On 06/11/2021 07:17, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
> news:JDdhJ.19091$6a3.7614@fx41.iad:
>
>> Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote in
>>> news:16b4a7dc13314a43$1$3170321$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com:
>>>
>>>> In 1910, the average annual wage in Germany was about 1000
>>>> marks. So each of those dime-sized coins equated to over 2
>>>> days of labor. Even for the idle rich, that's a lot of money
>>>> to pay for what was effectively street entertainment.
>>>>
>>> Ridiculous. The average wage in the US last year was a bit under
>>> $70,000. 2 days of their labor is under $300 (assuming a 40 hour
>>> week). A *lot* of people carry that much in cash on a regular
>>> basis. Hell, some people (that is, ordinarly middle class
>>> people) spend that much on groceries every week.
>>
>> Ah, but then they mainly use plastic to pay for those groceries,
>> and even if they carry cash, very few carry USD100 bills - the
>> logical analog of the gold coin of the era.
>>
> Do you claim that is a universal truth? That *everybody* uses plastic
> *all* *the* *time*?
>
> If so, you're as stupid as he is.
>
> Carrying a few hundred in cash is *common*.
>
Perhaps in the USA - here in Oz it's just easier to tap, or shove'n'pin,
and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer accept cash, anyway.

And no, it's not legislated that /anybody/ has to accept cash, and, if
it was, the courts consider public health to be more important, anyway.

I think the lonely pineapple (AUD50) in my wallet has been there for
nigh on 18 months!

Cheers,
Gary B-)

On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 11:12:50 PM UTC-6, The Horny Goat wrote:

> Now to be sure - chess grandmaster tournaments were mostly privately
> sponsored at that time and tended to be upscale events far more so
> than in our era but still - I can't pretend to know what was stadard
> practice in our great-grandparents' day.

Neither can I, which is why I asked. I could only speculate, based on
general principles.

While I don't expect to find time travellers in this newsgroup, it was
possible I might find a widely-read individual who remembered reading
an account of someone's travels in the 19th century that addressed
this point. And, indeed, I did get a couple of responses that... came
close.

When it comes to chess, though, I'm acquainted enough with it's
history to know what went wrong.

The recent world championship match between Magnus Carlsen and
Fabiano Caruana in which every one of the conventional games was a
draw... was an extreme case.

Chess games "back in the old days" used to be more exciting, on a
routine basis, than they are today. And we know why this is.

Players today are urged to study the games of Morphy and Anderssen as
examples of good play, as they applied principles... that weren't known
and employed by other players of their day, leading to their stellar
records as players.

But then one Wilhelm Steinitz came along, and revealed the secret,
teaching the world how to play chess in a proper, scientific manner.

The result was that players knew how to play defensively, and mounted
attacks on the King only when - and if - they had accumulated a sufficient
positional advantage to do so safely. Gone were the days of wild gambit
openings and the like.

Players with good tactical skills still pulled off impressive combinations on
occasion, especially if paired with weaker opponents, but this tended
to be an exceptional treat.

Something similar happened in Japan, due to the games of Honinbo Shusaku,
but after a period of desuetude, Go was saved through the introduction
of _komidashi_ - requiring the first player to win by a certain threshhold,
so that the first player winning would not be an almost inevitable result of
a game.

This is why the Soviet Union was able to so easily dominate world
chess with government support of players; chess had stopped being
much good as a spectator sport.

John Savard

On 2021-11-05, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> writes:
>>Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote in
>>news:16b4a7dc13314a43$1$3170321$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com:
>>
>>> In 1910, the average annual wage in Germany was about 1000
>>> marks. So each of those dime-sized coins equated to over 2 days
>>> of labor. Even for the idle rich, that's a lot of money to pay
>>> for what was effectively street entertainment.
>>>
>>Ridiculous. The average wage in the US last year was a bit under
>>$70,000. 2 days of their labor is under $300 (assuming a 40 hour
>>week). A *lot* of people carry that much in cash on a regular basis.
>>Hell, some people (that is, ordinarly middle class people) spend that
>>much on groceries every week.
>
> Ah, but then they mainly use plastic to pay for those groceries, and
> even if they carry cash, very few carry USD100 bills - the logical
> analog of the gold coin of the era.

I was a grocery checker during my college summers in Oklahoma in the
1970s; there would be a good number of people per day who would pay
with 100's; some from rather fat money rolls. Without access to
credit card payments, you carried around a lot more cash than you do
now. I expect that would be true of the rich of the era (as spectators
of a chess match would tend to be).

Chris

On Saturday, 6 November 2021 at 01:22:42 UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 5:45:34 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 15:53:30 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
> > <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >Back before ATMs and credit cards (not so long ago), it was common to
> > >carry quite a lot of cash; it was the only way to pay for things.
>
> > There is something called a "check" you know.
> Yes, but it's so awkward to stand around at the cash register while
> you're waiting for it to clear.
>
> Or, in other words, while it is possible to pay for things by check at a
> store under *some circumstances*, like:
>
> - the merchant knows you personally,
> - it's a big store, offering this service attracts more customers, and you
> carry suitable identification (like years ago, local grocery stores let
> people pay by check)
> - we're talking about a major purchase, which might also be bought
> on credit, such as an automobile

I was issued a "cheque guarantee card". Latterly
they came with an authenticity hologram, and I think
some banks issued a photo card. The cheque forms
were issued by the bank with their own authenticity
features, the card had my signature, and a clerk could
see me signing a cheque for them. The guarantee
had a maximum value rule. The bank probably took a
fee from a merchant presenting a cheque to their bank.

But I use the past tense. And not 100 years past.

> But if you're just passing through, or worse yet, you're a tourist from
> another country even, there might be... some hesitancy.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveller%27s_cheque>
since 1772.

Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>On 2021-11-05, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:

>>
>> Ah, but then they mainly use plastic to pay for those groceries, and
>> even if they carry cash, very few carry USD100 bills - the logical
>> analog of the gold coin of the era.
>
>I was a grocery checker during my college summers in Oklahoma in the
>1970s; there would be a good number of people per day who would pay
>with 100's; some from rather fat money rolls. Without access to
>credit card payments, you carried around a lot more cash than you do
>now. I expect that would be true of the rich of the era (as spectators
>of a chess match would tend to be).

Well, this the 2020's.

I would expect the rich of the era had someone to pay their bills,
and with the exception of the nouveau rich[*], never carried cash at
all.

[*] flashing the 100 dollar tips.

