of the details into a > computer by a bank employee. This is time-consuming and so relatively > expensive for small amounts, and now the banks are dissatisfied with > cheques too. They prefer bank cards. > > Originally these were guarantee cards presented with the cheque to > guarantee the payee that the bank would honour the cheque up to a > certain amount even if the payer didn't happen to have that amount in > their account at the time the cheque was presented for payment. Then, > with the incorporation into them of a microchip, they became "smart > cards" which enabled their holders to withdraw notes from the > hole-in-the-wall cash machines that sprang up in high streets > throughout the country. > > Now they can also be used instead of a cheque to pay for things, > provided, that is, the seller (a supermarket, shop, restaurant, etc) is > equipped with a machine that can read the information on the card's > microchip and transmit details of the transaction to a central > computer. The banks envisage these cards eventually replacing cheques > altogether. > > So, after the cashless society the chequeless society, the society of > electronic money or, as the computer buffs call it, "digital dosh". > > Digital dosh > > The experiment in Swindon, financed by the NatWest and Midland banks, > takes a different approach towards the same end. It aims to see if it > is practicable - and of course profitable - to replace not just cheques > but cash itself in everyday transactions. > > Cash differs from a cheque in two important respects. First, it > circulates: the same note or coin is used many times, by the different > people whose hands it passes through, to pay for things. Second, > payment in cash is a transaction between two persons only; no third > party is involved, only the payer and the payee, the buyer and the > seller. To recreate electronically these conditions, while at the same > time safeguarding against fraud, is technically more difficult than the > bank-card-type system which uses a third party - the central system - > to carry out and confirm any transaction. But it can be done, and has > been done for the Swindon experiment. > > Those taking part in the experiment will be issued with a plastic card > but this will be different from an ordinary bank card in that holders > can transfer to it from their bank account a sum of money of their > choice. This can be done either from a machine at the bank or from one > attached to their phone or from an "electronic wallet". This wallet is > similar in shape and size to a pocket calculator and it too contains a > keyboard and a display panel; money can be transferred to it in the > same way as to a card but it can also be used to transfer money > directly to someone else's card. > > The card works on the same principle as a British Telecom phonecard > except that it can be used to pay for anything from a supermarket, > corner shop, pub, restaurant, etc participating in the scheme, even for > small items like newspapers, stamps or sweets not normally purchased by > cheque. When the amount transferred to the card has been spent it can > no longer be used without more money being transferred to it. > > When the card is used to pay for something it is inserted into a > machine that transfers the money but no information about the buyer to > the retail outlet's electronic till. A perfect substitute for cash and > one that avoids the dangers of robberies and muggings (but not of > counterfeiting). > > What a waste > > It's all hi-tech stuff, but what a waste! What a waste of the ingenuity > and technical skills of the computer analysts, programmers and software > and hardware engineers, since electronic money is still money, i.e. > still a means of rationing people's access to things. > > All these smart cards, electronic wallets and scanners with their > digital signatures, guardians, cryptographic algorithms and PINs are > designed for one purpose: to allow those with money access to things > and then only up to the limit of the amount they have, and so to deny > this conditional access to wealth to those who don't meet the > conditions, i.e. to those who don't have money or who don't have enough > money. They only make "sense" in a society based on private property > and buying and selling and are yet another example of how today under > capitalism scientific knowledge and technology is prostituted and used > to serve anti-social ends. > > In a rationally-organised society, where we produced goods to satisfy > the various needs of people and where people had free access according > to their individually-defined needs to what had been produced, the same > technology could be used to set up and operate the efficient system of > stock control that would be needed to ensure that the stores were > always stocked up with the products people had indicated they wanted. > But this presupposes a society of common ownership and democratic > control, not the banks' advertising agency's slogan of a cashless > society. > > Then we would truly be able to say "Welcome to a World without Money". > > Jan Pole > > http://communities.msn.com/realworldsocialism > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.yahoo.com
