It sounds like computerized food stamps that never run out and are
available to the entire population, regardless of income.
One thing that I don't like about it is that it sounds like cc
would be a large bureaucracy. For example, they might declare that
plasma tvs with screens less than 21
I've split Peatbog's recent commentary into several posts as they are all
interesting.
Please keep in mind that the proposed Virtual Currency system is hoped to
work more effectively with the assistance of continued advances in
technology and automation.
From Peatbog:
...
One
I've split Peatbog's recent commentary into several posts as they are all
interesting.
Please keep in mind that the proposed Virtual Currency system is hoped to
work more effectively with the assistance of continued advances in
technology and automation.
From Peatbog:
...
It
I've split Peatbog's recent commentary into several posts as they are all
interesting.
Please keep in mind that the proposed Virtual Currency system is hoped to
work more effectively with the assistance of continued advances in
technology and automation.
From Peatbog:
...
Under
I need to correct a misconception. Under the VC system the
average and well-off DO pay for essential services.
Sorry, I badly mis-read that. So, it is food stamps without limit
for those who need them, applied automatically by cc.
I kind of like it but still wonder about:
1. A horrendously
- Original Message
From: mix...@bigpond.com mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, December 23, 2010 4:36:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: Virtual Currency - The future of currency in the 21st
century and beyond.
In reply to OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson's message
In response to Robin, and Jed as well:
[snip]
From Robin:
You mentioned the example of the Chiropractor that would be paid
anyway, even if the client didn't have the money to pay himself.
What's to stop everyone from purchasing goods and services for
which they have no money?
On Mon, 2010-12-20 at 20:28 -0800, Harry Veeder wrote:
He is proposing a system to ensure a more equitable distribution of
wealth.This
is different from giving everyone the same access to wealth.
The system of payment he is proposing does not depend on more taxation (or
what
you call
Craig Haynie wrote:
I was having a similar conversation earlier... Here's the point I don't
get: you want to 'spread the wealth', but why? Presumably, it's a moral
argument: that people 'should' have the same access to wealth . . .
Read the book! Or the web site summation. First, no one is
Least everyone forget, I deliberately created a different OT subject
thread so that Jed's equally interesting commentary (in regards to
advancing robotics rendering human labor obsolete) would not get
hijacked by another topic that I hoped might be of interest to a few
Vorts. I was interesting in
There go the prisons and workhouses. It's gonna ruin A Christmas Carol.
T
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:09:21 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Unfortunately they are not working for us but only for the factory owners.
Unless we are all collectively the factory owners via our shareholdings.
We just change from actually doing the work ourselves to
From Jed,
...
This sounds like money that dare not speak its name.
I am having difficulty determining the difference between
these credits and today's money in bank accounts, plus a
line of credit allowing you to run a deficit.
By all means Dare to Speak its name!
Please
He is proposing a system to ensure a more equitable distribution of wealth.This
is different from giving everyone the same access to wealth.
The system of payment he is proposing does not depend on more taxation (or what
you call theft). I hope it also does not depend on generating more debt.
14 matches
Mail list logo
