Is cash still important in our society today to buy the things we want, or is it an antiquated tool that is losing relevance in an increasingly technological world? Many argue that a cashless society is in our future while some say it is impossible (and dangerous) to live in an entirely digital society. Where do you stand on the issue? Can we really have a society without cash and where are the potential pitfalls? Read the following articles in order to see the various views on the topic before defending your position.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/business/07currency.html?_r=0
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-24/news/31391046_1_smartphones-privacy-fears-paypal
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=3017
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/toward-a-cashless-society/#axzz2K1R0K7z
71 comments:
I think a cashless society is a better way for a society to operate than one that uses cash. Cash can be destroyed stolen or damaged so that it will not be honored in a transaction. Also, the production of cash is harmful to the environment because it needs to be produced in factories and is made of paper, which comes from trees. On the other hand, a cashless society can have a more eco-friendly approach because the government could give everyone a debit card which is linked to their bank accounts. Naturally, an argument against this is identity theft, but with proper security measures this could be prevented. This would be more efficient for society. Think of an ezpass lane, it moves so much quicker than the cash lane because people are always fiddling for the correct change. The government would have to issue debit cards to the public that way people could only spend money they have and not just buy on credit.
I think physical currency should remain an integral part of our society, and I think it will because governments will realize that physical money is an important part of modern society, and they will therefore continue to print it. There are many reasons why I believe that physical money is an essential part of modern society and therefore should not be phased out. First of all, it is always better to have more choices of how to spend money, and taking away paper money would just limit these choices. Many people prefer to use paper money over credit cards, debit cards, etc. in many situations, and the phasing out of paper money would just limit choice. For example, there are retail stores where people can easily buy affordable goods with cash, and eliminating paper money would also eliminate the choice of consumers to spend cash in these situations. Also, without the existence of physical money, everyone must have a bank account to store their monetary assets. This can be a problem because some people, such as the homeless, do not have bank accounts. Also, if paper money were eliminated, people who are too poor to afford electronic devices, have too bad a credit rating to use credit cards, etc., would have a very hard time trying to survive in a society where all money is electronic. Also, electronic money would not reduce robbery of money because hacking into accounts to steal money would just replace physical theft. Also, although electronic money may encourage people to overspend (since we already do this with credit cards), it may also encourage people not to spend because there are fees for electronic transactions and because privacy of transactions is limited because every transaction is recorded and traceable. For example, people may buy less goods that they don't want people to know they bought than they would if they had paper money. If less money is spent, then the economy slows down, so people spending less money is a con to the phasing out of paper money. Therefore, I believe that the phasing out of paper money should not and will not occur because the negative effects of this far outweigh the positive effects.
I think that the presence of physical money benefits our society. Although a cashless society may seem convenient, it is unable to further simplify the task of purchasing something small. Not only will this task be over complicated, but fees that are often attached to a purchase made on a credit card may make the purchase more expensive than it originally was. This may discourage people from wanting to spend as much as they used to, thus hurting businesses. People would also need to constantly release their information regardless of the purchase size. Because this cashless society would be computerized, the releasing of a person's information so frequently would probably make the job of stealing someone's identity or money from their bank account a lot easier. The most convincing argument in favor of a society that uses cash is that they will have a lot more privacy than a society where every transaction is recorded. Although a person may have nothing to hide, they will not want to have all of their information available to be sold to third party entities or to be reviewed by their employers. A cashless society would take away the privacy promised by physical cash, and may discourage spenders from spending; this overall, would negatively affect the society we currently live in.
SEHAR L. (period 7)
In my opinion I think we should stick to the cash system. I agree with Martin Brinkmann when he explained that a cashless society will not mean a society without crime. If we lived in a world where everything was paid through cards and bank accounts, identity theft and computer hackers would be very dangerous. Unlike regular thrives they can not only steal your hard earned money but also access your personal and private information. Also I think it would be important to remember that if we switched to a cashless society we would have to rely only on technology, and as the recent hurricane Sandy has shown us we can not always rely on technology. Lastly I think that it would hurt small business as people might not feel as inclined to to spend as much. This is because in a cash system not everyone keeps track of how much they spend and generally tend to overspend, however with a account system people can constantly keep a track of how much they spend.
Sara Heinlein
I think that cash is a necessary part of our society and should not be eliminated. Although, it may seem easier to manage money electronically, I think people like to feel the satisfaction of holding physical money. Some argue that transitioning to a cashless society would decrease the amount of crime and robbery; however, I believe that even larger robberies would occur. People will be able to hack into huge accounts. Additionally, what is to stop people from figuring out ways to deposit huge sums of money that they don’t really have into their accounts? Their accounts wouldn’t be backed up by any cash. Additionally, I think that a cashless society will cause people to overspend, which will eventually lead to huge debts (and we recently saw what happens when people can’t repay their loans—a financial crisis.) I also believe that it would be hard for everyone to open up a bank account, which would be a necessary part for a cashless society. Plus, this would place a huge amount of responsibility on banks and technology and I feel that this would leave great room for error. Overall, I feel that there is a lot of potential risk in transferring to a cashless society.
While a cashless society may work for most, there are still too many who do not have credit cards or even bank accounts, and since the only way to track transactions is through a bank account, it would never work. Some individuals do not like using their credit cards for everything, since they may want privacy and not have every transaction traceable. Other problems would be that individuals may be more likely to go into debt since credit cards would be used a lot more and tend to encourage people to spend money they don’t have and overdraft, or have the thought process of “buy now, pay later.” I feel like you need some money in circulation, so you can pay your kids allowance, give a few dollars to a homeless person, or use it for other small transactions. There would also be a lot more identity theft and hackers breaking into individual’s accounts, so people would have to be very careful with checking their monthly bills to insure that no one has used their card. I think it would be okay if over time people used less cash, but I do not think it would work if all cash was discontinued.
I believe that our society should keep the cash system. Everyone is so used to that people wouldn't want to only use credit cards to pay for things. People would then be relying too much on technology. As previous disasters have shown us technology is not always the most reliable source. Power outages would cripple places trying to pay for food and other goods. Also identity thieves would run rampant through the economy and be very dangerous. People also have the tendency to spend more money when using a credit card and eventually causing them to go into debt because they arnt monitoring how much money they have.
Peter Tiranno Period 7
I feel that cash will always be a part of our society is necessary. Although our money today has no real value besides the belief we entrust in it, I feel without the dollar our economy won’t be able to function. If the dollar was completely eliminated, tax evasion and criminal online activity will take mass amounts of money. Fees and electronic transactions will make all goods cost more. Many people do not have credit cards and therefore wouldn’t be able to make any purchases. The homeless and poor wouldn’t be able to survive. Many people also have problems controlling their spending and max out their credit cards. This would be disastrous if it was all electronic transactions. I feel completely abolishing the paper dollar in American currency is a bad idea, and the current system is working just fine. I don’t see the United States in the near future becoming completely dependent on electronic transactions.
