The future of cash

An EC369 inspired essay. If you know, you know.

By Sadhbh Hendrick

What exactly is cash? According to Investopedia, ‘Cash is legal tender - currency or coins - that can be used to exchange goods, debt or services.’ Society has always placed value in trading, be it commodities or otherwise, to gain goods or services not previously in their possession. We have come a long way since barter style trading. As we progressed to exchanging precious metals as a form of money, we eventually saw through the introduction of cash. A practical, portable and durable form of money that allowed for easy transactions, encouraged specialization, the list goes on. As we now consider if it is time to bid farewell to our fond, familiar friend cash, we appreciate the many benefits of coins and notes have provided us with for hundreds of years. Moving ‘swiftly’ onwards, let’s discuss the alternatives to cash, any disadvantages associated with coins and notes and eventually begin a country by country investigation about the direction of cash’s future. So, my inverted commas around swiftly were not a typo, rather a reference to SWIFT Payment 1, one of the largest financial messaging systems in the world. In a nutshell, SWIFT is one of endless alternatives to cash payments. According to PwC, certain ‘Technological advances and solutions that could change the face of payments if they turn out to be scalable, resource efficient and sustainable’ include: social payments, NFC technology, Bluetooth Low Energy and Blockchain Technology. Fear not, we need not all obtain a degree in computer science or technology simply to buy our messages for the week or the daily newspaper. On the contrary, we daren’t forget our trusty steeds, the debit card and credit card. Electronic payment options that are easily accessible, understandable and widely used. In short, it is important to acknowledge that electronic or online payment does not immediately equate to some sophisticated coding platforms or a new form of trading that’s only understood by the chic 20 something year old hipsters of the world in downtown café’s and eco-friendly, (potentially FBI spywarerigged, hello, webcams?) apartments. Nonetheless, this dark and scary world of Blockchain Technology does still exist. What is this mysterious technology? Straightforward question; cannot say the same about the answer. In recent years, Bitcoin has become as big a buzz word as avocado, vegan and vanilla soy latte. But who can precisely recite what this strangely titled new currency is? Peeling it back, what is crypto-currency? Impressively and concisely put by BlockGeeks.com, cryptos are just ‘limited entries in a database no one can change without fulfilling specific conditions.’ So, essentially, just another form of cash, but cash which is active in an entirely different environment – the internet. Blockchain technology provides an appropriate platform for these forms of currency to thrive. And whilst your average Joe Soap may not understand or place any mass on Bitcoin, or one of its rivals, such as Ripple, due to its failure to satisfy all three money functions, there’s no denying the very real fluctuating share prices in these cryptos and the list of very credible firms currently accepting Bitcoin as payment. From Subway to Microsoft and every Bloomberg subscription in between, we simply cannot argue with the facts, this alternative form of payment is showing no signs of slowing down.

Considering further the world of crime, tax evasion, gangland activity and the leading role cash has to play in this more-successful-than-Shakespeare production. Whilst in the initial stages of researching for this article, I posed the question, ‘What is the future of cash?’ to my friends, family members, acquaintances etc. Essentially anyone that would listen to me. I posed the question with bated breath each time in the hope that one of them would present me with a groundbreaking idea or notion, an older, more mature outlook or a fresh, intriguing millennial insight. Unfortunately, this didn’t come to fruition and so crushed were my dreams of becoming the next Miriam O’ Callaghan, you know? One interesting pattern amongst my interviewees, however, was their lack of optimism. The majority told me outright that cash has no future. None. Just like romantic Ireland, it’s ‘dead and gone, it’s with O Leary in the grave’. Naturally, I pressed them for more information. Why? Why is everyone so certain? And the only two answers I received, from upward of 20 people, was the reliance on debit cards and also the eradication of higher denomination notes and the lowest denomination coins.

On a final note, it’s important to summarise and reinforce the conclusion of my evaluation. After examining what exactly cash is and waving hello to its friends or foes trying to ‘Revolutionise’ the world of payments, I still believe the future of cash is bright. Cash cannot be totally eradicated without isolating and imposing grave difficulty upon the more vulnerable members of society. Nevertheless, in an age of rapid technology developments and app developer after coding whizz-kid, we must still appreciate and welcome alternatives to cash. The use of cryptocurrencies or elimination of higher denominated notes in a war on crime or struggle against financial crises are not life-threatening to cash. Cash alternatives are not a terminal diagnosis on notes and coins. Rather, a call for necessary action to be taken to accommodate the uses of both cash and alternatives in the diverse and ever-changing world we live in. As proclaimed by UKFinance.org, cash remains king, however its crown is slipping. It is slipping as a result of Dogecoin or Ripple, electronic payments, cards, online banking, and apps such as SWIFT, but nonetheless, it is still only slipping. Much like Michael D. Higgins, cash is here to stay.

