Bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more
So, I was thinking about the possibility of combining a cryptocurrency system with a universal basic income. I had thought about this before, but I don't think I ever bothered to write anything about it. Well, I decided to do a Google search today and it turns out that I am not the only person who has thought about this.
In Fair Money for All: A person who initially invested a few hundred dollars in Bitcoin at startup would become among the wealthiest individuals in the world if Bitcoin became the world currency. This is highly unlikely because it requires adoption of those who are not favored in any way by this wealth shift. Basic Bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more on the Blockchain. The "early comers" joined because Bitcoin was a speculative investment that they believed might make them some money.
The adoption of the system by the would-be "late comers" would increase inequality. Thus a change in the monetary unit, which is uniform in its operation and affects all transactions equally, has no consequences.
If, by a change in the established standard of value, a man received and owned twice bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more much money as he did before in payment for all rights and for all efforts, and if he also paid out twice as much money for all acquisitions and for all satisfactions, he would be wholly unaffected. Such changes have produced in the past, and are producing now, the vastest social consequences, because, it does not change equally for all persons or for all purposes.
Hayek and Hernando de Soto Polar have argued that rules and social order are the foundation for free markets. Free markets work within the framework of set rules that are established bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more recognized.
Hernando de Soto gives the example of using property as collateral. He argues that market economies had succeeded in the West primarily because there were generally established property rules that linked land and houses to legal titles and allowed for the transfer of property via title. Under these specific conditions, a house can be used as collateral for a loan to start a small business. In third world countries, on the other hand, the land and houses of the poor are only held under bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more usufruct.
There is no artificial property system whereby actual tangible possessions become linked to legal fictions like titles, which means that the poor people in those countries can't use their land or homes as collateral for receiving a loan.
To rise up out of poverty, the poor man needs money with which he can take some risks. Using the loan, he may become an entrepreneur and get ahead, raising himself out of poverty. This is why Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the mutualists advocated "mutual banking" as a way of ensuring that poor people could receive loans. The core idea of the mutual banking system was to make credit available to the poor without high interest rates that might lead to debt slavery, thereby enabling the poor to climb out of poverty through their own effort.
Most of all, though, what makes markets "work" is the existence of standard rules that can be known and the enforcement of such rules. The enforcement can be through private police forces, government police forces, communal arrangements, or whatever, but there has to be enforcement of rules for markets to function.
Markets require law and order! Free markets are all about free contracts, and contracts have to be enforceable in order for markets to work. And this brings us back to Keynes' bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more. Contracts often set hard monetary payment amounts over extended periods of time, and fluctuations in the value of currency is sort of like an external manipulation of the contract from the currency side.
The free contracts are no longer truly voluntary contracts, but a sort of fraud that can be manipulated from without. The same thing would happen with a mortgage. The real value of the mortgage would be in constant flux, making economic calculation impossible. So, Keynes suggests that the primary goal of monetary policy ought to be the stabilization of the price level e.
My model is more distributist or egalitarian. The problem is that the stabilization of price levels and the allowance of substantial inequality are mutually exclusive.
If you allow for substantial inequality, then speculative investment is always a possibility. If hoarding of money beyond a certain point is prohibited, then speculative investment is actually restricted. If I am only able to hold so much of the currency at a time, I can't buy a bunch of units of this currency in the hopes that its value will increase. Well, the very fact that the currency cannot be hoarded will ensure that the currency will not be too volatile.
The value of Bitcoin can rise or fall quite rapidly as the result of speculative investment. If a few powerful people suddenly buy tons and tons of Bitcoin, the price goes up. If a few powerful players decide that they want out of the Bitcoin game, the value drops precipitously. By making a digital currency that does not allow any one individual to hoard very much, we create a system that prevents the emergence of oligarchs within the system.
There is no way that any one individual or group of a few individuals can gain that much power over the currency system as a whole. A truly sound cryptocurrency, in my estimation, would have to prohibit hoarding and make inequality impossible within the currency bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more. I have often wondered about the possibility of designing a currency system that had an automatic redistribution mechanism.
