[hvgk]

Cash is far less secure. There’s no transaction history, it’s easy to lose, easy to damage and difficult to exchange.

People forget the only thing that is important is the exchange not the material used to do so. It’s all promises at the end of the day.

[inglor_cz]

It is more secure against remote hacking and imposition of a serious negative interest.

In a purely cashless society, the central bank could force a -10 per cent interest on all savings, thus forcing people to spend even if they don't want to.

(This was, for example, discussed on the IMF blog pages: https://blogs.imf.org/2019/02/05/cashing-in-how-to-make-nega...)

This is harder to do in economies where people can take their money out of the bank as cash. There, the lower limit for interest seems to be around -1 per cent.

[hvgk]

That’s a fundamental misunderstanding of sensible economics.

Cash is a facilitating fluid which should be channeled into diverse investments which are not based on monetary value such as property and resources, not stashed in large piles. Holding any cash in any quantity is a risk. Doesn’t matter if it’s magic numbers in a computer or bits of paper in a mattress.

As for cash only society, sorry but fuck that.

[inglor_cz]

"Holding any cash in any quantity is a risk."

As usual, some people want to undergo this risk in order to balance out other risks. For example, your bank account can be frozen under a variety of scenarios, even unjustly so. In such situation, it is better to have emergency cash at hand.

Diverse investments are good, but some liquidity is good as well. If you e.g. need to escape a starting civil war, things that can be carried on a person and have near universal acceptance are more valuable than a roll of blue chip stocks or a nice house that you cannot take with you. I have met people who escaped the siege of Sarajevo; cash and gold went a long way helping them out.

"As for cash only society, sorry but fuck that. "

That isn't something I proposed.

[raverbashing]

> and imposition of a serious negative interest

It's called inflation and it doesn't care if your money was securely left in your mattress

[inglor_cz]

I am a bit influenced by the situation in Europe.

Countries like Italy cannot inflate their way out of debt anymore. ECB, at least officially, is trying to keep inflation low. But negative interest rates would help the heavily indebted countries to ease their debt service burden.

(If such constellation of parameters is sustainable, IDK, but that debt isn't going anywhere.)

[nybble41]

> But negative interest rates would help the heavily indebted countries to ease their debt service burden.

By penalizing their creditors, sure. That should teach them (and anyone else paying attention) not to lend to such countries in the future.

[inglor_cz]

This gets even worse. As of today, no one is already willing to buy Italian, Greek etc. debt at the current low interest rates - but the ECB itself.

It reminds me of Baron Munchhausen pulling himself out of the swamp by his own hair.

[Merem]

There being no transaction history is good (less data/more privacy). Not sure how it's easy to lose. At least I have never lost my cash. And if you lose your wallet for some reason, you also lose your CCs. There is "often" fraud with CCs, with cash that rarely happens, unless it's counterfeit money. Also not sure what you would do with the money that you would damage it. Usually, it's in your wallet or somewhere stored.

Promises that the money will be worth it the next day, sure. But at least I have my cash in my hand (and some stored where I live), so access to it can't just be denied.

[BurningPenguin]

If you lose your cash, it's gone. If you lose your CC, all it takes is one call (or a few mouse clicks) to lock it and get a new one in a few days.

[Merem]

Depends on where you lose it. If it's in/at some place where you can buy something, people usually bring it there and you can get it back as soon as you notice. If it's the whole wallet, it's even easier (would be true for CCs then as well). But yeah, if you don't get it back, then it's gone. But to be honest, if I lose like 100-150€ once in 80 years because of that, then I can take it. I never have more than that in my wallet, unless I intend to buy something. (And that's also another benefit. Cash prevents against impulse buying and you spend your money better (you visually see how it's shrinking etc)).

[raverbashing]

Exactly

Whoever thinks getting paid in cash is "free" is going to be outcompeted really quickly.

But even (some) old people seem to prefer paying with card today, so change is slow.

[DyslexicAtheist]

cash is antifragile

[hvgk]

It’s isn’t really. Look at Zimbabwe hyperinflation. I have a trillion dollar note here.

Cash is only worth what someone else agrees it is worth.

[DyslexicAtheist]

antifragile doesn't mean no shocks no sacrifices. it's regular shocks and sacrifices to reduce chances of black swan events. Zimbawe is a (predictable) white swan event not a black swan.

[midasuni]

You can burn cash for heating