While I do agree that there are some benefits of a cashless society, such as the reduced costs associated with printing, storing, and counting cash, I firmly believe that currency will not go extinct. The argument that a cashless society will have less crimes is misguided because although certain crimes, such as bank robbery, will decrease, other crimes, including fraud and other white-collar crimes, will increase. Furthermore, if identity theft were committed in a cashless world, the identity thief would have the potential to pilfer everything that person has; this poses a huge security risk for peoples' personal financial assets. Also, a fully electronic economy gives the impression that the government is watching every financial transaction made; to me, a society where the IRS can track every dollar in the economy is the most totalitarian economic system possble. In closing, abolishing cash would have adverse effects on society and the economy.
Danielle Domini
Period 6
Believed to be most convenient, a cashless society is beginning to dominate, and physical cash is becoming a thing of the past. While a cashless society seems easier and safer, many consumers avoid the reality that the system causes major problems. One of the biggest problems is that consumers are not seeing their money being spent; they do not feel an empty wallet. Because of this, buying on credit can lead to a quick accumulation of debt if one is not careful.
The dollar, however, is tangible, so one can “feel” one’s purchases. Paying with cash not only reduces overspending but also eliminates transaction fees that may come with buying on credit. Many believe that a cashless society is most convenient; however, I believe that small purchases in particular are made easier with cash. Not to mention, if one decides to make a large purchase with cash rather than credit, one has more privacy. Lastly, what if someone, for example, is homeless and is unable to have a bank account? Buying on credit would not even be an option.
Unfortunately, society is indeed moving towards a cashless society. If this is the case, consumers should at least have the option, flexibility, and choice to use cash if that suits them best.
Although there is a significant opposing argument for permanently eliminating cash and moving towards a cashless system, I don't think Americans will be able to fully adjust to a completely cashless society; moreover, cash will remain an integral part of our money system for many years to come. Many people are sick and tired of carrying around cash. It often becomes a hassle especially because cash spreads germs, requires the killing of trees, and isn't quite mobile when one attempts to carry larger amounts. MR. KARMIN, I HOPE YOU'RE REALLY READING THIS YOU BEARCAT ADDICTED GOON. A completely cashless society is overall much quicker and far more convenient than that of a cash society. Going cashless would even mean a significant decrease in the amount of drug trafficking, bank robbers, tax evaders, aspiring terrorists, and counterfeiters. However, there are many faults in the “go cashless” argument. First off, even though a cashless society would reduce physical person-to-person crime, there would be a vast increase in the amount of hacking and other market fragmentation. In addition, operating only electronically would mean that not only would everyone need an electronic device of some sorts, but also everyone INCLUDING senior citizens would need to be completely adaptable to E-Payments. Too many lives depend on cash. Over 50% of Americans use cash for over the counter purchases. Our society still depends on cash, and I don’t believe it’s in the United States’ best interest to adapt to a completely cashless society.
Kayla M.
I feel as though a cashless society in theory sounds more convenient and ultimately easier to keep track of, however I also find it unrealistic and much more complicated. Many people do not feel comfortable having to pay for everything using a credit or debit card. Although having every transaction recorded online in one’s bank account makes managing money easier, this system may also cause people to spend more. Without physically using dollar bills to purchase things, people could potentially drag themselves into more debt. This type of system would also make it impossible for people to keep certain transactions private. Every time someone spends a single dollar it would be viewable on his or her bank account, which may not always be ideal. It will dissuade people to make donations to organizations that they do not want to be associated with. Giving a few dollars here and there to say the Salvation Army for example or Boy scouts would now be more of a hassle. Reaching into your pocket to pull out a few coins is much more simpler than having to be very careful to transfer the right amount of money to the specific organization. Also the idea of a cashless society reducing crime rates is not necessarily true. Criminals will easily be able to find new ways of stealing people’s money by hacking their online bank accounts. Overall, I do not believe that having a completely cashless society is in people’s best interest and we should continue to have the option of using cash or a credit card.
The merge to a cashless society will bring us into a new age, with increased efficiency and productivity. With all transactions happening at the click of a button, there is no need to keep track of loose change or bills and no fear of losing them. Time and money would be saved since bills and coins do not need to be made, counted, or kept track of. In addition, with all transactions electronic there is an increase in accountability, limiting or even eradicating the black market. With the increased ability to trace all exchanges of money, the black market money circulation will either become a part of our GDP and better the nation's well being or will cease to exist because of its legality. Furthermore, the amount of money one owns does not have to be associated with only a bank account, as stated in the article most homeless people would not have a bank account, but they would have a social security number with which to identify their money with. Although some jobs would become obsolete with the shift away from cash, society would reach a new level of efficiency which would leave the future economy and well being of the country in an excelling condition. If the extra fees in electronic payments are eliminated and our society moves away from cash, we can become much more efficient and productive.
I believe that a cashless society might be a little dangerous. Although I do see how it is more convenient to have credit cards and bank accounts, we should be wary of completely switching over to electronic cash. For example, we are still expected to print out essays for school instead of simply emailing the teacher our essay or handing in a flash drive. This is because using this method is sometimes problematic and things usually go wrong. If we completely switch over to electronic cash, something is bound to go wrong and there might be a chance that someone will go completely bankrupt because of a power outage or something. This is why I believe that it is a good to have something tangible backing us up. I’m not saying we should get rid of credit cards and electronic bank accounts, I’m just saying we need to have something we can hold in our hands. It just be because I’m old fashioned and am a bit afraid of technology and all its glitches, but I am a firm supporter of keeping our cash.
Bobby K. Period 6
It is probably a long time from now, but a cashless society seems inevitable given humanity lives long enough to see it. In terms of the characteristics we discussed in class, digital money is more readily producible than physical money. Physical money is tied to trees and metals. Although these resources are not in any immediate danger of scarcity, the cost of memory is only becoming cheaper. Electronic money has its many problems such as the threat of identity theft and the possible lack of privacy, but many Americans already accept these problems and prefer cashless transactions. Physical money has long term problems like the cost of production and the need to adjust the values of dollars and tokens to inflation. Unless we all really are dead in the long term, I think we will eventually switch completely to cashless currency.
Danielle R.
We have had faith in our physical monetary system since the time of our founding fathers, but recently as we have gotten closer with technology, we have begun to lose patience with physical money. Paper money and metal coins can be looked at as an inconvenience when comparing them to IPhone applications, PayPal or mobile banking browsers because they have the chance of being lost or damaged unlike a website where you can retrieve your money via username and password. I do believe that an electronic monetary system would be easier and would make payments quicker, but realistically, our society is not ready for a cashless system. First of all, let’s talk about the technology- you would be giving everyone, infants with savings accounts to elderly people, an account to his money. From my perspective, my grandparents gave up with dial-up AOL after about a year it came out. Our “baby-boomer” generation and generations earlier than that did not grow up like we did where technology was at our hands. So, it would just create a hassle for the older generations that is unnecessary right now. Then, you have the biggest problem with monetary systems- our faith. We have a great deal of faith and trust in our system, and that’s the way it’s been since its creation. Switching over to technology would be hard to for many Americans. Personally, I have some faith that banks would protect my identity and money, but with identity fraud and hacking, we tend to be a bit reserved when it comes to technology. Once something is leaked or hacked, like Wikileaks, it is out there. The thought of that happening to hundreds of thousands of accounts would be devastating. In all, a cashless system sounds ideal, but right now, all it can be is an ethereal ideal.
