How do Cashless Societies Cope with this Plot Twist

[1Referee]

I believe in same outcome, tokenization. What is jp Morgan doing right now? Fiat will disappear, I don`t doubt in that, but what is future bringing for all of us in uncertain.

Tokenized fiat is still fiat. It all comes down to who's backing it, and it's still the government with a bag of potatoes and a pair of stinky socks. JPM's 'coin' is just a value transfer tool for their clients for now, but if they have serious plans to have it become an actual currency-like unit that the average joes can use to pay for things, the situation will obviously change.

Now we have decentralized cryptocurrencies. What will stop someone to use anonymous zcash and force him to use some USDT or some other stable coin, government coin, corporation coin? We are entering in specific era, what will happen nobody can say, but war between centralized and decentralized sector is inevitable.

I don't think there needs to be a war. If there is a war, then it's more something that thrives on social media rather than it being an actual real world issue. Governments still have the best position within the currency game they created themselves, and I don't see that change with the mass having more faith in fiat than in crypto. Convenience plays an important role too of course.

[1714099830]

1714099830

[1714099830]

1714099830

[BitHodler]

Centralized electronic payment processors such as Visa, Mastercard and co raising their fees is the least of the problems, the big problem would be the loss of financial privacy.

The loss of privacy is only a problem if you cared enough about it before the shift, which doesn't apply to most of the people. If they cared about privacy in general, they wouldn't be so carelessly sharing data on social media.

I even dare to say that people's privacy is already compromised by financial institutions and social media platforms. They know what interests you, what you buy, what you eat, and so forth. What's there to lose for people?

The damage is already done without people knowing, and when they finally do start to care they will realize it's too late already. People will swallow everything that they are subjected to. It has been like that for decades, no reason to expect things to change.

[cellard]

Centralized electronic payment processors such as Visa, Mastercard and co raising their fees is the least of the problems, the big problem would be the loss of financial privacy.

The loss of privacy is only a problem if you cared enough about it before the shift, which doesn't apply to most of the people. If they cared about privacy in general, they wouldn't be so carelessly sharing data on social media.

I even dare to say that people's privacy is already compromised by financial institutions and social media platforms. They know what interests you, what you buy, what you eat, and so forth. What's there to lose for people?

The damage is already done without people knowing, and when they finally do start to care they will realize it's too late already. People will swallow everything that they are subjected to. It has been like that for decades, no reason to expect things to change.

People isn't really aware of the impact that 0% of financial privacy will have on their lives (and that is exactly what you get with no physical cash). In many countries people are surviving thanks to not paying a certain cut of taxes (so called underground economy). All of these people will have to look for alternatives to make it.

Then there's drugs, prostitution, and any of the common goods and services that may be embarrassing to have on a record.

So there's trillions in there alone, and that is beside the store of wealth use case which is also potentially worth trillions.

[merchantofzeny]

If it's completely cashless then there's no way to go around the fees aside from using cryptos, assuming the government and banks haven't made it illegal yet. Would be funny and depressing if people would have to resort to bartering like inmate.

If you think about it, it only happens that our prison is larger than theirs.

This is exactly why central banks have now changed their minds about cashless societies.

For example Sweden was going cashless (with shops refusing to accept cash). But the Swedish central bank stepped in:

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/10/26/nirp-fades-swedens-central-bank-makes-u-turn-on-cashless-society/

Sweden’s Riksbank has become the first central bank in the 21st century to take concrete measures to ensure that cash does not disappear as a means of payment from the financial system. To that end, the Riksbank proposes, in a document published on its website, to make it mandatory for all banks and financial institutions to offer cash services.

Good that they actually thought about this. Completely cashless would give banks more power than they already have now.

[aoluain]

Centralized electronic payment processors such as Visa, Mastercard and co raising their fees is the least of the problems, the big problem would be the loss of financial privacy.

Bitcoin would obviously pump massively at the news of relevant countries going cashless. However the rise of demand for block space would raise Bitcoin fees as well, so second layer solutions must be ready by then to profit from the perfect storm.

Privacy is a big yhing. Paying for anything in cash means the transaction
is untraceable. Cash is on the way out, in my country it is difficult to pay
utilities like, electricity, phone, internet, waste collection, t.v. payment is widely
accepted or preferred by card or through the bank.

I would imagine card transaction fees would rise but not by 2000%, that is
just unsustainable. At the moment with "tap and go" card payments i can
buy a bottle of water for €1 and pay with card and walk away within 20
seconds, high fees for these payments wont work.

There really is no competition, in Europe its either Visa or Mastercard, not
a great start for competition.

[cellard]

Centralized electronic payment processors such as Visa, Mastercard and co raising their fees is the least of the problems, the big problem would be the loss of financial privacy.

Bitcoin would obviously pump massively at the news of relevant countries going cashless. However the rise of demand for block space would raise Bitcoin fees as well, so second layer solutions must be ready by then to profit from the perfect storm.

