Basic Income Is Dead. Long Live Basic Equality!

As earth’s population grows larger and automation gains traction each day, how many job categories and niches would dwindle each time before there would be none left for onlookers?  More people mean more jobs are needed to sustain a vibrant society where equality gap could be lessened instead of widening.  More automation means more people will lose jobs.  These two factors are like pouring gasoline onto the fire.

Unethically, such a society could demand people to have fewer children, but such a society needs a strong authoritarian government.  In the West, most governments are democratic, and so such demand would be outrageous.  Furthermore, such a demand is for a weak society, because the society doesn’t have a solution thus resolving into forcing a reduction of population headcount.

A wiser society would not demand a reduction of population headcount — it got a solution for what’s coming!  What solution?  As of now, there is no clear solution for the two detrimental factors I stated in the first paragraph!  By the way, what is a society?  In my opinion, a society is a group of people that stick together for the benefits of the majority.  The two detrimental factors I described earlier would chip away most benefits of the majority in our modern societies.

Few governments and groups are trying out basic income as a testing case for trying to solve the inequality gap between classes of groups of people in our modern societies.  Nonetheless, small-scale basic income test trials most likely won’t yield any good result.  Furthermore, basic income for large countries like the United States and China would be an insane proposition.  No amount of money would be enough to give out to each person in a large country.

I think basic income is kind of screwy too!  For an example, the more money the government prints to give out the more people will spend thus requiring the money printers to print even more money so the government could have enough doughs to give out to even more people.  Get the gist?  Once the government tightens the belt such as stopping giving out money, the basic income scheme would collapse immediately.  A society that is addicted to basic income could also collapse!

By the way, how inflation would work in a basic income society?  I don’t think I know the answer to this as I’ve seen nothing like it has ever applied to a large country like the United States or China.  We all know that if inflation goes north too much everything would become rather pricey because the supply of money is too large — simply put, too many dollars would chase too few demands.

As job loss number increases and automation gains worldwide prominent, the tipping point would become too real when a society becomes desperate and mad.  Nonetheless, as an advanced society could produce just about anything with little effort using automation, the tipping point once again could occur positively as people would no longer require making a living by working the field, factory, office and so forth.

The question is, in the between the transition from a working society to a leisure society, how many people would have to die and how many revolutions would have to occur before the storm could pass and peace could form?  The basic income could work as a dirty solution till the modern society could completely transform into a leisure society!  The question is, will the governments of the world dare to print an unlimited amount of money before inflation hits and destroys the hope and dream of attaining a transformation of a modern society into a leisure one?

Perhaps, basic income is too draconian and would not work.  Perhaps, providing a fair playing field for the newcomers would work?  What do I mean?  Imagine basic income is not basic income but a one-time thing for the poor and the newborns!  What do I mean again?  Well, basic income is too hard to carry out as it requires the governments of the world to continuously print an unlimited amount of money each year.  Instead of basic income, why not basic equality for the poor and the newborns?

What do I mean by basic equality for the poor and the newborns?  Well, let’s say the government would go about to calculate the right amount of money each person needs to have a fulfilling life as long such a person would not do anything too crazy to destroy the money cache quickly such as using drugs, gamble, and whatnot — then a government would give a one-time basic income to all the poor in his/her own country so to provide a fair level of playing field.  Obviously, the rich won’t need any basic income so the government can save money by not giving any to the rich through basic income channel!

Basic equality would save the prudent government a lot of money and yet his/her society would be able to function in a jobless era.  All the newborns could also receive one-time basic income in a form of a trust fund that the government would create for them.  The trust fund would go out to the parents of the newborns for a while till the newborns become adults.  Once the newborns reach adulthood, the government then could give them basic equality (one-time basic income) according to the inflation rate in their time.

Of course, the hope is that the basic equality would buy time for modern societies to transform into leisure societies across the world.  The idea of basic equality, one-time basic income, is to leave nobody behind yet buy time for the governments of the world to see their societies transform into leisure societies where automation would provide everything everyone needs.  When everybody got everything and more, money would become so irrelevant!  In such a society, money won’t buy anything!  In a leisure society, only the smart, funny, easy going, talented ones could become real assets of the world!

 

 

Advertisements

Could Blockchain Be Used More Appropriately To Facilitate Cashless Society?

