HOW A CASHLESS SOCIETY RISKS EXCLUSION: AN ECONOMIC & MORAL OBSERVATION

What happens when buying food, clothes, paying bills, or getting paid becomes a privilege

rather than a right? Have we ever stopped to think that maybe a cashless society is not

universally inclusive? Do we ever question our morals when progress is achieved through

removing the rights of others?

THE GROWTH DEFINITION OF A CASHLESS SOCIETY

A cashless society refers to a society without the use of cash (physical form of money) and

instead uses cashless transactions, the digital form of money.

The use of cashless transactions around the world is expected to increase by more than

80% from 2020 to 2025 and almost triple by 2030. Therefore, many often think of it as

“just digital” and “beneficial,” but this perspective is merely superficial and broad. We

cannot assume that a cashless society is entirely beneficial when the assumption lies on an

unstable base: the belief that technological access is universal.

In Sweden, for example, mobile payments apps like Swish are already used by more than

80% of the population. Now, what happens to people without phones, internet access, or

basic digital literacy? Well, we risk leaving people out of society itself.

EXCLUSION INCLUSION WITHIN A CASHLESS SOCIETY

Central banks around the world have started to develop the Central Bank Digital Currency

(CBDC). These are government-issued money that is not backed by tangible goods such as

gold or silver. CBDCs provide financial inclusion because it becomes accessible via a simple

mobile wallet and does not need a commercial bank account; thus, bringing millions to a

digital economy. However, this inclusion is actually a remodeled form of exclusion.

As stated prior, a cashless society can actually enhance financial inclusion through CBDCs.

While this is partly true, this fails to consider the people without phones, internet access,

and digital literacy. For these people, the change towards digital transactions does not

expand opportunities. Rather, it creates a rewritten form of exclusion. When purchases and

receiving require only cards, PayPal, Venmo, and many more, those who do not have access

to these risk exclusion from buying necessities, receiving wages, and a lot more.

One infamous and prime example of this exclusion lies within the country of India. During

2017, India’s government demonetized the widely used ₹500 and ₹1,000 overnight;

although the policy aimed to address crime, this affected the lives of many citizens badly.

Since around 93 percent of the country’s workforce relied on cash like ₹500 and ₹1,000,

many were left out of economic participation; some had even experienced extreme

poverty. Thus, this presents the risks of exclusion within a cashless society.

CONCLUSION

A cashless society is often seen as inevitable in the future of our economy. As the world

transitions to a cashless economy, it provides inclusion to some, but exclusion to

others. Although CBDCs provide inclusion, we cannot assume the benefit is universal. This

was seen through the people who do not have access to digital tools, or rely heavily on

cash. As a result, when a cashless system is marked as progress, it becomes questionable in

terms of morals. In summary, when progress is achieved through exclusion, then we lose

part of our humanity.