Swiss Vote Places Right To Use Cash In Country's Constitution (politico.eu) 76
Swiss voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to use physical cash. "The vote means Switzerland will join the likes of Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia, which have already written the right to cold, hard cash in their constitutions," reports Politico. From the report: Official results revealed that 73.4 percent of voters backed the legal amendment, which the government proposed as a counter to a similar initiative by a group called the Swiss Freedom Movement. The Swiss Freedom Movement triggered the national referendum after its initiative to protect cash collected more than 100,000 signatures, triggering a national referendum. Its initiative secured only 46 percent of the final vote after the government said some of the group's proposed amendments went too far.
good (Score:5, Insightful)
in a world of "age verification laws" and governments pushing for "cashless", and precedents like Canada freezing protesters bank accounts, yes.
governments are turning ultra fascist everywhere. doesn't matter if they say they're left wing progressive. they're after your internet anonymity and want you to keep your money in banks, mostly to avoid tax evasion.
(cue in europeans saying they're not fascist and i'm a dumb american etc and canadians justifying the bank account freezing because it was aligned with the party's interest)
Re:good (Score:5, Interesting)
(cue in europeans saying they're not fascist and i'm a dumb american etc and canadians justifying the bank account freezing because it was aligned with the party's interest)
Cue a European saying: u wot, m8?
Not everything you don't like is fascist. Something can be bad without being fascist. Also what specifically are you talking about here?
Re: good (Score:1)
Re: good (Score:3)
>suppression of dissent is a pretty fascist core policy
It's a pretty Communist core policy too. All polities don't tend to tolerate multiplicities of other, opposing viewpoints.
Re: (Score:3)
>suppression of dissent is a pretty fascist core policy
It's a pretty Communist core policy too. All polities don't tend to tolerate multiplicities of other, opposing viewpoints.
This comes up a lot in online conversations. Often the poster just means "authoritarian," which is of course a tendency of many fascist and many "communist" systems.
Re: (Score:2)
From what I know, Fascism's core is the idea that the individual's existence is for the collective. So "collective first" is Fascism, whereas "individual first" is the core of Liberalism. I'm guessing modern leftism would be "oppressed first", but that's a different discussion altogether.
The dictionary definition [merriam-webster.com] seems pretty similar to what I just said.
Thing is, both definitions seem to capture communism too.
Re: (Score:2)
Suppression of dissent stretches across all... do you want riots in streets?
Freezing (or blocking) bank accounts (whatever) would be good for the rioters who managed to run away, and the ones who got caught would be less likely to just bail themselves out.
Regardless of the ideology "said country" has, riots and armed protests aren't a good idea. Remember, there are consequences... choose a better path.
Not to mention, riots and protests don't get the point across to the right people to change whatever it is
Re: (Score:3)
> No but suppression of dissent is a pretty fascist core policy
So is building interstate highways. The fact fascists will do something is not the same as it being something you can safely use to identify fascism, or even suggest it's inherently wrong. Most democracies have forms of dissent that they will discriminate against or suppress. Fascism itself, thanks to the "paradox of tolerance" (which isn't a paradox), is one of them. Germany, to this days, heavily restricts advocating for Nazi politics, and
Re: (Score:2)
(cue in europeans saying they're not fascist and i'm a dumb american etc and canadians justifying the bank account freezing because it was aligned with the party's interest)
Cue a European saying: u wot, m8?
Not everything you don't like is fascist. Something can be bad without being fascist. Also what specifically are you talking about here?
To be fair, he's got a point about governments taking a goose step to the far right. Even Labour is not remotely left wing any more (realistically hasn't been since before Blair but I digress), hence the Greens and Lib Dems are having a lot of success lately, though you wouldn't know about the Lib Dems if you didn't look, but they have nearly 8 times the seats of Reform in Westminster and 7 times as many local councils. People are sick of both parties moving ever further to the right.
Reforms recent perfo
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, he's got a point about governments taking a goose step to the far right.
It's entirely true that they are, but I found his points a bit incoherent.
