Re: Legality of requiring credit cards?

Merchants are free to adopt most any non-descrimatory policy insofar as
transactions are concerned.  If you want hassle-free shopping use legal
tender (except for rentals, where a CC is most welcome).

-Steve

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>It's that wonderful season again, when all the assholes are out in
>force, and people feel obligated to purchase merchandise to give to
>each other.  For various reasons, I don't believe in credit cards, and
>yet, trying to pay for something by personal check at the local
>Hecht's, they either *require* a credit card, or go through the Nazi
>check-warranty company Equifax.  However, it doesn't stop there...only
>SOME departments seem to have this requirement (Electronics/Luggage
>not requiring).  Is it legal to require credit cards?
>
>|\/|ike Gurski  mgursk1@umbc.edu  http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~mgursk1/
>finger/mail subject "send pgpkey"|"send index"  Hail Eris! -><-  O- |Member,
>1024/39B5BADD PGP Keyprint=3493 A994 B159 48B7 1757 1E4E 6256 4570  |   Team
>My opinions are mine alone, even if you should be sharing them.     |   OS/2
>            Senate Finance Committee Chair, SGA 1996-1997
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: 2.6.2
>Comment: I am not a number, I am a free man!
>
>iQCVAwUBMr2dZiKEMrE5tbrdAQGNEwQAjxsj387SAbEQnGr+8j0z12cWpREK/Y8U
>e5xCYMMwJ6J+rLip05nZ8uMHfY/anfGW5m2mMrvsVOggMh5Sv9Ljrw3u4uFl66B5
>yU3iU3couXIZx5Dv1QhGdOSZPRpIo7wZGwCGtF4z9TM+cUzEUzA8LMDgavG8fY0D
>T+yrGuzhSzg=
>=aQ97
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, Steve Schear wrote:

> If you want hassle-free shopping use legal tender (except for rentals>

	Not always true.

	Go shopping with a wad of $100.00 bills.   Most stores don't
	accept them, regardless of the amount of purchase, without
	additional ID.   

	Try buying a new car, paying for it with $100.00 bills.
	You might enjoy filling out the paperwork that is required
	to do so.

In article <199612241223.HAA14556@homeport.org>,
Adam Shostack  <adam@homeport.org> wrote:
> 	(Speaking of which, is a state
> university student ID considered 'government issued?'  How about a
> faculty or staff ID card?)

Well, when I fly they ask for 'government issued' picture ID, and
I present my UC Berkeley student ID for inspection.  They usually
grumble at me, but I grumble back, and in the end they've always
accepted it.  Try it sometime.  (And yes, my student ID is probably
eminently forgable -- it looks very ragged and unprofessional.)

P.S.  At JFK I had a guy tell me that they preferred to see my
social security card!  I was completely surprised, since it has no
picture, and (I think) says 'this card not to be used for identification
purposes' at the bottom.  Anyone know anything about this?

At 6:20 pm -0500 12/29/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
>What I think this means is a move toward a national ID card, replacing the
>confusing (to airlines, to government agents, etc.) mishmash of state
>driver's licenses, student ID cards, etc.

"I've found that they issue a national ID card, it's time to leave..."
           Lazarus Long, "Time Enough For Love", by Robert A. Heinlein

Cheers,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox,
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson
The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996, Robert Hettinga wrote:

> "I've found that they issue a national ID card, it's time to leave..."

	So which countries don't issue a national ID card?

	I'm assuming that list will be far shorter than those that
	do issue a national ID card.

        xan

        jonathon
        grafolog@netcom.com





	***********************************************************

	Note:   a bad procmail recipe deleted all e-mail sent to
	me, except for spam, between 14.36 H 12-26-96 Zulu and 4.09 H 
	12-28-96 Zulu.

	So it you sent me e-mail, and didn't get an expected
	reply, that's why.  Please resend your e-mail.

	The recipe has been fixed.

Mr. Hettinga wrote:
> At 6:20 pm -0500 12/29/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
> >What I think this means is a move toward a national ID card, replacing the
> >confusing (to airlines, to government agents, etc.) mishmash of state
> >driver's licenses, student ID cards, etc.
> 
> "I've found that they issue a national ID card, it's time to leave..."
>            Lazarus Long, "Time Enough For Love", by Robert A. Heinlein
> 

     Yeah, but where are we going to go?

Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com

At 2:12 PM -0800 12/29/96, David Wagner wrote:
>In article <199612241223.HAA14556@homeport.org>,
>Adam Shostack  <adam@homeport.org> wrote:
>> 	(Speaking of which, is a state
>> university student ID considered 'government issued?'  How about a
>> faculty or staff ID card?)
>
>Well, when I fly they ask for 'government issued' picture ID, and
>I present my UC Berkeley student ID for inspection.  They usually
>grumble at me, but I grumble back, and in the end they've always
>accepted it.  Try it sometime.  (And yes, my student ID is probably
>eminently forgable -- it looks very ragged and unprofessional.)
>
>P.S.  At JFK I had a guy tell me that they preferred to see my
>social security card!  I was completely surprised, since it has no
>picture, and (I think) says 'this card not to be used for identification
>purposes' at the bottom.  Anyone know anything about this?

My SS card, issued in 1969 (and which I still have, surprisingly enough),
says this. Someone said recently here on the list that this line was
dropped in more recent years.

I've never once, in 29 years, been asked to show my little ragged card, and
I only have it because I kept it stored with my passport. (No employer ever
asked to see it; I haven't been employed for more than 10 years, so I can't
say anything about recent policies in the wake of the "immigration crisis.")

The current hysteria about "identification" probably does nothing to stop
real terrorists...if there's one thing they can easily afford, it's
realistic-looking ID cards, in any flavor and in any number.

What I think this means is a move toward a national ID card, replacing the
confusing (to airlines, to government agents, etc.) mishmash of state
driver's licenses, student ID cards, etc. After all, if someone doesn't
drive, and has no passport, just what _is_ there "government issued"
picture ID supposed to be, if not a national ID card? Or, as we like to
say, an "internal passport."

Or as the Christian Right likes to say, "the mark of the Beast." Big
Brother's SS number: 666-42-0000.

--Tim May



Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

> I've never once, in 29 years, been asked to show my little ragged card, and
> I only have it because I kept it stored with my passport. (No employer ever
> asked to see it; I haven't been employed for more than 10 years, so I can't
> say anything about recent policies in the wake of the "immigration crisis.")

	These days you can show a passport in leui of a social
security card. (I showed my"current employer" my SS card because I
kept forgetting to bring my poassport in to work. What an odd concept,
proving to my employer that I had a right to wrk in the
US... apparently the law is that you have a $10k fine if you *dont
have the paperwork* -- it doen't matter if all your employees are
legal.)

> 
> The current hysteria about "identification" probably does nothing to stop
> real terrorists...if there's one thing they can easily afford, it's
> realistic-looking ID cards, in any flavor and in any number.
> 
> What I think this means is a move toward a national ID card, replacing the
> confusing (to airlines, to government agents, etc.) mishmash of state
> driver's licenses, student ID cards, etc. After all, if someone doesn't
> drive, and has no passport, just what _is_ there "government issued"
> picture ID supposed to be, if not a national ID card? Or, as we like to
> say, an "internal passport."
> 
> Or as the Christian Right likes to say, "the mark of the Beast." Big
> Brother's SS number: 666-42-0000.
> 
> --Tim May
> 
> 
> 
> Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
> We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
> "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
President					FAX:     510-986-8777
C2Net 		    C2Net is having a party: http://www.c2.net/party/
http://www.c2.net/				sameer@c2.net

At 4:48 PM -0800 12/29/96, sameer wrote:
>> I've never once, in 29 years, been asked to show my little ragged card, and
>> I only have it because I kept it stored with my passport. (No employer ever
>> asked to see it; I haven't been employed for more than 10 years, so I can't
>> say anything about recent policies in the wake of the "immigration crisis.")
>
>	These days you can show a passport in leui of a social
>security card. (I showed my"current employer" my SS card because I
>kept forgetting to bring my poassport in to work. What an odd concept,
>proving to my employer that I had a right to wrk in the
>US... apparently the law is that you have a $10k fine if you *dont
>have the paperwork* -- it doen't matter if all your employees are
>legal.)

Indeed, the similarities with the "structuring" example (of financial
deposits, even one's own money!!!) are frightening. If prosecutors wanted
to "make an example" of someone, they could.

(This is part of a much larger issue: the vast array of laws, which nearly
all of us violate in various ways on various days. When there are so many
laws that one is almost inevitably a felon is, to me, the very definition
of a "terror state.")