On 5 Nov 2021 19:05:29 GMT, ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
wrote:

>In article <16b4ba49a3e93711$1$3501385$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com>,
>Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote:
>>On 11/5/2021 12:58 PM, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
>>> Ridiculous. The average wage in the US last year was a bit under
>>> $70,000. 2 days of their labor is under $300 (assuming a 40 hour
>>> week). A*lot* of people carry that much in cash on a regular basis.
>>> Hell, some people (that is, ordinarly middle class people) spend that
>>> much on groceries every week.
>>
>>Do a *lot* of people carry that much as one dime-sized coin or have
>>nothing smaller than a $100 bill and don't expect change? Do a *lot*
>>of people throw that much to an entertainer as a tip?
>>
>>It's not the amount of money they carry, it's the transaction
>>granularity.
>>
>
>I frequently carry hundreds of dollars in my wallet, but very much
>dislike bills larger than $20. In particular, there are several ATMs
>I have to avoid as they like to give $50s, and in one case $100s.
>Nobody wants to make change for those.

Ours used to (on the rare occasions when I took out $100, it's usually
less) select $100 as the default, but the current edition starts with
it's lowest denomination -- $10. The machine looks the same as it
always did, so this may be a software change. Older machines may, of
course, not be amenable to software changes.

Once, a long time ago, I got out 3 $20 bills that stuck to each other.
And were sequentially numbered.

Now, we all know that owning a bank is like owning a license to print
money, but /really/ ...
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 05 Nov 2021 22:09:32 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Nov 2021 02:38:10 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
><taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> - it's a big store, offering this service attracts more
>>> customers, and you carry suitable identification (like years
>>> ago, local grocery stores let people pay by check)
>>
>>Not any more. We're abandoning our check cashing service becuase it
>>literally costs more than the total value of the checks we get get
>>every month. That's on ~*80 million/year total sales.
>>
>>Nobody uses checks nay more.
>
>Actually they're still pretty common in business to business mail
>order transactions particularly with schools and school boards paying
>their bills. (Personal experience at work within the last 3 years)
>
>In person sales they've almost died out altogether.
>
>Again I'm speaking as a small business owner here.

The last two small business owners I dealt with (one fixed a window,
one removed a roof antenna) would take cash or a check but not a card.
And took their own sweet time in depositing my check.

One gave me a hand-written invoice that looked like a printed one. The
other sent two emails, one for an invoice, one for a receipt. Paper
invoices appear to be vanishing at this level.

But the /work/ was well done and the cost was quite reasonable.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:17:01 -0700 (PDT), Andrew McDowell
<mcdowell_ag@sky.com> wrote:

>On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 7:07:14 AM UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
>> This post might be on-topic for anyone wanting to write a fantasy story set in
>> the 19th century, or the part of the 20th century before the First World War.
>> I had already posted about this to two other newsgroups where it was more
>> on-topic, but without any germane replies.
>>
>> In 1912, in the city of Wroclaw, then called Breslau, and then in Germany, there
>> was a chess game between one Levitsky and one Marshall which ended with a
>> Queen sacrifice so impressive that, according to some accounts, many of the
>> spectators tossed gold coins at the chessboard.
>> Some writers have expressed doubt about whether that happened, but I
>> tend to be willing to believe Frank Marshall's account. But there was one
>> question in my mind: why would anyone, let alone many of the people in the
>> audience, be carrying gold coins around in their pockets?
>> I mean, this seems as though it's something basic that would have to be
>> possible before we could believe that this happened.
>>
>> Back in those days, nearly every country did mint gold coins.
>> But it was still true that for denominations larger than those of silver
>> coins, what was routinely used was paper money.
>>
>> I did some thinking about this, and I came up with a possible explanation.
>>
>> At one time, U.S. paper money stated, in addition to it being "legal tender
>> for all debts, public and private", that there was one exception to that:
>> payment on import duties.
>> The function of gold, even under the gold standard, was mainly for
>> exchanges between the central banks of different countries to
>> reconcile the case of a nonzero balance of payments.
>>
>> But combine that insight with this fact: back then, they didn't have
>> credit cards or travellers' cheques.
>>
>> One could, even back then, I suppose, go to a bank and change one's
>> money for that of another country. But it could be that the fees for
>> that service were high back then.
>> Obviously, just taking your own country's paper money to a foreign
>> merchant wouldn't work well. Such a merchant would be ill-equipped
>> to know if the money was genuine, and would not necessarily have
>> an idea of its value.
>> But gold coins... all you have to do is weigh them. (Yes, that's
>> oversimplified; one country's gold coins might be 10% copper,
>> and another country's gold coins might be 20% copper or
>> something...)
>> And back in those days, there were books published giving the
>> weight, fineness, and value of gold coins from all the different
>> countries around the world that issued them.
>>
>> Such as this one:
>> https://archive.org/details/petersonscomplet00tbpe
>>
>> And the chess game, in a German city, was between a Russian player
>> and an American one. So it's not unreasonable that many of the
>> spectators were international tourists, some of them from Russia
>> or the United States.
>>
>> So is this when someone, in 1910, or 1890, or thereabouts, would be
>> carrying gold coins in his pocket instead of paper money, because
>> that's how they handled transferring money between different
>> countries for individuals, not just between banks, in those days?
>>
>> John Savard
>According to many reports, the RAF issues gold sovereigns to pilots who might be shot down behind enemy lines so they can buy their way out of there (I did hear that there may be a change to credit cards somewhere along the line). The following link not only supports this, but points to a site that gives some insight into the typical humour of the UK armed forces - generally a lot more heavy-handed than in general society https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/because-you-never-know-when-20-gold-sovereigns-might.37670/ - come to think of it, that's obvious just from the domain name.

And, of course, there is always the survival kit detailed in /Dr.
Stranglove/ (the movie): gold and nylons, whee!
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Saturday, November 6, 2021 at 2:41:16 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 11:12:50 PM UTC-6, The Horny Goat wrote:
>
> > Now to be sure - chess grandmaster tournaments were mostly privately
> > sponsored at that time and tended to be upscale events far more so
> > than in our era

Not so much. While everyone, of course, wore a suit, reports are common of frayed cuffs, torn linings, boots that should long ago have been replaced.. Few players got appearance fees, or free hotel rooms. The others lived with friends, if possible, or cheap rooming houses. Mason at least once spent the night in a farmer's field, showing up (in his suit, of course!) with some of the residue of that field, and it's odour, clinging to him.