I vaguely remember David Graeber mentioning, in Debt: The First 5, Years, that one ancient currency system actually consisted of notes that expired after a certain amount of time. You couldn't just hoard the notes because they would eventually become worthless. This would incentivize people to spend their money, thereby preventing people from hoarding money for purposes of speculative investment, which in turn would keep the value of the money from fluctuating with the tides of the animal spirits i.
This brings to mind the idea of replacing money with a system of credits. EarthVote advocates a system of credits or "Reward currency" in which the credits are not transferred from one account to another but only deducted from an account after bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more.
Producers would receive "Reward" credits from the community for doing an activity that the community deemed productive. Graeber also notes how imperialist governments used to issue money and give it away in lands that they bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more colonizing whilst simultaneously demanding a portion of the money back in payment of taxes.
This would artificially create a market economy in the colony if markets had not previously existed there. So, here's a rough sketch of the sort of digital currency system that I envision. Each individual would be limited to owning one account. To prevent people from creating multiple accounts, the account would have to be linked to the persons' fingerprint. The fingerprint would not be sufficient to unlock their account and spend money, but it would be necessary in order to establish an account, just as a way to prevent people from creating multiple accounts.
When new "coins" are issued in the digital currency, they would be divided up evenly and distributed out to the accounts of all members in bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more shares or dividends. The digital currency system bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more be a sort of egalitarian cooperative in which all account holders are shareholders with equal shares.
The digital currency would expire after a certain number of years unless it changed hands. I would propose maybe years as a decent span. Accounts would automatically spend the oldest money in the account first, and the old money would expire after remaining in the account for years without being used.
When money expires, the system will automatically issue new units of currency in its place and distribute out the new money to all account as an equal dividend. The accounts would also be established with a maximum limit. The limit might be, for instance, the equivalent ofdollars or the price of a really nice home. Any money deposited into the account above that amount would automatically expire and an equivalent amount would be reissued by the system and distributed out in equal shares to the accounts of all users.
This idea of linking a universal basic income to cryptocurrency may more properly be regarded as a new rendition of social credit. In and of itself, this sort of cryptocurrency social credit system wouldn't necessarily be sufficient to give everyone a universal basic income.
I think that the funding of a complete basic income would probably require funding through a land value tax, following the models of Henry George and Thomas Paine. If we had a government or a democratic confederation that adopted such a currency, and exclusively accepted this cryptocurrency as payment from its citizens, then this would be the perfect system through which to issue a universal basic income funded by a Georgist land value tax. I don't really think that the mutual banking ideas of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon et al.
What we really need is a cryptocurrency system that operates along the lines of C. Douglas' social credit theory. But, most of all, I think we need a universal bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more income provided with revenue generated by a land value tax. The establishment of a social credit based cryptocurrency would be a decent way to lay the foundation for geo-mutualist social democracy with a universal basic income. All of this is more of a suggestion than a recommendation.
I'm mostly just putting these ideas out there. This article is so helpful for me to imagine how crypto combines with UBI. I had a similar idea to yours actually. I think that people that want to make money off bitcoin, or just make money in general, are all looking for the same thing: Security into the future, despite old age, health status or ability to work.
Security to have basic needs met and enjoy a fulfilling life free from fear of survival. A universal basic income would eradicate the fear of survival and without that primal fear, people will be given the opportunity to change. Nice post for sure. I am a big advocate of a universal basic income.
Crypto-currency could be the way forward. Thanks for posting your perspective. Don't you bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more Steemit's implementation seems to be based on social credit? Thanks, I really enjoyed your article.
Hope you keep writing on social credit and the technological dividends. Basic Income on the Blockchain The "early comers" joined because Bitcoin was a speculative investment that they believed might make them some money.
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post. I added one picture. Not exactly, but I do see a sort of parallel.