Privacy is a big yhing. Paying for anything in cash means the transaction
is untraceable. Cash is on the way out, in my country it is difficult to pay
utilities like, electricity, phone, internet, waste collection, t.v. payment is widely
accepted or preferred by card or through the bank.

I would imagine card transaction fees would rise but not by 2000%, that is
just unsustainable. At the moment with "tap and go" card payments i can
buy a bottle of water for €1 and pay with card and walk away within 20
seconds, high fees for these payments wont work.

There really is no competition, in Europe its either Visa or Mastercard, not
a great start for competition.

It seems is also a cultural thing. Some countries are more prone to not using cash. Apparently most transactions are already over phone already in Sweden, while in other countries like Portugal or Italy cash is still used a lot in everyday shopping.

But nonetheless I claim the necessity for cash will be evident the very moment it's completely unavailable for the general public, even on those countries which on the surface don't care about having financial privacy.

Banning of cash is objectively a super bullish fundamental for Bitcoin.

[bangkit tri]

Centralized electronic payment processors such as Visa, Mastercard and co raising their fees is the least of the problems, the big problem would be the loss of financial privacy.

Bitcoin would obviously pump massively at the news of relevant countries going cashless. However the rise of demand for block space would raise Bitcoin fees as well, so second layer solutions must be ready by then to profit from the perfect storm.

Privacy is a big yhing. Paying for anything in cash means the transaction
is untraceable. Cash is on the way out, in my country it is difficult to pay
utilities like, electricity, phone, internet, waste collection, t.v. payment is widely
accepted or preferred by card or through the bank.

I would imagine card transaction fees would rise but not by 2000%, that is
just unsustainable. At the moment with "tap and go" card payments i can
buy a bottle of water for €1 and pay with card and walk away within 20
seconds, high fees for these payments wont work.

There really is no competition, in Europe its either Visa or Mastercard, not
a great start for competition.

It seems is also a cultural thing. Some countries are more prone to not using cash. Apparently most transactions are already over phone already in Sweden, while in other countries like Portugal or Italy cash is still used a lot in everyday shopping.

But nonetheless I claim the necessity for cash will be evident the very moment it's completely unavailable for the general public, even on those countries which on the surface don't care about having financial privacy.

Banning of cash is objectively a super bullish fundamental for Bitcoin.

if the ban is carried out simultaneously, of course the bitcoiners will now prosper. but I don't think it's that easy for now. only certain countries may be able to implement it at this time

[orions.belt19]

Cashless society is a nightmare, not only privacy-wise, but also in other ways we can't currently imagine. I personally don't use credit cards, and if there was no way to buy something for cash, I would usually skip it. At the same time, I'm amazed how people around me opt in for credit cards, like it is something very fashionable and technologically advanced. I would like to see some common sense around me, but not seeing it, so I guess, that's the sad future that expects us no matter what country we live in.

The scenario you indicated is not only possible, but very probable. Further centralization and monopolization, not to mention more control over the lives of the individual members of the society. The fees are almost always absorbed by the consumers. I guess the consumers have no choice but to swallow the increased fees, or maybe, if crypto were widely adopted, switch to using crypto.

I agree, since I don't like depending on credit cards totally. This kind of scenario is not far from actually happening because there are some cities that have already adopted vast use of cards - such as in New Zealand. I've heard that they have been using cards for their payment transactions because it is preferred and used in most merchant stores. If such a problem would arise, I'm afraid that the people won't have much choice especially if cash would already be unavailable for use. I believe that during such case, the people would find other ways like using/switching to crypto. In fact, many have opted to invest in crypto because of their distrust in fiat and banks.

[senin]

This is another very strong argument that the cash of the states will always exist. If, for whatever reason, the state abolishes cash, in which I believe very little, then people will again switch to barter relations and the state will only lose from this.
At a time when non-cash forms of payment are only developing, and their number is growing, it is very strange to see an increase in transaction fees for their users. With increasing competition, the cost of such services should fall.
In any case, it will push people to use cryptocurrency.

[Mometaskers]

If this happens I can totally see people just engaging in an informal economy. They may get their pay from this "fiat" and try to exchange it for BTC and other alts.

If these are banned they might engage in bartering for a while, using the fiat to buy goods, until they gain a supply of crypto.

[stompix]

This is another very strong argument that the cash of the states will always exist. If, for whatever reason, the state abolishes cash, in which I believe very little, then people will again switch to barter relations and the state will only lose from this.

How is 60 or in some cases 80% of the population going to switch to barter?

The guys at customer services, IT, sales, sanitation, the police, the teachers, firefighters, how are they going to barter?
Hey, if you want this fire extinguished give me 20 apples and 10 spoons of coffee !! And if you want me to save your cat, that would be one pillow and two bowls of cheerios!

And why do you think that a barter system can't be taxed?
It was possible in Ancient Egypt, it will be possible now too.