Nick Mangano
I would speculate that there is a point in our future at which physical money will be completely replaced by digital credits, but I would also argue that the time for this shift is not now. There are far too many functions occupied by physical money in today’s cash-based world for digitalized currency to be effective. Perhaps the upper-middle class of America would fare well solely with digitalized money, but we must also consider the plethora of transactions throughout the third world in which hard cash is irreplaceable. Transactions using cash money involve the transfer of cash from one person’s wallet to another’s, whereas digital transactions involve bank accounts- a luxury often taken foregranted by the adults of today’s America and scarcely shared by those of the rest of the world. Proposed benefits that serve as the cruxes of anti-cash activists’ arguments are quickly discredited upon closer scrutiny of the function of cash in today’s international society. Whether it is for food in the Democratic Republic of Congo or doughnuts from a small New Orleans bodega, the removal of cash as an accepted medium of transaction would be devastating (imagine trying to stay afloat if your already teetering-on-bankruptcy business now has to raise prices to compensate for the “inconsequential” transaction fees). Not to mention the lower class of America, for whom a functional bank account is nearly impossible to obtain, digital money would be the nail in their coffin. Others will claim that the transaction fees and deductible charges are “a small price to pay for the convenience” offered by only having to hold a card in its stead, but small businesses and lower class Americans who rely on the benefits of cash may say otherwise. And those who claim a lowering of theft must have been under a rock last year when hackers defrauded millions of PlayStation Network users after obtaining their credit card information from a supposedly “secure database.” On that note, I will reiterate my stance: humanity will converge to universally accept electric currencies, just not today.
Emily Yee (Period 6)
While a cashless society would prove to be more efficient in terms of business transactions, hard cash is an integral part of our everyday lives. Even though people believe that having cash promotes impulse spending, I believe the opposite is true. When you see how much you have, you can ration it better, and many people fall into the trap of buying items on credit, thus spending more than they actually have. Also, while America makes much of its profit from its big businesses, privately owned companies are an important part. By using credit alone, that already takes a portion of a company’s funds, but with cash, there is no need to subtract anything to compensate for using credit. People in the service industry also rely on tips—something that is not often given in cash unless you’re at a restaurant—for income. Most of these tips are given on site as a quick way for gratuity, and using credit in this case would be cumbersome. There is also the issue of privacy. In the technological age, everything is documented, and in a cashless society, everything from buying a TV to a small candy bar will be seen by a company. People should have the right to use their money for whatever they want without the fear of someone seeing it. Identity theft is also a huge issue. Hackers are becoming smarter with each year, and the risk of hacking into an online database is much less than to rob a bank. A new form of crime will emerge and it will be even harder to track the criminal. Overall, while a cashless society would relieve some of the mundane tasks involving cash, the detrimental effects are not worth the switch.
While there are many benefits to a cashless society, I think that cash will remain an important form of currency even as electronic payment increases in popularity. There are many instances in modern society where using a credit/debit card would be easier or more efficient that paying with cash, such as at a convenience store or a gas station (before they started giving legal "discounts" for cash). In addition, large purchases are much more secure when done with a single check or wire transfer rather than carrying large bags with money signs on them - not only inviting to thieves/muggers but also rather cumbersome. Not having to carry as much cash is thus a significant benefit to an electronic payment-based society. However, sometimes paying with cash is much simpler and easier than electronic payments, such as small exchanges not involving official sales (like a hypothetical bet to wear a muscle tee to school for a day [interestingly against the official Code of Conduct], tips to a bellboy or server, or an unofficial exchange of controlled substances [again, hypothetically, of course]). Currently, electronic payment is limited only to employers and merchants (Chase does has a feature that allows this between a Chase customer and anyone with a bank account, though it is a [redacted] to use unless both parties have it set up and I have never used it). In addition to the impracticality of providing everyone in a cashless society with a means to easily make electronic payments in lieu of cash, providers of this service (currently credit card companies) make a significant profit for it, resulting in laws allowing retailers to give an added surcharge for using a credit cars, give an aforementioned "discount" for using cash, or limiting cashless payments to exchanges over a certain value. This makes using cash more practical for small purchases so that a large credit card company does not have to get involved. The other option would be to entrust the government with control over electronic payments. Presuming you made it through the part about entrusting the enormously financially responsible and efficient federal government with the collective wealth of the entire nation without walking away laughing, it should be considered that the government would provide this service without the capitalistic (read:evil) intentions of credit card companies with the money saved from minting cash. Otherwise, the reasons why cash is here to stay, despite the advantages of cashless payments, should be fairly evident to you.
Chris DiMuro.
I believe that physical currency is the best way for our society to operate under, and should remain an integral part in our modern society. I believe that a society that abandons cash transactions will take away flexibility and choice from people. Although others may argue that cash is in danger as long as the fees associated with electronic money are high, I believe that Americans would still prefer paying with cash, especially for small purchases such as gum and milk. Proponents may ague that Supporters of a cashless society would also argue that it would eliminate crimes such as counterfeiting and tax evasion, as well a reduction in the cost of paper money and coins. I believe that criminal activity would not necessarily be reduced in a cashless society. Robbery would just simply shift to hackers on the Internet. They would find ways to break into accounts, which would cause people to constantly keep checking their transactions and account balance. Personally I believe that these hackers would be able to hack into your account easier then physically stealing your cash. I also believe that having a cashless society would cause citizens to spend less due to the lack of privacy associated with having every transaction recorded and traceable. For example, what would happen to those retail areas where people find affordable goods by paying with cash. In my opinion I believe that physical currency should remain in our society.
John Vera - Period 6
Cash will have a place in our society for a very long time, if not forever. Digital money simply has too many flaws to be an adequate substitute for cash, regardless of physical money's faults.
The electronic banking system has numerous flaws. First, the only way for individuals to access their money is through a bank account. Bank accounts can be hacked, causing the affected account holders to lose money and the bank to lose credibility. Privacy is also an issue because banks track the flow of money through accounts. Also, the mere fact that electronic money is, well, electronic is problematic because people without the means to access their accounts, such as through smartphones or computers, would be unable to spend and receive money conveniently. Lastly, banks have the ability to charge their customers exorbitant fees for transactions. This is especially detrimental to small businesses, the "engine of job growth", that do not have large customer bases and/or sizable incomes.
