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.
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.