Brian Davis, our former federal prosecutor, seems a reasonable enough
fellow, and I'm fairly certain that he would not have sought an indictment
for a "small fry" who failed to ask for the proper SS card, but it's
sobering to think that a business could be shut down or massively fined for
such a thing. (I was advised in a local newsgroup that asking
Hispanic-looking job applicants more questions about their U.S. status than
one asks of Aryan-looking job applicants is ipso facto a serious, serious
crime. So, what does the white applicant who has no "proof" of his U.S.
residency--no passport, no birth certificate, no official card, just his
"whiteness" and his flawless English--do when confronted with such a
question? Just supplying an SS number is apparently not enough.

By the way, a question for Brian (if he happens to see this): Suppose I
take $27,000 I've had stuffed under my mattress...already taxed, blah blah
blah. In other words, no chance of it being "illicit" or "unreported." That
is, a situation like our gambler friend (he reported the income), except
even more clearly a case where the money is outright owned (by traditional
Western notions of ownership, i.e., cash sitting in a safe deposit box, or
under a mattress, etc.

So, I go to three banks and deposit $9,000 in each, for whatever reasons.

Do I face forfeiture of my money?

If so, I'll joing Jim Bell in his advocacy of solving this problem in a
more drastic way.

(Question: How many "small fry" have faced this kind of forfeiture for
committing the "crime" of making two or more deposits, thus appearing to
fit the "structuring profile"?)

On the forfeiture issue, I'm more and more convinced "deal making" is a
basic evil in our judicial system. While the argument is valid that it
reduces courtroom crowding (and maybe prison crowding), it also makes
things too easy for the government side to file serious charges and then
"bargain" for a compromise. "Civil forfeiture" is a Damoclean sword hanging
over the heads of citizens.

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Mr. May wrote:
> My SS card, issued in 1969 (and which I still have, surprisingly enough),
> says this. Someone said recently here on the list that this line was
> dropped in more recent years.

     I had to have mine replaced recently, and that line is no longer 
_anywhere_ on the card. 

     Did they change the laws regarding the use of your SSN as ID, or 
are most people just ignoring it?


Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com

At 11:02 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
>There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS
>laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. ...
>
>And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS
>number is the key to so many records, rights, etc.

I don't see how you can have the SS number be both a public ID number and a
secret password.  Perhaps you could have it be one, but not both.  It seems
to me that parts of our society are trying have it be a password and parts
a public ID number.  (Perhaps the same parts?)  Doing both just won't work.

(Using SS as a password is subject to all the stealing and replay attacks
that make passwords a really bad idea for secure identification.)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | in Pittsburgh, Packets in  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | Pakistan. - me             | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

At 7:32 PM -0800 1/2/97, Timothy C. May wrote:
>At 10:35 PM -0800 12/31/96, Bill Frantz wrote:
>>At 11:02 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
>>>There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS
>>>laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. ...
>>>
>>>And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS
>>>number is the key to so many records, rights, etc.
>>
>>I don't see how you can have the SS number be both a public ID number and a
>>secret password.  Perhaps you could have it be one, but not both.  It seems
>>to me that parts of our society are trying have it be a password and parts
>>a public ID number.  (Perhaps the same parts?)  Doing both just won't work.
>>
>>(Using SS as a password is subject to all the stealing and replay attacks
>>that make passwords a really bad idea for secure identification.)
>
>????
>
>I never made such a claim, that SS numbers are any kind of secret key or
>password.

Sorry for the confusion.  The "you" was meant in its plural form, and
probably should be replaced with "one".  If I understand your position
correctly, you would prefer to have no SS numbers (or Social Security
either).


>The phrase "identity theft," not coined by me, is a recent term of art
>involving the ease with which those with access to a person's SS number can
>then acquire credit cards, etc.

Sounds like the SS number is acting as a password which gives access to
privileges.  Or perhaps just a key which allows you to look up tokens in
public databases, which give access to privileges.  Either way, it needs to
be kept secret which is at odds with it acting as public person-ID number.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | in Pittsburgh, Packets in  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | Pakistan. - me             | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

At 12:59 PM -0600 12/31/96, snow wrote:
>Mr. May wrote:
>> My SS card, issued in 1969 (and which I still have, surprisingly enough),
>> says this. Someone said recently here on the list that this line was
>> dropped in more recent years.
>
>     I had to have mine replaced recently, and that line is no longer
>_anywhere_ on the card.
>
>     Did they change the laws regarding the use of your SSN as ID, or
>are most people just ignoring it?
>

At the bottom of my SS card are these exact words:

"FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AND TAX PURPOSES--NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION"

When I had to renew my California Driver's License, I was asked for my SS
number...a new requirement. I pointed out that the SS number is not for
identification. The clerk gave me a blank look and said I would not get a
driver's license without an SS number. I gave in, preferring to fight other
battles.