Or so said Janowsky, the aesthete who lost to Mason that day, as he usually did. To be fair, it is possible that Mason had a room somewhere, but simply passed out before getting there. If there was a world championship for playing while drunk, Mason would have been a favourite. As it was he was in the top ten and was a good writer on the game.

but still - I can't pretend to know what was stadard
> > practice in our great-grandparents' day.
> Neither can I, which is why I asked. I could only speculate, based on
> general principles.
>
> While I don't expect to find time travellers in this newsgroup, it was
> possible I might find a widely-read individual who remembered reading
> an account of someone's travels in the 19th century that addressed
> this point.

In the second half of the 19th century, Thomas Cook:

"introduced the circular notes which could be changed at designated hotels, banks, and tickets agents for Italian lira at a predetermined exchange rate. Cook's introduction of tourism-specific currency facilitated easier and effective trips..."

By 1912, tourists had long since discovered other destinations, as well. Even Germany.

I found this in an obscure place called wikipedia.
>
> When it comes to chess, though, I'm acquainted enough with it's
> history to know what went wrong.

I fear you are not.

>
> The recent world championship match between Magnus Carlsen and
> Fabiano Caruana in which every one of the conventional games was a
> draw... was an extreme case.
>
> Chess games "back in the old days" used to be more exciting, on a
> routine basis, than they are today. And we know why this is.
>
> Players today are urged to study the games of Morphy and Anderssen as
> examples of good play, as they applied principles... that weren't known
> and employed by other players of their day, leading to their stellar
> records as players.

No, not Anderssen. He was simply a great tactician. Reti demonstrates how he was positionally outplayed by Morphy. But he could learn. He was actually a stronger player after losing to Morphy, though the games for which he became famous were played earlier.

> But then one Wilhelm Steinitz came along, and revealed the secret,
> teaching the world how to play chess in a proper, scientific manner.
>
> The result was that players knew how to play defensively, and mounted
> attacks on the King only when - and if - they had accumulated a sufficient
> positional advantage to do so safely.

More or less true. Though modern players hearken back to Nimzowitsch and his chapter on "prophylaxis" in "My System". See John Watson's "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy".

Gone were the days of wild gambit
> openings and the like.

You mean like the Evans gambit Kasparov played against Anand in a world championship? Or the king's gambits played by the likes of Bronstein and Spassky? Or the Benko gambit? Or the Marshall gambit, played since 1980 by some of the world's strongest players, and by Spassky against Fischer in a crucial game?

And though Basmania is not a gambit, it is wilder than most. Steintiz, and particularly Tarrasch, would have heart attacks at this massive apparent violation of "scientific" chess.

>
> Players with good tactical skills still pulled off impressive combinations on
> occasion, especially if paired with weaker opponents, but this tended
> to be an exceptional treat.

Exceptional as in pretty common. Was Geller a weak player? Euwe sacrificed a rook against him at Zurich 1953, a concept far deeper than Marshall's queen sacrifice. Keres won at least one game against him with a knight sacrifice. Was Kortchnoi a weak player? John Nunn sacrificed his queen against him at least twice, again a concept far more brilliant than the Breslau event.

As you might imagine, I could go on for pages. If you still have an interest in chess, you might find Larry Evans' "Modern Chess Brilliancies" a fun read, though it only covers the 1960s and the title is now rather out of date.

>
> Something similar happened in Japan, due to the games of Honinbo Shusaku,
> but after a period of desuetude, Go was saved through the introduction
> of _komidashi_ - requiring the first player to win by a certain threshhold,
> so that the first player winning would not be an almost inevitable result of
> a game.
>
> This is why the Soviet Union was able to so easily dominate world
> chess with government support of players;

Again, no. They dominated because their players didn't have to earn a living as most western professionals did. With rare and much-touted exceptions they were full-time players, while the first prominent western players without other careers were Larsen (though his progress was badly slowed by military service) and Fischer (somehow not drafted).

chess had stopped being
> much good as a spectator sport.

Soviet authorities pushed for aggressive chess as a demonstration of the "soviet spirit". It has been said that the ultimate representative of the Soviet school was Bobby Fischer. The soviets played very interesting chess.

William Hyde

Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote in
news:16b4da7f307cef5c$1$3300346$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com:

> Goodbye.
>
I'll bet.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote in
news:id3cog9vf2bfk9hmsn9dl2bhk65auel7q3@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 06 Nov 2021 02:38:10 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
> <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> - it's a big store, offering this service attracts more
>>> customers, and you carry suitable identification (like years
>>> ago, local grocery stores let people pay by check)
>>
>>Not any more. We're abandoning our check cashing service becuase
>>it literally costs more than the total value of the checks we
>>get get every month. That's on ~*80 million/year total sales.
>>
>>Nobody uses checks nay more.
>
> Actually they're still pretty common in business to business
> mail order transactions particularly with schools and school
> boards paying their bills. (Personal experience at work within
> the last 3 years)

We still get those, too, but that's inapplicable to how the audience
at a chess match would tip the players for a spectacular finish.
>
> In person sales they've almost died out altogether.
>
> Again I'm speaking as a small business owner here.
>
We're not so small, and I agree.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:fnbdog5vv63o1tt9m61u9noq8sl94opudo@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 05 Nov 2021 22:09:32 -0700, The Horny Goat
> <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 06 Nov 2021 02:38:10 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
>><taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> - it's a big store, offering this service attracts more
>>>> customers, and you carry suitable identification (like years
>>>> ago, local grocery stores let people pay by check)
>>>
>>>Not any more. We're abandoning our check cashing service
>>>becuase it literally costs more than the total value of the
>>>checks we get get every month. That's on ~*80 million/year
>>>total sales.
>>>
>>>Nobody uses checks nay more.
>>
>>Actually they're still pretty common in business to business
>>mail order transactions particularly with schools and school
>>boards paying their bills. (Personal experience at work within
>>the last 3 years)
>>
>>In person sales they've almost died out altogether.
>>
>>Again I'm speaking as a small business owner here.
>
> The last two small business owners I dealt with (one fixed a
> window, one removed a roof antenna) would take cash or a check
> but not a card.

Sounds like contractors, rather than retailers. Different market,
different pace of change. Taking credit cards involves fees, which
for most retailers are less than the cost of dealing with bad
checks and counterfeit bills. But contrators have options to
collect on bad checks, and can easily identify the source of funny
money to the authorities.

We have several contractors we pay by credit card, and a number of
vendors we pay by wire transfer.

> And took their own sweet time in depositing my
> check.

We had a phone guy (now retired) who would take months to even send
us an invoice for work done. (And he knew, from 40 years
experience, we'd pay promptly once we had it.)
>
> One gave me a hand-written invoice that looked like a printed
> one. The other sent two emails, one for an invoice, one for a
> receipt. Paper invoices appear to be vanishing at this level.

