0
$\begingroup$

this is more a theoretical question, nowadays with Internet, Debit/Credit cards and Cryptocurrencies, why should we keep printing/making more physical money?

granted not everybody has access to these technologies, but for the sake of this question, let's say every body does

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Presumably what you are asking is whether economies could function more or less as they do now, supporting the same living standards, without the use of notes and coins? $\endgroup$ – Adam Bailey Sep 18 '18 at 20:17
  • $\begingroup$ that's correct :-) $\endgroup$ – juanp_1982 Sep 19 '18 at 0:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Perhaps the question could be made narrower or more specific. Right now it's a bit like asking if we can get rid of war and religion, and any answer would be book-length and heavily opinion-based. $\endgroup$ – Kenny LJ Sep 19 '18 at 8:31
  • $\begingroup$ One book you may be interested in reading: The Curse of Cash by Kenneth Rogoff. $\endgroup$ – Kenny LJ Sep 19 '18 at 9:21
1
$\begingroup$

Money will always be used for exchanges between nations. As a universal equivalent it will still be the best commodity for nation-to-nation exchanges and for measuring debts and credits between nations too. Besides using alternative open source equivalents, such as cryptocurrencies, how would national banks manage to regulate inflation rates? This certainly is a critical point. Bitcoin for instance is a finite source of exchange: if it were to become a universal equivalent, virtually it would infinitely increase in its value, since the volume of the market exchange gets bigger and bigger. Other cryptocurrencies tried solving this creating non finite sources, yet this still implies a arbitrary growth of the volume of available currency.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Good point about cryptocurrencies, my question is more about the physical money. I understand we still need money and currencies but what's preventing us to go 100% electronic? $\endgroup$ – juanp_1982 Sep 19 '18 at 0:11
  • $\begingroup$ Money needs to be tracked for it to be managed with electronic devices. $\endgroup$ – Mirko Aveta Sep 19 '18 at 10:51
0
$\begingroup$

There's no real reason to do so... Sweden, for example, is bearly usibg physical money at all

The question can be looked at in a broader sense, examining old technologies working in parallel with newer

At the end of the day, the last end-user, should abandon the old tech, for the regulator (in tgis case) to switch it off

sms (or 2g cell networks in general) are a good example

Evantually, the only barrier not to impose using debit cards (which unlike crypto-currency are quite common), is the potential damage for the economy from physical money users.

Regulation can encourage or incentivize traders to move to debit cards, using taxes, fees or subsidies, then when the physical money usage drops, stop generating physical money, with minimal damage

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Privacy would be a big issue. Making all payments on-line would mean that all payments will be recorded and could be traced. Even in anonymous systems like bitcoin, it would be easier to trace payments then with physical currency.

You can argue that law-abiding citizens don't need to be afraid - but thats not the point. There are certainly many many things that are not illegal, but nevertheless you won't be happy if they went public. That's the point of privacy.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.