Summary
The current summary reviews the article “We All Just Got Schooled by Rogers on the Importance of Having Cash on Hand,” published on July 11, 2022, in the Canadian journal The Globe and Mail by Rob Carrick. In his article, the author discusses the significance of having cash in case of emergencies to pay for daily necessities.
Natural disasters and technological accidents, such as the Rogers outage, can interrupt phone and internet services for days, blocking people’s access to their bank accounts. In such cases, individuals might lack immediate funds to pay for their groceries or gasoline; that is why it is crucial to always have cash for emergencies. Moreover, the current economic and geopolitical situation in the world is a relevant topic of concern for most people, making preparations even more significant (Carrick, 2022).
Critical Thinking
The author has presented a strong argument proving the importance of cash and its usefulness during emergencies. First, he clearly established the potential consequences of internet outages and other accidents. They include a complete disruption of digital infrastructure, making online payments impossible and creating chaos in emergency rooms, transport hubs, and supermarkets (Carrick, 2022).
The author presents his solution to the problem, explaining the importance of having cash on hand to pay for necessities in case of emergencies. He gives an example of how $50-100 can cover the immediate costs for several days and make people’s lives significantly more convenient (Carrick, 2022). It is a strong argument because real-life events have demonstrated that such accidents do occur occasionally and might present risks to one’s well-being. Moreover, the author references the current geopolitical risks due to the war in Ukraine and global political tension (Carrick, 2022). While this might not directly affect people in Canada, it demonstrates that additional preparations are beneficial and might even help individuals cope with stress and anxiety.
In other words, it is better to be well-prepared for emergencies than to react after the accident occurs. Lastly, having some cash on hand does not require much effort from individuals. Simply withdrawing it from the bank and keeping reasonable amounts safe in the house is an effective solution to potential emergencies. In summarizing these points, the author presents a strong argument and explains his position well.
Critical Reflection
While I do agree with the author’s position, it is essential to analyze the opposing perspective to understand the situation in greater detail. One of the counterarguments is the potential risk of keeping cash since it can be stolen. Keeping large sums at home might threaten one’s safety, especially if they are not careful about their privacy and confidentiality. In this case, bank accounts are more secure options since financial organizations prioritize safety as their primary concern. Consequently, the author discusses the risks of geopolitical events and associated stress (Carrick, 2022).
One of the implications of this argument is that these real-life occurrences can somehow affect digital infrastructure and prevent people from making online payments. However, it is not exactly true. The accident that disrupted electronic economics was the Rogers outage, which was unrelated to the geopolitical context.
In other words, most types of emergencies can cause significant stress to people, but they cannot disrupt digital infrastructure and prevent online payments. Moreover, over-preparing for emergencies can be as harmful to one’s mental health as insufficient preparations, meaning that consistently thinking about geopolitics and its effects on daily life is exhausting. In summary, although I agree with the author that keeping some cash on hand is a safe option, the mentioned counterarguments are relevant pieces of criticism.
Reference
Carrick, R. (2022). We all just got schooled by Rogers on the importance of having cash on hand. The Globe and Mail. Web.