Community

12,000 respondents to a survey sounds comprehensive until you look at the combined population of the countries covered - more than 3,000,000,000 (3 billion) - 0.000004 of the population. In addition, I note that it is only the responders to a survey. Experience tells me that the non-responders do not bother because they do not agree. What would be interesting is how many surveys were sent out and did they reach people struggling to make ends meet - in other words, the people at the poorer end of society. I would be amazed if we have a cashless society by 2050, let alone 2030.

I agree with Vernon Crabtree - Why should consumers continue be exposed to fraud any longer? I am surprised that it has taken so long to introduce. The fifteen month delay was reluctantly agreed before Covid-19 became an issue. Further delay is unacceptable to consummers.

In the current environment I would not trust any of the social media companies to resolve payment issues. They are unable or unwilling to resolve the many issues surrounding their activities now, so why would I trust them when anything goes wrong with my financial activities?. I do not doubt that they have the capacitiy to run financial activities for consumers. It is when things go wrong that the real test is applied. I can resolve issues with my bank readily and easily. I remain very doubtful that I could resolve issues related to my financial activities with a social media company with the same ease.

Customers of banks and financial institutions are protected by law. Until the same framework is in place with social media companies, then they should not be allowed to enter the market.

Without knowing how each group of 2000 was selected it is impossible to take the detailed percentages seriously. A siginificant number of receivers of surveys do not reply. As a result, I have no confidence that the detailed conclusions represent a fair cross section of society across the breadth of the UK.

Most of my local independant shops take cash, but do not record anywhere the number of transactions, so where do the statistic regarding ther number of cash transactions come from?

I hope that the same survey is carried out in 12 months time, contacting the same players, to confirm the number of companies that actually change banks, compared to the number that say they will. History says that few will actually change.

27% is nearer one-in-four, not one-in-three and 1400 adult  participants in a survey across 50 states of vastly different characteristics and more than 200 million adults is likely to be prone to error.

Here in the UK technology has been far in advance of the US for all of the last 50 years. Variable amount direct debits, whereby utility companies & similar could take money direct from your bank account have been in operation for more than 50 years. They would send you the bill in advance and give you 14 days to verify it. Your bank would act as the intermediary to ensure that no-one took money that was not authorised. It took the US a further 40 years to catch up on this one. We now have instant transfer of funds via the internet at all banks - not just same day transfers but instant. I have not written a check in more than ten years and very few before that. The only reason that someone needs a credit card is to defer payment at high cost. Debit cards are becoming more and more popular as a means to pay in shops and on-line. The real question is whether there is a long term future in credit cards. After all, they were invented in the US so that people could pay in a different state to the one in which they banked. Cross border checks were not accepted. Today, in a global market and with the internet, the need for credit cards is not there. 

Amazon do offer a credit card, but it is a Mastercard, which does not break the duopoly who control about 90% of the issued cards in the western world.