Not carting a pocketful of loose change round your entire life. Not an issue for some people, but I really like carrying less stuff.

Loose change is both heavy and worthless. You can carry cash around without bothering with loose change.

A very privileged perspective. Most of the world still counts their pennies, and the surcharges on non-cash monetary transactions make a sizeable, noticeable dent if pointed out to them. It's a tough balance they have to navigate.

Though I'm extremely privileged now myself, I'm not so far removed that I have forgotten those days when down-to-the-penny accounting mattered. In the US at least, if you had the right education (which sadly many lack), you can live amazingly inexpensively by forgoing many societal conventions and expectations.

less hassle, enhanced security. I can spend hundreds of dollars without having to carry that much cash on me, or having to go to an ATM ever. It's more convenient and more secure, which is almost never true today.

I would not necessarily call it enhanced security if you are using Android and your phone is not one of the latest models. Plus of course someone can just steal your phone, force you unlock it and steal more than they could ever steal from you if you only had cash.

Your enhanced security is a box containing more money than you can carry. This box can (most of the times) only be opened with a key but this key is always with you. So whoever steals your force will just force you to open the box

Sure, if someone specifically wants my money, but that is unlikely in a Bayesian sense. And the bank will interrupt in any case because of anti-structuring and max-spend limits.

You don't have to outrun the bear.

If it's bayesian-unlikely they want your phone then why should it be any less bayesian-unlikely they want your cash. That's one weird argument. And BTW your phone is usually quite visible, like sticking out if not actually being used.

> and max-spend limits

Ok, now they've got your expensive phone and can spend up to your limit.

> If it's bayesian-unlikely they want your phone then why should it be any less bayesian-unlikely they want your cash.

Because phones these days are mostly bricks when you steal them. Cash still works.

> Ok, now they've got your expensive phone and can spend up to your limit.

Haha, no, they can't. That's not how any of this works.

But listen, it doesn't matter. Carry cash if you want. I won't. And may the chips land where they may.

Phones becoming bricks when stolen AND reported hasn't and won't stop most thiefs from stealing them and it won't prevent you from losing your expensive phone and having to buy a new expensive phone. And if the phone is insured, well then you are paying a monthly fee for having a money holding device

indeed it's down to personal choice and I can't criticise yours but then I don't want a personal tracker on me almost as securely as if it were a collar, not having my buying habits tracked. This to me is normalising personal monitoring. I thought that's what americans were so idealogically against, and so loudly. There will be consequences, but I guess convenience trumps everything.

Is cash that hard?

Yeah, I carry around a grand on me usually (for drugs and stuff) and it's really bulky. Then you've got the denomination issues.

If you take the speed you've just bought everything will be less tiring.

This is true, but the deleterious effects are fairly significant.