No payment system will ever succeed unless someone can use it to purchase something from an unknown person, receive their good or service, be dissatisfied with the good or service, return the good or service, and then be assured of a refund from an unknown and untrusted actor.

Even with cash, in the vast majority of cases you physically hand over the cash to someone you can see at a location you can return to. In the event of a transaction for physical goods at least you have the good in hand, and in the event of services thanks to government regulations most expensive services require licenses so you can later find the person who failed to perform the service you paid for in cash to your satisfaction. Also, one can create an actual, literal, "paper trail" by requesting a physical receipt-- one that serves as evidence of the exchange and would ideally contain contact information.

With your un-named payment system, can I do a "charge back" if I order some totally legit good or service from an unknown actor in an unknown location in the event of the non-delivery or fraud?

Also, no payment system that requires an internet-connected device (and a powerful one at that if no third parties with the ability to store and process large amounts of transaction data are involved) will ever, ever, despite the protestations of its acolytes, between now and the heat death of the universe, ever be able to serve the unbanked.

That why with the IVL part of the proposal is a physical card that can be used, if a patron is poor and unbanked and does not have an internet-connected device, to transact with the ledger via a trusted intermediary.