Mature Student Diary

By Jody Moylan

All of a sudden, I feel like Karl Marx. And no, despite what you might be thinking, I haven’t become a socialist revolutionary over night, or a man whose influence will decide the fate of nations (though both are on my bucket list). No, it’s because, like Karl, I am writing in conditions of profound chaos. I was flicking through a biography of the great Prussian last week, when I really ought to have been studying. I discovered that for all his legend and cool-cat status, Marx was a bit of a disaster when it came to organising himself. Now, I don’t think I’ve got the personal hygiene issues that Karl never sorted out (though you tell me), nor the chronic financial anxieties (though I ain’t rich), the status of exile, nor the personal tragedies either. But I do feel his pain about ‘the long days and nights of frenzied reading and writing, followed by collapses into exhaustion’. Yes, the pressure is well and truly on, and Christmas now seems like many moons ago. There are a few deadlines looming, goose-stepping steadily towards me. As a third year, it seems like I’ve been living with these deadlines for a long time now; constantly tip-tapping away at the back of my mind. But I’ve got this far, and I have to believe the work will get done; it always does. In any case, the modules I’m studying this semester are very interesting, and it’s not the worst way

to be spending your time — that’s why I’m back here after all.

Coincidentally, given that it’s back in the news, the Holocaust has come up in our history syllabus. It really is fascinating stuff. I’m particularly thinking about our latest readings, namely the rise of the Third Reich, and the plummeting of civilised German society. I remember looking at a brilliant lecture series on YouTube by John Merriman, on European Civilisation. He’s a famous name to anyone who studies European history and one thing I remember from those lectures was when he talked about Christopher Browning’s book Ordinary Men, which we’re now reading. I had somehow imagined that those Nazi soldiers we’ve gotten used to seeing in films like Schindler’s List were the real deal; the raw, robotic embodiment of hate they’ve been portrayed as. And that’s probably what they were, when they crossed that line, and left the real world behind. But in Ordinary Men, we get to see them before all that. Those screaming monsters who had entered the ghettos had once been truck drivers and dock workers. They’d worked in warehouses and on building-sites. They had once been machine operators, sea-men, and waiters. When, all along, you’d thought they couldn’t have been from your world, the realisation that they were, that they’d once been ‘ordinary men’ is somehow, in some ways, the most disturbing thing you’ll ever read. Browning’s is a great book, doing what great books do; telling you something you never knew.

In a similar vein, my new history research project, on Ireland’s famine of 1817, is uncovering all sorts of interesting information that I’d really known nothing about. It’s a forgotten period, overshadowed in popular imagination by the Great Famine, but 1817 is a fertile ground for research, with online databases like the Irish Newspaper Archives and the British Parliamentary Papers giving us not just a glimpse, but a whole story of life in Ireland two centuries ago. The fever epidemic that followed

that famine lasted right up until 1819, and maybe now is the right time to be remembering it, exactly 200 years on. One topic we’ve not covered yet has been World War One, but I made time recently to get to the cinema to see 1917. From the advertising shots, I went in expecting something like Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk, an edgy and dark film, unique and powerful, with a lingering effect. I was left disappointed by 1917, a forgettable movie that played up to sentiment and cliché and gave us nothing new. Somewhat better was Uncut Gems; a film I caught last week, before all those

deadlines began to march in my direction. Adam Sandler as the lead plays a bumbling, chaotic, and completely unlikeable character, but you can’t for one second take your eyes off him. Now that’s a sign of great writing.

Hopefully, when I hand in my assignments, my own writing will at least be readable. And though I should have read more of Marx last year, when we studied him, at least I learned something worthwhile this time round: no matter how chaotic his life, he always managed, in the end, to get everything he was doing done.

Google Hash Code 2020 at NUI Galway Campus

By Varun Dua

Each year, Google conducts multiple programming competitions around the world for students and amateurs. Google Hash Code is one such annual team programming competition, with hubs all over Ireland. The Hash Code was created back in 2014 by engineers in the Google France office. Hash Code takes place over two rounds: first up is the Online Qualification Round on Feb. 20, after which the top teams will be invited to Google’s Dublin office for the Final Round on April 25. Business Analytics society has collaborated with GDG Galway and Launchpad to host and organize the event this year at NUI Galway.

