Is a cashless society good for economy

[junder]

The point the OP made is correct that cashless payments can reduce theft or robbery but even so, we must consider the other side of the coin where risks still exist, such as fraud in online purchases whether it’s receiving the wrong item or fraudulent payments. However, if for example we visit a store and the only payment option is cashless the likelihood of such risks occurring is very low because the transaction takes place while we’re still on-site, face to face with the seller. I often find myself in this situation and I won’t leave until I’ve received confirmation of a successful digital transaction.

[DanWalker]

The World is shifting to the digital era, and many countries are advancing and advising their citizens to adopt it because it helps reduce the cost of printing their fiat currency. At least the money being saved from that can be used for something else.

A cashless society, has helped in reducing corruption in the civil service because of the payments made to anyone who is not a civil servant through mobile transfers, the government can have them known and traced. Or someone who got a stolen money in their bank account, their identity is easily.known

You are correct in arguing that switching to cashless payments will reduce corruption because transactions will be easier to track and trace. However, it should not be assumed that not using cash will help the government save a portion of the national budget.

Because instead of printing, they would have to invest in digital infrastructure, payment systems, and maintain them...That is believed to be far more expensive than the cost of printing and distributing physical currency.

[AmaGold70]

I think the introduction of cashless policy does not totally erase the use of physical cash to engage in transactions. Like you made mention of, not every individual can go cashless like those who don't even have bank account, and the old men, and women. For instance, apart from those who go to the super market to purchase items, if you find your self in a general market where everyone comes to buy, and sell you only see few persons going cashless, and if you must buy in such market you need to go with cash, more especially the petty traders.
I so much like cashless policy, before now, we use to hear about criminals attacking people, especially those who carry huge amount of money while on transit, today because of cashless policy criminals bullying traders, and other individuals has reduced drastically, and sometimes you can decide to make an order at the comfort of your home, then make transfer, and your goods or order would be brought to your destination, and is really a good one.

[Obulis]

One can be better than the other in different ways but the coexistence of cash and cashless is already great. Looking at the advantages of cashless and the shortcomings of cashless, there's need to improve the obvious disadvantages of cashless policy. In some country, the experiences is helpless whereby it's major cities even talkless of rural areas are still in lack of stable network connection making increasing cashless economy more difficult but in some countries cashless transaction has so spread that barrier like network connection can't be a problem in the major cities except for known reason (maintenance) etc. cashless transaction should spread but it's coexistence with cash is fine.

[passwordnow]

I think the introduction of cashless policy does not totally erase the use of physical cash to engage in transactions.

Yes, that doesn't remove the use of physical cash. Because even in countries with advancement, most transactions happen in cashless and their respective app wallets but, there's still the consideration for the people who are not using it often. There are a lot of good concerns why some governments are pushing for a 100% cashless society and that has been opened during the pandemic. There won't be any physical cash contact to each other and that will avoid the containment of virus through the fiat itself. Another one is about saving paper and the trees that will be used for generation of the cash.

[Minor Miner]

One can be better than the other in different ways but the coexistence of cash and cashless is already great. Looking at the advantages of cashless and the shortcomings of cashless, there's need to improve the obvious disadvantages of cashless policy. In some country, the experiences is helpless whereby it's major cities even talkless of rural areas are still in lack of stable network connection making increasing cashless economy more difficult but in some countries cashless transaction has so spread that barrier like network connection can't be a problem in the major cities except for known reason (maintenance) etc. cashless transaction should spread but it's coexistence with cash is fine.

We are moving towards a cashless world, but I bet cash will not be completely eliminated in any country. The government will always maintain a certain amount of cash in the economy to ensure the flexibility of the financial system. Because although digital systems are more convenient and superior, they also have drawbacks, and the government understands that better than anyone.

They would never allow the economy to depend on a single system. That would mean putting themselves at risk.

[reagansimms]

Overall, while a cashless society can improve transparency and efficiency, it also brings up important concerns about privacy, security, and accessibility. I am ok with hybrid. Which one would you choose ?

I strongly agree with the hybrid system and will continue to support it because it is the most realistic and inclusive at this time, combining digital efficiency with cash accessibility. In my opinion, this system is ideal because it is universally inclusive, providing freedom of transactions for the general public, especially those who are not yet familiar with technology, such as the elderly or those living in areas with limited internet connections. Its flexibility is very noticeable to the general public and no matter where they live, in other words, the hybrid system is able to bridge the progress of the modern economy without leaving behind any group of people.

