So, money is "human time" and the value of that persons
time ? yes.
sand doesn't cost money - you pay for the guys to dig it
out,
drive it to you. (+ a whole bunch of middlemen).
So - other economies? like the carbon economy.
I think the most beneficial is the "economy of nice"
So
some guy is a jerk! that costs him. (in nice-money).
You're auntie is lovely to everybody she meets - she's
Loaded in nice-money.
She might be poor as a sausage in real money, but in
nice-
money she's loaded.
So, let's pretend the half-bakery is the Quarter bakery.
1) how do we spend this? Lets say a product relies on
exploiting people - it therefor has a high nice-price.
(And
the workers get that). You have to have been nice to get
that procuct. The opposite - lets say the workers live in a
happy-ville paradise. The product cannot charge any
nice-
price (though it charges its' normal money-price). So -
absolute Gits can have this product.
2) how do we assign nice-money?? well, the 'monkey-on-
the-shoulder' idea i mentioned elsewhere. It's a computer
which watches everything we do (you're going to have to
get used to the idea of this - because it's coming). It
decides how nice or not you were. It awards nice money.
So, let's skip the details of how Exactly this would work,
or
how Exactly it would be spent.
The basic idea here is that people make decisions on
more
than just money. That they THINK about how nice they
are
to other people. I believe this is important.
Hoever, if you've got any sense (in a capitalist world)
you'll
see all you have to do is get things for the cheapest
price.
Money is the only number that you have to reduce.
I believe that there Could and Should be other
currencies.
The currency of Nice is just one.
I am greatly looking forward to what people say about
this
one.
- - - - - - - - - - - read peoples comments - - - - - - - - -
[edit 1] - @flyingtoaster "but if you give money you're
being nice," - techically no, you're giving human-time.
You could say "you dont deserve this" - and give money.
They'd be upset (you weren't nice). The money is an
irrelevance. Money does not equal happiness. (though the
two are linked at the low-earning end)
@rcarty - "There's some pretty clumsy sociology in this
post" (and some flipant linking...) though ... i agree.
@mouseposture - heretical ... "a person believing in or
practicing religious heresy.
• a person holding an opinion at odds with what is
generally accepted." ... i did say it was quarter-baked...
Though, in all seriousness. Computers allow a level of
detail which was not possible before because it was "too
much hassle". This can be harnessed in ways (like this)
which might have quite profound implications.
@theircompetitor (i did not understand this - but this
seems to be what is eluded to ...
That is, communism (whose motto is “From each
according to his ability, to each according to his needs”)
is deemed a further development or “higher stage” of
socialism (whose motto is “From each according to his
ability, to each according to his deeds”) – communism
being the more “perfect” of two systems that both
advocate public ownership of the means of production
and centralized planning.)
@zen_tom - i like it! The system would have too stand up
to attempts at corrupting it - you're quite correct. I guess
it would be down to how smart the computer watching
you was.