In Denmark where I live there are now trivial things that are impossible to do without an Apple or Google smartphone, and important things that are becoming very hard. Unless laws are specifically enacted to enshrine "analogue rights" or whatever, it will become impossible to exist here without a smartphone over the next decade.

Cash is largely dead and will die when the legal requirement to accept it is phased out at some point in the next few years. In addition to credit cards, there is one app for payments (owned by the largest retail bank) that has become the de facto standard for person-to-person transfers. So we are already at the point where not having a smartphone makes you a second class citizen, unable to participate in some parts of the economy.

- Your ID card already has RFID, and it will only get more powerful

- credit, payment, banking, passports, air travel ... all getting centralized.

- Go ahead and fallback to paper, that just means the paper is entered into a computer when you hand it in and they "review" it. What will probably happen is that the all-paper route will become FAR MORE ONEROUS will submitting to facial recognition, DNA samples, and the like to back-verify your identity, higher fees, wait times, until you submit to practical day-to-day needing a on-body computer device like a phone.

- all democracies know laziness is the key to functionally subverting rights, it's only going to get worse.

- even if you don't submit, all they people you know WILL, and the government can track you by tracking the people you know. So I guess, no friends for you.

Now, for every place I said government, cross that out and put in "multinational corporation that is a monopoly or cartel in all its markets"... and it's all there, turnkey, same policies, but even less legal / constitutional protection.

Parking in many places requires an app from an app store.

There's lots of small community things, local classifieds etc., that exist in niche things that only have an app. Like I said, trivial things, but they add up to everyday life becoming harder.

As for legal requirement: the government single sign-on that is used to interact with all government services and is also mandated for many important things like banks, insurance etc., is app-centric, though not app-only. They used to send one-time pads on cardboard but recently switch to electronic tokens. All government ID (for public health etc.) is also moving to apps. You can still get plastic cards, of course.

BTW, if you want to make a call over the telephone network, neither the PinePhone nor the Librem 5 carry a modem you can control. In both cases, the modem is a black box with non-free firmware that you're probably not even allowed to modify, depending on jurisdiction.

Oh, and it doesn't even have to be an emergency. You might find out that your hospital only accepts appointments made by phone, and will turn you around from the door due to COVID restrictions when you try to schedule a visit. What will you choose?

Granted, it's not a legal requirement to take advantage of your legally mandated health insurance, but it's a catch-22 that was constructed out of a clash of laws.

It's the idea of an actual smartphone not just maybe, hypothetically but "right now becoming" a legal requirement that seems to be -- more than a bit of stretch, here,

My bank has made it (almost) impossible to make payments without a phone, btw. Either you need to receive SMS messages or use their proprietary app. I could receive SMS messages without a phone but I would expect this to be a solution that eventually gives me more trouble than it's worth.

My bank has several buildings full of people, all within driving distance of my house. Any of those people will happily accept a stack of paper bills.

If you don't want to use digital forms of payment, why on earth are you using a bank that doesn't have physical branches located near your home?

Many banks require you to call ahead if you want to make a large cash withdrawal, and if you make a large deposit you need to be able to document where you got the money from or had the authorities called on you.

Have you actually tried depositing large amounts of cash on a regular basis? Sounds like a good way to get your account flagged and suspended.

Not to mention the Treasury's seeming animosity toward cash as an instrument of payment.

1. OP said "make payments", not "receive money". Literally no one is going to give a shit if you make your mortgage or car payment in cash.

2. LOL, yes, I deposit cash all the time, including a quite large sum at least twice a year (charity events). Cash-based businesses are still very much a thing.

3. I write like $10K worth of checks every month, and deposit around $3K-$6K worth of checks every month. No smartphone required.

Are you sure? To get a mortgage they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash. Seems odd if they don't also check source for payments.

Yes, absolutely sure.

> To get a mortgage

I said:

>> make your mortgage or car payment

Making payment on existing loan != taking out a new loan.

> they check the source of your down payment and it cannot be cash.

If you mean literal physical cash: the main reason for this is that no one involved in the transaction is interested in taking on the risk of carrying briefcases full of cash across town.

If you mean money in a bank account that is of unknown provenance: This isn't really an issue unless you make a huge lump sum deposit just before closing and have absolutely zero documentation regarding where it came from. Even then, giant sums recently deposited isn't a problem. You just have to prove that it's of non-criminal provenance. Recent pay stubs or sales receipts will do.

That has nothing to do with the money being "cash" or not, though.

And even then, it's mostly about access to giant piles of credit. If you don't need to borrow huge piles of someone else's money, then no one gives a shit. E.g., I've purchased property with a cashier's check, which is about as close to literal cash as you can get without major security risks involved.)

That's actually incorrect, to my understanding. If you have 100k in your bank account for a year, the lender doesn't care when you pay your down payment out of that regardless of where it came from. They object when there's a recent transfer/deposit of that money because it could indicate an undocumented loan, throwing off the debt to income calculations.

> They object when there's a recent transfer/deposit of that money because it could indicate an undocumented loan, throwing off the debt to income calculations.

Right. It's not some authoritarian plot. They just wanna make sure you're not a fibbing about your net worth before handing you a giant stack of their money. If you can prove the money is yours then they're fine.

I haven't been to a store that has refused cash and have never been required to use a banking app.

Just because you choose to use e-banking doesn't mean that cash and checks are inaccessible, or even particularly inconvenient.

In stores I mostly use cash, except for larger purchases where it becomes inconvenient. Those go to the credit card which I'll then pay with a check.

Bills here are paid with bank transfer. It doesn't have to be done though online banking, but doing so is obviously easier.

But yes, you can go into banks and deposit money (even frequently, and in reasonably large amounts).

The flagging and suspending stuff is more what I'd be wary of using paypal or something similar, not an actual bank.

Anyway, Germany used to require people to join the military and kill other people. Now they don't. Progress.

Many in this branch of discussion seem to be measuring their possibilities against a current situation in their area - while in some other regions the situation is worse to desperate - and they are not seeing a trend.

You can (and in a way should) also wake up the sleepers, but it will be hard or less feasible to properly reach the masses.