Should cash be phased out?

Mark (No)

A cashless society is not only impractical but also reductive. Firstly, contrary to what may seem like the “new normal,” not everyone has access to the internet. For example, people in rural communities wouldn't be able to monitor their finances in a cashless system. It would also potentially have an adverse effect on lower-income families, who don’t necessarily have access to the internet. Privacy would also be a factor, as a digital footprint would accompany all financial transactions.

A cashless system would also mean essentially handing over complete control of the economy to the government. The government would then be completely free to institute any restrictions or impositions without warning or explanation. The same could happen with banks as well, as they could increase fees at any point with little to no reason. A cashless system would minimize and assimilate the working and middle class even more than the current one has.

Going cashless could also prove to be detrimental to the concept of having a savings, in addition to impeding the trajectory of successful entrepreneurship. If you have to solely rely on a digital system to hold your hard earned money, you are at the mercy of that system or state. This brings us to the possibility of a crashed system or a freeze-out. How nightmarish and futile is the idea of a major emergency or catastrophe temporarily deactivating our financial system? And in the age of hackers and digital glitches, it's a terrifying thought to think that all your money could be wiped out by a single keystroke or click. It’s virtually inarguable that tangible forms of currency remain not only active but the best viable option to keep our money as real as can be.

Rob (Yes)

While cash (physical currency) has been a mainstay of financial transactions for centuries and has been handy for the most part, it is time for society to transition to a permanent electronic currency. Cash also has numerous flaws and problems that can only be addressed by using digital currency.

Unlike digital currency, cash is very expensive to make, protect, and distribute, and taxpayers bear this financial burden. By eliminating cash, the government can redirect these resources to more pressing needs, such as healthcare, considering the US healthcare system is so expensive and borderline unaffordable. 

Phasing out cash will also enhance government and public institutions' transparency and accountability. Cash is 'king' for crimes involving money laundering, bribery, the use of counterfeit money, and tax evasion since it’s not easy to track. By eliminating it, the government can eliminate a major conduit through which most of these crimes are done. Eliminating cash is also better for the environment, as it decreases pollution produced by cash production and transportation, as well as litter from old bills. While the US Federal Reserve uses linen and cotton to make its notes, the transportation and manufacturing of the bills at the mint still cause substantial harm to the environment.

Going digital would also improve efficiency because digital operations are significantly faster and more convenient than wire transfers. Eliminating cash also eliminates the need to handle real cash, which is often contaminated with germs from previous holders. Moving away from physical currency, with all its problems, toward a new digital system is the right way. We stand to gain more than we stand to lose.