Now, with countries experiencing inflation, the best way to curb this inflation is by using this method of going cashless as there will be no much paper money in existence.
But then, when these government bodies introduce these policies, they carefully scrap out the demerits of these proposals if I may call it that, because why worry about these "little disadvantages" when there is a world of good adopting such a policy could do for a country.
I took out time to do a little research on this cashless economy plan, and found that though there are positives, there are also some red flags that are worth pointing out.
Pros:
1. Reduces crime rates as there is no tangible money to steal.
2. Decrease in money laundering
3. Less time and costs associated with handling, storing and depositing paper money.
4. Easier currency exchange.
Cons:
1. Banks have full control of every single penny you own .
2. Every transaction you make is recorded.
3. Access to your own money can be blocked at the click of a button.
4. The government will decide what you can and cannot purchase
5. If your transaction are deemed in anyway questionable by those who create the questions, your money will be frozen "for your own good".
6. Potential data breach may expose personal information
7. Temptation to overexpand may increase.
If the world must go cashless, Bitcoin should be the better option, but as the government will always want to be in charge of your funds, CBDC is always projected by the government. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.managementstudyguide.com/cashless-economy-pros-and-cons.htm&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjNtYToxIT4AhXMyIUKHdrhC7MQFXoECAUQBg&usg=AOvVaw2132ZR98zH061TKrcKtzvu
I would say that the first two things that you listed as pros are up for debate. Crime rates may fall because there is no physical money, but more advanced hacks like at an exchange can effect many more people and they have so far not been as secure as banks. Money laundering through Bitcoin has become a big issue and transactions through banks are much more traceable to individual owners, so that is another lie. You say in the cons section that banks have control, but for the average joe on the street to shift to cryptocurrency they are going to stick to exchanges as the most convenient form of centralized funds, so it doesn't really solve that problem. One major con that is often overlooked is how the less fortunate or technologically literate will have a much harder time, the homeless will be left with much less support from cash donations which needs to be addressed.