Even Labour is not remotely left wing any more (realistically hasn't been since before Blair but I digress),
Well, Blaire's lot did lean heavily on borrowing for growth (though in a stupid way because they fucked up their manifesto so they had to work around that using an expensive technicality), and had things like sure start, and pro EU. Oh also light
Re: good (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Bigger by what metric? Europe has more population and more land area than the USA.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Didn't they teach you guys any other word besides fascism in school? When everything is fascist nothing is.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Here's a handy poster for reference. https://syracuseculturalworker... [syracusecu...orkers.com]
Would you like me to check off the lines?
Re: (Score:2)
No need to check off the lines, you'll say everything is checked off, Trump is evil, et cetera.
While, in reality... the following has applied under every single President:
1, 3, 4, 7, 11, 12
Under what President were those not checked off?
Would your buddy Harris have any checked off?
Re: (Score:2)
So, you're saying as America has always had fascist tendencies, they're not fascist.
Re: (Score:2)
The US has (at various points) probably had some degree of Fascist, communist, Democratic, probably Feudalist and every other branch of ideology in some part of its handling... just because it might follow a little bit of one of them, that doesn't mean it's totally one of them.
The US aims to be Democratic, but just because some things could fit into Archie's linked poster (or even if all of their poster's boxes could be checked), that doesn't mean it's (the US) 100% Fascist or anything else. Keep in mind,
Re: (Score:2)
No, it doesn't mean you're fascist, but you do seem to like flirting with authoritarianism, of which fascism seems to be favourite for advanced nations.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I assume you're not in the US (could be wrong... I have occasionaly).
Limited Political Pluralism: isn't there always a group of the 'other party' in the cabinet, Senate, advisors and all them?
Centralized Power: Who hasn't? Name one guy in the "chair" who wasn't for that.
Suppression of Civil Liberties: You can, in fact (in the US) have a peaceful protest, you can even have a gun on your person... remember, if you cross the line from "peaceful protest" to "preventing carrying out of duties" (maybe shoving yo
Re: (Score:2)
So, if we do any of the crypto thing, we're fascists?
Re: (Score:2)
Forgot to mention that the law used to freeze the accounts was an American idea that they bullied us into passing.
Re: (Score:1)
governments are turning ultra fascist everywhere.
If you believe that, you haven't been paying attention. They've always been fascist. They're just finding new tools that didn't used to exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you've just proven that you don't know what the term means if you think Europe is ultra-fascist. You can try to pre-empt disagreement all you want, if you're being a dumb-dumb, people will call you a dumb-dumb.
There are fascist tendencies. That I could agree on.
Re: (Score:2)
Man your rant is incredibly ignorant.
a) This law doesn't guarantee a cash society at all. There's nothing about it that forces anyone to accept cash.
b) The three most fascist countries in Europe were the ones who passed actual cash mandating laws, because of course they are, it's far easier to control the flow of currency in a cash dominated world and it's far easier to launder money.
Re: (Score:1)
The only reason that other governments are turning fascist is because of the USA. Over there you let absolute bellends get mega-wealthy and have a culture that pushes people to the right and far-right.
They then turn their huge, ill-gotten gains on the rest of the world to drag them down with you. They're afraid, all the time, of most things--and the idea of an alternative system flourishing anywhere else that erodes their wealth and power terrifies them most of all.
It'd just be pathetic if it wasn't so dest
Just imagine what could happen in USA (Score:4, Insightful)
If Trump could stop his enemies from being able to spend their money? He hasn't figured out he could do that already... outside of international sanctions he already places on people he doesn't like just doing their jobs. (ICC judges)
FYI: in the USA, it's the law that currency has to be acceptable payment (since the great depression.) This law is often ignored these days and it doesn't specify physical money allowing legalese to render it almost pointless.
The state dept under Hillary blocked wikileaks without any laws; simply asking credit cards to block it, as a favor. I bet more of the swiss know of such things than Americans... who have been proven their stupidity. Hey, I'm one but I'm in the minority; one of the smart Americans. Many of us still have shame and it should be used heavily; we're not smart enough for facts and reason... again, this is proven.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
FYI: in the USA, it's the law that currency has to be acceptable payment (since the great depression.) This law is often ignored these days and it doesn't specify physical money allowing legalese to render it almost pointless.
The law only applies to debts, not all payments.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. good to know. why anon? Still, we need to follow those other nations and go beyond.