[Muba20]

A cashless society is one where payments are made through debit cards, credit cards, or mobile apps instead of physical cash. This makes transactions easier to track, which helps reduce tax evasion and hidden income. With less cash in circulation, theft and robbery also tend to decrease. Payments become faster and more convenient, and there’s no need to carry cash everywhere.

However, there are drawbacks to consider. In a cashless system, banks and the government can monitor every transaction, which raises privacy concerns. There’s also the risk of hacking and data breaches that could expose personal information. Additionally, reliable internet is essential, so elderly people, unskilled laborers, and those without bank accounts may find it difficult to adapt.

Overall, while a cashless society can improve transparency and efficiency, it also brings up important concerns about privacy, security, and accessibility. I am ok with hybrid. Which one would you choose ?

Though a cashless society is good for the economy in some ways, I don't think it would be safe if it were completely cashless. I'm not denying the benefits of the current digital payment system. The current digital payment system makes transactions faster, business settlements easier, and the risk of carrying large amounts of cash is reduced. But when cash is completely eliminated, those who are elderly people, rural users, day laborers, unbanked people, or those who don't have reliable internet or Android phones may fall behind in this cashless system. Because there is no guarantee that everyone will be able to use digital payments equally.

[iv4n]

However, there are drawbacks to consider. In a cashless system, banks and the government can monitor every transaction, which raises privacy concerns. There’s also the risk of hacking and data breaches that could expose personal information.

Well, you are right. But there's something more important... access to your own money. In a cashless system, banks & government can freeze your account and block your access! They can even take your money through taxes, fines, fees, or whatever... It's all "regulated", they can freeze your account, or/and take your money... you will just get the notification about what happened.

So "be your own bank"...

[Porfirii]

Overall, while a cashless society can improve transparency and efficiency, it also brings up important concerns about privacy, security, and accessibility. I am ok with hybrid. Which one would you choose ?

If you look at the advanced ones, you will see that most of the citizens are paying through mobile app or various cards Because as the state becomes more advanced, it will move towards technology and the use of cash will decrease.The States that still use paper money, they will not use paper money in the future. You look at China, they use mobile banking even in rural areas, they don't accept cash. Interestingly, beggars also accept online money. There are many advantages to online transactions, especially quick and hassle-free payments. But I use both cash and online money. But in my state mobile banking is used in all regions or everywhere.

I live in a so called advanced country and one of the mains reasons why the government is encouraging the use of digital means of payments is because of the millions spent in minting that could be saved or invested in other basic services such as education or health. According to the U.S. Mint annual report, the cost is increasing.

But that is the same argument they use to propose that supermarket receipts no longer be printed on paper but sent to your email. Saving on paper would be good for both the environment and the pockets of large retail chains, but it is a risk vector in terms of data protection (a series of consumption patterns could be associated in an individualised way and exploit or sell this information, at the expense of the consumer). The same argument could be used to pay for everything by card.

[Dreadboost]

I do prefer the cashless economy,  because it makes transactions easier and also safes you the worries of carry cash around,  although it has its on flaws as you have mentioned,  which includes privacy of datas, the older generations, laborers and those that don't have a bank account. In my country we use the both system, so I won't really say that we are completely cashless, but people are beginning to get aware of it , but we still have a lot of people that still don't trust it, so they prefer cash transactions, which totally understandable. They nit be conversant of this method, or they don't even trust the process, so I still suggest that it will be better for a country to use both of them.

[Shishir99]

Also in developing countries and also in underdeveloped countries, but cash may still remain their primary means of payment. In my country, cashless is now very common but my country is under the category of the developing countries.

Yep, but don't you think it will become harder for people who don't have smartphones and live in places where internet connectivity is unstable? I think about these people, who live in remote villages, and they will have to use smartphones to pay for their daily needs. I think these places will still remain cash-friendly, while the cashless system will still be available. In my country, expensive malls and shops accept card payment for a long time now. However, some mobile bankings already getting popular here.

But I am afraid about people who does not have smartphones. Even if some of them have it, they don't know how to trasnfer the funds. They often ask the shopkeepers to transfer the funds from their mobile and ask for help. These people are giving their pin codes and passwords to the shopkeepers, which is too risky.

[Egii Nna]

To me, I can say cashless is very easy compared to cash transactions, because it has been a long time since you would see a person get robbed of their cash on the street. Even when it comes to making payments, when you are using cash, you will tend to have issues with your change. But if it’s cashless, you will transfer exactly the amount that is needed, and it will be smooth and fast unlike other transactions.

