E-Cash Concerns

[arabspaceship123]

It isn't ready to take over. It's going to take a few generations providing there aren't any cyber attacks. Sweden & Norway are under attack on daily basis from hostile countries. They can't allow their ppl to be held to ransom if the pay systems are attacked.

I think that it will take a few generations to replace the cash. In my country, despite the fact that you can pay with a card everywhere and everything, despite the fact that almost everything can be done online, old people struggle and need the assistance of young people. Old people in my country are very far from technology. People in their 50s have no idea about Instagram and can't even register on social networks without the help of their children but young people know almost everything and are very tech friendly. I think that once the old generation passes, becoming cashless is possible but I don't like this idea because the government will easily control people by manipulating the money on their bank accounts.

[lizarder]

Cash can't be replaced soon. We've been using it for centuries it's going to stay with us. Rural communities suffer because govt's put city ppl in the middle of their plans. In some rural communities ppl don't have smart phones so they'll use cash or sms to pay for goods & services.

That does not mean cash will disappear anytime soon because it is still quite needed and not only in rural areas because in urban areas itself there is still quite a need for transactions using fiat currency in everyday life. Except if we are talking about developed countries because access to payments is utilized in much easier things and the use of transactions is starting to be developed using other than cash.

In the near future cash is still quite needed and I do not see any urgent need to not use it even though currently some people prefer to make payments using credit cards or other products that have similarities and cash still has a place as a process of paying for goods and services.

[WillyAp]

In view of WW3 getting rid of cash is just plain madness.
Luckily the northern countries had an insight. It came to them when Russia entered Ucraine.

[arabspaceship123]

If WW3 happened it's going to make tech useless we'll be heading in reverse. Smartphones aren't going to work it's back to barter like before coins were used to pay for things. Sweden & Norway know how it's going to make daily life strained for their ppl if the pay system doesn't work. They won't rely on their digital pay it's why cash is being used again.

In view of WW3 getting rid of cash is just plain madness.
Luckily the northern countries had an insight. It came to them when Russia entered Ucraine.

[Republikcoin.com]

That does not mean cash will disappear anytime soon because it is still quite needed and not only in rural areas because in urban areas itself there is still quite a need for transactions using fiat currency in everyday life. Except if we are talking about developed countries because access to payments is utilized in much easier things and the use of transactions is starting to be developed using other than cash.

Maybe you are talking about the conditions of a country that is not yet developed so that you still always see people using cash in everyday life when they make transactions to buy goods. But that should be able to be changed slowly if a country that is not yet developed wants to follow the development of existing technology. For example, by utilizing several banking applications or wallet applications that can support fiat currency digitally so that the circulation of physical paper money will be increasingly thin in everyday life.

[jaberwock]

Cash can't be replaced soon. We've been using it for centuries it's going to stay with us. Rural communities suffer because govt's put city ppl in the middle of their plans. In some rural communities ppl don't have smart phones so they'll use cash or sms to pay for goods & services.

That does not mean cash will disappear anytime soon because it is still quite needed and not only in rural areas because in urban areas itself there is still quite a need for transactions using fiat currency in everyday life. Except if we are talking about developed countries because access to payments is utilized in much easier things and the use of transactions is starting to be developed using other than cash.

In the near future cash is still quite needed and I do not see any urgent need to not use it even though currently some people prefer to make payments using credit cards or other products that have similarities and cash still has a place as a process of paying for goods and services.

Cash won't e gone forever, but which cash do you hold? That matters the most. Like during a war, is holding the cash of the war thorn country makes sense? Or is it smarter to hold cash from a fiat that stays strong? And which one will make any sense? Bitcoin makes sense because of this, because if you are holding bitcoin instead of cash, then wherever you go, then you can cash it out and make money from it and the value will not drop as much.

It is more volatile than a currency, but that doesn't mean it always goes down, sometimes that means it will go up. You can look at current bitcoin and say it went from 100k+ and into 90k, which is a drop, or you can look at it and see 20k became 90k and see how much it went up.

[lizarder]

Maybe you are talking about the conditions of a country that is not yet developed so that you still always see people using cash in everyday life when they make transactions to buy goods. But that should be able to be changed slowly if a country that is not yet developed wants to follow the development of existing technology. For example, by utilizing several banking applications or wallet applications that can support fiat currency digitally so that the circulation of physical paper money will be increasingly thin in everyday life.

Even in developed countries, cash is still quite needed even though in a smaller percentage, so talking about cash is still quite a necessity for most people. Technology is developing so rapidly, but to make a policy of using other than cash still requires a long process because not everyone is used to making transactions using other than cash.

Slowly this can become a plan and the independence of each individual to accept the convenience of transactions will definitely change along with the development of technology. People have to get used to starting so that it is easier to accept something new and in general I see that cash is still quite needed.

[arabspaceship123]

It isn't only for developed facilities in a country. In some rural areas ppl use sms to make payments. Changes are happening slowly for ppl living in poor countries. Millions don't have access to banks & bank accounts so they'll find other ways to meet their needs. Digital banking's their best hope.

Maybe you are talking about the conditions of a country that is not yet developed so that you still always see people using cash in everyday life when they make transactions to buy goods. But that should be able to be changed slowly if a country that is not yet developed wants to follow the development of existing technology. For example, by utilizing several banking applications or wallet applications that can support fiat currency digitally so that the circulation of physical paper money will be increasingly thin in everyday life.

[WillyAp]

Changes are happening slowly for ppl living in poor countries. Millions don't have access to banks & bank accounts so they'll find other ways to meet their needs. Digital banking's their best hope.

Don't you see your contradiction?
You are saying:  "Millions don't have access to banks & bank accounts"  and then "Digital banking's their best hope". How do they manage that. Rural areas could have internet over star link, but as illiterate how do those manage?

[arabspaceship123]

I didn't contradict. Millions of ppl don't have bank accounts & they can't access physical banks for services like opening accounts. In rural areas some are using sms to make payments on 2g phones. Other ppl who're in better personal circumstances use smart phones for digital banking. Govt's should subsidise costs because it'll be difficult for ppl in rural areas to use Star Link on limited incomes.

Don't you see your contradiction?
You are saying:  "Millions don't have access to banks & bank accounts"  and then "Digital banking's their best hope". How do they manage that. Rural areas could have internet over star link, but as illiterate how do those manage?

[WillyAp]

I didn't contradict. Millions of ppl don't have bank accounts & they can't access physical banks for services like opening accounts. In rural areas some are using sms to make payments on 2g phones. Other ppl who're in better personal circumstances use smart phones for digital banking. Govt's should subsidise costs because it'll be difficult for ppl in rural areas to use Star Link on limited incomes.

Are you aware that there are people without phones, nor any other skill but mixing cement and if that?
What would those do?

[arabspaceship123]

Not every body who's living in rural areas is devoid of money or tech. Some poor ppl in rural communities use 2g phones. In other rural areas ppl use smart phones. Why wouldn't cement mixers be able to buy & use one old nokia phone from the year 2000 with 2g sim to share between their village ?

If they can't buy a phone between a village there's thousands of other rural villages where some ppl will have phones & others won't. Until they get 2g sms or 3g smart phones they'll miss out on banking & digital so they'll use cash.

Are you aware that there are people without phones, nor any other skill but mixing cement and if that?
What would those do?