“People are doing business without any fear of losing cash to militants or conmen,” Aden said. “The country’s telecommunications sector has undergone a rapid rise, fueled by intense competition amongst the numerous telecommunication firms that dominate the country.”

Cash is freedom to be robbed, so I don't think that will convince anyone in Somalia.

I checked my bank statement this morning. I withdrew DKK 300 ($45) on 16 January, and still have 100kr left. I have no fear of being robbed though. You should argue against Scandinavia, and some other countries in Europe.

Indeed. The problem with some hardcore libertarians, among others, is that they want "freedom" to be #1 on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and become confused or angry when others disagree. If you want people to want freedom--and you should!--you need to start by guaranteeing their basic physical safety and survival. "Live Free or Die" makes for a catchy bumper sticker, but if what you offer is the "freedom" to watch your family starve, most people would actually prefer a bit of oppression, and I can't really fault them for that.

Truth be told, "Freedom", as defined as: n. The condition of being free of restraints. n. Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.

Would fit squarely under level 2 "Safety" needs in Maslow's hierarchy. Therefore "Live Free or Die" would essentially translate as "Level 2 Needs fulfilled, or Deny me my Level 1 needs".

Basically, hardcore libertarians feel that nothing should keep them from fulfilling their physiological needs, and the only thing that might would be government force. if Government force is stopping your family from eating (See: bread lines in Russia during CCCP), You're already unable to meet your safety needs, which will naturally lead to revolt/rebellion.

Your analysis indicates that you're stuck on the dimension of individuality vs collectivism whereby libertarian solutions would somehow be inferior to socialist ones.

The real problems in Somalia lie along dimensions of corruption and violence. The biggest gains that they could make as a society would be to reduce the value of corruption and violence as a means to an end. Possibly that reduction comes in the form of free markets that create a vibrant economy that their people become incentivized to protect. Possibly, some more socialist democratic processes could take hold that appeals to their cultural tendencies to help one another. Probably some mixture of those forces could help to create a new Somalian society.

I'm saying that if you want people to agree with your philosophy, whatever it is, you have to make it relevant to them. Frik seemed to think that Somalians should give up day-to-day security, including financial and physical safety, in order to protect themselves from hypothetical monitoring by a government that currently can't even provide basic law enforcement. In the environment Frik lives in, government monitoring is a reality and frequent robbery is not, and he naively assumes that his priorities can be applied everywhere unchanged.

Are you reply to me? I was talking about cash in general, and for your information why I care: certain parties want to limit cash or forbid cash in US and Europe.

One can only robe you the cash you have with you, and no one has all his money with him, right? But if the same guy also robes you the credit card or debit card or smartphone with contact-less payment setup, they can take all your money, or multiple times more money (and the rest over a few days if you don't act very quickly and try to contact your electronic payment provider, if possible (see bitcoin/altcoin)).

The next question, how often do you get robbed in US or Europe? Beside certain hot spots in a few areas, I never heard that this is a real big problem.

No, this article is about near cashless society that are not in Europe but in Africa.

I think you lack an understanding how cashless transactions work in Somalia. First off, no one is using a credit card in Somalia. They don't work, no one has them. Two, the article made it very clear, carrying cash is a big problem in Somalia due to crime. How contactless payments work on phones in Somalia and M-Pesa is that you have to have a code to access the funds on the phone. If someone robbed you and they get your phone, they still don't have access to your funds. You can simply go to the phone store (Or whatever they have in Somalia) and get a new SIM for your account and then have access to your funds.

I imagine that carrying cash in Somalia is extremely dangerous and well worth the "Big Brother" factor.

I now realise my words are ambiguous.

I don't fear being robbed in Denmark, whether carrying cash or not. After all, I carry a €500 smartphone everywhere.

The smartphone apps are protected by a PIN, and contactless cards are limited to low values which the bank will refund.

This was the point of "New Yen" in William Gibson's Neuromancer, in fact. The only remaining real-cash currency, used mostly for illegal trade but still very much sought after because was not traceable by anyone (and had incredibly favourable exchange rates with electronic money)

The Danish Kroner is basically that way already.

That's just not true. People pay by cash all the time in Denmark. I happened to read this in line at a Danish supermarket and people were paying with cash as much as with cards while I was paying attention.

Visited Denmark twice in 2015 and I can testify that using cash was perfectly normal.

Cash was 40% of transactions, 25% of total value in 2012. [1]

Since then, to July 2015, there's been a 25% increase in card payments, but only a 12% increase in total value [2], so smaller things must be being paid for by card.

