An era where you don't panic at all even if you leave your wallet at home.
Have you ever taken a rustling bill or jingling coin out of your wallet today? Most people have probably used a Pay app or a plastic credit card registered on their smartphone to pay for coffee, ride the bus, or pay for lunch. In an era where even street food stalls and bungeoppang vendors display QR codes for bank transfers, we're already living in the midst of a "cashless society."
Nordic countries like Sweden are already at the forefront of this change, having already discontinued cash handling in their commercial banks. South Korea, led by the Bank of Korea, is rapidly preparing to move beyond a coinless society to a cashless one. This is a welcome development for both the government and individuals, as it reduces the costs of printing and circulating banknotes. However, every rapid change is accompanied by an unexpected downside. In today's GOLA discussion, we will delve into the bright and dark sides of a cashless society that has become so deeply ingrained in our lives that we often overlook it.
The Revolutionary Light of a Cashless Society (Arguments for the Pros)
1. Crime prevention and the complete legalization of the underground economy.
The disappearance of cash means the complete cessation of the flow of "black money"—bribery, slush funds, tax evasion, drug trafficking, and other covert activities. Movie scenes of 50,000 won bills being handed out in apple boxes will now be a thing of history. Because all money tags (payment details) are transparently recorded in digital data, tracing funds becomes incredibly easy, preventing violent crime and corruption at the source. This becomes the most powerful weapon in securing transparent tax revenue for the entire nation and strengthening the economy.
2. Overwhelming efficiency and reduction of social costs
Did you know that hundreds of billions of won in taxpayer money are wasted each year on discarding old and damaged banknotes and printing new ones? Add to this the costs of operating armored vehicles to transport cash, maintaining ATMs, and the labor required to prepare and settle change at each store, and the social cost is staggering. Proponents argue that a cashless society would prevent this astronomical waste and reinvest the funds in welfare and infrastructure, dramatically enhancing national competitiveness.
The cold shadow hidden in convenience (the cautious side's argument)
1. Threats to the survival of the digitally excluded and their tears
The most painful rebuttal is the issue of "alienation." For the younger generation, card payments at kiosks or biometric smartphone transfers are as natural as breathing. However, for the elderly, who have poor eyesight and are unfamiliar with smartphones, or for low-income individuals and those with bad credit who struggle to obtain their own cards, a cashless society presents a formidable "invisible barrier." The bitter sight of seniors being turned away after being refused cash even for a bottle of water illustrates the violence that technological advancements, which emphasize only speed, can inflict. It's a warning that the "right to pay," which should be given equally to everyone, could lead to a class society where discrimination based on digital accessibility is inevitable.
2. The birth of a society of perfect control and Big Brother
Another terrifying problem is the complete evaporation of privacy. My entire life—when, where, with whom, what I bought, and which hospital I visited—is recorded in a single database. If state agencies or mega-corporations so desire, this could usher in a modern-day "Big Brother" society, where every second of an individual's life is monitored and controlled. Furthermore, this presents a potentially fatal instability: if a hacker paralyzes the banking system or causes a large-scale power outage, we could be plunged into a national crisis, unable to buy even a single loaf of bread, even with money.
More important than speed is the direction we go together.
Technological progress is like a mighty river, impossible to forcibly stop. The transition to a cashless society is already a massive, irreversible trend of our times. But even if we're on the best boat, is it truly "progress" if we arrive at our destination alone, leaving others to drown in the cold waters?
While we enjoy the convenience of payment, we also have a responsibility to consider "digital inclusion policies" for those who have no other option but cash. It's also urgent to establish a robust legal framework to prevent the data in our wallets from becoming a tool of control for others. GOLA platform users, which do you prioritize more: the speed of convenience offered by a cashless society, or the brakes on looking after the marginalized? We hope your passionate comments will gather to sketch a blueprint for a future where technology and humanity coexist.