(And I would surely lose this battle, probably even if I spend tons of
money on mounting a legal challenge.)

There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS
laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. (It already is, of course,
for taxes, for employers, for credit, for driver's licenses, for student
ID, etc.)

And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS
number is the key to so many records, rights, etc.

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

At 10:35 PM -0800 12/31/96, Bill Frantz wrote:
>At 11:02 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote:
>>There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS
>>laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. ...
>>
>>And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS
>>number is the key to so many records, rights, etc.
>
>I don't see how you can have the SS number be both a public ID number and a
>secret password.  Perhaps you could have it be one, but not both.  It seems
>to me that parts of our society are trying have it be a password and parts
>a public ID number.  (Perhaps the same parts?)  Doing both just won't work.
>
>(Using SS as a password is subject to all the stealing and replay attacks
>that make passwords a really bad idea for secure identification.)

????

I never made such a claim, that SS numbers are any kind of secret key or
password.

The phrase "identity theft," not coined by me, is a recent term of art
involving the ease with which those with access to a person's SS number can
then acquire credit cards, etc.

--Tim May


Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

> At 12:59 PM -0600 12/31/96, snow wrote:
> >Mr. May wrote:
> >> My SS card, issued in 1969 (and which I still have, surprisingly enough),
> >> says this. Someone said recently here on the list that this line was
> >> dropped in more recent years.
> >     I had to have mine replaced recently, and that line is no longer
> >_anywhere_ on the card.
> >     Did they change the laws regarding the use of your SSN as ID, or
> >are most people just ignoring it?
> 
> At the bottom of my SS card are these exact words:
> "FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AND TAX PURPOSES--NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION"

     My original had that, the replacement doesn't. 

     If you, or anyone else would like to see a scan of it, I can have it up
in about 30 seconds. Number obscured of course (not that it is hard to find
it other places). 
> 
> When I had to renew my California Driver's License, I was asked for my SS
> number...a new requirement. I pointed out that the SS number is not for
> identification. The clerk gave me a blank look and said I would not get a
> driver's license without an SS number. I gave in, preferring to fight other
> battles.
> (And I would surely lose this battle, probably even if I spend tons of
> money on mounting a legal challenge.)

     In Illinois, you merely have to request they not put it on the card,
supposedly in Missouri you don't have to have in put on the card if you
have a "religious objection", but I'd bet if you bitch loud enough at the 
DMV office, you can get out of it. 


Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com

On 31 Dec 96, snow rambled thusly about Re: Internal Passports...

>      In Illinois, you merely have to request they not put it on the
>      card,

I don't remember having that option, but I was barely sixteen at the 
time.

> supposedly in Missouri you don't have to have in put on the card if
> you have a "religious objection", but I'd bet if you bitch loud
> enough at the DMV office, you can get out of it. 

Not even that bad.  When I went in there (just a few months ago) the
clerk asked nicely if I wouldn't mind having my SSN used as my ID/
Drivers Licence number.  (I wisely chose to say, "why yes, I would
mind." and was assigned a pseudorandom number.)

dave

Timothy C. May wrote:
[...]
> And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS
> number is the key to so many records, rights, etc.

All you have to do is take a stroll down any street the last week of 
December, reading SSNs off the labels on the tax forms in everyone's 
mailbox.

-rich

David Wagner wrote:
> Adam Shostack  <adam@homeport.org> wrote:
> > (Speaking of which, is a state university student ID considered
> > 'government issued?'  How about a faculty or staff ID card?)

> Well, when I fly they ask for 'government issued' picture ID, and
> I present my UC Berkeley student ID for inspection.  They usually
> grumble at me, but I grumble back, and in the end they've always
> accepted it.  Try it sometime.  (And yes, my student ID is probably
> eminently forgable -- it looks very ragged and unprofessional.)
> P.S.  At JFK I had a guy tell me that they preferred to see my
> social security card!  I was completely surprised, since it has no
> picture, and (I think) says 'this card not to be used for identification
> purposes' at the bottom.  Anyone know anything about this?

This is really weird.  Maybe the person asking for SS cards is just
clueless, or from somewhere outside the U.S. I haven't seen my SS card
since 1965, shortly after it was issued.  I did three years in the U.S.
military without the card (although the military switched from RA and
US numbers to only SS numbers circa 1967-1969), and nobody has ever
insisted I have one, although I've seen a reference maybe once every few
years about the need to have one.