[aad140386]

You asked a really good question. And this is really a problem that needs to be addressed. If we imagine that miners, having united in large pools, will somehow be able to raise the rates for transactions within the network, we will get a very bad situation. In addition, electronic money can not be as secure as paper money. And in case of problems with electricity in a particular region, we can get a collapse in all walks of life. Therefore, I believe that the transition from fiat currencies to cryptocurrencies should be gradual and painless.

[tonyja2017]

I do not appreciate this. A society that is too advanced and technology really makes me bored. When we come in contact with technology a lot, we need something different, that's fiat money.
I still like to spend with fiat money, although it's not as convenient as using a credit card but it's traditional. We cannot change the cultures that have existed for a long time.

[tadpole_bitfrog]

I quite like such a society. there will be no problem with counterfeit money anymore. In my country, every year there are more than 5 million dollars (converted) counterfeit money circulating in my country and many people suffer because of it.
some foreign guests were tricked by bad guys when the scammers always paid back the excess with fake money.
I like a society that uses credit cards or other payment methods. It is quite modern and fast.

[el kaka22]

Visa and Mastercard is playing their last hands, they are not going to be allowed to continue doing this forever, digital currencies and blockchain technology will not allow them to continue abusing the need for transactions using only them because they are the monopoly right now.

Smart people like us already left visa and mastercard methods (or even western union type stuff) to send money overseas and we are using any crypto (hell we even stopped bitcoin for a long time because fee got expensive and using altcoins) we want to send money to somewhere in the other side of the world. Why would anyone spend 2.5% or more on a transaction instead of using something less than 1 dollars ? Maybe mastercard is still the best option for paying something under 1 dollar I don't know (at least for bitcoin but not against stuff like nano) but its still a horrible horrible system that will be outdated quite soon.

[TheCoinGrabber]

Tokenized fiat is still fiat. It all comes down to who's backing it, and it's still the government with a bag of potatoes and a pair of stinky socks. JPM's 'coin' is just a value transfer tool for their clients for now, but if they have serious plans to have it become an actual currency-like unit that the average joes can use to pay for things, the situation will obviously change.

Should this happen and we can't use cryptos, we're screwed. We'd be at the mercy of not just these bankers but the government as well. It would be easy to just lock out our accounts and we can't do anything coz that is where all our money is. Not to mention the constant monitoring.

[South Park]

Cashless society is a nightmare, not only privacy-wise, but also in other ways we can't currently imagine. I personally don't use credit cards, and if there was no way to buy something for cash, I would usually skip it. At the same time, I'm amazed how people around me opt in for credit cards, like it is something very fashionable and technologically advanced. I would like to see some common sense around me, but not seeing it, so I guess, that's the sad future that expects us no matter what country we live in.

The scenario you indicated is not only possible, but very probable. Further centralization and monopolization, not to mention more control over the lives of the individual members of the society. The fees are almost always absorbed by the consumers. I guess the consumers have no choice but to swallow the increased fees, or maybe, if crypto were widely adopted, switch to using crypto.

Banks are pushing for the disappearance of cash precisely because of this, they want to have exclusive control of the money of the world, once they have that monopoly they could do anything they want and we will be powerless to go against them since they just could freeze your accounts and then you will starve and you will have no way to pay for your daily expenses, the scenario given by the op is precisely why we must support bitcoin because we cannot rely on the governments to do the right thing and stop that from happening.

[cryptjh]

I live in a near cashless Society, here the fees of local credit card or debit card are paid by the shopkeepers, bigger online companies don't charge fees either on card payment, but smaller online shops charges a small card fee of around $0.20 to 0.40 
But nothing are really free, so the shops just add their card expenses to there costumers in higer sale prices.

I don't think any government would allow private companies to take a 2% fees on every card transactions. But in the event it did happens new payment method would arrive, even blockchain payment cut be introduced.

[futile-resistance]

Not exclusively is a cashless society more remote away than some might suspect, we are really observing an expansion in the utilization of money everywhere throughout the world (and this isn't only a US marvel).

We will see some intriguing tidbits that in themselves make for provocative discourses, yet when we couple them with research on the ascent of the unreported economy (otherwise known as the underground economy) and the quantity of individuals who get some type of government help, we may discover hazardous outcomes coming about because of concealed motivating forces that work in unintended ways.

[ausbit]

This is another very strong argument that the cash of the states will always exist. If, for whatever reason, the state abolishes cash, in which I believe very little, then people will again switch to barter relations and the state will only lose from this.
At a time when non-cash forms of payment are only developing, and their number is growing, it is very strange to see an increase in transaction fees for their users. With increasing competition, the cost of such services should fall.
In any case, it will push people to use cryptocurrency.

I have this believed and of which I think a few people and independent ventures trust that dealing dodges accessible pay on the grounds that there is no trade of cash. This isn't valid, in any case; bargain trades are viewed as accessible pay by the IRS. The equitable estimation of merchandise and ventures traded must be incorporated into the salary of the two gatherings to the trade.