The fit of alternatives was not the focus of the comment I was replying to. The fact is that many people hold their wealth in cash, and many of the same people

The fit of alternatives was not the focus of the comment I was replying to. The fact is that many people hold their wealth in cash, and many of the same people are part of vulnerable populations. One shouldn’t remove another’s alternatives simply because it’s assumed that the other lacks access or sophistication. Even if true, both potential deficiencies are fully reparable and do not permanently negate the benefits of uncensorable money.