lderly Swedes like Majlis Jonsson, who is in her 70s, prefer using cas

as made her life more expensive. And she isn’t alone: more than one in three Swedes are over the age of 55.

Ola Nilsson, a spokesperson for the Swedish National Pensioners’ Organization, told the BBC in the same article that its 350,000 members aren’t necessarily against a cashless future. Instead, they want to ensure vulnerable individuals are catered for, that they can still put their money into the bank, and that changes aren’t brought in too swiftly.

It seems Swedish politicians are beginning to realize that greater thought is needed to the ramifications of a cash-free world. Leaders in parliament have called for the country to reflect on the pros and cons instead of “sitting back and letting it happen.” Mats Dillén, the committee leader examining the issue, has even warned that there would be major implications for society and the economy if cash disappeared altogether.

Those who are poor, disabled and living areas are often hardest hit by the transition to going cash-free — and there are other risks, too. IT failures and cyber attacks can take networks relied upon by millions offline within seconds, bringing daily commerce grinding to a halt.

The upshot

Cash is easy to steal and hard to track — and a cashless world could clamp down on financial crimes and eliminate the costs associated with printing and storing banknotes. It could also be a game changer for transactions from one country to another, meaning payments clear within seconds instead of days. This has the potential to reinvent the remittances market, where many foreign workers end up paying high fees to send money back home to their loved ones. Although economists argue that a cashless economy could reduce economic uncertainty, all of this hinges on achieving a smooth transition that ensures every member of the population is taken into account when new infrastructure is introduced. This means protecting vulnerable groups in society, giving people time to get acquainted with new systems, and keeping the old way of doing things in place — at least temporarily.