Increasingly common for us, but we still get a lot of paper
statements.
>
> But the /work/ was well done and the cost was quite reasonable.

And in the end, that's the most important thing.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

"Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote in
news:nvjh5i-4qs.ln1@paranoia.mcleod-schmidt.id.au:

> On 06/11/2021 07:17, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>> news:JDdhJ.19091$6a3.7614@fx41.iad:
>>
>>> Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote in
>>>> news:16b4a7dc13314a43$1$3170321$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.co
>>>> m:
>>>>
>>>>> In 1910, the average annual wage in Germany was about 1000
>>>>> marks. So each of those dime-sized coins equated to over 2
>>>>> days of labor. Even for the idle rich, that's a lot of
>>>>> money to pay for what was effectively street entertainment.
>>>>>
>>>> Ridiculous. The average wage in the US last year was a bit
>>>> under $70,000. 2 days of their labor is under $300 (assuming
>>>> a 40 hour week). A *lot* of people carry that much in cash on
>>>> a regular basis. Hell, some people (that is, ordinarly middle
>>>> class people) spend that much on groceries every week.
>>>
>>> Ah, but then they mainly use plastic to pay for those
>>> groceries, and even if they carry cash, very few carry USD100
>>> bills - the logical analog of the gold coin of the era.
>>>
>> Do you claim that is a universal truth? That *everybody* uses
>> plastic *all* *the* *time*?
>>
>> If so, you're as stupid as he is.
>>
>> Carrying a few hundred in cash is *common*.
>>
> Perhaps in the USA - here in Oz it's just easier to tap, or
> shove'n'pin,

Well over half our retail business is plastic now.

But there are still quite a lot of people who carry a few hundred
in cash on a regular basis (even ignoring the "unbanked" who have
little other choice).

> and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer
> accept cash, anyway.

Any store that does there here tends to get either protestors
outside their doors, or unwanted attention from activists (for the
unbanked) or politicians. Or both.

(Contrary to popular belief, it is not illegel to refuse cash under
nearly all circumstances that ordinary people will ever
experience.)
>
> And no, it's not legislated that /anybody/ has to accept cash,
> and, if it was, the courts consider public health to be more
> important, anyway.

We've all heard about how completely, utterly broken the minds of
Ozzies are with fear and panic, yes.
>
> I think the lonely pineapple (AUD50) in my wallet has been there
> for nigh on 18 months!
>
And yet, you still have it.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote in
news:3467dbe9-523b-4954-a285-edad6740d0c3n@googlegroups.com:

> On Saturday, 6 November 2021 at 01:22:42 UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 5:45:34 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 15:53:30 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
>> > <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >Back before ATMs and credit cards (not so long ago), it was
>> > >common to carry quite a lot of cash; it was the only way to
>> > >pay for things.
>>
>> > There is something called a "check" you know.
>> Yes, but it's so awkward to stand around at the cash register
>> while you're waiting for it to clear.
>>
>> Or, in other words, while it is possible to pay for things by
>> check at a store under *some circumstances*, like:
>>
>> - the merchant knows you personally,
>> - it's a big store, offering this service attracts more
>> customers, and you carry suitable identification (like years
>> ago, local grocery stores let people pay by check)
>> - we're talking about a major purchase, which might also be
>> bought on credit, such as an automobile
>
> I was issued a "cheque guarantee card". Latterly
> they came with an authenticity hologram, and I think
> some banks issued a photo card. The cheque forms
> were issued by the bank with their own authenticity
> features, the card had my signature, and a clerk could
> see me signing a cheque for them. The guarantee
> had a maximum value rule. The bank probably took a
> fee from a merchant presenting a cheque to their bank.
>
> But I use the past tense. And not 100 years past.

These days, there are services like Telecheck, who maintain a
*massive* database of check transactions, and use it to guarantee
checks. If you have a history of writing bad checks (even just a
few), they'll decline to guarantee it, and the merchant will
decline to take the check. If they guarantee it, and it bounces,
the merchant gets reimbursed, and the bad check becomes the
property of the service for collection action.

The last 10 years or so, unless you bank at a very small, local
bank, they would verify funds in real time while you're at the
register, scan an image of the check, and process it electronically
(and you get the paper check back). The only reason we don't have
the money in our bank account before you get to your car is because
there's an expectation that it will take until the next day, and
people get angry that they can't kite checks.

