this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
3 points (61.5% liked)

Human Rights✊⚖

69 readers
13 users here now

!humanrights@crazypeople.online is a SAFE place to discuss human rights and related laws.

Related: !humanrights@lemmy.sdf.org (but down votes → less safe)

Loosely related: !Law@europe.pub, !juridisch@feddit.nl, !law@civilloquy.com, !law_us@lemmy.sdf.org, !legaladvice@feddit.uk, !legaladviceuk@feddit.uk, !uklaw@feddit.uk

Human rights law comes from many sources. E.g:

One important factor that makes this forum a safe structure is that silent down votes are impossible. Rationale:

  1. Down votes are a form of suppression.
  2. Silent down votes are uncivil and antithetical to human rights because they deny the other person the dignity of understanding.

How to express your urge to down vote: post a civil criticism that avoids logical fallacy (ad hominems in particular). Or up-vote an existing civil post that captures your criticism.

Moderation:

The moderator has a hands-off moderation style generally. However, human rights matters in a place calling itself “safe” calls for an extra degree of civility, thus uncivil posts will likely be more prone to mod intervention than other forums under the same moderation team (a team of 1 ATM).

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
rageAgainstCages@crazypeople.online
3
EU: “You cannot be charged a fee for paying by card, but you can be charged a fee for paying in cash.” No worries about marginlising Americans who face discrimination by banks. (www.fiserv.com)
submitted 1 month ago by activistPnk@slrpnk.net to c/humanrights@crazypeople.online
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/30909420

According to the linked leaflet, the EU’s payment services directive ensures that “You can no longer be charged extra costs by a merchant when you pay using a card issued in the EU.” But they neglect to extend reciprocity to cash payers.

Incidentally, this exacerbates adversely discriminatory treatment of Americans who face uniquely poor treatment by banks. Cash is the sole notable refuge from shitty banks.

Upcharging cash payers violates human rights. This is not only attributed to banks discriminating on the basis of nationality. We have a human right to:

  • self-determinism
  • autonomy
  • consumer protection
  • privacy

Penalising cash payers is an assault on any consumer who exercises their self-deterministic right to live autonomous and independent from banks.

No consumer protection is more important than the right to opt out of a transaction. It’s the only consumer protection that one can give themself without relying on others. Surcharging consumers who opt out of banking is an attack on that option. It puts a price on consumer protection.

Banking inherently entails abuse of privacy. The digital footprint is huge and undermins data minimisation rights.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] activistPnk@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It’s laissez-faire everywhere in this regard AFAIK. At a street market you can of course haggle because there is no policy or contract. Outside of that narrow context, cash payers are upcharged because they lack the protection being given to card payers. The most important transactions are for things like public transport, mass transit and utilities. There is no haggle.

Utilities suppliers are increasingly quitting cash acceptance entirely. So then cash payers are forced to pay their bills using the post office, who charges a fee. Mass transit services are providing online and kiosk transactions for card payers without fees, then forcing cash payers to get manual service from a human. Then they charge a fee rationalising that they need to pay the worker a wage.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

For Skonto you can also haggle in stores and department stores in my region.