My new economic system idea

a reply to: dfnj2015

Soooooo.... cyberpunk or shadowrun?

I respect your post and commend you for thinking about how to improve society. I have to admit I only read a few paragraphs. What you described, in many ways, is what the Soviet Union was all about. Unfortunately, people were miserable and had little to motivate them to succeed. There were no rewards for working hard. Getting extra entertainment isn't enough. There are countless ways individuals in a free society are motivated. The decision belongs to the person.

a reply to: LogicalGraphitti

If you only read a little bit that explains your view of it. The system hugely favors risk and reward, you need to read the whole thing and understand it. I don't know why the the people keep reading this and think it's the government deciding pay rate and controlling everything.

A problem I see is a person wants to do a position but they are not a person for that position. I’ll use an example, juggler. Last thing on earth you would ever want is for me to juggle chainsaws or working lightsabers no matter how desperately I want to be paid to do it.

For me, being told no, not a good idea is enough, because I can honestly reason and evaluate. But we have over one percent of our population currently sitting in prison because they couldn’t be told not to do something. And far more that just have not been convicted or have served their time or otherwise under the radar.

How do we motivate the disenfranchised into production in a different field? Part two, how to incentivize to absolutely necessary but undesirable tasks like dead animal removal?

Basically the “I only want to do this but am unqualified” and “Ain’t nobody doing that” are the hard hurdles before addressing the “why give up my wealth and power to switch to this” crowd.

a reply to: Ahabstar

Dead animal removal will fix itself when people get sick of dead animals everywhere and vote for an increase in pie rate for animal control to deal with that. Undesirable or not, eventually there will be enough pay to incentivize people to deal with it if it goes on too long with no one taking care of it. Any truly undesirable but necessary job will eventually end up being a highly paid government job if left alone too long. That will easily self correct in time. Plus there will always be those people that aren't really bothered by these things and will happily fill the niche for any easy job they know few will compete with them on.

As for the unqualified trying to do things they suck at and will never be good at. There's no reason they can't try and fail over and over, and never get any business or stop being given a position anywhere. At least they'll have a home and food to fall back on when they fail, and trying won't cause them to lose everything. Not sure what our current system does to combat this... oh right nothing, instead it prays upon it with college debt.

a reply to: Puppylove

I award you with a star and flag..even if it doesn't work out. Taking the time to think such a complex task over is itself something tp apploud. It is clear that the world needs a solution for the economic problems which cause a greater gap between rich and poor. Universities should spent more time studying alternative economies or should encourage their students to put their minds to it.

I always had the suspicion that the different social structures there are to find in different part in the world are somekind of experimental petrie dishes organised by the people controling the world. Just to see what form is best to control the masses while keeping them happy and maintain the peace. But just a new economic model will not guarantee succes because other variables like religion, tradition, culture...maybe even lacation on this planet will be a factor of being succesfull or not. But hey... a promising idea and a new start will hopefully grow into something beautiful while being tweaked along the way.. It is important that everybody is willing to give it a chance and work towards a better future for our kids and theirs..

this is sort of a good Idea but what about automation, the more it advances the less "need" for human input.

and the way things are going politically, Automation will even supercede Politicians. AI will be the government.

Automation will be the work force, No need for any human input at all.

"you are obsolete" is the quote from the Twilight Zone, from the early 60's, it was prophetic.

will Government AI need humans? Aye there is the rub.

I realize some of you think this could not happen, The "boomer" generation never thought socialism would be a thing from their children either!!!

the 5 year olds of today will vote for AI tomorrow.

a reply to: thedigirati

I'm not sure about the automation discussion, if for no other reason than the denial so prevalent about it even being an issue. I'm sure this system could be adjusted for that in some way, not sure how exactly, but some way. For now I'm just trying to pull things away from the work for scraps model and welfare trap.

That just sounds like socialism, but with extra steps.

