Government’s Duty Of Care To Keep Cash
In light of the significant dangers posed by a cashless society, we can argue that the government has a duty of care to ensure the continued availability of cash. This duty of care stems from the government’s responsibility to Lawfully protect the well-being of its citizens, ensure economic stability, and maintain social order.
Here are several reasons why the government might be obligated to keep cash as part of its duty of care:
1. Ensuring Financial Access for All
Not everyone has equal access to digital payment systems. Vulnerable populations—such as the elderly, homeless, or those in remote areas—might struggle to adopt a fully digital financial system. The government has a responsibility to ensure these groups are not excluded from participating in the economy, and cash provides a universal and accessible means of payment.
2. Providing a Backup in Case of Digital Failures
As mentioned, the risks of system crashes, technical malfunctions, and cyber-attacks in a cashless society are significant. Without cash, there is no fallback for individuals and businesses to continue transactions during a system failure. Maintaining cash as an alternative ensures that people can still access their funds and meet their needs in an emergency.
3. Maintaining Economic Stability
In the event of a major disruption to digital payment systems, the economic impact could be severe. Cash provides a safeguard against widespread economic paralysis and allows trade to continue, preventing panic and economic collapse.
4. Mitigating the Risk of Social Unrest
If people lose access to their funds due to a system malfunction, widespread panic and social unrest could result, especially if essential goods like food and medicine cannot be purchased. By maintaining cash as a backup, the government can reduce the risk of social instability.
5. Preserving Financial Privacy
A cashless society eliminates the anonymity of cash transactions, leading to concerns about privacy and surveillance. By continuing to support cash, the government upholds citizens’ right to financial privacy, preventing the concentration of control in financial institutions or government authorities.
6. Reducing Over-reliance on Technology
A fully digital economy makes society highly dependent on technology and infrastructure like power grids and internet access. Any disruption to these services could result in widespread financial hardship. Cash acts as a buffer against these vulnerabilities.
7. Supporting Consumer Choice
Maintaining cash ensures that consumers have the freedom to choose how they wish to transact. Forcing everyone into a cashless system, especially one fraught with potential risks, could be seen as limiting individual freedom and autonomy. Governments have a duty to ensure that consumers are not coerced into a single payment method.
8. Addressing the Risk of Digital Exclusion
Some people may not have access to digital tools (such as smartphones or bank accounts), especially in developing or rural areas. Ensuring the availability of cash would prevent these individuals from being excluded from participating in the economy and society, which is part of the government’s obligation to care for all citizens, particularly the most vulnerable.
Conclusion
The government’s duty of care extends to protecting citizens from foreseeable harm, ensuring economic stability, and safeguarding individual rights. Given the risks of a fully cashless society, including system failures, exclusion of vulnerable groups, and threats to privacy, it could be argued that the government has an obligation to keep cash as a viable and secure alternative. This would provide citizens with financial resilience, security, and choice in a rapidly digitizing world.
In a cashless society, relying entirely on digital transactions poses several serious risks if the system crashes or malfunctions, especially without the availability of cash as a fallback. Here are some of the more obvious and significant dangers:
- Total loss of access to funds:
If the digital payment system crashes, people would have no way to access their money. Without cash, individuals wouldn’t be able to buy food, fuel, or other essentials until the system is restored. - Disruption of vital services:
Many services (e.g., healthcare, transportation, and utilities) rely on digital payments. If the system malfunctions, services could grind to a halt, leading to a breakdown in the delivery of necessities such as electricity, water, and emergency care. - Economic paralysis:
Businesses, from local shops to large enterprises, would be unable to process transactions. This could result in widespread economic chaos, with trade and commerce coming to an abrupt stop. - Cybersecurity risks:
A cashless society is more vulnerable to hacking or cyber-attacks. A well-coordinated attack could potentially disable entire financial systems, resulting in large-scale theft or fraud, and leaving people unable to access their accounts. - Exclusion of vulnerable populations:
Some individuals, especially the elderly, homeless, or those without reliable access to technology, may struggle with a fully digital system. In a crisis, they would be disproportionately affected if cash is unavailable as an alternative. - Loss of privacy:
In a fully cashless society, every transaction is recorded and traceable. While this may not directly link to a system crash, the absence of cash could allow governments or corporations to track and monitor spending habits, raising concerns about privacy and surveillance. - Dependence on power and internet:
A cashless system requires a reliable power grid and internet connection. Any disruption to either of these could leave people unable to access money or make payments, especially in remote areas where these services are already unreliable. - System errors and technical glitches:
Even without a full crash, technical malfunctions, bugs, or errors in the digital system can lock people out of their accounts or result in incorrect balances, further complicating access to money. - Panic and social unrest:
A sudden system failure could lead to widespread panic as people scramble to access their funds. This could result in social unrest, as food and goods become difficult to acquire, and people lose trust in financial institutions. - Centralized control and overreach:
In a cashless society, governments and central authorities would have unprecedented control over individuals’ financial access. If the system malfunctions or is used to impose sanctions or freeze accounts, citizens could lose access to their funds without recourse.
These risks highlight the potential vulnerabilities and dangers of a fully cashless society, particularly in situations where the digital infrastructure fails or is compromised.