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.