I don't think this system will work the way you think it would work.

a reply to: dothedew

Bull#, why does everyone think this is socialism, it's got more similarities to capitalism, it's a hybrid of both. Most economics isn't even under control of the government and is entirely competitive. The only thing changed is how goods and services are handled. So tired of people only paying attention to the socialized aspects and ignoring all the rest. It goes to show how badly entrenched the socialism bad mindset is, that even a hint of socialism means full blown socialism. This system is highly competitive and has tons of reward for risk and hard work, something socialism usually lacks entirely and is a major component of capitalism. People still trade goods and services, just usually in a more rent based version of this trade, and every person that takes part in a trade, service or good gets some compensation directly for their part in it in what is basically a royalty fee, albeit a very small fractional one. Say for example you add a wiget to a car engine, you get a small fraction of cash everytime that single car is rented for your part. It might be as low as 1/1000 of a cent for example, but you add 30,000 widgets to 30,000 cars and they get all get rented for a week for 50 dollars a piece for example, and you just earned and keep earning money as long as they are rented. Sure that car may never get bought, or the car could get broken down, but that's the risk you take. Only some of the cars might sell. Again all part of the risk, but even if none sell, the worst that happens is you wasted your time, you still have food, shelter and medical care.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: dothedew

Bull#, why does everyone think this is socialism, it's got more similarities to capitalism, it's a hybrid of both. Most economics isn't even under control of the government and is entirely competitive. The only thing changed is how goods and services are handled.

The reason it comes across as socialism is because of the collectiveness of government authority in your description. One is dependent on government for their basic necessities is the crux of socialism.

How will the government be able to provide all of this without taking a fraction (tax) for themselves? Thus businesses or ownership is nullified into simply a government run entity. Aka: socialism and borderline communism.

a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes the government gets a cut of every purchase, they do that now for the most part, does that make us socialist? I certainly remember seeing tax added to the bottom of damn near every receipt. The government's pay rate is also based on this economic model, they don't really control it as in a later post I've added a bit of corruption control by putting more control on how the government uses it's money into the hands of the people. It's not the government defining how the money it's used, it's the government working out the minutia, and the key players being directly held responsible by their constituents, even going so far as being not paid and then fired if they work against their constituents interests. The government cannot give themselves a pay raise, only the citizens can, and can even give them a pay cut if they do badly.

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti
I respect your post and commend you for thinking about how to improve society. I have to admit I only read a few paragraphs. What you described, in many ways, is what the Soviet Union was all about.

I'm not sure I agree with this sentiment. Corruption in government occurs with both left-wing and right-wing governments. Corruption in government is not solely a communist thing. I think it is human nature to become corrupt. It doesn't matter what system of government you have. Human nature will eventually make every form of government suck.

I think that ideas like this are so very important. Thanks for posting it pup

I feel it is foolish to really look to the past for what we should do now, while on the cusp of some pretty big changes. Especially failed systems.. Though, I have no issue with having inspiration there. Thats why I love stuff like this post.

Personally, I feel it would be more effective to meet basic needs with automation. Thats actually a part of what I used to work on.

Usually, we talk about automation in terms of manufacturing and jobs in general. Even if Im convinced this is a controlled narrative, we just dont talk about how we can use it to our advantage in our actual homes. Automated aquaponics systems, for example, can do everything from help a family meet their food needs to decentralize our nations food supply. Both very good things, IMO, and even if the costs were subsidized similar to food stamps.. It would roughly be a one time cost versus a lifetime of monthly payments.

When it comes to "work," I think we are in desperate need of a reimagining of how we do things. If for no other reason than technology on the horizon.

The issue is the same one that has plagued all societies since their inception: corruption of the system. There are some amazing possibilities out there, but the more "ideal" the system, the higher the chance of abuse. So, I feel that for anything to truly succeed, it will also require really examining who we are and how we see things down to the core. Scarcity paradigms, cooperative competition (rather than destructive), etc. Good luck with that...

As an ideal though, I think a system similar to yours could succeed. If the government and private entities are going to go all in on facial recognition, tracking, and mass surveillance, these systems could be used to redefine "jobs."

