Quote (jiangstein @ Oct 8 2015 09:28am)
heya, this seemed intellectually stimulating so i read some of the "economic theory" and some of the "energy as money" portion.
If my understanding is correct, you're proposing that the input of energy/resources to generate money is a rather wasteful step since it is only the energy/resources that have real value. In turn, shifting the currency from "money" to something of use such as energy would potentially eliminate some waste (and maybe debt?) for the economy. This is an interesting proposal that i've never thought about it.
However, to be fair, currency was initially based on something of value, i.e., gold. Because of the scarcity of gold, it did have value, but not in the sense that it could be directly utilized to power factories like petroleum. I imagine as time passed, carrying pounds of gold wasn't feasible and this shifted to the paper money as we know it today, whose value is no longer rooted in something concrete like gold, but instead is based on abstract entities like market stability or future growth potential.
But one massive need and benefit for having paper money is that it provided a normalized platform for people to purchase items. Prior to paper money, we would use a bartering system where we haggle to trade bananas for apples and what not. With this said, now that paper money is deeply ingrained in our society, and although more optimal strategies may exist, it may be difficult to implement those more efficient policies.
A prime example of how the most optimal solution is not always the most widely adapted are the QWERTY keyboards everyone uses today. The QWERTY keyboard was invented to slow down type writers who were typing so fast that they were jamming the type writers. But now that technology has advanced and typewriter jamming is no longer an issue, you would think that we would switch to a keyboard that allows for faster typing, but because the QWERTY keyboard has been so deeply ingrained in society, that change has never (and probably never) will happen.
Overall, this is still a really neat idea and I may have misinterpreted your main point, but it would be quite difficult to switch currency at this point regardless of the benefits that a new currency system would bring. Good luck!
Yeah; what you said about money is mostly true. It provides (is) a liquid asset that serves as a fluid interchangeable medium.
As far as it once being gold (and silver) and is now just paper - it was a progressive removal and dissolution based on pressured geopolitical dynamics and stressed budgets where real assets were needed but not available. Once 'temporary' legal acts were implemented they instead became permanent and Gresham's law removed the 'real money' from circulation. The transition was gradual enough and paper money kept its perceived value so the system was uninterrupted.
People are indeed used to money much like people are used to the QWERTY keyboard layout. Its called a network effect and established network effects are hard to break; but not impossible. The problem is money has utility without people thinking about what it actually is because the illusion of value is held up through ignorance. But the testament of bitcoin becoming a multi-billion dollar market (4-7 billion) in only 5 years is evidence of at least a microcosm of the population seeking an alternative to the current monetary dynamic.
--- The above stuff was just babbling in relation to your points which were general claims about money.
As far as people being used to 'money' that is correct but you refer to 'paper money' (physical money) which only makes up ~ 3% of the money in circulation. The rest of the currency is digitized. So as long as you made spending a cryptocurrency as easy as using a credit card and as long as it is as widely accepted it's largely the same in terms of physiological use. The problem is establishing a large enough network effect where the currenct become usable tangible goods.
Solracoin would be tangentally backed (partially) in fiat - which is generated by something of real value which is in demand (the commodity: electricity). So it is not just an illusion of value; but provides something of actual use to humanity. The real value is not quite in the coins but in the solar deeds (think of the solar deeds as bonds/stocks; and the solracoins themselves as dividends paid in cash).
By owning solar deeds you own rights to a portion of money production backed by real value (generated electricity).
--Did a lot of rambling; thanks for the questions/statements -- Sent 15 fg; would like for you to ask more questions if you have any. Will answer more specific questions more directly. --