seamus wrote: » Think of it more like you're wandering past a shop and you think of something you'd like to buy but you don't really need. It's fifty quid, and sure you've sixty in your pocket, so why not. In the scenarios you describe where you're going in to buy something specific, then it doesn't matter what's in your pocket. You buy what you came to buy either way. But for me, money i mo phóca is more likely to result in impulse buys.
cdeb wrote: » You can track your spending, sure. But I wonder does anyone actually do it at a granular level? Genuinely.
Amirani wrote: » Yeah, I check my online banking transactions every day. Also have all my financial planning and transactions in a smart Google doc that I have set up. Paying with cash messes with my analysis and requires manual inputs that are annoying.
biko wrote: » Some banks, like Permanent TSB, will punish their customers by charging "cash advance fee" when the customers withdraw cash using the credit card. This is to force you towards card only, which suits the banks best.www.google.com/search?q=cash+advance+fee+site%3A.ie
my3cents wrote: » Thats a good argument but if you are spending only cash then you can't spend money you haven't got in your hand. With a card its not always money you have in your account.
seamus wrote: » One's relationship with money is a very individual thing though. For some people the card is a problem because money unseen is money easily spent. Whereas they find it easier to budget the money that's in their hand. I'm the opposite. It's the unseen nature of the card that discourages spending. Because I like to know what I have, the idea of closing your eyes and hoping the card works seems anathema to me. A bit like those people who close their eyes when trying to squeeze through a gap between cars. I can't do that. If I don't know, I don't do it.
Murt10 wrote: » If you want to be careful about how much you spend, or cut down on what you spend, then cash is the way to go. Numerous studies have shown that people will spend far more when using a credit/debit card, than they will when paying with hard cash. It's much more painful and real that way. Cash is always real, not something abstract in a far away bank account that you can worry about later. Your instincts are telling you to spend now.https://www.forbes.com/sites/billhardekopf/2018/07/16/do-people-really-spend-more-with-credit-cards/#79e4ddf71c19
retalivity wrote: » I try to use cash as much as possible. I work in IT and finance, i can see what they are trying to do and what my job entails, its scary!!
dxhound2005 wrote: » Use Bitcoin. That's far simpler:)
cdeb wrote: » I'm intrigued, and yet I get the feeling I shouldn't ask...?
Ariah Wooden Slope wrote: » Mostly cash. I'd always have €150 to €200 in my wallet. Although the debit card is always to hand in case of larger purchases. I just find cash more convenient.
cdeb wrote: » Anyone else intrigued as to what injury that could possible be?
cdeb wrote: » It's the same concept though.
cdeb wrote: » That's not the point though. Cash is physically handing over money. A card is just a piece of plastic. The latter has a proven disconnect with actual spend, so you tend to spend more with it, whether it's debit card, credit card, tap, phone, whatever.
lbc2019 wrote: » Still prefer cashless
jcorr wrote: » How often then would you go to the hole in the wall?
cdeb wrote: » Entirely up to you of course. But I think the link between cashless and extra spending - particularly impulse spending - is well proven at this stage. Plus, if the banks want to push you towards it, I'm immediately suspicious!
