Don’t have cash? No problem. The number of places where you can use cashless transactions has multiplied in recent years, from digital wallets to contactless payments on public transit. For all the convenience of digital currency, however, there are significant downsides to eschewing cash, according to Lana Swartz, an assistant professor of media studies. Swartz argues that cash is a “universal, public, printed monetary medium” that makes it possible for people to participate equally in economic exchanges.
Lana Swartz, "In Praise of the Dollar Bill," MIT Technology Review, 15 April 2022
- In the first two paragraphs of her essay, Swartz states her “I say” argument and the “they say” argument she is responding to. Using templates from Chapter 1 and Chapter 4, paraphrase these “they say” and “I say” statements into your own words.
- Swartz identifies many benefits to using cash as opposed to digital currency. Name three of these benefits. In your own view, which benefit do you think is most critical, and why? What is a significant downside to using cash instead of mobile currency or digital transactions?
- What groups of people have the most difficult time using or accessing digital currency or mobile transactions? Why? In the past, what were the ramifications of having multiple monetary systems in the United States? What inequities might a “cash-light” or “cashless” economy create today?
- Swartz argues, “we might work to prevent money that acts like today’s social media platforms: privatized and rooted in data-driven business models.” What are the key differences between public money, like cash, and privatized monetary systems, like cryptocurrency? How might the privacy of individuals be affected if our future monetary systems were built like today’s social media platforms? What do you think could be done to combine the stability of printed cash and the convenience of digital currency?
Comments