expand_less
If we define a currency as a measurement in complex transactional markets, then we can define a currency system as any {{formal system}} based on a set of currencies. So, the financial system and consumer banking are based on a worldwide system of {{fiat currencies}} that is ultimately derived from one or two national fiat currencies that is the measuring stick for all inter-currency transactions.
The ubiquity of this system leads people to confuse money, and all its derivitive currencies in markets and banking, with currencies in general and the actual wealth that is being measured. The wealth is the goods, services and labor that are transacted. We have tricked ourselves into thinking that actual wealth is involved in purely financial transactions. If you win or lose in financial markets, it is no different that winning or losing in the casino. No wealth is created, it is only moved from one account to another. Ironically, the claimed purpose of the markets is to distibute risk, and that is a valid insurance function of markets, but in reality markets are predatory environments where players are competing to hide and concentrate risk on those without the power and information to resist. We will leave the deconstruction of the current system and its violence to another essay, here we are concerned with the functions and features of alternatives to the systems of scarce money.
First, although our systems may use prevailing local currencies as both a measure and a medium of exchange, these are distinct currencies. In reality, this is little different than customer accounts with a vendor or a bank. Accounts payable and receivable are denominated in dollars, and stocks are valued in dollars, but the numbers in these accounts are not money, but other currencies derived from dollars.
As an example, let us consider the function of funding activities that build the commons. Now, we assume we will need contributions in conventional currencies as well as time and other resources that will be permanent donations to the efforts. Ultimately, gifts to the commons, but what if some of my investors are willing to give a certain amount, and provide financial backing at a higher level. In other words, some moneys would be contributed as a lone rather than a gift.
So, we are building a community based educational resource where students of all ages learn about technology and social media, and learn to design and build all sorts of things. I come with the knowledge and experience to help build the school and small amounts of money to invest. If someone in the community can replace my salary with gifts and loads, I can go full time. Like so many, I should be retiring soon, but I can't afford to. In a community of gifts and abundance.
Say I can inspire the advanced systems class to take on metropolitan area networks. We create one or more open technology based network technology companies, and they are successful. Now we can feed back some of the profits made possible by the knowledge assets created and transferred in the educational experience to retire the obligations created in building the commons assets in the first place.
The difference in our currency design is mainly in our approach to scarcity and abundance. In natural systems, we have balance of flows and signals of relative abundance that are the currencies of the natural world. New flows can overwhelm and replace existing ones, but ultimately either there is a long term balance, or scacity becomes extinction. Scarcity as a control mechanism is a simialr threat to existence. In other words, we want currencies and currency based signals to contribute to choices based on attraction, not fear. We want to produce wealth as a collaboration of friends, not as warring tribes or empires.
We will design a system of currencies and provide a reference implementation of supporting systems. Using these currencies will be how we measure our work and wealth in collaborative enterprise. I will measure my wealth and security by the communities I participate in and not by the scarce currencies I hord, and I will know I can be secure in my retirement even if the conservatives ultimately destroy Social Security. I will know because our systems of currency make visible the shared community wealth we always had. If my wife and I need someone to come over and clean or shop when we can't anymore, and if we need nursing care, we can be confident that is available out of our collective abundance. All the wealth I create in teaching and building technical local industries will stay in the community rather than getting sucked out by vampire capitalism. I don't need money to pay for care, I need the abundance in the community to support a larger community of caregivers.
In the system we have, caregivers get squeezed with minimum wages and few benefits. In our system, everyone can get what they need, so they can't be squeezed that way. Collectively, we can only consume the wealth we produce, but if we share that more equitably, I think we'll be fine. We'll even take care of the failed leaders of the old system who find little they can productively do now.
The currency system will be designed with the understanding that the purpose is not to restrict choice, but the enhance it. It makes contribution visible in all it's detail. If your designs are included in millions of systems, we'll know that. Is that more valuable than being a neurosurgeon or an NBA player? I don't know, does it matter? Does comparing their salaries help? The real wealth we share will continue to be largely intangible, but we can do a better job measuring even the intagibles with a better system.