I believe physical currency will always have a place in our society. To make all of our currency digital would leave us incredibly vulnerably to computer hackers who could end up ruining the global economy. Furthermore, if all currency was digital, who would control it? Would each government have its own type of digital currency? And what would determine the conversion rate among currencies?
I feel that cash is an important thing to have in our society. Despite the fact that removing cash would provide a more 'green' approach to the economy, the other downfalls of having no cash outweigh this one benefit, in my opinion. For example, every single purchase a person makes would be recorded and kept on record, thus leaving people with little to no privacy. Also, small purchases would become more of a hassle. There is also the issue if the power goes out, such as during the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, many stores could only accept cash because credit card machines were down, but in a cashless society, purchases in this case would be extremely difficult to make. I also feel that whether there was cash or not, robbery and theft would still be a problem, and removing cash would not solve this.
Emma K.
I think physical currency is necessary part of our society. At this point in time, there are too many uncertainties and potential problems that could occur using an electronic currency. Computer glitches, power outages, and other unexpected events could cause difficulties transferring cash, or result in loss of savings. Many argue that the change to a cashless society will decrease crime, but I think that electronic banking will make it easier for hackers to get into accounts, and making larger accounts more available, potentially increasing white collar crime. Without physically cash, people could create false account with money in it they don’t actually have, or figure out ways to transfer huge sums of cash into their accounts. Additionally, people would be more likely to overspend. I also believe that it would be difficult for everyone to get a bank account. What would happen to homeless people, or others who would not be able to open accounts? I think that physical cash is necessary for small transactions such a giving kids their allowance or buying a cheap item at a grocery store. Overall, I think there are too many potential problems that go along with a cashless society and until those problems can be fixed, physical currency will be continued.
June Chang (period 6)
I think physical currency is the best way to operate our society. Today, not only the United States but also many countries use electronic money including credit and bank cards, online transactions and mobile technology because it makes life more convenient. Having a credit card tends to give some confidence to people when they want to purchase something pricey because they do not have to pay off the front. I, personally, am a very careful money user; whenever I purchase something I check how much is left over and plan out how much I should spend from there. However, when I go out to shop with my mom’s credit card, I tend to spend because I do not realize how much I am actually spending. Another reason that I support the cash transaction is because I can’t trust the bank. If I go to the bank and say that I want all my money in my account, they would probably say that they do not have it and will ask me to wait for couple days. However, while I was waiting for the money if the economy clashed, then all the money that I saved up to this point would just diminish. Lastly, there isn’t any minimum amount that I should spend in order to pay goods in cash. Whereas, credit card, I, sometimes have to spend more by purchasing unnecessary goods to meet the minimum.
I feel that cash is still an important part of our society. Electronic transactions do have their benefits, but they can never completely replace cash. Physical cash is a simple way to make quick transactions. It isn't tied to another bill which you have to pay later, so you don't have to worry about the purchase once it's made. Having cash gives more choice to the consumer on how they want to handle their funds. I have been in many situations where people want to lend a few dollars to someone else, and simple situation like this couldn't happen if all our money was tied to a card. Some people argue that Electronic banking would reduce crime, but people will just be mugged for their credit cards or have their identity stolen through computer hacking.
Elizabeth R. (Per. 7)
Although I can agree that a cashless society could still function properly and would be convenient in some ways, such as in the case of transactions or storage, I still firmly believe in physical currency. One argument for a cashless society would be a reduction in crime. However, crime would still exist- just in a different form. While bank robberies may go down, identity theft and white-collar crimes would increase instead. Furthermore, identity theft would now be a much bigger problem as all of the money would only be numbers on the computer. Hacking would also become a larger problem. In addition, it is fair to point out that relying on a cashless system would also mean a heavier reliance on technology. Not only is technology not always reliable, but no everyone has access to electronic devices such as computers to manage their accounts. These people would be forced to constantly go to banks and such to check on their money.
While I would love to jump on the fast moving phenomenon of an idea that is a solely electronic monetary society, I am greatly phased with its many drawbacks. If there was no physical dollar, everything would be traceable. Therefore, it wouldn't be far fetched if society as a whole shifted towards a limited selection of goods. For example, if Johnny wanted to buy a nice GAP T-shirt, he might be abused by the much more fashion-savvy Tom who likes to take his business to Calvin Klein. As a result, there would be a nation wide rejection of discount goods and lower quality brands. Another example, Sam wants to donate to the United Prostate Exam Charity of America. However, despite the non-profit organization's great cause, Sam decides otherwise due to the negative incentive of the bad reputation of being the "Butt donator", or something of that nature. It is also not hard to foresee rampant robbery and identity theft via electronics. I do in fact believe that someday we can make the shift to monetary trade done purely with electronics. However, with our current technology and all others foreseen within the next 5-10 years, it would be a bad idea to jump aboard just yet.
Although I feel that our society is rapidly growing to be electronically based, I do not feel that removing physical currency from our economy is a smart move. The argument can be made that by doing this crime may be reduced, but with increased knowledge in computer and technological sciences, individuals may then form ways to hack into bank accounts online, etc. This will surely not solve anything. Also, I feel that keeping a physical form of currency is important because it helps individuals balance spending money, and their savings. If we were all to resort to credit and debit cards, I am sure that a great number of people would soon find themselves incurring large debts. If we were to become a strictly electronic economy, I feel that this process should be an extensively though through process, and should come into effect during a time of prosperity--not during our current recessional phase.
Matt O
I can not imagine our society without the American dollar. As a frequent consumer I prefer to use cash a majority of the time. On the occassions that i use my debit card I never notice how much money i spend and i seem to care even less. When I use cash and see that my wallet has a little more space in it I become a more intelliegent spender.Also another problem with using electronic currency without cash is that a major disaster or technological crash could cripple our economy for an unseen amount of time. Finally I beleieve our cash system is more sufficent becasue not everyone in our society has bank accounts and eliminating cash would simply increase the power of the already powerful banks.
Thomas G. Period: 06
Although it may seem like a great alternative to switch from a cheaper source of online banking, I don't believe it will feasible for many different reasons.
I love banking with my debit card, however, cash makes it easier to make transactions for smaller purchases. I personally prefer cash over cards because I tangibly have to money to buy items. If we switched to a totally electronic way of banking, every school, every store would need to have the technology to make such transactions. Let alone, every single person would need a banking account, whether you were 10-18-49- or 90 years old. If you were in middle school you may not know how to make smart economical decisions. You will definitely spend more as a kid with the "endless possibilities." How would homeless people be able to track their money and be able to have these resources for a world without cash. It may be less of a convenience to carry money, it makes everyday life more simple, in my opinion.
Also, robbery may not be much of a problem anymore; however, identity theft would then be major problem. So maybe you wouldn't lose money, you'd lose something more than that, possible everything you own. That's way worse than losing tangible money. It would just cause major problems.
