[chrisco255]

It's useful for privacy, which is a basic human right.

It's useful if electronic systems go down. It's useful in an emergency situation. It's useful for donations. It's useful for instant settlement.

You're more than happy to give away your financial sovereignty and to take away your optionality because you think they'll collect more taxes from it?

[forty]

Financial sovereignty? I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but cash has value just because the states says so. If they ever said it's just paper, the next day it's worth 0. And I don't use cash already so I'm not giving anything away :)

In my country, privacy doesn't include hiding financial transactions from the state. I think they have the right to know everything on this topic, even though cash obviously makes it harder for them (and more expensive for them, so for the tax payer). I don't really see how I benefit from that except that I need to pay more taxes to make up for those who use cash to hide their taxable transactions.

Absolutely agree on the fallback in case of downtime from the payment systems. We'll have to find a good solution to that probably before dropping cash completely. (Note that I never said that cash can/should be dropped right now. They are other missing things, like garantying that anyone can get a payment mean for free)

[chrisco255]

No, it doesn't. The value of cash is decided by an open market. Crypto is proof enough that all you need is liquidity and a market for something to be exchangeable like cash.

Privacy is a universal human right. Your ignorance of that fact and your state's refusal to accept that is another issue entirely. But history is quite clear about what happens to countries and citizens thereof that continually encroach on private human rights.