There doesn’t have to be a sinister plot for the result - mandatory, ubiquitous tracking and bank commisions in the middle - to be real and problematic, is what I’m saying. The governments have all the resources they need to make it possible to pay with cash anywhere you go, but the trajectory they choose is the opposite. Regarding the costs, I think IT and integration work required for cashless payments are an order of magnitude costlier than cash and coin slots, because of the telecom equipment, data centers and IT professionals working on it.
No, they are not choosing this trajectory on purpose. They are simply not fighting against it. For example there was a big push for card payments during Covid pandemic. Banks lowered fees and using cards was encouraged. It was done because it was more sanitary and safer, not because some sinister plot. After the pandemic governments didn’t push against it. They don’t fight it because cash payments make tax avoidance easier but total reliance on cash is a huge security risk so when cash is almost gone governments step in to save it. Like Sweden did. Tiny fraction of people actually want to use cash. The move to cashless happens mostly because majority of people don’t want to use cash.
As for the cost, you’re clearly not using public car chargers. Telecom equipment has to be there because the law mandates connectivity and constant reporting of availability. Payment through app is minimal cost and that’s the default. Card payment requires terminal which are standard equipment now. That’s the second option. No one is going to offer cash payment first and then offer card payment. Cash payment has to be implemented on top of app and card payment so it’s just additional cost. On top of that it creates security risk (a lot of chargers are in the middle of nowhere and would be an easy target for thieves).
There doesn’t have to be a sinister plot for the result - mandatory, ubiquitous tracking and bank commisions in the middle - to be real and problematic, is what I’m saying. The governments have all the resources they need to make it possible to pay with cash anywhere you go, but the trajectory they choose is the opposite. Regarding the costs, I think IT and integration work required for cashless payments are an order of magnitude costlier than cash and coin slots, because of the telecom equipment, data centers and IT professionals working on it.
No, they are not choosing this trajectory on purpose. They are simply not fighting against it. For example there was a big push for card payments during Covid pandemic. Banks lowered fees and using cards was encouraged. It was done because it was more sanitary and safer, not because some sinister plot. After the pandemic governments didn’t push against it. They don’t fight it because cash payments make tax avoidance easier but total reliance on cash is a huge security risk so when cash is almost gone governments step in to save it. Like Sweden did. Tiny fraction of people actually want to use cash. The move to cashless happens mostly because majority of people don’t want to use cash.
As for the cost, you’re clearly not using public car chargers. Telecom equipment has to be there because the law mandates connectivity and constant reporting of availability. Payment through app is minimal cost and that’s the default. Card payment requires terminal which are standard equipment now. That’s the second option. No one is going to offer cash payment first and then offer card payment. Cash payment has to be implemented on top of app and card payment so it’s just additional cost. On top of that it creates security risk (a lot of chargers are in the middle of nowhere and would be an easy target for thieves).