I would be okay with eliminating smaller coins to eliminate the cost of manufacturing, but to terminate all cash, I think that would be a problem. Based on the reasons above, I don't think it would be safe to do so. Yes, it would lower costs, but we should at least start with eliminating smaller coins. It would lessen the deficit a little and maybe get us used to a new way of making transactions. However, for now, I think we are good the way are.
Matt L.
While I do agree that going to a cashless society will have many benefits, I think that going to a cashless society wouldn't be able to work. Even though a cashless society can have benefits including reduction in crime, counterfeiting, cost that go into making money and tax evasions, it will create new problems. People will resort to internet hacking as a new way of robbery. Many people still do not have bank accounts so how would they be able to spend and receive money. This especially hurts the poor because how would donations be able to be transferred to them if they don’t have a bank account. Also people might be discouraged from spending money because cashless spending usually leads to overspending. This is because people don’t physically see how much they are spending like they do if they use cash. Lastly many people, including myself, like to use cash to pay for less expensive items because it is just easier and faster way of paying than using your credit or debit card. Also some things we use cash for would be hard to be replaced using cashless payments, like tipping people at a hotel for example. Though cashless spending is very useful today, our society still uses cash for many things, so people should be able to be given the choice of which they would like to use.
I believe that a cashless society would cause our society to fail. first, in a cashless society robbery will not decrease but merely transform into a new kind of crime. this new kind of crime would be in the form of computer crime such as hacking. just as Brinkmann said this constant fear of not knowing if your money is safe would cause people to constantly be checking on there accounts via electronics. secondly, it would be a lot harder for people to give out of the goodness of thier heart. the next time you walk down the streets of New York and you see a homeless man begging for money you wont be able to drop some change in his cup becuase all you will have is a credit card and a pin number, which of course is not help to him. these are the reasons why i believe that a cashless socitey is not good.
Physical money will not be leaving American society anytime in the foreseeable future. While a few advantages to a cashless society have been presented, the majority of these would be canceled out by a corresponding disadvantage of the disposal of paper money. It is probable that the elimination of cash would indeed lead to a decrease in counterfeiting and tax evasion. However, proposing that all transactions be done electronically would drastically increase the prominence of online hackers. Fraud as well as the theft of credit cards would also occur. As for the argument that a cashless society would eliminate the cost of producing physical money, transaction fees would even this out. Think of the gas stations that charge an increased price for those who pay with credit; in a cashless society, we would eventually see this additional charge incorporated into almost every good on the market. The elimination of physical money would also inhibit which citizens would be able to purchase things. I know that my Grandma is very opposed to the modernization of society; she does not own a credit card. Surely there are other senior citizens who also cannot grasp the concepts of the modern day and would not be able to correctly complete transactions in a cashless society. In addition, the homeless—many of whom do not have bank accounts—would also lack a means of completing transactions. One last group who would no longer be able to spend would be young children. I don’t think any parent would want to entrust a child with a small piece of plastic which would allow a potential thief to gain access to all of their financial assets.
I believe that a cashless society is doomed to fail. A society needs something that can be physically possessed to hold value. If we do not have anything to hold value in our society, we will only have an idea to trade. While in theory this may work, as it does work in situations today involving non-cash transactions, at least as the system works now, there is something to back up the digits on the screen. In a cashless society, we would have nothing to fall back on in the event that the idea of the digits was doubted.
Also, without this physical object, you lose the paper trail of your dollar. Crimes are less easy to track, as there is no longer any documentation to refer to for each individual dollar.
This is not to say that cash is perfect either. Our bills today are all based off of an idea themselves. There was a point when all currency in the United States was backed up by something that held numerical value. Those days are long gone, and we now live by nothing more than the unanimous idea that the paper in our hand has some sort of value. We see societies today turning towards a more technologically friendly economy. Just this past week, Canada stopped coining it’s penny, as it became too expensive to produce. HOWEVER, this did not stop all small digit purchases. While the government of Canada has urged producers and merchants to round their products to the nearest nickel, they still feel that non-cash transactions - such as those over the Internet - at prices that require pennies are ok.
Noelle I
I feel that transforming into a cashless society is ultimately inevitable taking into account our constant growing dependance on technology. However, I believe we should continue for as long as possible with the choice of the physical dollar. Without cash, making small transactions such as a weekly allowance, money for babysitting the neighbors, gratuity for a waitress, and other circumstances, would be a complete hassle. With a completely electronic money system, it will also be much easier for computer hackers to steal everything a person has worked for on an online account and there would be no cash back up plan. Looking at this from a typical employed seventeen year old view, having a debit card or credit card isn't even an option for some. At some banks, for example, TD bank (which might I add, isn't very convenient) doesn’t allow people under the age of eighteen to be a cardholder of their own account, which means in a society with no cash, there would be no way for some people to use their own hard earned money under their own name. Although from a more mature view, the bank is probably doing many minors a favor by doing this because it is much easier to blow through $200 without seeing any physical money switching hands than it is handing cash money over to another person. If there is no option for cash, people will spend more than expected just as the typical seventeen year old would. Although cash is important in a society, having a credit card or debit card is just as necessary. Without them, people would have to carry around a ton of cash (leading to theft) when making a large transactions. I feel that today’s money system is the most flexible and easiest we can have in today’s society by using both electronic money and cash interchangeably.
Despite its flaws, there is an inevitable movement to a cashless society. Just as calling someone on the phone is being replaced with tweeting or emailing or messaging them on facebook (or posting on a blog like this one), cash is being replaced by instant electronic transactions on smartphones, debit and credit cards, online purchases, and gift cards. This is due to society's tendency to move towards the easiest, fastest, most convenient method of doing things. Typing in a number, swiping a card, or pressing a few buttons is a lot more efficient than counting out pennies at the register. It will also be easier for the government, as they will have to pay less to produce currency. The resources such as trees, inks, and metals used in producing actual money have many other uses, and the government would put them into other products. Although the faults of a cashless society, such as the increased risk of identity theft, fraud, and information selling, are convincing, that won't stop society from pushing for a transition to electronic money. The same is true for online purchases, memberships, and services that require credit card and social security numbers, birth dates, adresses, names, and other personal information; all of it can easily be accessed, and is sometimes even sold to third parties. But that doesn't stop consumers from making these electronic transactions. They take the risk and do it anyway because it is more convenient for them. Also, a cshless society has the potenital to help the economy; if wealth is just a number, it seems less important, and consumers are more likely to spend it instead of save it because they can't see how much tangible money they have. Although it has its flaws, a cashless society is inevitable. Whether or not it is a good decision can only be evaluated after it happens.
