Generally you are either director or indirectly their elector so they are in fact accountable to you. But yeah, that's kind of how democracy works.

I'm personally only supportive of privacy-preserving CBDCs like the Rohan Grey e-cash proposal.

For example, with the creation of a national identification number (which, thanks to the initial poor security measures has already been hacked), government welfare schemes which involved the distribution of money to people now actually results in the poor benefitting from them, since the money gets deposited in their bank accounts directly. In the past over 80-90% of the money would be stolen by intermediaries.

This is entirely the result of the creation of a massive identity database which by any angle is a security nightmare.

Further, the digitization of money has led to tremendous benefits to the population. Not having to carry around cash greatly reduces the risks of loss or theft. A lot of abuse faced by vendors in the unofficial sector (which is the bulk of the economy) has also reduced because a customer promising to pay cash later because they wouldn’t have it on them, and then either “forgetting” to do so, or delaying it and effectively getting an interest free loan from people who were least able to afford it, is something that has reduced dramatically because the vendor can demand the customer pay them directly using any of the digital means whose receipt they will get confirmation of instantly.

Digital currency has also led to a reduction in fraud and claims of fraud. If a vendor sends a product to a customer with a delivery person, for example, in the past they’d bring cash. This opened up a lot of opportunity for abuse against the largely powerless delivery person where either the customer would not pay enough, and the vendor would blame the delivery person for stealing the money, etc. But now, that simply doesn’t come into play. The customer pays the vendor directly and the vendor sends the delivery person a confirmation and they hand over the product to the customer.

A whole class of exploitation tactics have basically been eliminated.

But the amount of control this tracking can create is potentially evil. We have to be careful with this.

I'd rather work for less and keep control than doing this. But what this is going to generate is massive govt. control. Worse than before. Not telling about India specifics though.

It's already awful to live there for a large part of the population, and they have so little, that the government really has no use tracking them: yes, they re starving, going to work for $5 a month, and sleeping... like, okay they knew that already, maybe having some sort of better grasp on the currency flow could help direct it better.

"Working for less" in India is not the same as in California, just yet.

I would not bet my safety on more govt. control. Of course my situation is different from many of those people.

At the same time, promoting long-term govt. and state dependence is, IMHO, the wrong choice. As a temporary situation it could be useful, but to promote autonomy when ppl get wealthier, not to make them depend on power.