Money is still king with regard to crises

Do you feel like blizzards, tornadoes, forest fires, thunderstorms and other disasters are more common today?

The data suggests that our intuition is good while the cost of damage caused by disasters continues to increase, largely thanks to greater economic wealth and increasing development. Whether they are natural or human manufacturing disasters, disturbing daily life. The power supply could drop, cell towers may not work. There could be water could contamination and domestic evacuations.

A reasonable personal funding recommendation is that households create a daily emergency kit in the event of a natural disaster or human manufacturing.

The Minnesota Ministry of Health has a useful control list on its website for an emergency kit that includes enough essential supplies for households to be self -sufficient for 72 hours. Among the essential elements of the emergency kit, there are species – small sums of money.

When calamity strikes, money is useful. A recent report from the European Central Bank (ECB) highlighted the importance of cash during and after a disaster by highlighting “the single value of cash as a safe asset and an essential emergency payment instrument for emergencies”.

That said, money is something from Rodney Dangerfield of Finance: Cash receives no respect. In our digital time, we often treat money as a relic. People regularly use credit cards and debit cards rather than money for daily transactions. Financiers recognize the safety of species, but generally consider the detention of money as a drag on yields.

Harvard University economist Kenneth Rogoff, in his book “The Curse of Cash”, has made a passionate case to get rid of most paper money.

However, small sums of money are an “emergency tool” during a crisis. Cash works when digital payment systems fail. The report of the ECB noted that Cash has attributed that no digital system can be fully reproduced: tangible, offline, universally accepted, private and reliable.