Prady M Period 7
I don't see a reason that we still need cash. Cash is quickly becoming an antiquated part of society that is more of a hassle than anything. Cash can easily be stolen because anyone can use it. A more personalized form of currency should develop in the future that does not have to be tangible. No one will steal something that they can not use. Moreover, this potentially has an added benefit to the economy because it will start a cycle of overspending. Because nothing is tangible, people will feel free to purchase whatever they want which helps the economy. It might hurt individuals, but with an electronic currency, they could keep better records of their transactions so it is up to them. I feel though that most people will not do this and only the intelligent will save themselves while the less intelligent incur large debts and go bankrupt. FISCAL DARWINISM, SHUN THE LESS INTELLIGENT
Kevin Shannon
I believe physical cash is here to stay for a long time. When you give up all physical money and switch to electronic money, you are giving up a huge freedom. With cash, you can be discrete as you want, with no government intervention in whatever purpose you are making. Also what happens if somebody crashes the electronic bank's system? Does everyone's money just get forgotten? As well as the fact that people could have their money stolen by hackers.
i think a cashless society would work in a perfect world and seems rather convenient, but it cannot be done in the society we live in. A cashless society would bring about way more problems than benefits. Complex bartering issues would be a reoccuring theme and honestly, very difficult to deal with. A system that doesn't have "cash" would have to base financial transactions heavily off of personal value/beliefs. It would make things very hard on--lets say--a farmer in an urban society, because the farmer is now forced to go out and search/barter with someone in order to recieve a profit for his good. Now, take the farmer's situation and multiply it with all the other producers who are now forced to go out and search just to make a profit...really more of a trade. Eliminating cash from a society brings around the other problem of what you are going to replace it with? Although many economists might claim they have a better idea, if one looks at some of the examples we have been given as replacements, it is almost impossible to effectively replace money. Resources are either too limited, too readily available, not portable, etc. Nothing is quite as useful as physical currency. Lastly, i agree with Brinkmann when he stated that a cashless society does not mean one without crime, because, in my opinion, i think a cashless society would bring about multiple ethical and legal issues. Computer hacking and identity theft would be much more common and have to be regulated, but with technology rapidly advancing, i find that hard to control. Bottom line, if we, as a society, want to function to the bnest of our ability, cash needs to remain in our economic system for a long time.
Taryn D.
While our society today exhibits symptoms of becoming cashless, such as online shopping, credit cards, direct deposit, etc., I do not see the demise of physical currency any time soon. The most prominent concern in a cashless society would likely be hackers; if one were to break into your account, they would have access to all of your funds and personal information. Also, if someone fails to check their account regularly, it would be easy to overspend. Contributing to the overspending would be the extra fee associated with using a credit card. In addition, technology is not always reliable. In an event such as Hurricane Sandy in a cashless society, many would be left without a means of purchasing necessary goods. A purely electronic system of transferring wealth would also pose a problem for people who have no bank account, such as the homeless. The absence of physical currency would make it near impossible for them to survive. Another group that could be hurt by a cashless society is small business owners. The absence of physical currency would mean an added expense for them. In conclusion, while there are some benefits of doing away with cash, they are outweighed by the drawbacks.
I'm sort of taking an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy regarding eliminating cash and going completely electronic. I certainly understand the benefits of transferring our money to computers--limiting large scale crime, cutting printing costs (to virtually zero), and eliminating a large source of pathogens--but cash is part of our culture. Why would I want to go through the hassle of taking out a credit or debit card just to pay for my cup of coffee? People may be less inclined to give things like small impulse donations, or traditions like allowances may never exist to teach our youth about the value of money. Some may never know the feeling of satisfaction that one experiences when holding money one earned; people may have more large impulse purchases as there is a difference between holding tangible money and spending it and paying with money in some account somewhere. Society would eventually misunderstand what money actually is because to them its just some value of a bank account. I don't want to put my faith in digits on a computer screen; I personally want something concrete that insures my wealth and drives my desire to earn.
In my opinion, I think society will stay with cash. While it may seem like your money is safer in a bank where it can't be taken from you the prevalence of cyber crime will increase probably small at first with people try to imitate the movie office space, but will most likely become a serious concern. Another reason is convenience. Some people don't want to have to take things electronically like people being paid off the books, private sellers, and those who just want anonymity. Privacy would be less, and as we've seen most people don't like privacy infringed upon. The last reason is because people may save more or overspend and get themselves into debt. This has happened to people before where they overcharge and can not pay back their debt.
While a cashless society may seem enticing to many people, it is simply not practical. Yes, electronic transactions are much easier and efficient than fumbling through your wallet, but could you really eliminate tangible cash? Sure, robbery crime rates may decrease, but what about identity fraud? Technology is expanding at an alarming rate, and if money were 100% electronic I would not feel secure. Hackers are always finding ways to beat the system, and this would only cause more crime. Also, what would happen if there was some sort of failure in the system? Would everything simply disappear?Without a physical dollar, I cannot be certain that my money will always be there. Also, how can we assume that every person in America, including the elderly, will simply agree to this idea? Introducing a change as great as this would hurt people who are not proficient in technology. Along with all of this, what would happen in the case of a power outage? A simple mishap like this eliminates any possible transactions and demonstrates why this would not work in society.
Yes, I do believe the world will become a completely cashless society one day. Humans throughout history have always found ways of making their lives easier through the advancement of technology. Ironically, humans once made cash to make their lives easier, and one day they will inevitably get rid of it, to once again make their lives easier. However, I do not see this change happening in our immediate future. This transition will require better technology and cybersecurity, along with the widespread use of smartphones. This is just not the case at this moment in time as we have senior citizens along with a good portion of the baby boomers who are just not technologically savvy enough to handle a smartphone. A cashless society becomes much more realistic when my generation becomes senior citizens as society will have become much more accustomed to smartphones by that time.
A cashless society poses a few threats though. A completely cashless society makes stealing money along with committing fraud and identity theft easier. The global economy also becomes much more vulnerable to a terrorist attack on the internet.
Frank I.
Obviously, electronic payment has become a prevalent facet to the functioning of our society today; however, the root usage of physical money is still important with its own advantages that cannot be replaced by data currency. While it may seem that the transfer of digital currency is faster, more reliable, and simpler, that would not always be the case. As our country has in fact moved towards a more technological payment method with credit cards, debits cards, and even EBT cards (which sometimes include a debit method within them), there have been great decreases in the use of cash, but it does not change the speed of small transactions that would be much easier with physical money. As a cashier at Waldbaum’s, (with honestly little training or time at the register itself), I have already made many assumptions on this matter with my own personal experiences. The greatest disadvantage that not only refutes the power of electronic payment over physical currency, but contradicts the idea that it is more efficient and profitable, is the fact that consumers don’t always realize how much they are spending when they can’t have a visual account. Physical currency becomes a constant reminder to how much a consumer is spending as it depletes in their wallet. I constantly fall into circumstances where I ring up a customer’s entire order of over 50 items and when they reach in their pocket to pull out a card of some sort to pay, it gets declined and the entire process is put to a halt. Everyone behind that customer must now wait for the unfortunate customer who hasn’t realized that they are out of money or exceeded their credit limit to find another method to pay, or for some reason, stall as long as possible to make a deal or only take some crucial items and put back the others which takes even more time to linger on. With cash however, this problem would be solved entirely because the customer would know how much they had at the beginning to spend and be aware with what expenditures they can afford. Although this is a specific case, the idea that cash is more simplistic compared to the overbearing burden of constantly checking on an electronic table to see how much money is available can be placed into most any situation, unless that is the transaction happens to be extremely large in which an electronic payment would be much more necessary to avoid the abundant amount of physical currency needed.
