Eva is a single mother who works two jobs to provide for her children. Her ex-husband Rick was a deadbeat who did not do his job and left her when money was stretched to thin. Unfortunately, Eva’s monetary situation was endangered when she was one of the countless victims of identity theft in a cashless society. Eva now has to start all over on earning money because there is no way to prove her innocence. In a cashless society, Eva would be one of them many examples of all the damage a lack of physical cash would cause. Obviously, eliminating cash detrimentally impacts hard working people, like Eva, for innumerous reasons. Society wants to promote a cashless society, oblivious to the obvious detriments to society. One of the possible risks …show more content…
With the installment of money in a centralized place leaves a perfect breeding grounds for thieves to gain money. Money could also be easily hacked from online accounts, wiping out all of one account in an instant. Thieves would now have a new playground that would allow them to evade the law and potentially steal millions. Logically, the government would not be able to convict every criminal or help citizens stay safe from these stealthy attacks. No one would be safe, with the chaotic uncertainty of how to move on once all the money is taken from a person at one time. Another problem that people would have to face is the lack of privacy created by the ability of the government to track citizen spending. Overall, society tends to want to keep privacy and with “unprecedented access to information and power over citizens.” making citizens vulnerable to government bullying (Winkler 5). Citizens should not have to disclose all of their spending details, that reveal about their personal lives to the government. Without cash, society would not be able to gauge what information people should know. When all transactions happen through technology there would be no …show more content…
The opposition states that people will save money in a cashless society. The opposition states that people would have an added cost benefit by switching to a cashless society. Lombardo states that people “The ink, paper and even the designs… have associated costs with them..” and these costs will go away and not be replaced in a cashless society (10). This is an oversimplification fallacy because these are not the only costs associated with money. Furthermore, these costs do not automatically vanish with no cost successor. In fact there are costs to a cashless society, like the technology that is the replacement in the transaction. The opposition does not take into account that technology costs money to make and maintain because that will be the predecessor to cash. Society would be at the same expenditure because the maintaining of the new ways to pay would cost the same as using money. This leads to a neutrality in cost savings in which both sides are equal. Another reason the opposition gives is that other countries are heading toward a cashless society. The opposition insists “China has made more progress than the U.S in transitioning citizens to mobile wallets…” (LaMagna 7). This is a bandwagon statement because China and the United States are not the same, yet the author wants to put them in the same group. This bandwagon especially falls flat because China is
The only difference between the U.S. and those countries is that they have made the progressive step to stop producing pennies. Their system is now as follows: Pennies can still be spent, but as no more production exists to balance out wear, tear, and loss, the population of pennies will gradually decrease until they become something of the equivalent of the U.S. 2 dollar bill. Values between 5 cent intervals are rounded up or down, and neither consumers nor vendors need to worry about overpaying/underearning, as the amounts rounded up and down balance each other out in the long run (.02 saved one transaction becomes .03 spent the next, and so on). Credit card transactions still go down to the cent, but as digital currency is handled by computers, it doesn’t pose any inconvenience to
It has come to my attention of how we use our money and noticed that pennies aren't being taken seriously. I realized while standing in the checking line, people would rather use dollar bills instead of the piggy bank of pennies in their possession, not only because of limited utility, for instance, pennies are generally not accepted in vending and bulk machines, but also because the act of producing the penny cost more than the actual penny itself. So I ask myself, "Why use pennies? Should they be eliminated?" The growing debate of whether or not the penny should be eliminated from all cash transaction is, personally, futile, when they, themselves, doesn't bother to use them.
Every day we buy things, and to purchase these items, most of us use credit cards or bills. Do we use pennies for virtually any transactions? The answer is no, we don’t. Consequently, the penny is far and away the least useful monetary value we have. Pennies are inefficient and should be cut out of the currency. The rationale behind this conclusion is simple: the price tag of minting a penny is more than one cent. Unfortunately for the penny, two other reasons prove that we require it no longer. The first reason is that not only will the removal of pennies make us more effective, it will drop prices similar to what happened in Australia and New Zealand when they abolished their “pennies”. The second is that we know that we do not need it
A completely cashless society sounds clean and convenient, and although we've made huge strides, we're not quite there yet. Despite the magic of PayPal, Square and credit cards, most of us need to carry around a handful of greenbacks. While we can choose from a rich array of singles, fins, sawbucks and Benjamins (and one day maybe Tubmans), there are several other denominations that the U.S. Treasury has discontinued.