Checks at retail have gotten so uncommon that the entire business
model is nearly dead. We've had a couple of the machines break
down, and their tech support desk simply can't figure out how to
make them work any more, because they can't hire people who can
even read the script on the computer in front of them.
>
>> But if you're just passing through, or worse yet, you're a
>> tourist from another country even, there might be... some
>> hesitancy.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveller%27s_cheque>
> since 1772.
>
Those, too, can be counterfeited. And they're harder to verify than
an actual check.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
news:jdcdog11149n7dknd85r4rrslkclq645rm@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:17:01 -0700 (PDT), Andrew McDowell
> <mcdowell_ag@sky.com> wrote:
>
>>On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 7:07:14 AM UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> This post might be on-topic for anyone wanting to write a
>>> fantasy story set in the 19th century, or the part of the 20th
>>> century before the First World War. I had already posted about
>>> this to two other newsgroups where it was more on-topic, but
>>> without any germane replies.
>>>
>>> In 1912, in the city of Wroclaw, then called Breslau, and then
>>> in Germany, there was a chess game between one Levitsky and
>>> one Marshall which ended with a Queen sacrifice so impressive
>>> that, according to some accounts, many of the spectators
>>> tossed gold coins at the chessboard. Some writers have
>>> expressed doubt about whether that happened, but I tend to be
>>> willing to believe Frank Marshall's account. But there was one
>>> question in my mind: why would anyone, let alone many of the
>>> people in the audience, be carrying gold coins around in their
>>> pockets? I mean, this seems as though it's something basic
>>> that would have to be possible before we could believe that
>>> this happened.
>>>
>>> Back in those days, nearly every country did mint gold coins.
>>> But it was still true that for denominations larger than those
>>> of silver coins, what was routinely used was paper money.
>>>
>>> I did some thinking about this, and I came up with a possible
>>> explanation.
>>>
>>> At one time, U.S. paper money stated, in addition to it being
>>> "legal tender for all debts, public and private", that there
>>> was one exception to that: payment on import duties.
>>> The function of gold, even under the gold standard, was mainly
>>> for exchanges between the central banks of different countries
>>> to reconcile the case of a nonzero balance of payments.
>>>
>>> But combine that insight with this fact: back then, they
>>> didn't have credit cards or travellers' cheques.
>>>
>>> One could, even back then, I suppose, go to a bank and change
>>> one's money for that of another country. But it could be that
>>> the fees for that service were high back then.
>>> Obviously, just taking your own country's paper money to a
>>> foreign merchant wouldn't work well. Such a merchant would be
>>> ill-equipped to know if the money was genuine, and would not
>>> necessarily have an idea of its value.
>>> But gold coins... all you have to do is weigh them. (Yes,
>>> that's oversimplified; one country's gold coins might be 10%
>>> copper, and another country's gold coins might be 20% copper
>>> or something...)
>>> And back in those days, there were books published giving the
>>> weight, fineness, and value of gold coins from all the
>>> different countries around the world that issued them.
>>>
>>> Such as this one:
>>> https://archive.org/details/petersonscomplet00tbpe
>>>
>>> And the chess game, in a German city, was between a Russian
>>> player and an American one. So it's not unreasonable that many
>>> of the spectators were international tourists, some of them
>>> from Russia or the United States.
>>>
>>> So is this when someone, in 1910, or 1890, or thereabouts,
>>> would be carrying gold coins in his pocket instead of paper
>>> money, because that's how they handled transferring money
>>> between different countries for individuals, not just between
>>> banks, in those days?
>>>
>>> John Savard
>>According to many reports, the RAF issues gold sovereigns to
>>pilots who might be shot down behind enemy lines so they can buy
>>their way out of there (I did hear that there may be a change to
>>credit cards somewhere along the line). The following link not
>>only supports this, but points to a site that gives some insight
>>into the typical humour of the UK armed forces - generally a lot
>>more heavy-handed than in general society
>>https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/because-you-never-know-
>>when-20-gold-sovereigns-might.37670/ - come to think of it,
>>that's obvious just from the domain name.
>
> And, of course, there is always the survival kit detailed in
> /Dr. Stranglove/ (the movie): gold and nylons, whee!

In "From Russia With Love," Bond mentions that 20 gold sovereigns
is part of the standard kit for agents (while producing one from
his briefcase).

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:27:22 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:

>Sounds like contractors, rather than retailers. Different market,
>different pace of change. Taking credit cards involves fees, which
>for most retailers are less than the cost of dealing with bad
>checks and counterfeit bills. But contrators have options to
>collect on bad checks, and can easily identify the source of funny
>money to the authorities.

I dunno - we've had ONE counterfeit bill in 25+ years in business. (On
another occasion in a stack of 25 bills we once had one half bill
which the bad guy counted out with the half bill in the midst of the
stack! We didn't notice till the end of day cash reconciliation....)

As for credit cards from highest to lowest the fees go Amex, M/C, Visa
and debit - a typical Canadian VISA/MC charge is 2-4% of the charge
(mostly higher for affinity and 'high spender' cards which have point
programs paid for by higher fees to vendors) while Canadian debit
transactions are typically 5-15 cents per transaction based on volume
and are by far the cheapest form of payment which is why I usually use
debit particularly in small establishments as I can quickly calculate
what my purchase is costing them in fees.

On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:30:29 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:

>> and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer
>> accept cash, anyway.
>
>Any store that does there here tends to get either protestors
>outside their doors, or unwanted attention from activists (for the
>unbanked) or politicians. Or both.

In the early days of the pandemic many stores didn't like cash BUT
when the schools re-opened the provincial health officer said that in
situations where both parties were masked and basic hand-washing was
taking place that there had been NO cases where Covid had been spread
by handling paper alone.

Now she was talking about school classroom situations but after that
news release cash started making a strong comeback.

At this time if a store rejected my cash I'd leave my purchase at the
cashier and go elsewhere though for me at this time it's usually about
70% debit, 25% cash and only rarely Visa for in-person purchases.

On Saturday, November 6, 2021 at 10:42:24 PM UTC-6, The Horny Goat wrote:

> In the early days of the pandemic many stores didn't like cash

Fortunately for me, because I'm a senior citizen, my bank doesn't
charge any service fee for debit purchases. So with one or two unusual
exceptions, I haven't used cash since the pandemic began.

John Savard

On 07/11/2021 14:30, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
> "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote in
> news:nvjh5i-4qs.ln1@paranoia.mcleod-schmidt.id.au:
>
>> On 06/11/2021 07:17, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>>> news:JDdhJ.19091$6a3.7614@fx41.iad:
>>>
>>>> Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:16b4a7dc13314a43$1$3170321$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.co
>>>>> m:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In 1910, the average annual wage in Germany was about 1000
>>>>>> marks. So each of those dime-sized coins equated to over 2
>>>>>> days of labor. Even for the idle rich, that's a lot of
>>>>>> money to pay for what was effectively street entertainment.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Ridiculous. The average wage in the US last year was a bit
>>>>> under $70,000. 2 days of their labor is under $300 (assuming
>>>>> a 40 hour week). A *lot* of people carry that much in cash on
>>>>> a regular basis. Hell, some people (that is, ordinarly middle
>>>>> class people) spend that much on groceries every week.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, but then they mainly use plastic to pay for those
>>>> groceries, and even if they carry cash, very few carry USD100
>>>> bills - the logical analog of the gold coin of the era.
>>>>
>>> Do you claim that is a universal truth? That *everybody* uses
>>> plastic *all* *the* *time*?
>>>
>>> If so, you're as stupid as he is.
>>>
>>> Carrying a few hundred in cash is *common*.
>>>
>> Perhaps in the USA - here in Oz it's just easier to tap, or
>> shove'n'pin,
>
> Well over half our retail business is plastic now.
>
> But there are still quite a lot of people who carry a few hundred
> in cash on a regular basis (even ignoring the "unbanked" who have
> little other choice).
>
>> and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer
>> accept cash, anyway.
>
> Any store that does there here tends to get either protestors
> outside their doors, or unwanted attention from activists (for the
> unbanked) or politicians. Or both.
>
> (Contrary to popular belief, it is not illegel to refuse cash under
> nearly all circumstances that ordinary people will ever
> experience.)
>>
>> And no, it's not legislated that /anybody/ has to accept cash,
>> and, if it was, the courts consider public health to be more
>> important, anyway.
>
> We've all heard about how completely, utterly broken the minds of
> Ozzies are with fear and panic, yes.
>>
Important point - we are "Aussies". "Ozzy" means Austrian. (And,
sadly, both nations are becoming stupider as time passes. Sigh,
eventually we'll all be as stupid as the USA.)