Thinking out loud is often done in a haste hints the nature of it.  Thus my thinking out loud in this post isn’t solid, but I like to dabble on here.  One thing people fear about a cashless society is that once the digital numbers are being erased somehow, their worth would be gone without any trace for recovering.  Thus, people are definitely still preferring cash as a mean for emergency backup.  After all, if their digital world is being shut down, they got cash to help them survive daily such as buying foods and whatnot.

Bitcoin is probably going to be an enemy of the banks since banks want to be the middlemen of the transactions.  Bitcoin takes out the middlemen role and allows people to have a direct transaction between the two parties.  In order for the bank to receive commission and gain liquid fund, the bank needs to be able to insert itself into the deal.  Simply put, Bitcoin is against a traditional bank which isn’t accepting Bitcoins!

Banks can accept Bitcoins, but people won’t use banks as of how they would use a traditional bank.  Bitcoin users may want a bank to behave as a trustful Bitcoin exchange to facilitate the Bitcoin transactions in safety manners.  This way any Bitcoin bank can still insert a banking role in a non-traditional way into the deal.  Since Bitcoin will be more transparent — plus demoting a traditional banking role somewhat, I don’t think the banks will be able to create more creative derivative means for creative investments.  I could be wrong since this is thinking out loud session.

Bitcoin is also very similar to a cashless society because it isn’t cash and it’s digital medium.  Taking away Bitcoin, underneath it all is the technology itself which is the blockchain.  The blockchain technology is more important than the clothes it is wearing such as a crypto coin (i.e., Bitcoin).  Why?  I think blockchain technology is good at keeping transactions honest.  This honesty is rather important for cashless society don’t you think?  Nonetheless, current Bitcoin way isn’t helpful for blockchain technology since the implementation is rather crude, allowing people to hack and steal each other Bitcoin without a clear way to trace back to the original owner of the lost Bitcoins.

If I’m not wrong, a will be successful cashless society could use the blockchain technology to keep cashless money honest so the original owner of the money won’t fear the tyranny of a cashless society shutdown event.  By that I mean the only way for a person in such a society to lose wealth is being incriminated with evidence and wealth get confiscated by a court of law.  In such an orderly way the blockchain technology could be used to keep track what money belongs to whom before the exchange takes place and long afterward so a cashless society shutdown event which occurs by any other mean besides the legal ones such as the one I stated just a moment earlier would be a futile effort.

I think people would be able to accept a cashless society when their wealth won’t be suddenly disappeared overnight in a mysterious event.  Of course, people are still going to fear that if they’re innocent and being convicted wrongly; their wealth got confiscated in such a rude event — they could be helpless as they would not be able to survive daily when their digital wealth got shut down in a cashless society.  I think once one accepts a cashless society, one has to accept such possibility as there won’t be any legal cash laying around to act as a legal tender for acquiring daily things.

By writing this blog post, it doesn’t mean I support a cashless society!  I just merely thinking about the possibilities and effects of it all when such a society occurs.  Although China isn’t a purely cashless society, because paper money is still going to be a legal tender within China.  Nonetheless, China is one of those countries that is leading the race in facilitating the use of money through digital devices such as the smartphone.  I think once the money becomes digital numbers, money is indeed facilitating a cashless society.  A cashless society is definitely taking some shapes or forms around the world, and so I’m writing this to amuse myself with both negative and positive possibilities of such a phenomenon.

Feeling Like A Broken Record, But I Admit Cryptocurrencies Are Really Broken! I Don’t Trust Bitcoin!

Why I trust the bank and not Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency?  Simple!  Origin’s traceable trail!  What do I mean by this?  The time you deposit your money into the bank either through electronic means such as mobile or you could deposit your money in person, a third party, in this case, the bank is there to take the responsibility of safekeeping your money.  Sure, the bank could have a system hiccup where your bank account would show up with a wrong value, but the bank has the responsibility to generate other traceable trails of your money such as paper statement, online bank statement and so forth.  Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency is a different matter because there is no third party that is responsible for your money!  When something goes wrong with your electronic wallet such as corruptive memory on your device would destroy everything you store!  Cryptocurrency exchanges could be the third party to be responsible for your crypto coins, but these are new institutions that you could not trust and they got hacked too often!

