RE: How to Allocate the Worlds Resources Fairly
A new form of socialism... Alright let´s philosophize for the sake of spending some of my finite time on earth to dedicate on this topic.
So... give everyone on earth $1000 a month as basic income...
Then we, the producers raise our prices because people are now spending more.
In a short matter of time $1000 will be worth something like $100 or $10
There is no monetary policy that will ever work long term. No matter how clever you are, you will never be able to create a perfect system in an imperfect world where opinions is ever changing, where the human greed exists, and where a man can be corrupted simply by believing that a friend is a friend when he in reality is an enemy with a secret identity.
How about giving every human being the right or gift to receive an ox and a cow, a chicken and a rooster, and enough space to self sustain?
That is the only kind of inflation that actually solve a problem - hunger. But it would not take long before new conflicts would terrorize the perfect new world and capitalize on shorting (burning down and destroying your neighbors property in the middle of the night when he or her is away).
So corruption is reborn, The insurance industry is reborn, banks are reborn, the middleman is reborn
We can philosophize on these things until we are blue in our face @dantheman but the bottom line is that the only sustainable capital that exists in our world is human capital. It is the human being that has value - not the world around him. And human beings are a vicious creature when it becomes greedy and powerful and no - we can´t replace ourselves with robots or our planet with another planet.
But there is no law against dreaming up a new world, like Minecraft or Sim City Extreme. Some experiments only work in isolated forms where one can set all the parameters. Our world does not allow for anyone to change all the parameters. We can create systems and set systematic parameters - but - sooner or later we or those who will come after us will break them down and time will again show how unsustainable it is.
You are value.
Sincerely, and in all friendliness
@fyrstikken & @fyrst-witness
I think you miss my point entirely because of the easy assumption that I am suggesting people are entitled to a minimum purchasing power.
That is not my stance. I say people are entitled to a share of the economy whatever that share can buy. This requires not changing the number of shares in a misguided attempt to guarantee purchasing power sufficient to live.
I have taken politics out of the equation.
ok @dantheman, politics is out of the equation. I can play along with that, and no - I have not missed your point, I only want to challenge you on the philosophy because I am a major Macro-Economy-Nerd and this among other of your topic interests me.
Remember - You are value.
Sincerely, and in all friendliness
@fyrstikken & @fyrst-witness