Real-world humans lose cards all the time, hence the need to implant
people with ID chips as soon as the chips are secure enough to use as
guaranteed permanent and unique ID.  Not my first choice, of course.

Several (or most) states threaten their drivers in the license literature
that if they're caught driving without possession of the license (even
though the person so caught has a valid license somewhere), they can be
jailed as a criminal.  If there are any cases where this has been tested,
I'd like to hear about them.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996, Dale Thorn wrote:

> David Wagner wrote:
[...]
> Several (or most) states threaten their drivers in the license literature
> that if they're caught driving without possession of the license (even
> though the person so caught has a valid license somewhere), they can be
> jailed as a criminal.  If there are any cases where this has been tested,
> I'd like to hear about them.

I've heard about such cases, and in fact North Carolina (where I am)
"requires" all drivers to have their card on their person while driving.
A friend of mine was pulled without his, and they gave him 30 days to
produce it, and finally agreed just to look it up on the computer when he
produced 2 other valid forms of ID.  But then again, in North Carolina the
family Bible is a valid form of ID (as well as a completed work
_application_, and other odities).

 --Deviant
   PGP KeyID = E820F015 Fingerprint = 3D6AAB628E3DFAA9 F7D35736ABC56D39

They seem to have learned the habit of cowering before authority even when
not actually threatened.  How very nice for authority.  I decided not to
learn this particular lesson.
                -- Richard Stallman


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQEVAwUBMsdSYDCdEh3oIPAVAQEP+Af7BHDT43r700Q1lb2Ioc2RjfS9+eDIxtLn
f+bhWqsk3YpIpCVenYHr23PzSvnHBIztHpNMM0HEsFRZOHzQjuQ9QSEOzBgehmon
P4wJURbQIH4lIpcH4VQUFfHuU/yT5ZPaSGrNvXYnEIyZFRyvu5XnZyynKes344/v
TmQ7Wj5KIiYtmp7AJ+QIEJuCeGVJaSNbjj2ibmMyHf3tyhk7nQjtiWmGSYx0Dq8H
6hKrRLI4QzqKnsAYwrWFO9MZBXQGgLm5CGZAVgexr73AtfcTJyBLio+kaFQBws7e
VkPtZzCo3o+jGbu5XLt4TJoLgr5BMIL6cxDGmbCko9ALzzYfMixJJA==
=/IRS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

jonathon wrote:
| On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, Steve Schear wrote:
| 
| > If you want hassle-free shopping use legal tender (except for rentals>
| 
| 	Not always true.
| 
| 	Go shopping with a wad of $100.00 bills.   Most stores don't
| 	accept them, regardless of the amount of purchase, without
| 	additional ID.   

	Did they require statist ID?  (Speaking of which, is a state
university student ID considered 'government issued?'  How about a
faculty or staff ID card?)


Adam
"Never had a problem paying with hundreds either.  Maybe its my 'You
will need to get your manager' attitude."

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume

Adam Shostack wrote:
> jonathon wrote:
> | On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, Steve Schear wrote:
> | > If you want hassle-free shopping use legal tender (except for rentals>

> |   Not always true. Go shopping with a wad of $100.00 bills.
> |   Most stores don't accept them, regardless of the amount of purchase,
> |   without additional ID.

> Did they require statist ID? (Speaking of which, is a state university
> student ID considered 'government issued?' How about a faculty or staff ID card?)
> "Never had a problem paying with hundreds either.  Maybe its my 'You
> will need to get your manager' attitude."

It's been my experience in the L.A. area as well as elsewhere in the
U.S. that stores will take hundreds if the purchase is a significant
fraction of a $100 bill, or more than $100.  I've also found that
restaurants, for example, will nearly always take a $100 if the check
is over $20, and some will take it when the check is less than $20.
Common sense is the key, i.e., if the tab is $101, and you give them
two $100 bills, expecting $99 change, expect some static.

In spite of the brainwashed multitudes' attitudes about carrying cash,
and standing like beggars in an ATM line where muggers are prowling
nearby, the L.A. authorities actually urge(!) people to carry a few
hundred dollars at least in case of earthquake or other emergency.

Recently when I was in my bank drawing out some cash and getting change
(in a way that I suppose customers don't normally do), the teller made
a snide remark about my habits, so I raised my voice and said "Remember
the adage 'possession is 9/10 of the law?', well, when you possess my
money it's really your money, and I don't like that.  I'm withdrawing
my money, OK?"  That was the one and only time they made any remarks.