Contactless cards were only introduced in Denmark in 2015, and payment by mobile phone in 2013 [3].

So yes, it's normal. But it's not the most common form of payment, and I've been asked by a guy selling sausages from a wagon to use a card when I offered cash.

[1] http://www.cfir.dk/Arrangementer/andrecfirarrangementer/frem...

[2] https://www.nationalbanken.dk/en/bankingandpayments/danish_p...

[3] http://www.mobilepay.dk/da-dk/pages/The-story-in-English.asp...

No question, we're quickly moving away from physical Kroner. There's also political and especially business pressure to get rid of them. However, it's not true that they're obsolete or somehow similar to new yen.

I think it's a point worth emphasizing because going cashless is a huge decision, especially the way we're moving towards in Denmark. There's a discussion to be had around it and if we just accept that it's inevitable or has already happened then that kills that discussion before it's even taken place.

I have a question. Suppose I visit Denmark again, and I decide to hire a prostitute. Am I expected to pay by credit card, debit or contactless?

Presumably, that works the same way as the people buying cannabis in Christiania — I briefly lived close to Christiania. The cash machines next to the metro station are the only ones where I've ever seen a queue, sometimes 4-5 people waiting at each one!

Forcing everyone to use e-money only has a few drawbacks. There will always be things that you don't want to be associated with - even if prostitution is legal in your country, if you are married you would prefer this transaction to be untraceable, I suppose. Another possible drawback is that once money is only available through "controlled" sources, you could find yourself subject to redlining (see: http://www.engadget.com/2015/12/02/paypal-square-and-big-ban...).

So while I find e-money convenient and practical, I do not think that society would be "better" if physical money went away.

"We can see already with the encryption trojan programs that ask for Bitcoins/altcoins to decrypt your data - something like that wouldn't be reasonable and work on a large scale with cash."

Well, if everyone would drive with horses, there wouldn't be deadly high-speed traffic accidents.

You have it backwards. Horses aren't forbidden, you can still use them on the road. The horror, you can even still walk by foot on the road (near the side).

Some wealthy parties nowadays try to convince certain players to forbid cash.

[edit: disclaimer: of course depending on states law, horses/cars/pedestrians/trains/what-ever are forbidden or allowed on certain autobahn/freeway, railroad, subway, etc. The point was about forbidding cash for the sake of forbidding cash, just to track all your money movement, to be transparent. As a consequence you have to be very careful and loose your freedom. That would be like going back to Soviet Russia or similar times, were the trust is gone.]

On some roads, horses and pedestrians are allowed. But certainly not all; both (and bicycles, as well) are banned on freeways in many jurisdictions.

> Cash is freedom. No one spies on what you do with your cash money.

You need to physically visit the other party, so it isn't black and white necessarily the best option.

> We can see already with the encryption trojan programs that ask for Bitcoins/altcoins to decrypt your data - something like that wouldn't be reasonable and work on a large scale with cash.

Before Bitcoins, it was possible by using wire transfers. This only won't occur if you have a fictional purely cash society.

>> Cash is freedom. No one spies on what you do with your cash money.

> You need to physically visit the other party, so it isn't black and white necessarily the best option.

Some parties, want to limit cash or downright forbid cash. Then there is no option anymore, think about that. I am all for options and fine with electronic money for web transaction, but removing cash from our society would be a very very bad move. That would lock us in to banks and telecom companies and states. No freedom. Not good.

Gold is the only real cash. Banknotes are locked us into banks and states. No freedom. Not good.

What about copper or silver?

For those who don't know, there are countries that allows government or companies to take away money from your bank account without your consent if they prove you own them money. I know this may sounds strange and you will properly be thinking that is fine, but there are variety of reasons why you don't want that.

Yes, and your wages can also be garnished if you don't have a bank account so I don't see how cash solves this "problem." And it isn't just companies and governments, individuals also have the power to garnish wages and bank accounts.

half of my week has been setting up wage garnishments for people based on liens my customers have filed. I can confirm what the parent says is true in US/Canada/UK/NZ/AU jurisdictions.

Well, for me electronic cash should be the future.

Something with the anonymity of cash and the easiness, portability of electronic transactions.

Well, in fact cash is traceable, it has serial numbers on it, and you could trace it easily, some entities do it.

Physical gold and silver is much better, you could not trace it when you melt it.

People -- the government specifically -- does, indeed, monitor some things you do with your "cash money", including treating merely travelling with a large quantity of it as something inherently suspicious.