Sure it is.
> If there is a business cost you don't have to pay, if you have that option, why would you not take it?
You are implying that a business could opt-out of paying janitors. No, that is not an acceptable business practice. Janitors cannot work for free, they are not slaves. And we cannot allow trash to pile up and things to go uncleaned.
> You missed an option there - not generating the trash in the first place, so you don't need to pay a janitor.
There is no situation wherein trash will not be generated. Likewise there is no situation where cash shouldn't be accepted.
> As a small business you also don't need all of that, just a tablet and a reader. Everything else is already done.
Sure, everything else is already done if your shitty small business offloads all of the work to the customer instead.
> The risks of taking cash are gone if you don't take cash. If you're taking cards anyway, deciding not to take cash is an absolute reduction in risk and hassle.
No, it's not a reduction in risk at all. It's offloading the risk to someone else.
> By this logic it's better to die than break a limb.
In the United States with the current state of healthcare, this logic is practically true.
Look, our discussion clearly shows that you might do well at increasing business profits. But your arguments are unable to reconcile basic compassion to your fellow humans. That's unfortunately common in modern businesses.
No, I didn't, saying "wouldn't you opt out of paying a janitor to take out the trash" in reponse to your comment "are you going to complain about the janitor who gets paid to do it?" is absolutely not a non-sequitur.
> Asking about ...
You missed an option there - not generating the trash in the first place, so you don't need to pay a janitor. That's the analogy with not taking cash - deciding not to create the issue in the first place that requires the cost.
> Taking cards involves a variety of extra costs, risks and infrastructure. If you don't take cards you don't need a card reader, you probably don't need internet, or have IT staff to manage all of that, you don't need to pay staff to count and reconcile sales, or pay processing fees..
We're not talking about "Taking cash or taking cards, we're talking about the difference between taking both, or taking cards only.
As a small business you also don't need all of that, just a tablet and a reader. Everything else is already done.
Also this is not the same argument you were making before, which was that the burden was transferred to you the potential customer.
> The risks aren't gone. They're just moved.
The risks of taking cash are gone if you don't take cash. If you're taking cards anyway, deciding not to take cash is an absolute reduction in risk and hassle from the other state.
> If you have a problem with cash... well usually there _isn't_ a resolution so why bother trying?
By this logic it's better to die than break a limb. More bullcrap I'm afraid!