>> I think the lonely pineapple (AUD50) in my wallet has been there
>> for nigh on 18 months!
>>
> And yet, you still have it.
>
I'm hardly going to throw it away!!!

Cheers,
Gary B-)

On Sunday, 7 November 2021 at 04:42:24 UTC, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:30:29 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer
> >> accept cash, anyway.
> >
> >Any store that does there here tends to get either protestors
> >outside their doors, or unwanted attention from activists (for the
> >unbanked) or politicians. Or both.
> In the early days of the pandemic many stores didn't like cash BUT
> when the schools re-opened the provincial health officer said that in
> situations where both parties were masked and basic hand-washing was
> taking place that there had been NO cases where Covid had been spread
> by handling paper alone.
>
> Now she was talking about school classroom situations but after that
> news release cash started making a strong comeback.
>
> At this time if a store rejected my cash I'd leave my purchase at the
> cashier and go elsewhere though for me at this time it's usually about
> 70% debit, 25% cash and only rarely Visa for in-person purchases.

In Scotland, we're told that contactless card payments
are preferred, but I've had card payment refused by a
clerk for small purchases - that may or may not reflect
current fees - and at the moment, I offer cash for that.
I think the clerk takes money and makes change, then
washes or "sanitises" their hands immediately.

And there's TV adverts for apparently a new system
allowing self-employed people to take card payment
by smart phone. The sole trader declares "I take card
now" and several people around them go "Ooh" at
high pitch and for an extremely long time. This is in
the advert; it's very annoying and it motivates me to
pay cash deliberately. I haven't seen it in real life;
I suppose it would be my role to go "Ooh". I intend
not to.

On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 02:58:13 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, 7 November 2021 at 04:42:24 UTC, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:30:29 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
>> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer
>> >> accept cash, anyway.
>> >
>> >Any store that does there here tends to get either protestors
>> >outside their doors, or unwanted attention from activists (for the
>> >unbanked) or politicians. Or both.
>> In the early days of the pandemic many stores didn't like cash BUT
>> when the schools re-opened the provincial health officer said that in
>> situations where both parties were masked and basic hand-washing was
>> taking place that there had been NO cases where Covid had been spread
>> by handling paper alone.
>>
>> Now she was talking about school classroom situations but after that
>> news release cash started making a strong comeback.
>>
>> At this time if a store rejected my cash I'd leave my purchase at the
>> cashier and go elsewhere though for me at this time it's usually about
>> 70% debit, 25% cash and only rarely Visa for in-person purchases.
>
>In Scotland, we're told that contactless card payments
>are preferred, but I've had card payment refused by a
>clerk for small purchases - that may or may not reflect
>current fees - and at the moment, I offer cash for that.
>I think the clerk takes money and makes change, then
>washes or "sanitises" their hands immediately.
>
>And there's TV adverts for apparently a new system
>allowing self-employed people to take card payment
>by smart phone. The sole trader declares "I take card
>now" and several people around them go "Ooh" at
>high pitch and for an extremely long time. This is in
>the advert; it's very annoying and it motivates me to
>pay cash deliberately. I haven't seen it in real life;
>I suppose it would be my role to go "Ooh". I intend
>not to.

I think that, like depositing checks, we've had that capability here
for some time.

Not me, of course; I don't do smartphones. But I think it has been
available for businesspersons that are interested.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 21:35:23 +1100, "Gary R. Schmidt"
<grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:

>On 07/11/2021 14:30, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
>> "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> wrote in
>> news:nvjh5i-4qs.ln1@paranoia.mcleod-schmidt.id.au:
>>
>>> On 06/11/2021 07:17, Ninapenda Jibini wrote:
>>>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
>>>> news:JDdhJ.19091$6a3.7614@fx41.iad:
>>>>
>>>>> Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>> Michael Benveniste <mhb@murkyether.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:16b4a7dc13314a43$1$3170321$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.co
>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In 1910, the average annual wage in Germany was about 1000
>>>>>>> marks. So each of those dime-sized coins equated to over 2
>>>>>>> days of labor. Even for the idle rich, that's a lot of
>>>>>>> money to pay for what was effectively street entertainment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ridiculous. The average wage in the US last year was a bit
>>>>>> under $70,000. 2 days of their labor is under $300 (assuming
>>>>>> a 40 hour week). A *lot* of people carry that much in cash on
>>>>>> a regular basis. Hell, some people (that is, ordinarly middle
>>>>>> class people) spend that much on groceries every week.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, but then they mainly use plastic to pay for those
>>>>> groceries, and even if they carry cash, very few carry USD100
>>>>> bills - the logical analog of the gold coin of the era.
>>>>>
>>>> Do you claim that is a universal truth? That *everybody* uses
>>>> plastic *all* *the* *time*?
>>>>
>>>> If so, you're as stupid as he is.
>>>>
>>>> Carrying a few hundred in cash is *common*.
>>>>
>>> Perhaps in the USA - here in Oz it's just easier to tap, or
>>> shove'n'pin,
>>
>> Well over half our retail business is plastic now.
>>
>> But there are still quite a lot of people who carry a few hundred
>> in cash on a regular basis (even ignoring the "unbanked" who have
>> little other choice).
>>
>>> and vide the pandemic a lot of retailers no longer
>>> accept cash, anyway.
>>
>> Any store that does there here tends to get either protestors
>> outside their doors, or unwanted attention from activists (for the
>> unbanked) or politicians. Or both.
>>
>> (Contrary to popular belief, it is not illegel to refuse cash under
>> nearly all circumstances that ordinary people will ever
>> experience.)
>>>
>>> And no, it's not legislated that /anybody/ has to accept cash,
>>> and, if it was, the courts consider public health to be more
>>> important, anyway.
>>
>> We've all heard about how completely, utterly broken the minds of
>> Ozzies are with fear and panic, yes.
>>>
>Important point - we are "Aussies". "Ozzy" means Austrian. (And,
>sadly, both nations are becoming stupider as time passes. Sigh,
>eventually we'll all be as stupid as the USA.)

In Australia, no doubt.

But here in the USA, I'm not sure the distinction is well-defined.