Bryan W.
Although I do not think that a change to a cashless society will happen anytime soon, I believe that a cashless society would work better than one that uses cash. When we transfer money from one account to another, there is no physical exchange of money, it is an exchange of a value. Having a cashless society would reduce the risk of money being damaged or stolen while acting in the same way that cash was being used. It would be a quicker and more efficient means of exchange. Cash is expensive to manufacture, store and secure. A real life example of using a cashless currency occurred in Brazil during the 1990's. They were experiencing a hyperinflation with an 80% inflation rate each month. In order to solve this problem, four economist's came up with the idea of creating a fake currency known as the URV (Unit of Real Value). Their wages, taxes and prices were all listed in URV's and the only thing that changed was how much their regular currency was in URV's. As a result of this change, the people thought of the URV as their new currency. Eventually the hyperinflation ended and prices began to stabilize. What this all proved was that there is not a need for cash, only a means for exchange. A society without cash is not perfect because people will be exposed to hackers , yet that still occurs in a society filled with cash. I believe that our society should take a few steps forward by becoming a cashless society.
Kristal S. (Period 6)
Although a cashless society certainly holds a lot of potential, there are many issues that must be addressed before we could ever completely get rid of physical money. For example, it is necessary to insure that everyone has access to bank accounts and methods of payment regardless of their income levels. In addition, when making transactions, consumers are often charged a fee, which makes spending unappealing to some. At the moment, credit seems to play a crucial part in the banking system, and it may serve as a downfall for the lower class and impoverished. The basis of a cashless society seems to rest on technological advancements; however, regardless of the progress made and the improvement of security measures, there will always be skilled hackers who can steal identities and commit crimes. There is also a lot of room for human error when managing consumer transactions, and mistakes may result in unintended consequences that cannot be easily dealt with. Besides the complications behind managing the flow of money, there is also a privacy concern. Should all sales be tracked and recorded? Should only certain sales be noted? And if so, how to we determine what should be monitored and what should not? Is this a violation of a person's right to privacy? While there are many proposed ideas formulated to address current concerns, these ideas have yet to be tested on a full scale, therefore putting them to use is extremely risky and potentially disastrous. There are still many points in a cashless society that are vague, and as a result, getting rid of physical money would be a poor decision for our society as it currently stands today.
Technology has progressed so much that it is forever integrated into our society. However, technology is not available to all citizens of the United States. Not everyone has internet access and not everyone can afford a cellphone. For this reason, our society cannot become cashless and rather, an option between the two should be offered. Also, increased online transactions will provide more opportunity for hackers to infiltrate accounts and leak personal information.
Andrew Kallinikos Period 6
As we move further and further into the age of technology, the prospect of a cashless society comes into question. I believe that a cashless society could not work in any way, especially with the way our society currently operates. A cashless society would require the use of a network (a form of the internet) that could handle the constant transactions, be free, and also be 100% reliable and safe. That is why paper money will always have a place in our society. Everyday, people find themselves unable to order something online due to website malfunctions or the internet being out. Also, in the case of emergency where power is out, people would not be able to purchase goods and services, and would therefore need to rely on some form of physical medium to exchange for the time being until the system could be restored. Although it would be more convenient to carry around all your money on a single device, it also leads people to spend more and not realize what they have. I am more likely to buy something more expensive with a debit card because I physically can’t see the money I spent being taken away from me. However, when I pay cash I am more reluctant to spend unnecessarily, because I see a portion of what I have obtained being taken away. In conclusion I believe that a totally cashless society could never work, however, incorporating the best of both worlds is what we should continue to do.
Victoria L. (Period 7)
As we near, or live, in the technological age, I feel it is inevitable that many aspects of society will be replaced by technology. However, I don’t feel that we necessarily should. Technology tends to be incredibly unreliable (as this is the second time I write this), data gets lost, and hackers steal information. In the case of a major technological fail, society would be trapped in a stand still with a complete lack of currency. For example, we experienced this recently with hurricane Sandy. Many facilities were unable to make any transactions because their systems didn’t have power. Theoretically, a lack of physical money may cause people to save more due to the fact that it’s more difficult to keep track of. However, there is the truth that just as many people under a completely technological system would spend more because the money itself would feel significantly less ‘real’, and every transaction would appear less important in overall income.
Are we Past Cash?
With exciting new technology, such as square- which was not mentioned in any of the articles, but is featured in the blog post picture- NFC, Google Wallet, and Google Checkout, cash is becoming ever more fleeting. However, the “experts” put various dates on the death of cash, this decade, 100 years, 200 years, never. So what’s the deal? Well there are two sides.
You Can’t Kill Cash
Cash is a niche innovation, as old as the Romans, we use it primarily for individual - individual transactions: gratuities, paying street vendors, baby sitters, basically anyone when owe a set value and who can’t accept cash. Additionally, cash is extremely hard to track (impossible really) which is useful for: shameful purchases, criminal activities, and librarians. While production of $5 bills is the lowests its been in 30 years, and no $10 were minted last year, and currency in circulation represents only 2.5% of all money in the economy, cash is impossibly to kill now. Well at least until your babysiter starts accepting Amex, and the 4-6% fee associated with Amex. Not likely to happen in the near future. Also, cash transactions are free, there is no middle man taking 1%, yet there are also no awards to be reaped either.
Kill it With Fire!!
Mortgauges, loans, interest-bearing accounts, health insurance, home insurance, college savings - what’s the pattern? All these services are conducted in 1s and 0s not paper and coin. And as more and more tecnhologies like, paypal, ezpass, square, nfc, and google wallet (specialized nfc), are brought to market, less and less cash will remain in circulation. Howeer, these all have negatives as well. I run my own business, and get slammed by an 11% commision of Paypal on transactions under $5. So unless you are making bigger deals than a lemonade stand, these technologies really eat into profit. So while digital transactions - especially between individuals - dramatically innovate and expand, cash becomes more and more useless.
Also, imagine a magical world without change.. making or giving out... magical...
So....
So, for now cash remains in our economy, but one day, there will cease a need for it. Until transactions cut out the middleman, criminals figure out a way to use digital currency without being tracked, and it becomes unhackable (unlikely), cash will sit comfortably in its niche.
ps. Seriously 11% Elon Musk? Really...