[X-ray]

One thing for sure it's good for the environment, less trees to be cut and turned into paper money.

As for the economy, it will enable faster money circulation and economy growth will be boosted.

Being cashless seems to be improving spending on the people and can help to grow economy to be stronger and this phenomenon is called "cashless effect".

Less people hoarding money, the better. So the answer is yes.

[Pi-network314159]

A cashless society is one where payments are made through debit cards, credit cards, or mobile apps instead of physical cash. This makes transactions easier to track, which helps reduce tax evasion and hidden income. With less cash in circulation, theft and robbery also tend to decrease. Payments become faster and more convenient, and there’s no need to carry cash everywhere.

However, there are drawbacks to consider. In a cashless system, banks and the government can monitor every transaction, which raises privacy concerns. There’s also the risk of hacking and data breaches that could expose personal information. Additionally, reliable internet is essential, so elderly people, unskilled laborers, and those without bank accounts may find it difficult to adapt.

Overall, while a cashless society can improve transparency and efficiency, it also brings up important concerns about privacy, security, and accessibility. I am ok with hybrid. Which one would you choose ?

The society can not go cashless totally. The both mis good to maintain equity amongst aducated and non educated. People will prefer The type that suit them, if cashless is good for you, it may not be good for another. And the fact is that going cashless does not prevent you from getting scammed or hacked. You might think going cashless will help you reduce the risk of you being robbed when with physical Cash, but that which you afraid of will still affect you anyways. Although no one is completely safe but rather the cashless system offer a slight security than physical Cash, but they both are not totally free from risk of financial theft.

[viljy]

The non-cash monetary system has a fundamental vulnerability. The economy requires electricity, the Internet, and end devices (e.g. smartphones, terminals) to function. In general, the more convenient (and more complex) a system is, the less reliable it is. It is very reckless to make the economic life of society dependent on the availability of the Internet.

[fighter2627]

Is there a country today that only implements cashless in their country? I think there is not yet because all countries around the world currently still use fiat. So in my opinion it is still unclear whether it will be implemented 100% in all countries.

Maybe this is only applicable in civilized areas but in provincial areas it is difficult to execute in my opinion, now whether this will help the country's economy
I honestly don't know yet.

[Agbamoni]

If it were possible to be in a cashless economy so that well know the positive and negative effect of it. Because all we can do now to make speculation on what we think will happen which may happen or not happen.

Well, after some research I came to the conclusion that a cashless economy have its upside down. If every transaction is digital, then when there is blackout of internet no transaction will be possible.

[Delaforetnoire]

Overall, while a cashless society can improve transparency and efficiency, it also brings up important concerns about privacy, security, and accessibility. I am ok with hybrid. Which one would you choose ?

There are some difficulties that the cashless system helps us to keep pace with the updated generation. But we have to keep everything in mind so that we do not fall behind and move forward. I think that both cashless and cashless systems should be prevalent in increasing places.

For example, when we buy small things, there is no need for cashless transactions, when we go to the raw market, cash transactions seem to be the best medium than cashless transactions.

[Akbarkoe]

A cashless society is one where payments are made through debit cards, credit cards, or mobile apps instead of physical cash. This makes transactions easier to track, which helps reduce tax evasion and hidden income. With less cash in circulation, theft and robbery also tend to decrease. Payments become faster and more convenient, and there’s no need to carry cash everywhere.

However, there are drawbacks to consider. In a cashless system, banks and the government can monitor every transaction, which raises privacy concerns. There’s also the risk of hacking and data breaches that could expose personal information. Additionally, reliable internet is essential, so elderly people, unskilled laborers, and those without bank accounts may find it difficult to adapt.

Overall, while a cashless society can improve transparency and efficiency, it also brings up important concerns about privacy, security, and accessibility. I am ok with hybrid. Which one would you choose ?

You can see it in developed cities, most developed cities do online transactions and it does help in terms of efficiency and effectiveness and also clear transparency.
 
The workers who are born millennials or boomers after they leave this cashless money system will run much more dominantly that will be used by many people later because the current generation is used to digital things, so that hope is quite possible.
 
It's okay, challenges are always there every time, risk is included in the category, there is always a solution to how to avoid hacking or online fraud, it just takes time for a much better socialization so that people can know the procedure.

Currently there are still many tasks for the government if it wants to be fully implemented in all regions, the availability of internet networks, human resources and also many more which in my opinion are less supportive for now, but the future is very possible even though it does not completely eliminate cash.