Re:Just imagine what could happen in USA (Score:4, Informative)
It is permissible to make the form of payment a condition of sale. Once the sale is made, the debt by law can be settled in cash--unless it was part of the terms of sale that payment must be by some other means. You'll only pay in cash? Then I won't sell to you. This is allowed.
Re: (Score:2)
It is permissible to make the form of payment a condition of sale.
This is exactly how it works in Switzerland too and this vote did not change that: the vote is mainly symbolic without practical consequences.
Re: (Score:2)
Fail to bay. Bam! it's a debt now! And will they take cash now that it's a debt?
That is not how any of the laws work. Debt has a specific legal meaning, not whatever you are making up.
You imbecile
Hello? (Score:2)
"BRUSSELS â" The right to use Swiss franc banknotes and coins wil"
What EXACTLY do you mean by "Brussels"???
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is called a dateline. It indicates the location of the journalist, not necessarily where the events happened. Seems less relevant in this day and age. In the past, Bjarke Smith-Meyer would've traveled to Zurich to cover this but clearly didn't bother.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems less relevant in this day and age.
It's more relevant now than it ever was before as it can provide information as to how locally understood a situation is. In this case for example it's clear that someone from within the EU is reporting on the situation. That may or may not expose biases when discussing the laws and changes thereof of another country, it may indicate lack of first hand information, or may indicate a lack of language understanding. For breaking news it becomes even more relevant.
Re: Hello? (Score:2)
This place has become a cesspool of smartasses...
Nowdays it seems fine that some "journo" chomping on stomp would write about something as important as Swiss changing their constitution. Because if it says "Brussels" then it must be true, I guess? Whereas "Bern" would be scoffed at. Most of PFY slashdot crowd probably wouldn't even be able to point at it on a map.
Anyway, salü aus Zueri...
Oh, and the ORIGINAL article link is here:
https://www.srf.ch/news/schwei... [www.srf.ch]
Re: (Score:2)
What EXACTLY do you mean by "Brussels"???
What is meant by Brussels and your question is that's been a long time since you took a basic English class and have forgotten the elements that make up a news article in an international world.
Re: Hello? (Score:2)
A loooong time, PFY, a loooong loong time...
Obvious. (Score:3)
Cut the sprouts in half first. Long ways, obviously.
San Fancisco is reverting their law (Score:2)
San Francisco already has a similar law (it was to purportedly to help street people (AKA âoehomelessâ), but the city supervisors are talking about repealing it (one is that having cash in stores makes them a bigger target for robberies and overnight break-ins).
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
..the city supervisors are talking about repealing it (one is that having cash in stores makes them a bigger target for robberies and overnight break-ins).
Translation: San Francisco city "leaders" don't see a crime management problem. They prefer blaming it all on the cash instead.
Or perhaps their plan is to literally starve the homeless while asking for another $20 billion to "help" them. Less homeless means less mouths bitching about not getting fed.
Re: (Score:1)
^100%
The robbers will probably just say they're not US citizens, so US law doesn't apply (or just get all 50 of their friends to join in on a shoot-out).
Not everyone keeps every cent on their bank card or uses CashApp.
Re: (Score:1)
That's just because nothing can survive in San Francisco after all the stealing that all the lil' hoodlums do.
it barely guarantees anything... (Score:2)
> Yesterday, 73 per cent of voters approved of a government proposal to enshrine the use of cash in the Swiss Constitution
> It will now be amended to include the Swiss Franc as the country’s currency, and the Swiss National Bank will be legally required to make sure there will always be enough cash money available.
source: https://brusselssignal.eu/2026... [brusselssignal.eu]
Pallets of cash (Score:1)
This does not guarantee any right to use cash (Score:3)
No part of this law gives any Swiss national (or other national) a right to use cash for payment. No doubt 99% of Slashdot will think that is what this story is about. The only thing voted on here is that the Swiss Franc is the national currency and that supply of cash into the public market is guaranteed - i.e. the Central Bank can't choose to not supply cash.
There is zero practical implication of this for anyone.
Here from the Federal Council:
The initiative
The initiative aims to enshrine the availability of cash and the Swiss franc as Switzerland's currency in the Constitution. To this end, it wants to oblige the federal government to ensure that a sufficient quantity of coins and banknotes is always in circulation. Furthermore, replacing the Swiss franc with another currency should only be possible with the consent of the people and the cantons.
