Poor people, and especially poor non-whites, are much less likely to have a credit or debit card.
I think it's important to understand "racist" as an effect, not as an opinion. The decision to not accept cash probably wasn't made with racist intentions, but it can very well have racist outcomes.
>> I think it's important to understand "racist" as an effect, not as an opinion.
I'm pretty sure it's the other way around. If as a white person you punch a black person because you don't like the car the person is driving, that's not racism, that's just some weird aggression. It's not based on the concept of race. But if you punch them because they're black, that's obviously racism.
Same thing here. If you're taking an action that indirectly causes harm to mostly non-whites (more specifically to poor people, some of whom are white) without the intent of causing harm, that's not racist. It's only racist if you feel that the group that's being harmed is racially/ethnically inferior to your group and that that justifies your actions.
That isn't to say that knowingly causing harm to people, even without any racism involved, is OK. It's not. But it's the intent that defines racism.
I meant it literally. There are corporate persons and there are human persons. When you pay with a credit card a corporate person is paying. When you pay with cash a human person is paying.
Off topic, but: is there an Adblocker-style tool that automatically removes sidebars full of shitty celebrity gossip and swimsuit pictures? It's not the only reason I almost never click a Daily Mail link, but it's the one that usually makes me wish I hadn't. Makes my head hurt trying to filter that out while figuring out if the actual story has anything intelligent or interesting to say.
It works great in Edge, Firefox, and Chrome on my PC. I think he's too high up on his horse to realize that the problem may be on his beloved religion/platform.
Wut.