The ubiquity of this system leads people to confuse money, and all its derivitive currencies in markets and banking, with currencies in general and the actual wealth that is being measured. The wealth is the goods, services and labor that are transacted. We have tricked ourselves into thinking that actual wealth is involved in purely financial transactions. If you win or lose in financial markets, it is no different that winning or losing in the casino. No wealth is created, it is only moved from one account to another. Ironically, the claimed purpose of the markets is to distibute risk, and that is a valid insurance function of markets, but in reality markets are predatory environments where players are competing to hide and concentrate risk on those without the power and information to resist. We will leave the deconstruction of the current system and its violence to another essay, here we are concerned with the functions and features of alternatives to the systems of scarce money.
First, although our systems may use prevailing local currencies as both a measure and a medium of exchange, these are distinct currencies. In reality, this is little different than customer accounts with a vendor or a bank. Accounts payable and receivable are denominated in dollars, and stocks are valued in dollars, but the numbers in these accounts are not money, but other currencies derived from dollars.
As an example, let us consider the function of funding activities that build the commons. Now, we assume we will need contributions in conventional currencies as well as time and other resources that will be permanent donations to the efforts. Ultimately, gifts to the commons, but what if some of my investors are willing to give a certain amount, and provide financial backing at a higher level. In other words, some moneys would be contributed as a lone rather than a gift.
So, we are building a community based educational resource where students of all ages learn about technology and social media, and learn to design and build all sorts of things. I come with the knowledge and experience to help build the school and small amounts of money to invest. If someone in the community can replace my salary with gifts and loads, I can go full time. Like so many, I should be retiring soon, but I can't afford to. In a community of gifts and abundance.
Say I can inspire the advanced systems class to take on metropolitan area networks. We create one or more open technology based network technology companies, and they are successful. Now we can feed back some of the profits made possible by the knowledge assets created and transferred in the educational experience to retire the obligations created in building the commons assets in the first place.
The difference in our currency design is mainly in our approach to scarcity and abundance. In natural systems, we have balance of flows and signals of relative abundance that are the currencies of the natural world. New flows can overwhelm and replace existing ones, but ultimately either there is a long term balance, or scacity becomes extinction. Scarcity as a control mechanism is a simialr threat to existence. In other words, we want currencies and currency based signals to contribute to choices based on attraction, not fear. We want to produce wealth as a collaboration of friends, not as warring tribes or empires.
We will design a system of currencies and provide a reference implementation of supporting systems. Using these currencies will be how we measure our work and wealth in collaborative enterprise. I will measure my wealth and security by the communities I participate in and not by the scarce currencies I hord, and I will know I can be secure in my retirement even if the conservatives ultimately destroy Social Security. I will know because our systems of currency make visible the shared community wealth we always had. If my wife and I need someone to come over and clean or shop when we can't anymore, and if we need nursing care, we can be confident that is available out of our collective abundance. All the wealth I create in teaching and building technical local industries will stay in the community rather than getting sucked out by vampire capitalism. I don't need money to pay for care, I need the abundance in the community to support a larger community of caregivers.
In the system we have, caregivers get squeezed with minimum wages and few benefits. In our system, everyone can get what they need, so they can't be squeezed that way. Collectively, we can only consume the wealth we produce, but if we share that more equitably, I think we'll be fine. We'll even take care of the failed leaders of the old system who find little they can productively do now.
The currency system will be designed with the understanding that the purpose is not to restrict choice, but the enhance it. It makes contribution visible in all it's detail. If your designs are included in millions of systems, we'll know that. Is that more valuable than being a neurosurgeon or an NBA player? I don't know, does it matter? Does comparing their salaries help? The real wealth we share will continue to be largely intangible, but we can do a better job measuring even the intagibles with a better system.