In China, people are going cashless by using their mobile phone as the main medium to pay for things.  Still, their digital currency in their electronic wallet is tied to a medium of cash and a whole lot of other mediums such as check and so forth that could eventually generate into very noticeable trails of origin.  With such noticeable trails of origin, the owner of the money could always demand some sort of compensation when everything goes wrong such as the value of money is suddenly being misreported somehow.  These people, although in cashless society (almost), would be able to morph their medium of payment effortlessly — cash to check to digital numbers on their mobile to whatnot — with some sort of confidence that some sort of traceable trails of origin would back their transaction up clearly.

Although cryptocurrency’s blockchain is very rigid and vivid in showing transaction trails, the sender and receiver of the crypto-coins could hide behind the transaction which in the end could hurt their claim of the transaction.  What’s worse is that they could face a perfect storm when their device got corrupted or hacked and their wallet somehow was rendered broken — they won’t be able to open their wallet to show that they got the traceable trail of origin to back up their transactional claim so they could receive any compensation from whatever party that they’d dealt with.  As of now though, even if they’re proving that they’re the owner of a crypto wallet that sent out the crypto-coins, they mostly like are going to face anger and confusion as once the crypto-coins leave their wallet — these crypto-coins are gone forever and nobody would be able to compensate for the lost crypto-coins.

I think until the cryptocurrency tech could address the worries and weaknesses of the transactions that are being made by the blockchain and the frontend technology such as the cryptocurrency tech (e.g., Bitcoin, Litecoin, Namecoin) itself, nobody could fully feel comfortable of using such tech as a replacement for traditional forms of currencies.  I hate the feeling of being a broken record, but let’s be clear cryptocurrencies are facing real hurdles such as hackable, not widely acceptable, not being supported by the governments, relying too much on an electronic wallet as the trail of origin, facing corruptable electronic memory (i.e., RAM/hard-drive), no mean of compensation once crypto-coins got loose from the crypto-wallet, too much saturation as too many cryptocurrencies are in the existence, and so forth.

One more thing!  If someone stole the medium that you store your crypto-coins on such as your smartphone, you will never get these crypto-coins back!  Traditional forms of money such as the digital numbers that represent the dollar amount you got in your smartphone app would still be yours if your smartphone got stolen!  After all, the app on your smartphone is probably connected to your bank account and the app could once again be re-download and reconnected to your bank account. Perhaps, you’re using an app such as Starbucks app which requires you to preload the number of dollars before you could use it to pay for coffee — even a stolen mobile phone won’t be a problem since you could always re-download Starbucks app and reconnect to Starbucks’ server which got the proper dollar amount in your Starbucks account as before!  Crypto-wallet?  I don’t think so!

Why I Think Bitcoin Is Not Ready For Prime Time

So Bitcoin becomes the rage again for unknown reasons.  Today Bitcoin price is going through the roof.  As of this writing a single Bitcoin is equating to $2251 (US Dollar).  I can see the allures of Bitcoin, but I can also see so many drawbacks.  Let’s talk about the drawbacks shall we?

First, one of the biggest drawbacks of Bitcoin for me is not be able to sell Bitcoin anonymously through an exchange.  Instead, the exchange requires you to send your info includes your social security number before you get verified and be able to do any trading of Bitcoin.  This means if an exchange gets hack, all of  your info is going to be shared or be sold to any unknown parties.  Of course you can argue that lot of your information is already in places that are being stored online and can still be hacked easily.  I argue that at least the government agencies and banking institutions are perhaps more willing to protect your information than some Bitcoin exchanges.  Thus, hacking into these institutions may not be easily done, and once it is being done the government would definitely go after such hackers in a big way.  So, at least you know you got huge resources to look after your information in a more serious manner.

Second, another biggest drawback is that many Bitcoin exchanges cannot be trusted, because not only they’d gotten hacked way too many times before but some of them also run away with your bitcoins.  This means if an exchange decides to stop doing business and just run away with your bitcoins, you’re basically losing all of your bitcoins on a specific Bitcoin exchange.  This is why I don’t think it’s wise to store any of your bitcoins on a Bitcoin exchange besides just enough bitcoins for selling purpose.  Once buying a bitcoin on an exchange it’s wise to transfer the bitcoin out of the exchange immediately and into your more secure Bitcoin wallet that stores on your local machine/computer.