Universal Basic Income UBI as a possible policy instrument is slowly creeping from the fringe into the mainstream. Switzerland, mid last year, humored a historic referendum on implementing and allocating a basic income of 2, CHF 2, USD to each adult, with an additional CHF for each dependent. And although the referendum was mostly an act of political posturing - with almost 77 percent of the population voting against it - murmurs and arguments in favor of Universal Basic Income have surfaced from hard-hitting entrepreneurs like Elon Musk of Telsa to small town municipalities bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more the United Kingdom.
As automation and downward pressure on wages intensify, populist elements may identify Universal Basic Income as a strong addition to political platforms or party lines. Therefore, the follow-through of such programs would likely land in the backyard of government institutions, a mighty proposition in terms of breadth and expense. Any long-term hope to turn these rose-colored aspirations from theory into reality would require comprehensive digitization across the board to manage administration and monitoring costs.
However, between burdensome bureaucracy or budgetary tightness, government-directed initiatives might not be the most efficient UBI scheme to arise. Cryptocurrencies could represent a private response to large-scale unconditional wage transfers. But, would it be accessible to groups that would most heavily rely on UBI - such as the elderly or the needy - who tend to be poorly versed in more advanced digital finance technology?
As it currently stands, more than low and middle income countries have put cash bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more programs into place. The consequences of such disbursements in relation bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more both financial inclusion and digitization of financial services are two-fold.
For one, these transfers serve as a funnel into 'formalized' financial accounts, whether that be through mobile devices or more traditional banking tools. According to World Bank Global Findex dataonly 50 percent of the worldwide adult population enjoys a registered financial account.
That percent bounces up to 70 when the cohort subject to analysis is limited to recipients of government transfers. While this is not definitive proof that there is causation between accepting government funds and account ownership, there is certainly a case for correlation.
But, custody over an account is only half of the equation. An account that is merely symbolic of financial inclusion, but fundamentally dormant, does not beget the same benefits - for either the individual or the economy - as an account plugged into, and used for, the full portfolio of financial services. Again, though, data suggests that government transfers, especially digital transfers, warm or coax communities to the idea of borrowing, saving, and even investing. In India, randomized trials across sub-districts of 60, people revealed that the digitizing of government welfare allocations triggered a 15 percent jump in participants' willingness to take on a loan.
Similar findings were echoed in a Kenyan study. Participants who received government payments were 7 percent more likely to squirrel away savings, and 10 percent more likely to borrow from formal channels, in comparison to the control group. It stands to reason, then, that if digital Government-to-Person G2P aid campaigns can cause cascading effects across the financial inclusion spectrum, Universal Basic Income would be the 'nuclear bomb' equivalent in a government's arsenal of wealth and financial services distribution tactics.
That said, UBI as a concept is still in its formative phaseand there is no consensus as to whether it would be truly universal or have its availability capped to those in certain income brackets.
Other more practical policy considerations, like what is the ideal value for a basic income to achieve social goals, or which technology will optimize disbursements in regard to administrative costs, reach and red tape, are playing out in real-time as pilots around the world strive to find answers. Finland is one such pioneer, and an experiment involving 2, unemployed citizens is underway. With ages ranging from 25 to 58, each Finn will automatically pocket EUR USD every month in lieu of other government welfare services.
That sum will remain steady even if a recipient elects to enter the labor market. And Finland is not alone - a whole medley of governing bodies in Europe and beyond are toying with UBI variations to suss out their budgetary viability, technological demands and holistic impact. The jury, however, is still out, and UBI advocates and opponents alike are eagerly waiting for raw data from government pilots to trickle in.
Other programs are a bit further along the development curve, and early assessments are starting to take shape. GiveDirectlya non-profit that delivers cash transfers to the extreme poor, has circulated the first qualitative feedback aggregated from its Universal Basic Income trial in Kenya.
The survey data paints a picture of ever expanding economic activity in response to the free money - from entrepreneurship to urban relocation - contrary to convictions that it would breed laziness and inertia.
