🚀 go-pugleaf

"George Grapman" <sfgeorge@paccbell.net> wrote in message 
news:skADi.13266$3x.10649@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
>    If a retailer is hacked at the  most you have the inconvenience of 
> getting the charges removed from the bill.

As I said, everyone needs to weigh the costs and benefits for themselves.

For someone who's already well off and can't spend what he already has, the 
cash back is not worth the "inconvenience" no matter how small. You only get 
so many years on this planet.

I'm not saying everyone should choose not to use plastic for the rewards.

I'm just against blanket statements that say everyone *should* use them.


>  I recently took a ten day vacation. I never had more than $50 cash on me. 
> I used my credit card for larger purchases and my debit card when I wanted 
> cash back either from a merchant or an ATM (my credit union allows no fee 
> withdrawals at many other credit union ATMs as well as the 7-11 network.
>
>  The alternatives would have meant carrying a lot of cash with me or using 
> travelers checks. The former entails the risk of theft or loss,the latter 
> requires finding a store that takes them and going through the ID 
> verification process.

Certainly, there are other benefits to plastic besides the cashback. (It 
just wasn't part of the original argument.)

Though I'd pick the risk of losing a pocketful of cash over having 
fraudulent cc charges. The former is an event with a beginning and end and 
your total loss is known upfront. When the fraudulent chages show up on your 
card, it can be a long time before you're sure whether it's "just getting 
the charged removed" or the start of a major identity-theft nightmare that 
could last for years. The uncertainty and lack of clear closure can be just 
as bad or worse than the financial loss.