Third, another biggest drawback is that you can lose all of your bitcoins easily if a computer that you’re using to store all of your bitcoins got corrupted hard drives.  This means if you cannot rescue a specific corrupted hard drive that stores all of your bitcoins, you basically lose all of your bitcoins forever.  Thus, I think some people may adopt storing their bitcoins on multiple machines in multiple wallets, so they don’t have to worry about having all of their eggs in one basket.  Some people also do backups for their Bitcoin wallets’ data to ensure that Bitcoin wallets’ data won’t get corrupted easily.  It is also wise to encrypt the partition or partitions that you store your Bitcoin wallets’ data, and only this way you can protect your bitcoins from being stolen easily.  Basically, encrypting a partition on top of already encrypted Bitcoin wallet’s data is like having one more security layer.

Fourth, another biggest drawback is that Bitcoin is still not being accepted widely.  Sure, there are many places that may accept Bitcoin, but there are also so many many places that do not accept Bitcoin.

Fifth, another biggest drawback is that Bitcoin can be confusing for people who have no experiences with computer.  Some people in older generations will not be able to understand how to use Bitcoin, and so it’s going to be exotic and hard to use for them.  To use Bitcoin, one must know how to securely protect your bitcoins in a Bitcoin wallet and on a secure machine, but these measures are probably just gibberish for people who do not have the ability to use computers correctly.  Especially, if they do not know how to use computer in a secure manner, they are going to get hack easily and lose all of their bitcoins.

Sixth, another biggest drawback is that many governments are not recognizing Bitcoin as currency, and so Bitcoin is in a grey area in which so many different laws are being applied to Bitcoin.  This means you have to use Bitcoin differently in each country, and so laws that regulate Bitcoin in one country doesn’t behave similarly to laws in another country.  Of course you can argue that cash are not the same in all countries, but cash are legal tender — thus there are specified laws that may apply on the usage of cash even though such cash are not printed in the specific country or countries.  Some governments are outright hostile toward Bitcoin, thus they’re banning Bitcoin outright.

Seventh, another biggest drawback is that some governments are making you as a target of investigation for using Bitcoin, because they think Bitcoin is a way to facilitate dirty money.

These are the drawbacks and other drawbacks that I may not have stated that prevent me from seeing Bitcoin as a sure way that can replace the traditional money.  Furthermore, I like to have the option of Bitcoin and digital currencies and traditional currencies in digital forms, but I also like even more to see that traditional currencies in the form of cash that do not go away.  Why?  Anything that is tangible is definitely harder to be erased and made disappear.  This means your wealth can be protected better even it means securing them under your mattresses.  If your wealth can just go poof in an instant, it means your wealth is not being secured in a correct form or forms.  Because Bitcoin has so many weaknesses, I think it’s not wise to convert a huge portion of your wealth into bitcoins at all.

Can basic income and good karma/credit system provide a way to cope with AI’s automation?

In 2017, a lot people and various parts of different countries are talking and experimenting with basic income.  Automation — comes naturally and intelligently through artificial intelligence — is the new thing that has gotten people worried.  Some people argue that AI’s automation will replace human beings with robots/programs in all sorts of jobs.  Dumb automation probably has already replaced humans in many cumbersome, repetitive jobs/functions.  Intelligent machines/programs through AI can probably replace many white collar jobs already.  When too many people are out of work, this could become a huge bother for many powerful people who carry important positions in our society.  Displaced people would want to be able to survive and strive in a society in which they’re no longer productive, but this could mean standing up against the factory owners, corporations, and even the governments.  If not careful, a world of full automation could mean a bloody revolution.  Thus, basic income becomes an urgent question for many leaders in any country in our time.

Nonetheless, in the West, we have a thing that was being taught since the fall of Soviet Union is that communism has failed utterly.  We look at China as if Chinese communistic society is the new capitalist society.  How can basic income fit into a Western society in which communism has been taught to be disgusted upon?  After all, basic income is about rationing, splitting equal income for everyone in a single society.  Isn’t communism is also about rationing and splitting equal things for a community, a society, and in biggest case a country?  I guess, we could argue a mix of basic income with capitalistic values won’t lead to new communism, but it could morph into an entirely different beast.  I guess we should ask, can a strong supportive basic income be an uplifting element for the despondent citizens?  I guess we should consider the humming capitalistic tunes of the middle class in this situation.  Can basic income give the despondent ones a chance to reach the middle and eventually the upper classes within this beastly creation?