And, of even more excitement, is that this economic activity is absorbed into the digital finance ecosystem, as the transfers are deposited directly into M-Pesa mobile money accounts. Because of this, a lot of families are connected to financial networks for the first time through our program. Although the experiment is still at its dawn, with only one of the tentative villages enrolled, there are already inklings that the GiveDirectly's Universal Basic Income project has, on top of inducing account ownership, encouraged financial service usage as well.
We have also seen the emergence of informal financial savings groups, where all the members will transfer their payment bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more one particular member in bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more rotating circle every month.
And while it is too early to draw authoritative conclusions, Universal Basic Income appears to be one avenue to rope large swaths of the unbanked into digital finance and commerce. The logistics and bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more tag, alone, of UBI schemes render it a tough sell in politics - great as a talking point, but difficult to actualize and therefore a risk that could derail careers.
Cryptocurrencies, in contrast, have almost negligible transfer bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more and do not face the same level of scrutiny, regulation or taxationthereby offering a degree of flexibility to react and respond as issues crop up. In fact, there are a whole host of Cryptocurrencies already exploring UBI initiatives.
Resiliencewhich is powered and secured by Ethereum blockchain, is hoping to grow taxes from PersonPerson P2P exchanges, through Swarm Redistribution and dividend pathwaysthat would then be doled out among the members as Universal Basic Income see here for a more thorough technical explanation. Universal Basic Income, in this scenario, would be self-generated, and therefore self-sustainable, as Resilience's ecosystem expands. Bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more, not all block-chain inspired solutions have proposed to follow this model.
The Grantcoin Foundationa U. In its rendition of UBI, every year the organization would inject an additional 3. Anyone can opt-in to receive a slice of that 3. Private answers to the question of Universal Basic Income seem to revolve around the idea of consent. In the case of Grantcoin, the re-distribution of wealth is voluntary, whether through grants or individual contributions, and the product of a collective social conscience.
Resilience, instead, leverages the technology of block-chain to normalize built-in deductions that 'branch out' into a pliable pool of funds. Even though government might be more of an imposition, and arguably less technological adaptive or efficient, there is one unignorable factor that underpins the worth of any government's attempt to roll out a Universal Basic Income. In terms of financial services, any UBI scheme implemented by a government has to cater to the lowest common denominator of financial inclusion and be accessible to even the most un- or under-banked.
Cryptocurrencies, in contrast, are still fairly avant-garde, and those most comfortable with their deployment are unlikely to be the most deserving recipients of a Universal Basic Income.
Perhaps, then, government and private initiatives of UBI should not be treated as an 'either or' paradigm, but as two compounding systems that are exposing different segments to the idea and execution of Universal Basic Income. While government intervention is not necessarily the be-all and end-all strategy to introduce more complicated financial instruments, like cryptocurrenices and blockchain, to overlooked consumers as was demonstrated by the independent success of blockchain derivatives in the remittance sectorit is certainly an over-arching tool that can capture, educate and empower numbers unimaginable by a single private campaign.
Therefore, if a private enterprise is ever to pilfer and operationalize certain duties of the State, especially bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more regard to a Universal Basic Income, it would most likely piggy back on in-roads made by a government that had already cleared the way with broad digital G2P programs. Or, alternatively, maybe it will be government that instead swallows the inventions and value-added of private sector technology, similar to the strategy of a recent UN projectall while maintaining its role as the lifeblood of greater society.
Image courtesy of Generation Grundeinkommen. Click here to subscribe and receive a weekly Mondato Insight direct to your inbox. Washington DC Home Page. We hope your like our new look! Mondato Insight recently switched to a new, we think fresher and more readable, blog platform and layout. If you had 60 seconds to spare we would appreciate your feedback, positive or negative. Please click here to answer 4 short questions and share your bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more.
If for any reason you cannot find bitcoin cryptocurrency or universal basic income more content you are looking for or if you have a comment, query or criticism please get in touch at info mondato.