Letter to the editor: Defending cash, defending freedom | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Defending cash, defending freedom

Finding points of unity in this political climate is similar to panning for gold, yet our brethren on the eastern side of the state have done it.

Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney signed into law a bill introduced by City Councilman William Greenlee banning the phenomenon of cashless stores. While the law does include several carve-outs, it generally stands to defend consumers’ use of cash to complete transactions for basic food, goods and services.

Modernization and technological trends are encouraging cashless transactions, which do offer certain benefits — comparatively greater efficiency of time and precision and avoidance of physical burdens of counting and securing hard currency. However, both Democrats and Republicans can agree on the benefits of retaining cash as a medium of exchange.

Some Americans living below the poverty line do not maintain bank accounts nor do they own credit cards. Some consumers select cash to self-regulate spending and to insure privacy. Other Americans are interested in maintaining the freedom to choose from an array of options for completing fiscal transactions. And cash is unparalleled in reliability. Any hiccup in the grid doesn’t stop the exchange of goods and services when cash is available.

As a Pennsylvanian, I’m proud to stand with Philadelphia as the first official city in the United States to defend use of hard currency. Pittsburgh should join Philadelphia and unite the state on this policy. Defending cash defends freedom and choice for all consumers always.

Stacey West


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.