5 ms·
> The development raises some crucial issues regarding the state’s role in the payment market. For hundreds of years, the public has been offered central bank n
by clintonb 8y ago
> The development raises some crucial issues regarding the state’s role in the payment market. For hundreds of years, the public has been offered central bank notes and coins. If cash stops working, it would leave all individuals to rely on the private sector alone to get access to money and payment methods. This would be a historical change without precedence. Norway is seeing a similar trend, and the two central banks are cooperating in this area. In the Eurozone, cash is still used to a high degree. The value of the outstanding amount of cash is equivalent to 10% of the Eurozone GDP, versus the Swedish equivalent of only 1%.
A government system ideally guarantees access to every citizen/entity desiring to possess "cash". A system run by a private entity doesn't have to do so. If you don't agree/fall out of compliance with the terms of service of a private system, you can be banned. The same can be done on a government system, but at least you have the option of court intervention and voting people into/out of office.
- pishpash 8y agoPrivate entities can be regulated to the same effect on the matter of access.
- vfclists 8y agoBut are they?
- FabHK 8y agoAs the article discusses: > One option is to do nothing, meaning we accept that the general public no longer has access to central bank money. Such a future would imply a changed scope for the public sector. The payment market would have to be regulated and supervised in new ways to meet fulfil the objective to have a safe, efficient and inclusive payment market. > A second alternative is to issue central bank money in a digital form, as a complement to cash and the money held in bank accounts.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]