LETS Abolish Money?

It's an interesting article, but doesn't discuss the ability to code the exchange and legal system into the currency as involate laws at a code level that require the destruction of all the exchange currency in order to change the rules.  We can create currency based on time in our new world and we can make rules about how that time is exchanged and if we build a good enough exchange system, it can have a dramatically different affect on peoples conciousness of class and produciton issues and their actions. There's nothing in theory or practice that prevents me from creating a digital currency and exchange system and saying that "exchanges which do not meet the requirements for a socialist exchange will not be honored or enforced by the exchange system."  Some people might not like the time currency with that rule, but they can't change the rule or break it even in theoriy if it's coded correctly into the currency blockchain itself.  The article makes the common mistake of arguing that "something similar has been tried, so variations on it and improvements on it won't work".  the irony is that same argument is the one used by capitalist to argue socialism should not merit attention or bother.  The argument that "it can't work" is a total rejection of marx philosophy which understood that conditions in society can preclude somethign from working for a while.  The digital currency solution to exchange profiteering is something that was not possible 15 years ago or even 5 years ago.  The argumen against a time value exchange currency is out of date and the criticisms have new solution not possible 15 years ago or even 5 years ago. 

@aloanJohnstone, Thank your for your time and effort finding that valueable quote for me.  I did enjoy reading it and spent about an hour on reading, reasoning and writing my reply.  Can I ask how much time you spent so I can estimate how much value you put into your reply in terms of time and offer a fair exchange of value with my time? I agree with the article and have made many of the same arguments myself.  The quote you are refering to references bitcoin as an exchange system for capital value.  It's a government free form of exchange, but not a capital and profit free form of exchange.  I am proposing an exchange system that offers the individual the choice of what form of exchange they freely accept. Specefically, the time value exchange system protocols are designed and intended for working with non-capital based value measurments. It can work for capital based exchanges if that's how you want to use it, but it allows the individual to also exchange non-tangible or subjective value such as beauty, or environmental restoration.  So Bitcoin is just another capital value exchange system in my opinon and it suffers the flaws you quoted because it's limited to exchange of capital value.  everybody has time and that's an exchangeable value in my universal exchange value system. So time value (and other values) do not work the same as capital value. unlike capital value, people allways own the means of producing time currency by definition. Even the richest person in the world only has 24 hours in a day just like the poorest person in the world.  If the article author couild step out of their capitalist based preconceptioins about the meaning of exchange and value and poverty, then I think it would be more interesting.  Also, this article seems to ignore the "two is better than one" argument for running bitcoin alongside dollars.  even granting all of the articles arguments and compliments about bitcoin.  The question of Bitcoin + dollars vs just dollars is not investigated.  we can speculate that giving individuals the power to exchange good in any currency has some value in that the individual can chooose which national currency to choose from.  That's better for democracy and equality than having only one currency exchange system option. there's less of a monopoly of exchange of goods and services with two instead of one.  So if you don't like the laws or quantitive easing or inflation of US dollars, then you can use another nations currency or bitcoin for your exchanges. Running an economy with multiple complimentary currencies has several benefits that are related directly to how different the currencies are.  So bitcoin is a little different than US dollars which are a little different from the Euro currency, which is a little different from the chinease currency, etc.  Because of the laws and they way they're used and the social norms for echange, different currencies offer different value exchange rates in their usage.  What i'm proposing is a digital currency that is so dramatically different from capital dollars or chinese dollars or even bitcoin that it revolutionizes the whole concept of money and value and exchange.  here's an interesting second quote I found in the article on the topic of GPL. . . "But, “you can’t hack the law”13. The legal system—guaranteed by the state’s authority—cannot be tricked: licences (no matter what kind) are legally binding contracts following the logic of the law that, if in doubt, always can be enforced in case one of the contracting parties claims its right.14 The result of this is that, e.g., scientists who make their research-software available to others have to deal with a maze of different incompatible licence versions. "In fact with Universal Values Exchange System Protocols.  You can hack the law.  As long as none of your exchange agreements specify property or capital value, then most all of the laws about what you can exchange do not apply.  So if you trade time hours for upvotes, there's no monetary value and the capital laws about property are not applicable.  That allows you to write terms and conditions for your exchange in non-captial based langauge taht enforces your agreements.  So it's legal to have a time value exchange system that has it's own rules for garnishing a persons hours of effort if they break an agreement for trading hours of time.  The breaking of an agreement of no capital value is of no concern to capital and private property regulation laws.  The enforcement of that agreement with penalties, credits etc to their time value accunt ballance which is also of no capital value is likewise free from interference by laws regulating private property and capital value ownership.  So with time value exchange protocols that prohibit in the exchange terms and conditions any discussion or reference to private property, we can have an exchange system that's substantially independent of capital laws as they currently exist.  Extending capital laws into a non-capital exchange system would be difficult and innefficient and is the subject of further analysis at a later date if needed. How do you fine someone for not paying taxes on an exchange of love hours for upvotes?  You really can't do that very well in the capital based legal system we have today.  Capitalism law is famous for their catch 22 trick of making exchange agreements that include a token of capital value such as $1 in order to make sure the agreement is enforceable under law.  I have created an exchange system that lets you run an entire economy without ever exchanging $1.  

Reminder: 6. Do not make repeated postings of the same or similar messages to the same thread, or to multiple threads or forums (‘cross-posting’). Do not make multiple postings within a thread that could be consolidated into a single post (‘serial posting’). Do not post an excessive number of threads, posts, or private messages within a limited period of time (‘flooding’).

@mcolome1,I don't think I've mentioned copyright and flags to you at all.  You  must be confusing me with someone else or read my comments outside the ones intended for you. I do talk about copyright at times when it comes up. You brought it up this time so do you want to discuss copyright, or are you just one of those know it all's who only know a false story about nobody else knowing anything at all?  Marx was thinking more like me than like you and you should know that too. You complain In never sticking to one subject? Check the criticizms levelled against marx in your dusty books and history.  They're the ones you're using.  I'm as much of a money crank as marx was, which is not at all.  I talk a lot more about other things than money and why can't you drop your capitalist preconceptions that money = gold or capital goods.  Money is a counting system for facilitating exchange and nothing more. You would probably have rejected marx too for the same reasons you reject me.  You have an anti-marx spirit about you.  You're right that I don't bother looking up dusty quotes of long discredited philosophers for their exhaultation as you seem to focus on as valuable. But I understand Marx in way that you clearly don't.  You know the words but not their meaning. You don't practice communism you preach about it and then act like a capitalist in your preaching approach.  the biggest trick capitalist ever pulled on you, Mcolmee1, was getting you to agree to their values.  They've tricked you good and they created the term money crank to discredit economic theories like those of marx.  You've taking up the job of capitalist in defending capitalism and call it socialism.  Well, you're wrong and a traitor to the poeple and you don't even know it because you've been bought and paid for by the capitalist disinformation system.

This seems a better way of arranging this sort of thing within capitalism than LETS schemes and their accounting, not that it's a challenge to capitalism of course:https://www.gofundme.com/el-cambalacheBut I'm sure people will see the irony of the opening lines of "the story".

This forum is becoming a cranks' convention. I suppose nobody else would be so tolerant of them but they just take advantage.

ALB, i think you answered your own question elsewhere.

Gnome, i understand the frustration, especially after the time i spent sincerely addressing CP's position. Now i will merely fact-check him and perhaps use some of his statements to post some historical details. We no longer require to engage in direct conversation but simply use as a spring-board for other ideas and our own interpretations.