Perhaps, basic income may not be the only solution.  Perhaps, we require many more parts of a larger, more creative solution in order for us to tackle the AI’s automation revolution.  Imagine in a society in which doing good things promotes good karma, and this karma translates into real monetary credits.  Can this route take us to a Nirvana?  Basic income to support a crumpling foundation, and on the top of this reparable foundation we decorate it with good karma.  The double edge sword of a good karma/credit system is that the implementation of punishments, punishing the good people who have bad karma/credits.  Then the question should be asked such as what could be the punishments for the people who have bad karma/credits?  This won’t be a good thing if new harsh punishments are there to wreck havoc in lives of good citizens.  It could literally lead to a society in which looks very much like a Nazi one.  Perhaps, karma/credit system should be used for the implementation of a positive, credit/monetary system only and not much more, and no punishment should come along with this very system.  This way, good folks won’t be affected by stupid punishments.  Just imagine good karma/credit system provides even more basic income on the top of the basic income?

I couldn’t let this go. Imagine a society in which isn’t too different from a fantastical Star Trek’s one, because a replicator alone could conjure any item out of the thin air.  Perhaps, a replicator could replace basic income and money and credits altogether?  If such a society and technology exist, this could mean the end of being desperate in a more intelligent universe.  Perhaps, if this to occur, people won’t have the need for ancient money/credit system, because a replicator alone could conjure up anything.  It’s magical.  Anyhow, the summation of all is that an interesting time is upon us, and AI’s automation may be replacing us humans in all sorts of jobs.  The old system isn’t providing an answer to how to create new jobs in an AI universe.  A jobless society would be very different in nature, because people need money to survive.  Without providing jobs to a hungry population, a society could face an upheaval of all sorts.  Can basic income and good karma/credit system provide a way to cope with AI’s automation?

Cashless Society Encourages Monopoly Money

I’m not an economist, because I’m a nobody.  Thus, my experience in trained economics is a zero.  As a human being, I do have opinions.  By staying informed with everyday experiences, I do form opinions on facts that, I think, are real.  From these opinions and ideas, I can draw some non-expert conclusions.  In fact, right now I like to talk about one or two conclusions I have on cashless society.

I think cashless society is wonderful for governments, bankers, and whatever associations that have control over a society, because electronic traces are available 24/7.  What is scarier is that anybody in the position of power or any hacker who has enough knowledge can just shut you out of a cashless society by changing your electronic numbers.  This is very real, because without any cash on hand, your only option is to rely on the credit system and other electronic monetary forms.  When such a system cuts you out, you are basically helpless and powerless and cashless.  In such a situation, surviving becomes impossible!

Cashless society can also be wonderful for you, but as long the illusion of real efforts and real transactions are actually taking place.  I think bankers can just enter any number of money into a bank account for just about anybody, and the money will form instantly by the electronic means.  You could say money seem to be appearing out of thin air!  Growing on tree, or however you want to phrase this illusion.  I think cashless society will enhance this ability by an infinite time more.  What do I meant by an infinite time more?  Cashless society won’t use cash, because cash cannot be legal.  Thus, cashless society is all about the electronic, monetary numbers, and anybody who has the authorization to form these numbers can just make them out of nothing.  Or they can just delete these numbers whenever!

What makes cashless society humming brilliantly is the illusion of convincing people that real efforts and transactions are actually taking place.  Let’s say, if a doctor who got paid very well by treating his patients in exemplary manner would probably quit his job if the bank could instantly form any amount of money, into the infinity, without any effort.  Why even bother to go to work when you can just go to the bank for an easy loan, and the bank won’t care if you can pay the money back or not since the bank can form infinite amount of credits.  In the cashless society, if the bank isn’t going to lend you any credit, you have to acquire these credits by working for a job or doing whatever to acquire more credits.  But will you be working with a happy smile on your face knowing the bank can form any amount of credits out of thin air?  Demand and supply formula won’t be a good gauge anymore in cashless society, because unlimited amount of credits can flood the system forever.

