This is something I slowly think about every now and then. Every time I mention it, someone pokes a hole in it and then I think about the hole. The implementation itself is the problem while the idea, I think, is sound.
All you have to do is show that you contribute, right? Kind of like a credit score shows you are supposedly responsible with money and debt. So like a "contribution credit score." That credit gets applied against what you do for a living. Like a replacement for salary, it says "This person can consume a maximum of this many goods and services per anum." It gets rid of money. And barter is gone except on a personal level (assuming you disallow it on any larger level).
It also gets rid of poverty and welfare programs, yes?
There are problems with this.
Everyone on the planet needs to be a part of this system.
This would require an insane amount of data on a person, country's population, etc.
Hackable. I mean, you need a computer system to track this. At some point, someone will get the idea of getting into the data and give themselves more than they're worth.
Disability. I suppose a workaround might be that once you are disabled, you either stay at your last "registered" consumer class or you get a fraction (kind of like how unemployment works now).
But the idea, simply put, is that you cannot consume if you do not contribute and you cannot consume more than you would be able in a capitalist economy. No more arguments about socialism, communism, etc.
Every time I mention it, someone pokes a hole in it and then I think about the hole.
That's how progress is made.
All you have to do is show that you contribute, right? Kind of like a credit score shows you are supposedly responsible with money and debt.
Who sets the values of individual contributions? How do we prevent that from being corrupted?
I'm going to need to think about your other points a little more.
Things generally change as a whole or at least in ratios and percentages... cost of living, wage increases for performance, industry costs, and so forth. Similarly, you should "contribute" more according to the value you would have if money were involved, right?
Corruption hasn't been too high on my thought processes on it yet simply because you'd need a system to harden before you can harden it, right? But it wouldn't be too crazy. I mean, all you'd have to do is keep it from being hacked and then have safeguards in place. Like on any site where you can't rapid fire submissions, comments, or edits. Similarly, you couldn't give someone a "raise" 3 times in a year or something.
Sure, think away. Poke at it. I'd love to see it evolve into an implementable thing, start spreading the thought on it. It would make it easier, I'm sure, to get to Mars or the next star because funding becomes a thing of the past.
What about savings, I assume you can bank unused credits?
Can I load my unused credits to another? What is the incentive? Can I charge interest on these credit loans?
Why do I open a business? First I have to starve self for years to accumulate credits if no loans, and then I open one, but what benefit do I get - I assume that the business gets assigned a credit value for opening? I am giving up high credit position to open business, and if business is low to start or goes gangbusters, what credit value does business get? I might be getting overpaid or underpaid based on current business value.
What if I have great new idea, but because it is new idea, there is no credit value, therefore I get none until idea is proven? What is process for assigning credit value?
Interesting thought exercise! I love brainstorming!
It's not a credit thing. It's not money. It's not cashless money. That implies a tradeable thing with value. That's what we want to get away from. You have a limit of "value" that you can consume based on what you contribute. So that should answer a lot of the questions, right?
I suppose you could allow it to roll over and "save". If you're living below your means, why shouldn't you do that? If you live below your allotment for 5 years, maybe you're consumer level is worth more. So maybe you can "afford" that house in a better neighborhood. tangible things suddenly don't have a value on their own so why would a house cost anything? It's not the materials that have value as much as the person's time and ability. So it's not the building of the house that costs you but rather the features of it. And anything that can be mass produced by machines might have less value, right? But then again, to prevent hoarding, most automated positions would be "banned". It lets everyone do whatever it is they really want to do. So that janitor can suddenly build houses because that's what he wants to do and that introverted lady down the street can take the janitor job because it satisfies her needs. I don't know, something about that seems off, maybe the value of those jobs. Janitorial work is critically important in, say, a school or office but it pays so little. How do you maintain value equality between positions without creating a standards of living gap? <sigh>
Opening a business... hmmm.I hadn't thought much of that yet. I honestly don't know. Something more to think about! I mean, you're contributing but you need starter material. Maybe raw materials "cost" nothing and you're "paying" for someone's time. So if you open a business, it should be a high value business, right? Instead of some little kiosk "selling" plastic trinkets from China? I mean, there should be nothing to stop you from opening a business but at some point, there needs to be a mechanic that prevents "useless" value from being created while allowing people to do what makes them truly happy. As an example, if I won $5 million tomorrow, I'd probably still go into work for a while, at least part time. Something to do to keep me from being lazy or something.
Ugh, maybe the idea is just not workable. Or maybe I don't know enough about the things needed to define these issues and solutions.
I'm listening. I'm probably one of those people with the ingrained thinking you're talking about.
What kind of system are we talking about here?