We could be given a representative currency based on what we do throughout the day, modified by how it affects others realized potential. Meaning, someone would be "paid" if they decided to fill a pothole in the morning and then again if they decided to walk some folks dogs in the afternoon. The modifier would take into account how these acts enabled others to do the same. The pothole being something that, depending on severity, will do everything from reduce vehicle repair costs to enabling more reliably optimized traffic patterns. Someone who invented something, or discovered a scientific novelty, would be "paid" according to how their work enabled others in everything from simple daily life to the discoveries that precipitate from the original. Meaning, some prolific and incredible scientist would likely be in the upper financial echelon of society. Similarly, someone who manages others extremely well, or something similar, would be paid accordingly.

Of course, such a system would be ripe for abuse. Regardless of how effective and frankly amazing it could be "if we did it right." And, therein lies the rub.

Now, Im certainly not one to believe that private organizations are somehow more benevolent than governments. In many ways, I would prefer government simply because it has constitutional restrictions (in the US). All the same, I think capitalism tinged with socialism is probably the best match for our current stage of societal development. Using anything else eschews the ability to freely implement new innovations as they come along. The biggest issue I see is if/when our Cultural Story of destructive competition becomes obsolete, and we are incapable of letting go. Or more horrific, start looking to implement even worse systems from the past simply because of issues present here and now and a seeming inability to have original thought.

The part that concerns me the most, however, is that something like the Cultural Story takes generations to change. And, the pace of creation and innovation of our tools has already outstripped our ability to beneficially adapt and integrate our own creations. We are already beginning to see the negative impact of this, exacerbated by modern social engineering to maintain control in the face of massive change.

Itll eventually come to a head, and sooner than we'd like.. I expect Ill be getting some riffage on, on the guitar, while watching the world burn itself in its own confusion.

a reply to: Nyiah

But technically you are getting paid. Think about it, if you had to pay a daycare to take care of those kids and they were homeschooled through the daycare, it would cost a lot of money if you worked. It is saving a lot of money.

I did the stay home dad for a few years when I first got married to my wife, taking care of our daughter. As long as I had something to do I was fine, I remodeled a house we bought during the first three years as I took care of the daughter, then when the wife came home, I did some handyman jobs for people somedays. I got tired of it, the house got remodeled, rewired, insulated, and I put in a new boiler. I then got my builder license and started working long hours and six or seven days a week building and remodeling and insulating homes. I actually liked doing the seventy hours a week more than taking care of the house and daughter.

I am sort of glad I was forced to change my life because of an accident, I now have the ability to do stuff with and for the kids more than when I was working seven days a week from seven in the morning till dark..

Ahh another one of those "If socialism was done MY way threads".

Like it was somehow done incorrectly the first thousand times it was implemented. You'd think when it yields the same results over and over and over again people would get the hint.

You don't hand over the reigns of production, labor, housing, education, or healthcare to the government.

Ask any Obama care recipient how their healthcare experience has been...

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Jubei42

At some point corporations will be powerful enough to wage real war against each other with employee casualties.

From what I understand, the Chinese already have a long history of this kind of thing. You are hired to work for a company essentially for life, with your family's needs being taken care of. The catch is that if the company wants to attack or defend itself against a competing company, then you are expected to fight and be killed if necessary.

I don't know how much of this still exists in China, or if it's hidden or whatever. You'll see kung-fu movies with that plot. Perhaps it isn't all fictional.

a reply to: JAY1980

It's not socialism...

How much difference will quality of life be for those sitting at home for the minimums compared to a retail worker? What about hard labor jobs? If the difference is not significant those positions will be hard to fill.

Everybody gets a fraction of what they produce now. If I build a $500k house for somebody, I am compensated for my contribution, depending on how much of it I do, just the same for any subcontractors. The workers in factories and mills are compensated for their role. It's all in the cost of the materials. Why should a higher class of people dictate how much you deserve instead of the free market paying you for what your work is worth?

a reply to: SouthernForkway26

That's not what's happening in this system. No one has any reading comprehension.