>>> I think the lonely pineapple (AUD50) in my wallet has been there
>>> for nigh on 18 months!
>>>
>> And yet, you still have it.
>>
>I'm hardly going to throw it away!!!
>
> Cheers,
> Gary B-)
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:38:35 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
<taustinca@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>news:jdcdog11149n7dknd85r4rrslkclq645rm@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:17:01 -0700 (PDT), Andrew McDowell
>> <mcdowell_ag@sky.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 7:07:14 AM UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
>>>> This post might be on-topic for anyone wanting to write a
>>>> fantasy story set in the 19th century, or the part of the 20th
>>>> century before the First World War. I had already posted about
>>>> this to two other newsgroups where it was more on-topic, but
>>>> without any germane replies.
>>>>
>>>> In 1912, in the city of Wroclaw, then called Breslau, and then
>>>> in Germany, there was a chess game between one Levitsky and
>>>> one Marshall which ended with a Queen sacrifice so impressive
>>>> that, according to some accounts, many of the spectators
>>>> tossed gold coins at the chessboard. Some writers have
>>>> expressed doubt about whether that happened, but I tend to be
>>>> willing to believe Frank Marshall's account. But there was one
>>>> question in my mind: why would anyone, let alone many of the
>>>> people in the audience, be carrying gold coins around in their
>>>> pockets? I mean, this seems as though it's something basic
>>>> that would have to be possible before we could believe that
>>>> this happened.
>>>>
>>>> Back in those days, nearly every country did mint gold coins.
>>>> But it was still true that for denominations larger than those
>>>> of silver coins, what was routinely used was paper money.
>>>>
>>>> I did some thinking about this, and I came up with a possible
>>>> explanation.
>>>>
>>>> At one time, U.S. paper money stated, in addition to it being
>>>> "legal tender for all debts, public and private", that there
>>>> was one exception to that: payment on import duties.
>>>> The function of gold, even under the gold standard, was mainly
>>>> for exchanges between the central banks of different countries
>>>> to reconcile the case of a nonzero balance of payments.
>>>>
>>>> But combine that insight with this fact: back then, they
>>>> didn't have credit cards or travellers' cheques.
>>>>
>>>> One could, even back then, I suppose, go to a bank and change
>>>> one's money for that of another country. But it could be that
>>>> the fees for that service were high back then.
>>>> Obviously, just taking your own country's paper money to a
>>>> foreign merchant wouldn't work well. Such a merchant would be
>>>> ill-equipped to know if the money was genuine, and would not
>>>> necessarily have an idea of its value.
>>>> But gold coins... all you have to do is weigh them. (Yes,
>>>> that's oversimplified; one country's gold coins might be 10%
>>>> copper, and another country's gold coins might be 20% copper
>>>> or something...)
>>>> And back in those days, there were books published giving the
>>>> weight, fineness, and value of gold coins from all the
>>>> different countries around the world that issued them.
>>>>
>>>> Such as this one:
>>>> https://archive.org/details/petersonscomplet00tbpe
>>>>
>>>> And the chess game, in a German city, was between a Russian
>>>> player and an American one. So it's not unreasonable that many
>>>> of the spectators were international tourists, some of them
>>>> from Russia or the United States.
>>>>
>>>> So is this when someone, in 1910, or 1890, or thereabouts,
>>>> would be carrying gold coins in his pocket instead of paper
>>>> money, because that's how they handled transferring money
>>>> between different countries for individuals, not just between
>>>> banks, in those days?
>>>>
>>>> John Savard
>>>According to many reports, the RAF issues gold sovereigns to
>>>pilots who might be shot down behind enemy lines so they can buy
>>>their way out of there (I did hear that there may be a change to
>>>credit cards somewhere along the line). The following link not
>>>only supports this, but points to a site that gives some insight
>>>into the typical humour of the UK armed forces - generally a lot
>>>more heavy-handed than in general society
>>>https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/because-you-never-know-
>>>when-20-gold-sovereigns-might.37670/ - come to think of it,
>>>that's obvious just from the domain name.
>>
>> And, of course, there is always the survival kit detailed in
>> /Dr. Stranglove/ (the movie): gold and nylons, whee!
>
>In "From Russia With Love," Bond mentions that 20 gold sovereigns
>is part of the standard kit for agents (while producing one from
>his briefcase).

And then forgets to mention how to safely open one.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 10:45:24 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:38:35 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Paul S Person <pspe...@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
> >news:jdcdog11149n7dknd...@4ax.com:
> >
> >> On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:17:01 -0700 (PDT), Andrew McDowell
> >> <mcdow...@sky.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 7:07:14 AM UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
> >>>> This post might be on-topic for anyone wanting to write a
> >>>> fantasy story set in the 19th century, or the part of the 20th
> >>>> century before the First World War. I had already posted about
> >>>> this to two other newsgroups where it was more on-topic, but
> >>>> without any germane replies.
> >>>>
> >>>> In 1912, in the city of Wroclaw, then called Breslau, and then
> >>>> in Germany, there was a chess game between one Levitsky and
> >>>> one Marshall which ended with a Queen sacrifice so impressive
> >>>> that, according to some accounts, many of the spectators
> >>>> tossed gold coins at the chessboard. Some writers have
> >>>> expressed doubt about whether that happened, but I tend to be
> >>>> willing to believe Frank Marshall's account. But there was one
> >>>> question in my mind: why would anyone, let alone many of the
> >>>> people in the audience, be carrying gold coins around in their
> >>>> pockets? I mean, this seems as though it's something basic
> >>>> that would have to be possible before we could believe that
> >>>> this happened.
> >>>>
> >>>> Back in those days, nearly every country did mint gold coins.
> >>>> But it was still true that for denominations larger than those
> >>>> of silver coins, what was routinely used was paper money.
> >>>>
> >>>> I did some thinking about this, and I came up with a possible
> >>>> explanation.
> >>>>
> >>>> At one time, U.S. paper money stated, in addition to it being
> >>>> "legal tender for all debts, public and private", that there
> >>>> was one exception to that: payment on import duties.
> >>>> The function of gold, even under the gold standard, was mainly
> >>>> for exchanges between the central banks of different countries
> >>>> to reconcile the case of a nonzero balance of payments.
> >>>>
> >>>> But combine that insight with this fact: back then, they
> >>>> didn't have credit cards or travellers' cheques.
> >>>>
> >>>> One could, even back then, I suppose, go to a bank and change
> >>>> one's money for that of another country. But it could be that
> >>>> the fees for that service were high back then.
> >>>> Obviously, just taking your own country's paper money to a
> >>>> foreign merchant wouldn't work well. Such a merchant would be
> >>>> ill-equipped to know if the money was genuine, and would not
> >>>> necessarily have an idea of its value.
> >>>> But gold coins... all you have to do is weigh them. (Yes,
> >>>> that's oversimplified; one country's gold coins might be 10%
> >>>> copper, and another country's gold coins might be 20% copper
> >>>> or something...)
> >>>> And back in those days, there were books published giving the
> >>>> weight, fineness, and value of gold coins from all the
> >>>> different countries around the world that issued them.
> >>>>
> >>>> Such as this one:
> >>>> https://archive.org/details/petersonscomplet00tbpe
> >>>>
> >>>> And the chess game, in a German city, was between a Russian
> >>>> player and an American one. So it's not unreasonable that many
> >>>> of the spectators were international tourists, some of them
> >>>> from Russia or the United States.
> >>>>
> >>>> So is this when someone, in 1910, or 1890, or thereabouts,
> >>>> would be carrying gold coins in his pocket instead of paper
> >>>> money, because that's how they handled transferring money
> >>>> between different countries for individuals, not just between
> >>>> banks, in those days?
> >>>>
> >>>> John Savard
> >>>According to many reports, the RAF issues gold sovereigns to
> >>>pilots who might be shot down behind enemy lines so they can buy
> >>>their way out of there (I did hear that there may be a change to
> >>>credit cards somewhere along the line). The following link not
> >>>only supports this, but points to a site that gives some insight
> >>>into the typical humour of the UK armed forces - generally a lot
> >>>more heavy-handed than in general society
> >>>https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/because-you-never-know-
> >>>when-20-gold-sovereigns-might.37670/ - come to think of it,
> >>>that's obvious just from the domain name.
> >>
> >> And, of course, there is always the survival kit detailed in
> >> /Dr. Stranglove/ (the movie): gold and nylons, whee!
> >
++In "From Russia With Love," Bond mentions that 20 gold sovereigns
++is part of the standard kit for agents (while producing one from
++his briefcase).
+And then forgets to mention how to safely open one.

