SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the bills-have-serial-numbers-so-only-use-change dept.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Many Austrians value their privacy and won't accept someone to keep track how many beers they drink. It may sound like a strange thing to enshrine in a country’s constitution: the right to pay cash. But a debate on whether to do just that has entered Austria’s election campaign, shining a light on the country’s love of cold, hard currency.
The Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP, EPP-affiliated) recently made the suggestion as part of its campaign for a parliamentary election in late September, for which it has a commanding poll lead. This led to other parties — though sceptical of the ÖVP’s proposal — vaunting their commitment to protecting cash, with the centre-left Social Democrats (SPÖ) demanding an end to fees levied at cashpoints.
And it is not hard to see why all major parties see protecting cash as a vote-winner.
“In Austria, attitudes change slowly,” an employee of Weinschenke, a burger restaurant in downtown Vienna, told AFP. The woman in her 30s, who only gave her name as Victoria, says she prefers to use cash because “you don’t leave a trace”.
Financial law expert Werner Doralt says Austrians put a high value on privacy and are wary of anything that could be used to keep tabs on them, such as card transactions. “If for example I go shopping, and it’s recorded exactly how much schnapps I’ve bought, that’s an invasion of my privacy,” he says.
A recent survey conducted by the ING bank in 13 European countries, Australia and the US, showed Austrians were the most resistant to the idea of giving up cash payments.
Just 10 percent of those surveyed in Austria said they could imagine doing without cash, compared to a European average of 22%. According to European Central Bank data compiled in 2017, cash accounted for 67% of money spent at points of sale in Austria, compared to just 27% in the Netherlands. Even in neighbouring Germany, another country known for its attachment to cash, the rate is only 55%.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Thursday September 05 2019, @05:09PM (4 children)
If it defines how a government, an election, or whatever operates. Or define what a right is intended to protect. Great! That's not a problem. That doesn't bother me in the slightest.
I like all but about 2 of the post-bill of rights amendments. I think most of them were basically addressing that kind of question. I don't mind there being constitutional amendments. I mind dumbfuck movements thinking that an amendment is "Exactly like a law but more powerful"
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday September 05 2019, @05:40PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday September 05 2019, @11:30PM
No, totally, as long as what they are doing doesn't hurt anyone else, they are free to put in their constitution any garbage or clever things they want.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 06 2019, @12:29AM
And Britain has Boris Johnson and prorogation. Such a lawless nation!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 06 2019, @01:03AM
"Many" European countries lack a written constitution?
The only one I can think of is the UK. Which are the others?
Any country which has had a revolution or become independent since about the Napoleonic Wars should have one; it was standard practice since then.