This entire vote seems like it was a colossal waste of time.
Also typical fucking useless reporting from Politico, this law has nothing even remotely in common with the laws in Hungary, Slovakia or Slovenia. None of them enshrine a local currency in their constitution (and indeed Slovenia and Slovakia use the Euro), none of them mandate cash circulation, all of them mandate acceptance of cash payments by businesses.
Re: (Score:3)
This entire vote seems like it was a colossal waste of time.
It is kind of explicitly acknowledged [admin.ch]: (quote translated in English)
Neither the popular initiative nor the counter-proposal has any practical effect. No new tasks or additional costs will arise.
Said that, it was a popular initiative: the people of Switzerland decided to put the matter to the vote, not the government.
Re: (Score:2)
the people of Switzerland decided to put the matter to the vote, not the government.
To be clear I'm not criticising Switzerland or their people. I'm criticising Politico and Slashdotters who started ranting and raving about the right to pay with cash.
Re: (Score:3)
YES! Unlike what the article would make you believe, this has nothing to do with any sort of "right to use cash". It only guarantees the existence of cash. It does not guarantee that you can actually use it everywhere. There are already many places, like cafés etc. which don't take cash. And even some machines where you must buy tickets for public transport don't take cash anymore. So you cannot give a child a few francs and let him take his ticket to go visit his aunt etc.
So while it is good to
Re: (Score:2)
...with the laws in Hungary, Slovakia or Slovenia. None of them enshrine a local currency in their constitution
Yes, Hungary does. AI summary: "Hungary’s 2011 Fundamental Law (Alaptörvény) contains a clause stating that the official currency (legal tender) of Hungary is the forint. This means the currency is embedded in the constitutional framework rather than only in ordinary legislation."
Re: (Score:2)
Good to know, probably another anti EU move.
Cash is King (Score:4)
This is good to hear. It baffles me when people loudly proclaim things like "I don't remember the last time I've used cash," or claim to never carry cash, as if it were a flex. Who are you trying to impress, your credit card company?
It just reminds me of the old Rejected cartoon by Don Hertzfeldt, holding up a sign proclaiming: "I'm a consumer whore!"
It's actually kind of sad that you effectively have to pay with a credit card because if you don't get your 4% cash back, this effectively means you're paying a premium for using cash. Your cash back is coming from all the "suckers" who do pay with cash, and these fees just keep increasing.
Re: Cash is King (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Around here... the nearest liquor store (to where I live) upgraded their register from one where you manually entered everything, and cash and card payments were the same... now, they have a scanner and touchscreen (like a Kwik Trip), and cash is cheaper than using a card.
Re: (Score:2)
your credit card company?
Nothing says "I'm American" more than thinking the opposite of paying cash is to partner with a credit card company. Fun fact: One of the most cash free countries in Europe also has one of the lowest credit card use, and every transaction happens directly with a bank - kind of like where you get cash from.
Also what is "cash back"? Is this another strange Americanism? (Note this is sarcasm, I know what cash back is, just pointing out it's a uniquely stupid Americanism to have it tied to a credit card transac
Re: (Score:2)
Also what is "cash back"? Is this another strange Americanism? (Note this is sarcasm, I know what cash back is, just pointing out it's a uniquely stupid Americanism to have it tied to a credit card transaction)
You can't get cash back from a credit card transaction, only from a debit card transaction, which is the "transaction happens directly with a bank" case. Credit cards do give cash advances, but they have to be approved through an interaction directly with the card issuer, not at a point-of-sale.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't get cash back from a credit card transaction
Sigh, I can see you're not American so it would help to understand when we are standing here insulting stupid Americanisms. Cash Back is not about getting actual cash back. It's a rewards system used in the states for being a good spending consumer with your credit card.
Cashback reward systems are not common in Europe when tied to payment processing (and in fact illegal in some countries).
Re: (Score:2)
You can't get cash back from a credit card transaction
Sigh, I can see you're not American so it would help to understand when we are standing here insulting stupid Americanisms. Cash Back is not about getting actual cash back. It's a rewards system used in the states for being a good spending consumer with your credit card.
Cashback reward systems are not common in Europe when tied to payment processing (and in fact illegal in some countries).
