Governments and corporations that push for a cashless society are responsible for a ripple effect of negative repercussions in people’s lives. Going fully digital leaves certain groups in our society vulnerable to getting pushed aside or susceptible to government surveillance and hacking. 

A cashless society limits consumers’ payment options to debit or credit cards, QR codes or other digital transactions. 

Last year, the World Health Organization recommended switching to cashless transactions to help slow the spread of the coronavirus. This is because of the questionable sanitation on physical money.

The recommendation caught the attention of some governments and businesses. 

Both entities have different reasons why they have implemented the switch to a cashless society.

Governments want a better knowledge of transactions and businesses are looking for safe ways to keep their doors open, according to a June 2020 article on Phys.org, a website dedicated to science, research and technology news. 

Removing money all together would stop the possible transmission of germs and viruses to others. This creates a safer environment for businesses to remain open with employees and customers experiencing a lowered risk of contracting COVID-19. 

In fact, because dollar bills stay in rotation for a number of years, money can be incredibly contaminated.

The U.S. Currency Education Program conducted a study to determine how long bills remain in use. Researchers found the estimated lifespan of a larger denomination, like a $100 bill, can stay in rotation for almost 23 years. 

It is understandable how eliminating that contamination can help slow the spread of COVID-19, but the amount of unethical issues that arise with a cashless society would cause more harm than good. 

The elderly and the homeless community make up a large section of the population who would be negatively affected, according to an August 2020 Forbes article.

The elderly already have a hard time figuring out how to use social media, smartphones and other forms of technology. Switching to a fully digital format for all transactions would only create more confusion. 

The homeless community should also be considered. Many homeless people do not utilize bank services and rely on loose change to survive. 

If all restaurants decide to go cashless, homeless individuals would not be able to buy food and get the necessary nutrients they need to survive. 

Another issue addressed in a July 2020 USA Today article asserts that the government would be able to thoroughly track, tax and monitor everything people purchase without cash. 

“In a cashless society, banks will have full control of ‘every single penny you own’ and that everyone’s movements and actions will be traceable,” according to the article. “All money will be taxed, and the government ‘will decide what you can and cannot purchase.’” 

Imagine having every financial move you make monitored by the government. It cannot get more unethical than that. 

In some ways, a completely cashless society makes sense on paper. There would be a crime reduction because of decreases in cash burglary and counterfeit issues. It would also lead to fewer resources wasted from printing money and less bacteria transmitted on dirty money. 

But relying solely on fully digital platforms to manage all currency leaves you susceptible to hackers. 

“Hackers are the bank robbers and muggers of the electronic world,” according to a June 2020 article on TheBalance.com, a personal finance service. “In a cashless society, you’re more exposed to hackers. If you are targeted, and somebody drains your account, you may not have any alternative ways to spend money.” 

Switching to a completely cashless society can have unfavorable consequences in our world that cross the line of certain morals and ethics. 

Next time you see a sign in a coffee shop that reads “card only” think about the exclusion that sign represents and take your business elsewhere.