Even better, why don’t you just form a bank where you, yourself, can electronically form infinite amount of credits?  Wouldn’t this make you an infinite-air?  Why would you bother with taking out someone else’s trashes and problems for a wage/fee when you can just hallucinating yourself with infinite credits of your own bank?  If everyone is into this, then the system got a problem.  The problem is not lacking of credits or money, but the problem is about — nothing will ever get done.  Because nobody will give any real effort in any exchange since credit is created out of thin air without any real effort.  This means the producers see no reason to produce products, because the infinite bank is giving out easy credits freely.  Basically, why produce when you can obtain free credits, right?  Without producers in the equation, the consumers won’t have anything real to consume.  The whole economic system would become meaningless, and so the system collapses.

I guess, the only real demand for cashless society is the demand for more credits, and the easy credits are plentiful available so the demand for more credits could be fulfilled.  Of course, the government and the powerful bankers can just create laws that make the illusion works for awhile.  An example would be you have to pay back the loan you want to borrow, or else you may suffer a consequence of being shutout of the cashless society system.   Knowing being shut out, it means you are not going to be able to buy the most necessities such as foods, and so you know you’re doom for good.

Nonetheless, in a cashless society — a shutout mandate or whatever rules a cashless society wants to impose on the people — the atmosphere can become very toxic for the powerful people.  How come?  If a society can only get poorer while the banks have unlimited amount of credits, the poor people will see this as the greatest injustice of all time.  This means if there is large amount of poor people who are thinking this way will have a king’s head rolls.  Thus, a cashless society needs to uphold not only the illusion of real efforts and transactions, but it also needs to uphold the income equality for the whole society.  As long the majority (e.g., 65%, or 75%, or 80% of the general population) is wealthier than a small percentage of the whole population, then nobody would be able to form a big enough movement to have a king’s head rolls.

If you’ve read thus far, I think you would probably have a notion that cashless society is the same thing as a credit society we’re living in today.  I would agree, but cashless society is more draconian since it outlaws the tangible cash.  With cash in the equation, people can still feel that transactions are real, because something gets sold something gets paid with hard, cold cash (i.e., it’s real).  Even with cash in the system, it’s all about maintaining the illusion that credits are properly distributed.  Taking the cash out of the current credit system to make a complete cashless society, the illusion of proper distribution and exchange will be harder to uphold when the going gets really tough.  Few good examples would be unemployment goes skyrocket, income inequality goes skyrocket, debts go skyrocket and so forth.

Of course, you can argue, when the going gets really tough, with cash in the economic system or not, the whole bubble is going to pop and a king’s head rolls anyway.  Nonetheless, with cash in the system, at least new problems of cashless society won’t be introduced to the general population.  Once cashless society is in place, some traditional problems plus new problems are going to continuously rain down on the whole society, especially when people can be cut off from the system altogether since only credit-like means are acceptable and real.

Cashless society would definitely help the controllers to see the nuts and bolts of the whole system more clearly, because electronic transactions are going to leave electronic traces behind.  Nonetheless, in bad time, this would aggravate people rather easily, because they feel their privacy are being invaded all the time.  When it comes to money, privacy matters!

I think people won’t mind sharing who they’re having sex with, but when it comes down to money people are not that willing to share.  Thus, money is rather private!  So, cashless society is going to have a problem of allowing people to have some privacy with their money.  For an example, if everything is so connected in the cashless society, everyone would know how much credits you have available.  This would mean your local pizza parlor would refuse you a slice of pizza for they know your whole worth is zero or negative credit.  In a cash society, you can just hand over the cash, the local pizza parlor would careless if you have any credit, and off you go with a delicious slice of pizza.  In a cashless society, your shame would be revealed instantly.  Even worse, you will not be able to fill up your stomach when nobody is going to accept cash.  After all, it’s a cashless society!

In summary, I think cashless society can make bad economics worse, because new problems would be introduced to the general population.  These problems may become apparent rather quickly when the economy goes bad.  An example would be people may become less cooperative in making a living, because there are less incentives to encourage people to earn money the hardy way.  People may try to scheme the infinite credit/cashless society to make money the easy way, and economic bubbles would form into gigantic ones till they burst and collapse the economic system altogether.  Instead of really solving the problems of society such as poverty and whatnot, cashless society can only enhance the paranoia of lacking privacy.  Money is a very private matter to many people, and so these people are not going to be very happy about having to live in a cashless society when every known businesses and services out there know how much you are worth 24/7.  At least with cash, people can hide their shame of having less worth.  Basically, any society with a lot of insecurity can collapse, and so the same goes with cashless society.