I *am* American, and when you say "cash back" in the US in the context of retail purchases, it has a specific meaning: cash handed to you by the cashier at point of sale, from your bank account, added on to your purchase transaction.
What you're talking about goes by a few different names, mostly depending on the precise structure of the program. It sometimes does translate to actual cash back, but not usually because people find that just getting a few bucks off of their credit card bill boring. I call
Re: (Score:2)
It baffles me when people loudly proclaim things like "I don't remember the last time I've used cash," or claim to never carry cash, as if it were a flex.
Why do you think it's a flex, rather than a simple statement, explaining why they don't have cash? I mean, I guess if they're just announcing it outside of any relevant context...
Re: (Score:3)
This is good to hear. It baffles me when people loudly proclaim things like "I don't remember the last time I've used cash," or claim to never carry cash, as if it were a flex. Who are you trying to impress, your credit card company?
It just reminds me of the old Rejected cartoon by Don Hertzfeldt, holding up a sign proclaiming: "I'm a consumer whore!"
"I don't even use cash" is just the latest "I don't even own a TV". Nothing but attention whoring.
Only a fool rejects a form of payment simply because they don't like it... only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of fools limits themselves to just one.
It's actually kind of sad that you effectively have to pay with a credit card because if you don't get your 4% cash back, this effectively means you're paying a premium for using cash. Your cash back is coming from all the "suckers" who do pay with cash, and these fees just keep increasing.
This is not true. The "cashback" comes from merchant service fees, meaning the merchant pays an additional fee for accepting the card, from which the bank gives you a small percentage of what they take. They've effectively got you paying for the bank to
What an odd thing to say.. (Score:2)
What an odd thing to say.. unless there was a coordinated attack on individual freedoms by forcing everyone into centrally controlled digital-currencies which can be turned off on a whim if you are not a good boy or girl - the definition of which will be entirely up to the regime in charge.
But surely this is just an eeeevil and probably rightwing conspiracy theory and the Swiss are totally known for being so emotional and overreacting! ;-)
That's not what the vote was about (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Take away dependency on third party (Score:4, Insightful)
Most everything that involved a plastic card, or a proxy for one, involves some third-party to make a transaction, and those third-parties are also typically wanting a transaction fee. They also sometime decide their "morals" are law onto themselves.
Ensuring money exists in a physical form ensure that the ability to do a transaction does not depend on the access to a device, so helps keep the ability to spend money democratic.
Re: (Score:1)
There's a transaction fee for cash as well. It's baked into the cost of doing business and passed on to you in the sticker price. There's a reason some businesses strive to go cashless, it is a not insignificant cost and time effort to manage cash, balance registers, manage float, and perform deposits and withdrawals at the bank. It literally adds hours to the operational time of a business (Just because the sign says closed doesn't mean someone isn't on the clock and the business isn't incurring expenses).
Re: (Score:2)
There's a transaction fee for cash as well. It's baked into the cost of doing business and passed on to you in the sticker price. There's a reason some businesses strive to go cashless, it is a not insignificant cost and time effort to manage cash, balance registers, manage float, and perform deposits and withdrawals at the bank. It literally adds hours to the operational time of a business (Just because the sign says closed doesn't mean someone isn't on the clock and the business isn't incurring expenses).
That's before you consider the risk involved in managing a float. Some insurances even charge a higher premium if a business keeps more than a certain amount of cash in the float on any given day.
For businesses that go cashless the transaction fee of debit / credit cards is often a saving.
Its complicated. For some its a saving and for some is lost business. For smaller "mom and pop" style businesses or those who prefer I'll go with cash.
One thing I forgot is that in a number of cases using plastic means dealing with a business tied to another country, making your ability to buy stuff dependent on them politically. Then the other risk is choosing a purely national system that cuts out travellers. For this reason mixed options are the way to go, though my pecking order would be cash -> nat
Re: (Score:2)
I think you've overly narrowed down how the system works from your political point of view. Payment processors are dime a dozen. If you do pick an overseas payment processor it is not difficult to change to a different one, and local ones exist in many countries. The choice of how to handle a payment is not yours as a business owner. It's not up to you whether you accept only Credit cards, or only Cirrus, or German EC cards (which is a problem for foreign travelers). That is the choice of your payment provi
Be prepared... (Score:2)