For as long as money has existed, governments have sought to control its supply for their own benefit. The ancient Romans, for instance, regularly debased their coins so that, by the end of the 3rd century AD, the actual content of silver had declined to less than 5% purity. The debasement of and inflation of the money supply has historically been a tool of governments to expand their power. In conventional economics, which this paper will assume as a positive background in defending the feasibility of a sound money amendment, the result is a redistribution of real wealth from savers to the government, the banking and finance system, and other
advances the wellbeing and soundness of individual money related organizations and screens their effect on the monetary framework in general;
Identity theft/fraud is becoming a major threat to the Australian community as technology advances. This section of crime produces substantial profits for offenders and causes considerable financial and emotions harm to the victims (Australian federal police, 2014). With this increasing alarm around identity theft/fraud in Australia, there has to be strong legal actions available to counteract the issue. Identity theft/fraud can be defined as a crime of obtaining the personal or financial information of another person for the sole purpose of assuming that person’s name or identity in order to gain benefit (investopedia, 2014). This essay will extensively discuss the current laws/legislations implemented for identity theft/fraud, the key stakeholders involved in the issue and an overview around the effectiveness of the current laws/legislations. After thoroughly analysing the current legislations used to counteract the threat of identity theft/fraud, it will be clear which aspects of the legislations are working efficiently and which aspects are proving inefficient for the Australian government.
1. Case Study: “Don’t Let Crooks Steal Your Identity: How to Protect Yourself-and Your Credit Rating” (p. 225)
Our society is in a downhill spiral. There is no liberty, no equality and there is no physical value of money. We live in a world in which prison companies and children’s hospitals are traded publicly on the stock market. Virtual currency is the only thing that these corporations strongly care about. There are no boundaries when profits are in concern. We live in a society that is dominated by the attraction of money. Greed is the characteristic that is pervasive, not generosity or compassion. People are encouraged to be selfish, not charitable. The idea and function of governments will only change if people’s minds alter first.
Throughout history there has been much speculation about a cashless society. With a cashless society in the near future there are many benefits, as well, as many negative implications. Society without cash will lose the benefits of the most liquid asset in the world. Without cash there would be no instant payments for goods and services. It is important that, if society moves toward a cash free economy, the benefits must out weigh the negative aspects in the end. There are major social and economic benefits to a cashless society such as reduction in cash related crimes and monetary benefits. There are major negative implications with a cashless society such as privacy issues and losing the liberty of cash. A cashless society could only be
Identity theft affects millions of Americans every day. Scam artists and hackers lay in wait for an unsuspecting person to get caught up their scheme through ignorance or naivety so they can take full advantage of their personal information to do as they desire with it. Problem is, it infiltrates and depreciates the integral infrastructure of our society which creates a cultural lapse through the declination of economic and cultural growth and double jeopardizes an already unstable system to the brink of its destruction. To understand how
Identity theft is the fastest growing fraud crime in America (Finklea, 2009). Gaining knowledge in preventing theft will better the economy and lower the crime rates in America. There are reported 9.9 million victims of identity theft and this number is increasing rapidly as the years go on. It has been reported that an estimate of fifty billion dollars has been charged to our consumers every year due to identity theft (Finklea, 2009).
We take the position that digital currencies are a fad. As argument, we try to clarify the definition of currency in general and explain what a "digital currency" really mean. Than we examine the arguments for the digital currencies and at the end we present the evidences of perils of digital currency.
The move to use electronic cash in an ironically termed society dubbed “cashless”; there are many issues that include
Picture this, you are purchasing your favorite drink and as you reach for your wallet, the only option you have for paying is electronically. That could become the case if we become a cashless society. You will see what a cashless society is and what it all entails. With disturbing someone’s privacy to the results of hijacking electronic accounts, cashless societies can have some advantages and disadvantages. As a list of countries that have already made the surface of topic when it comes to cashless societies, you will see how much of a difference cash is being used today as in years before. Cashless societies are creeping up upon people without them realizing it, but becoming aware of it could help people as they enter into the future.