I don't think he exactly forgot...

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

In article <1f1dc987-6fd6-49fc-8a5a-b5d82130e6e8n@googlegroups.com>,
peterwezeman@hotmail.com <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Sunday, November 7, 2021 at 10:45:24 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sun, 07 Nov 2021 03:38:35 GMT, Ninapenda Jibini
>> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Paul S Person <pspe...@ix.netcom.invalid> wrote in
>> >news:jdcdog11149n7dknd...@4ax.com:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 5 Nov 2021 10:17:01 -0700 (PDT), Andrew McDowell
>> >> <mcdow...@sky.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>On Friday, November 5, 2021 at 7:07:14 AM UTC, Quadibloc wrote:
>> >>>> This post might be on-topic for anyone wanting to write a
>> >>>> fantasy story set in the 19th century, or the part of the 20th
>> >>>> century before the First World War. I had already posted about
>> >>>> this to two other newsgroups where it was more on-topic, but
>> >>>> without any germane replies.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In 1912, in the city of Wroclaw, then called Breslau, and then
>> >>>> in Germany, there was a chess game between one Levitsky and
>> >>>> one Marshall which ended with a Queen sacrifice so impressive
>> >>>> that, according to some accounts, many of the spectators
>> >>>> tossed gold coins at the chessboard. Some writers have
>> >>>> expressed doubt about whether that happened, but I tend to be
>> >>>> willing to believe Frank Marshall's account. But there was one
>> >>>> question in my mind: why would anyone, let alone many of the
>> >>>> people in the audience, be carrying gold coins around in their
>> >>>> pockets? I mean, this seems as though it's something basic
>> >>>> that would have to be possible before we could believe that
>> >>>> this happened.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Back in those days, nearly every country did mint gold coins.
>> >>>> But it was still true that for denominations larger than those
>> >>>> of silver coins, what was routinely used was paper money.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I did some thinking about this, and I came up with a possible
>> >>>> explanation.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> At one time, U.S. paper money stated, in addition to it being
>> >>>> "legal tender for all debts, public and private", that there
>> >>>> was one exception to that: payment on import duties.
>> >>>> The function of gold, even under the gold standard, was mainly
>> >>>> for exchanges between the central banks of different countries
>> >>>> to reconcile the case of a nonzero balance of payments.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But combine that insight with this fact: back then, they
>> >>>> didn't have credit cards or travellers' cheques.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> One could, even back then, I suppose, go to a bank and change
>> >>>> one's money for that of another country. But it could be that
>> >>>> the fees for that service were high back then.
>> >>>> Obviously, just taking your own country's paper money to a
>> >>>> foreign merchant wouldn't work well. Such a merchant would be
>> >>>> ill-equipped to know if the money was genuine, and would not
>> >>>> necessarily have an idea of its value.
>> >>>> But gold coins... all you have to do is weigh them. (Yes,
>> >>>> that's oversimplified; one country's gold coins might be 10%
>> >>>> copper, and another country's gold coins might be 20% copper
>> >>>> or something...)
>> >>>> And back in those days, there were books published giving the
>> >>>> weight, fineness, and value of gold coins from all the
>> >>>> different countries around the world that issued them.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Such as this one:
>> >>>> https://archive.org/details/petersonscomplet00tbpe
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And the chess game, in a German city, was between a Russian
>> >>>> player and an American one. So it's not unreasonable that many
>> >>>> of the spectators were international tourists, some of them
>> >>>> from Russia or the United States.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So is this when someone, in 1910, or 1890, or thereabouts,
>> >>>> would be carrying gold coins in his pocket instead of paper
>> >>>> money, because that's how they handled transferring money
>> >>>> between different countries for individuals, not just between
>> >>>> banks, in those days?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> John Savard
>> >>>According to many reports, the RAF issues gold sovereigns to
>> >>>pilots who might be shot down behind enemy lines so they can buy
>> >>>their way out of there (I did hear that there may be a change to
>> >>>credit cards somewhere along the line). The following link not
>> >>>only supports this, but points to a site that gives some insight
>> >>>into the typical humour of the UK armed forces - generally a lot
>> >>>more heavy-handed than in general society
>> >>>https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/because-you-never-know-
>> >>>when-20-gold-sovereigns-might.37670/ - come to think of it,
>> >>>that's obvious just from the domain name.
>> >>
>> >> And, of course, there is always the survival kit detailed in
>> >> /Dr. Stranglove/ (the movie): gold and nylons, whee!
>> >
>++In "From Russia With Love," Bond mentions that 20 gold sovereigns
>++is part of the standard kit for agents (while producing one from
>++his briefcase).
>+And then forgets to mention how to safely open one.
>
>I don't think he exactly forgot...

Yeah. You don't want to have every Tom, Dick, and Harry learning
how to open containers designated for double-zero spybusters.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/