Is an economy without physical money safe for the poorest?

[michellee]

I am not sure about this because the safety factor is felt by individuals and it cannot be saying without feeling. and I think maybe it will safe for the poorest because they don't have to take the physical money to everywhere and we can feel safe. and it maybe reduces the criminal too because today there are many criminals that are happening in out there.

[cmaxwell]

the whole world has turned to a global village which made it possible for both the developed and the developing countries and even the under developed countries to transact with their economy even without the physical money. so the poor countries can still survive without physical money in their economy.

[mx667]

the whole world has turned to a global village which made it possible for both the developed and the developing countries and even the under developed countries to transact with their economy even without the physical money. so the poor countries can still survive without physical money in their economy.

I cannot say that it is good, but I cannot say that it is bad either. In my opinion, I guess the physical money will always be used by many people because not all humans can use digital money or have the access for it. But I believe that a lot of people in the village will survive and the physical money will always exist. In the other hand, I think digital money and cashless system can work with the people in a big city. But there is one thing that bugs me, what happen with those people who are poor but live in a big city. What if they cannot use the digital money like cryptocurrency ? I hope they will be fine and find away to face that.

[Fasunathan]

Imagine the situation in which we don't have any physical money and every currency is digitalized. The US dollar is now a token, the Japanese Yen is only in the network and the British pound is a fast-moving digital coin. What are the consequences of such an economy for the poorest of the population? Do you think that a few people can influence the digital wealth of people and wouldn't hackers be the best people to have as friends?

I am not an economist but in my point of view, economy of a country will be booming when the time that it will implement digital currency to the fullest. By that time also, i think there will be no more person that will be considered poor and all citizens of a country can gain access to digital currency. I think it is not happening in the near future because there a lot of things to be done for this digital currency to be implemented.

[Simplyield]

These are harmful not only for poor but also for rich because they can interconvert between them in moments

[snkneo]

Money is survival, so the poor will adapt. It might stop people from begging in the streets.

[francojon]

I don't know why money being digital would make it any worse for the poorer people. As long as they have inclusion in the system, the amount of money you have doesn't matter.

It will be not secure for any poor because it needs an internet connection for its operation which the poor doesn't have

That is beginning to change, most people now have a cell phone and an internet connection nowadays.

I think that is what the OP is pointing out, the possibility of the less favoured not being able to be included in the system and become even less "favoured" by the system.

[goldade]

This is a really interesting topic. Making all currency digital has its advantages and disadvantages.
If a country adopts digital currency, its a sign that it has a good economy. Another advantage is that petty stealing will be a thing of the past as only the individual has access to his wallet and there are safe private keys. This is can only happen in developed countries where everybody have access to the Internet.
This cannot be implemented in under-developed or developing countries because not everyone have access to the internet and this is a major disadvantage of digital currency as there will be no means of transaction for the poor that lack access to the internet.
I believe if a country can provide internet services for all its citizens, digital currency is a very good initiative.

[MarkThief]

Are you serious even before judging threat to poors we should first spread awareness vastly for promotion of btcs

[Best Dreams]

These are harmful not only for poor but also for rich because they can interconvert between them in moments

No it is not like this but I think it is opposite as it is good and profitable not only for poor but for rich as well. If rich people will use bitcoin they will be able to have savings with bitcoin they will be able to have saved money for the long time, but if we talk about poor’s they will be able to have some way to get money and to use it they will be able to spend and earn bitcoin at the same time, right now they cannot create money using physical money without investing it but with bitcoin they will be able to earn it and to use at so it is beneficial but not harmful.

[South Park]

I don't know why money being digital would make it any worse for the poorer people. As long as they have inclusion in the system, the amount of money you have doesn't matter.

It will be not secure for any poor because it needs an internet connection for its operation which the poor doesn't have

That is beginning to change, most people now have a cell phone and an internet connection nowadays.

Billions of people do not have access to water do you think people like that are going to have computers, smartphones and the electricity and internet to run them, if you can access this forum then the truth is that no matter how difficult your situation in your life you are better than hundreds of millions of people, so it is going to take a lot of time before all the economy becomes digital.

[MommyElsa]

Digital currency can bring a good change in the economy since most of the person are earning with bitcoin so why not consider it as a challenge to the poorest to earn as well.  It will be a great help for all of us.

[rockyboy]

Bitcoin will not harm anyone. Even the poorest can live a better life because of bitcoin. So i guess,  bitcoin is safe to the poorest, it will serve as their opportunity to earn too.

[Zlatangu]

I don't know why money being digital would make it any worse for the poorer people. As long as they have inclusion in the system, the amount of money you have doesn't matter.

It will be not secure for any poor because it needs an internet connection for its operation which the poor doesn't have

That is beginning to change, most people now have a cell phone and an internet connection nowadays.

As it is quoted the inclusion of every party to this system will neither bring more nor it would make the situation worse(spread the poorness ,in a bigger time frame).
And to respond to your question(accounting the time from the start till the fully implementation of the  system) : is this particular economy safer for poorer people? i am going to go with a yes, cuz people with less money tend to lose more slash what they earn or have, so if they are partially unable to reach those virtual numbers, they will be partially unable to spend or lose those numbers . Although with the pass of time everything should and will go to balance. The balance is where your average poor neighbor will find its way to spend and/or lose virtual money with means that will will surpass his/her knowledge. (fraud included)

[pecson134]

Imagine the situation in which we don't have any physical money and every currency is digitalized. The US dollar is now a token, the Japanese Yen is only in the network and the British pound is a fast-moving digital coin. What are the consequences of such an economy for the poorest of the population? Do you think that a few people can influence the digital wealth of people and wouldn't hackers be the best people to have as friends?

I think this would a problem especially from the lowest sector or the poorer people. Not all of us are knowledgeable when it comes to the things of the digital age or what we call as gadgets. This would become a disadvantage to those who stll doesn't learn about this kind of things and probably will become ground for abuse on them since they don't know even the basic.

[Sanu Simon]

That never supports the growth of the poorest, and people who have got skills to some extent and trying to make themselves show high belonging to middle class families were gonna use it more. Whether it is poor or rich, self interest and the trust gives profit.

[BeGoods]

the consequences will be that some people won't have access to internet , so they have no way to acquire coins. or even if they have access to internet and a computer , what if that computer crashes and they can't afford a new one , they will not be able to spend money. there are a lot of hurdles to get over to see such a economy become reality.

Therefore for the current era where technology and the Internet has not been too mainstream and used of course without physical money cannot be implemented at this time, there are still many poor people who have not been able to mind and ability to operate and use digital currency. this idea still takes a very long time to be able implemented

[Ngewex Yuk]

I'm not sure, as we know that most poor people can not read much less use the internet, they will be confused because they have to deal with something they do not understand, and certainly this is dangerous because it can make them gullible.

[Bitompel]

On the off chance that we discuss the needy individuals then clearly the utilization of physical cash is greatly improved choice than the digital currencies. This is on the grounds that they do not have the essential information required to enter this field and have no entrance to the offices like throughout the day ling web association and consistent power supply as a result of poor living conditions. So in such manner, the Btcs or other virtual resources are just to be utilized by the general population who have and kind of connection specifically with the created nation.

[jassanpary]

I'm not sure, as we know that most poor people can not read much less use the internet, they will be confused because they have to deal with something they do not understand, and certainly this is dangerous because it can make them gullible.

Can poor people use other than physical money like digital money, crypto's, they are not able to use because they might not able to  spend for purchasing mobiles and computers so for them it's is not possible, but the economy without physical money is definitely useful for the poorest.