Livable Income For Everyone
Money
New Article: Defining Money and Productive
Guaranteed income is about money. Any discussions of guaranteed income must include the topic of money. Yet, even though we all use money, we know almost nothing about money. As the quote above shows, money is not real. You cannot eat money. People made up money because it is easier to buy things with money than carrying around things to barter. Since we made up money, we can make up the rules about how society uses money. Governments make money and give power to private banks to create money. Money is a legal construct. That is why it is "legal" tender. Right now almost everyone in the world uses money to get the things they need to live. Maybe in the future, there will be a moneyless economy. But today we need money to live. A guaranteed livable income for every person in every country in the world means that we could transition to an economy not based on forced production and forced consumption -- things that waste natural resources, pollute, harm health and harm human relations and our relations with other living things. Until we can come up with something better, a guaranteed income would give us a foundation to create change where everyone could participate -- not just those who have the luxury of not having to scamble everyday to survive. The following resources about money will give you a place to start What you will find if you start researching money, is that there is no scientific basis for the money system. There are no rules that banks have to have a certain amount of reserves. The money supply is not based on the GDP, nor is it based on production (since all kinds of harmful things are counted as "Productive"). a The money system is all just made up since people simply trust the experts. The current economy is a death-cycle economy. The only way to transition to a life-cycle economy is with a universal guaranteed livable income implemented in every country in the world. Some monetary reformists want to rationalize the money system by having money supply linked to productive capacity, however, who will decide on the definition of "productive"? Do people think it was "productive" of their own mothers to birth them and keep them alive when they were infants and children? Very oddly, most monetary reform people do not yet advocate guaranteed income. Even though they dispute the status quo idea of money, they do not dispute the status quo definition of productivity (which count as unproductive all the unpaid care work done on the planet, and count as productive any activity that makes the economy grow -- regardless of whether that activity is harmful or wasteful of resources, the environment or people's lives. Quotes Quote: “Living capital [natural capital, human capital, social capital], which has the special capacity to regenerate itself, is the source of all real wealth. To destroy it for money—a number with no intrinsic value—is an act of collective insanity.” David C. Korten, The Difference Between Money & Wealth. Quote: (from an engineer about the mathematical impossibility of interest) Quote: "If all the money in the world were destroyed, as long as we have sufficient arable land, the factories, the necessary resources, and technical personnel, we could build anything and even supply an abundance." --Jacque Fresco Articles Article: Monetary Reform and Basic Income by Richard Cook: "In my opinion, it would be much more effective for the Federal Reserve simply to give away money"
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/1232/81/ Article: Fail-Safe Humanity - a non-tax source for guaranteed income Books Book: Interest and Inflation Free Money by Margrit Kennedy Book: The lost science of money by Steven Zarlenga
|