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? IOW living a life of luxury, and > contributing nothing in return? (and I can assure you there are > many who would if it were possible). > > The net result would be that little if anything got done, so the > goods and services available would be severely limited. In fact > I think this is at least partially what went wrong in the > Soviet Union (empty shelves and long queues for basic commodities). Glad you asked an important question, Robin. Let me correct a misconception in regards to the hypothetical Virtual Currency system. The handy-dandy folks in charge of running Computer Central aka "CC" (we probably elect them!) determine which kinds of products (physical or virtual) should be considered essential for maintaining the general health and welfare of society. The same folks also determine which products have been determined to be luxuries. For a Virtual Currency system to work effectively any product considered to be a luxury must be paid for with actual credits one has accumulated in their bank account. You can't acquire luxury products from an empty credit bank account, aka: "for free." To recap: Essential products, like unprepared grocery food, health, basic health services, basic public transportation, basic shelter are the right of every citizen to acquire. If you have credits in your bank account, good, you pay for them from the supplies of credit you have accumulated in your bank account. If you don't have sufficient credits in your bank account to pay for what is considered an essential product, it's still ok as far as you are concerned. Your credit account simply goes to zero while you still get the basic product you need. YOUR CREDIT BANK ACCOUNT DOESN'T GO NEGATIVE. YOU DON'T GO IN DEBT. At the same time CC is keeping track of who is economically healthy and who appears to be in economic trouble. If CC detects someone's credit account is essentially going into the virtual negative column it might be time to have experts (social workers, counselors, doctors, etc ...) review the individual's situation to see what could be done to help improve things. Meanwhile, anyone who wishes to purchase anything CC has determined to be a luxury (and that might account for 90-99% of everything being generated in the economy), you had better have sufficient credits in your account to pay for them. If you don't have sufficient credits in your account to pay for them, well then, you can't acquire it. Hopefully this gives most incentive to work above and beyond the bare minimum particularly if they wish to acquire luxuries. Hopefully, such a system would motivate the vast majority to excel to their fullest potential. An essential aspect of the proposed Virtual Currency system is that beyond making sure everyone is covered for basic essentials, there is no free ride. The proposed Virtual Currency system realizes that economic health can only be maintained when the majority of its citizens are motivated to go to work - to produce WANTED products that others would like to acquire. The economics of supply and demand, particularly in regards to purchasing luxuries is still in place. You must pay for luxuries out of your own pocket, so to speak. Meanwhile, the economics of supply and demand pertaining to essential products is ALSO essentially in place even though some might think that may no longer be the case. For example... Let's take a closer look at the simplistic chiropractor situation I cited in my original post. Let's assume for the sake of argument that the folks running CC have determined that chiropractic services are considered to be an essential product. When a customer needs the services of a good chiropractor, market forces are still going to influence the decision making as to whom he chooses to have work on him. For example, a prospective customer with 100 credits in his account is still motivated to seek a chiropractor he trusts and likes, but ALSO someone he can afford. What I mean by "afford" is that if a customer can find a chiropractor he both trusts and who will work on him for 50 credits, versus another chiropractor who would perform the same service for 100, which chiropractor do you think the customer will likely choose?. Of course he will choose the chiropractor that only costs him 50 credits. After he leaves the chiropractors office the customer will still have 50 credits in his account, 50 credits that he can still spend on luxuries. If he had gone to the chiropractor who would have charged 100 credits the customer would have left the offices with zero credits in his account, meaning he was no longer in a position to purchase any luxuries. He will have to wait till he is once again healthy enough to get back to work so that he can start generating additional credits to acquire the luxuries he covets. Could such a proposed system be abused? I'm sure it could. No proposed system (actual or theoretical) is without its weaknesses. Nevertheless, I bet deliberate attempts at abuse could be regulated to controllable tolerances through the implementation of both stick and carrot incentives. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