I support the use of cash and do not agree with supporting an "intangible" currency system where everything I buy can be easily traced back to me. It's not that i have anything to hide but it is nice to know my purchases are not being monitored eveytime I go to the store. I feel people would be discouraged from making purchases as simple as a pack of gum because paying for it would be a hassle. If people are discouraged from buying things the economy will not expand and be hurt in the long run. Crime as stated in the article would not decrease but possibly increase by hacking into accounts and transfering money from your account to an unsecure other file, under the hackers or theifs file. Also what if you couldnt afford to own an account and were pour, would you have to trade things to get food? you can no longer scrouge around for change or beg for dollar bills because they no longer exist. The homeless or unemployed would no longer be able to live and get a meal in a simple manner causing them to starve and possibly die quicker. What if that were you one day? I dont think you'd want to die because we go on an invisible form of currency.
I support the use of cash and do not agree with supporting an "intangible" currency system where everything I buy can be easily traced back to me. It's not that i have anything to hide but it is nice to know my purchases are not being monitored eveytime I go to the store. I feel people would be discouraged from making purchases as simple as a pack of gum because paying for it would be a hassle. If people are discouraged from buying things the economy will not expand and be hurt in the long run. Crime as stated in the article would not decrease but possibly increase by hacking into accounts and transfering money from your account to an unsecure other file, under the hackers or theifs file. Also what if you couldnt afford to own an account and were pour, would you have to trade things to get food? you can no longer scrouge around for change or beg for dollar bills because they no longer exist. The homeless or unemployed would no longer be able to live and get a meal in a simple manner causing them to starve and possibly die quicker. What if that were you one day? I dont think you'd want to die because we go on an invisible form of currency.
Adam Period 6
I think an entirely cashless society would not be a great idea. First of all, as the world becomes more and more electronic, people are becoming better and better at internet fraud and hackers and becoming more prevelent. Having all of our money on some interent database could never be perfectly secure and there would always be the risk of a hacker taking all of your money. In addition, because of the nature of the internet these hackers could be anywhere in the world, which would make tracking them impossible and makes it more likely for these crimes to happen. Another reason why a cashless society would be a bad idea is that there are too many legal and illegal transactions that have to occur with physical money. One such transactions is when people work of the books, sure not paying taxes is problematic to society but that money these off the book workers have goes right back into the economy. If you take away physical money, you take away many of these transactions and hurt the economy.
Trying to imagine a world without cash seems unbelievable. Paying for everything with a debit card or credit card seems even more unusual. Although David Wolman made some good points against cash, I have to disagree with his beliefs that eliminating cash would be a good thing. Yes cash is germy and expensive to print and inspect but it has it benefits. Cash is seamlessly universal, and credit cards aren’t. By eliminating all cash, it will isolate countries that still have cash and third world counties. Wolman claims that it will reduce poverty in these third world counties but most of these countries don’t even have plumbing, how are they going to have the technology for credit card machines? Brinkman makes a good point about the homeless. In order to have a credit card, you need a bank account. The homeless man down the street most likely doesn’t have a bank account, so how are you going to give him any money if you don’t have any cash. In both articles they talk about crime. Wolman believes that it will reduce crime, but I feel that it will increase it. Although it makes buying things from the black market harder, it will increase fraud and identity theft. It is easy for internet hackers to break into accounts and get your credit numbers and back account information.
The future of money is no longer in cash, but will be a mix of some electronic currency and an advanced form of paper currency, which would go hand in hand and have the same value. This would expand on our already streamlined system used for most purchases throughout the day. For example, daily meals, gasoline, and grocery shopping would be completed using an electronic currency—or the electronic transfer of currency—and other purchases/money transfers such as personal sales or gifts would be completed via a paper currency. Also, one could choose to change the paper currency into electronic currency or vice versa depending on their needs. To conclude, a complete conversion to electronic currency would eliminate many markets which currently use cash and may leave people at the will of large corporations whom hold their moneys. And, a complete system of cash only transfers would put be like society taking a step backwards. Therefore the solution to the money issue of the near future is a streamlined(no-fee) system of electronic currency and also an option for cash.
I think that a cashless society wouldn't be necessarily an optimal society and that a combination of the two systems would make the most sense. Crime wouldn't be abolished in a cashless society-- instead, crime would just adapt. Idenitiy theft would be more of a problem than ever, for example. However, a system using electronic currency has its benefits as well, for there would be reduced prices in regard to actually producing paper money and coins, and someone physically stealing your money would be impossible. Overall, there needs to be a combination of the two.
Ashley P (period 7)
A cashless society may seem appealing, however I do not believe it is the best alternative for our society. There are consequences that exist with entrusting technology for all of society's transactions. Only having electronic methods of monetary transactions may not be as secure as most people would hope hence leading to an increase in identity theft. If society was cashless and everything was done through electronics it would make the effects of identity theft much worse and would make recovery much more difficult if all of a person's wealth was saved through electronics. Furthermore if there was any catastrophic event that shutdown technology, would any saved funds just disappear? How would they be recovered? Lastly, there would be very little privacy in a cashless society. Online bank accounts are monitored and thus would track every dime removed from the account and what the money would be spent on. I believe things should remain the same and continue using a physical dollar.
I agree with David Wolman and the article he has written because technology is the new. It will continue to grow and everything behind it will need to follow in order to remain alive and of value to society. This holds true for money amongst many other things. Right now we're wasting money manufacturing and distributing paper bill. I say waste because in retrospect, what is "money"? It is a piece of paper or metal with fancy designs on it; that is all. They have no legitimate value and truly are a hassle as opposed to using it electronically. No money would be spent in distribution and manufacturing of money, which would greatly benefit our economy at this point in time. Another benefit of electronic mail is there is no way to counterfeit money; if the money is there in the account then it is there and if not then its not. There are no grey areas. People may argue that your accounts can be hacked, but in reality, anybody can reach into someone's pocket and take a wallet. A lot less people can hack accounts. Also, it's much easier for police to trace someone hacking into an account rather than chase someone down.
Ryan D.
I do not feel that cash is on its way out because there aren't any real benefits to a cashless society. As Martin Brinkmann said, crimes would shift from robbery to Internet hacking and this would require you to check your accounts more often. This would also lead to the hassle of keeping a detailed record of all of your transactions. A cashless society may encourage people to overspend and increase individual debt. People already overspend with their credit cards and this would only continue in a cashless society. It would be nearly impossible to transfer cash to others that don't have bank account. Everyone's right to privacy would be given up because all of their transactions would be recorded. A cashless society only leads to a less flexible society.
Judy Kim
Judy K.
I believe that spending becomes much more easily manageable with cards than with cash. Services such as online banking, monthly statements and etc. make purchases more convenient. Also, cash is limited to a certain types of purchases such as making small purchases while cards can be used for all types of purchases. For example, online shopping would not exist without cards. In addition, tasks such as transferring money to and from other people are hugely facilitated by the use of cards. Although some argue that the use of cards can be dangerous because of the potential of identity theft, I believe that as long as there are strict regulations regarding the use of cards and technology to prevent such frauds, using cards will only be beneficial to the society. In addition, as David Wolman said, physical money is “germy” and expensive to manufacture. Overall, I think that cash should and will be replaced by cards in the future.
Post a Comment