SIN talked to a few people who were involved in hosting the event on the NUI Galway campus last year, including some members of the Business Analytics society, and students and lecturers from the J.E Cairnes School of Business and Economics. The event last year was a great success according to Siddhant Mohapatra, one of the key committee members of the organizing team. “It all started with a plan to organize an event for students at NUI Galway to quench their thirst for programming. What better way to do that than a programming competition by Google itself!” Ruminating, he adds, “This could not have been possible without the support of GDG Galway, LERO, Launchpad, faculty at the J.E Cairnes, and members of Business Analytics and CompSoc societies”. According to Siddhant, a key takeaway of hosting such events is the enhanced collaboration between societies, students and faculty.

Denis Dennehy, Director of the Business Analytics programme at the J.E Cairnes School of Business and Economics, who has been instrumental in encouraging students at the Business School in participating in such hackathons, adds, “The positive energy and inspiration of the event organisers and mentors makes everyone involved feel like a winner. The camaraderie and competitive spirit of the students provide an electric atmosphere.”

Neil Keane, lecturer at J.E Cairnes School of Business and Economics, has been guiding the organizing committee for the last few years in registering and organizing a successful event. Talking about his continuous support, Magalakshmi Venkatesan, this year’s committee head, feels that holding such large events, where participants come from different organizations around Galway such as GMIT and GDG, would not be possible without such a wonderful support system that we have in place at the Business School. With more than 70 participants last year, from across Galway, this year the committee expects around 80 students to participate in the coding marathon.

2010 Sean Moncrieff of Newstalk presented his show Moncrieff live from The View in Áras na Mac Léinn in the run-up to the General Election. Pictured here is Moncrieff chatting to JP McMahon, local award-winning restaurant owner and chef

As we enter a new decade, SIN looks into the past and takes on its own 10-year challenge. Here’s to another 10 years of the best student newspaper in the country!

Student Independent News VOL. 21 Issue 07. 21 JAN 2020 NUACHTÁN SAOR IN AISCE WINNER: BEST NEWSPAPER AT THe NATIONAL sTuDeNT MeDIA AWARDs 2019 2020

Students encouraged to vote to have their say on structure of Students’ Union Committee SU REFERENDUM: All You Need to Know

By Mark Lynch

The Students’ Union will hold a referendum this coming Thursday, January 23 rd , in which students will be asked to vote yes or no to the motion of restructuring the Students’ Union officer roles, after gathering the 500 votes needed to hold a referendum on the matter. The changes proposed to the structure of the SU Executive Committee, and the motion which students will vote for or against on Thursday, are three-fold. The first change is to reinstate the part-time position of Equality Officer on the Students’ Union Executive Committee.

The second change is the abolition of the roles of Mature Student Officer, International Students Officer, Gender and LGBT+ Rights Officer, Disability Rights Officer and Ethnic Minorities Officer, and the removal of the SU Council Chairperson as a part-time officer. The third change is simply renaming the Clubs’ Captain as the ‘Clubs Officer’. This role remains otherwise entirely unchanged.

These three changes are all contained within the same motion, so students will be voting yes to all or no to all. The changes, if the referendum passes, will come into effect in the next election cycle, i.e. officers would stand for election under the new structure in Spring 2020.

The part-time Equality Officer role previously existed up until the end of the academic year 2017/18. Its existence ended as a result of a referendum held in February 2018, whereby the Equality Officer role was abolished and the roles of International Students Officer, Gender and LGBT+ Rights Officer, Disability Rights Officer were created in its place. Later that year, the student body voted to create the position of Ethnic Minorities Officer as a part-time role on the Executive Committee. This Thursday, the motion refers to the reinstating of that part-time Equality Officer role that existed until 2017/18, and the abolition of the 5 part-time officer roles that have been created in that time to work on the different aspects of equality in the student community. Equality is also within the jurisdiction of the full-time position of Vice President/Welfare and Equality Officer, currently held by Brandon Walsh. This position would not be impacted by the proposed referendum changes.

The change regarding the removal of the SU Council Chairperson is not an abolition of the position entirely, but if the referendum passes, the SU Council Chairperson will no longer be part of the Students’ Union Executive Committee. SU Council meetings would still be chaired by a Chairperson, but this would most likely be an external person, who is independent of the Executive Committee.

