E.g. My sons school charges 2% extra if i use credit card, Rs 20 if i use netbank and does not accept cash. So on a Saturday i am happy pay in cash when i have nothing else to do.
Unless government makes the transfer without fee (now they can print less money and that cost can be used for this infra of transfer), why is cashless better in the scenario where that saved time is not used for anything value generating?
Genuinely looking for answers to this that makes sense rather than saying time is money.
Feature of cash, not a bug. It's not the best choice for every situation, but neither is digital, which is why it's important that people have both options available.
Also consider Bitcoin as a "cashless society" alternative to the financial panopticon - no one's looking over your shoulder there and it's definitely not "cash".
I'm clearly in the 'it's nobody's business except for the parties involved' party...
'Cashless' as in 'cash is illegal' terrifies me. It's nothing more than a force multiplier for the power brokers (banks, govs, etc.).
There will always be corruption, theft, etc. But in one scenario, anyone can do it. In another, only the third (one) party can do it. Tell me which is better, oh starry-eyed Valley dreamer?
Which is why the tinfoil me gets change before doing tinfoil purchases xD