SU President, Clare Austick, spoke to SIN to explain how this referendum came into being. She states that it is a result of a review of the SU Constitution. “The constitutional review process began during my predecessor’s year. This year, we continued on the work of the constitutional review, with a particular focus on the composition of the executive team and the effectiveness and efficiency of roles within the exec structure. What came out of the constitutional review would have been streamlining and enhancing the functionality of the Union”.

Students’ Union divided on referendum as both sides look for a strong voting turnout

By Mark Lynch

The process that led to Thursday’s referendum has been the point of much criticism, with a particular focus on transparency in the decision-making of the Students’ Union Executive Committee. Current Disability Rights Officer, Alex Coughlan, will see their role abolished, and its responsibilities come under the jurisdiction of the new Equality Officer, should the referendum pass. They are concerned about the consultation process that brought about this referendum. “I feel that far more consultation was needed before presenting the proposed changes to SU Council and going to referendum. Over the past two years, there was only one meeting open to all students to attend to discuss the executive structure, and this took place in week 11 of term, with only two days’ notice. I feel that simply does not allow for feed in from a body of almost 19,000 members, and the process should have taken place over a number of weeks, with students being given the chance to feed in and propose changes to draft versions of a document over a number of weeks”.

Students’ Union President, Clare Austick, is aware of these concerns but feels some of the criticism is unfair. “Well, it started 2 years ago, so it would have started in my predecessor’s year, and ours was a follow on from that, so there would have been a consultation process, it would have been brought up at Exec meetings numerous amounts of times, with SU Council, it would have been advertised in the weekly email and on our social media platforms”. On the motion itself, Ms Austick, who was the last Equality Officer in the year 2017/18, says it’s all about improving the way the Union is run. “It’s strengthening and streamlining the exec, increasing effectiveness and efficiency and having meaningful representation that translates into action, and to improve the functionality of the Union”. She added, “It’s about bringing back the 9 strands of equality under the one term. If there’s just representation for the sake of having a representative, it can become tokenistic and dilute the overall equality agenda. All Exec members are there to represent all students and not just necessarily their role remit”.

The SU President also added that having so many members of the Executive Committee makes it difficult to run efficiently. “I do think having 19 officers isn’t always the most productive in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and functionality in working towards a shared vision. It doesn’t always work trying to get 19 people in the same room, making cohesive decisions together for the betterment of the whole student population, so sometimes that can be putting the amount of work and function at risk”.

Alex Coughlan believes, however, that the current

proposal is not the answer. “I believe that a constitutional review is needed, as the current document is 10 years old, however the specifics of the referendum question I cannot support in good faith. I fully believe that combining the work of 5 part-time officers into one, part-time, unpaid role, is promoting poor work practices. As a part-time officer, I do between 15 and 25 hours work per week”. They continued, “Even if this were to be rounded down, combining 5 of these roles easily creates 40+ hours of work. I believe that as a Union, we should be promoting excellent work practices, and asking such of one unpaid volunteer is deeply unfair and shows a lack of concern for individual welfare”.

Despite the motion largely based on reverting the structure of the SU Executive Committee back to the way it was in 2017/18, Ms. Austick doesn’t see the last 2 years of a split-up equality role as a failed experiment. “At the time, it was trialled and the great thing about the Union is it’s adaptive and reactive to the surroundings, of what students want.”.

On the other hand, the current Disability Rights Officer claims two years isn’t long enough to revert to the previous structure. “I don’t believe that this is enough time for these roles to fully develop. Furthermore, I feel that these roles are extremely important representation for students, who very rarely see themselves represented within University structures, and to remove that is removing seats at the table for marginalised students, who face particular issues when accessing third level education”.

Alex Coughlan continued, “As an example of this, many times when I attend meetings within University structures, I am the only person there with experience of disability, and as such, have raised issues that would have otherwise gone unnoticed by management”.

As a final call for a ‘yes’ vote in this referendum, the current SU President stated, “It’s not an equality referendum, it’s about the functionality, the effectiveness, the efficiency of the Union. It’s what students want and it’s to really carry out the mission of the Union and make sure that the team can work together on a shared vision and not against each other”.

On the ‘no’ side, Alex Coughlan had this to say, “As someone who is marginalised, the creation of specific roles to represent these experiences felt like being invited to sit, and share my experience and expertise with my Union. I felt empowered to be a part of that body, and in trying to remove these voices, we are all the poorer for it. I hope that the larger student body not only agrees with this, but listens to those around them who are marginalised”.

Both Officers encourage students to go out and have their say on Thursday, whichever way they vote.