>>12988On the flipside, there's this moneyless society sort of deal.
Current model of currency ensures that I always have value to someone else in the form of money that I give out, no matter where that money comes from.
I don't think you can rely on individuals to accurately assign value to someone and provide services based on that value, because no one in a larger society even knows what the majority of individuals contribute.
And I don't think it's a good idea to let people trade only within small tribes disjoint from the rest. Our society as is, is large enough so that we can provide services with way greater reach. I can get surgery even in another country for a certain illness if needed and that is gone if I only know Jeff the grocery store owner and Mike who knows how to work computers.
The one way, I can imagine this "work", perhaps, is in this sort of communist-like setting, where everyone gets stripped of their properties and all the services / goods / resources are pooled together and divyed up among everyone.
Every family gets assigned a living quarters, food and goods are rationed and sent to everyone.
Jobs are not done for any kind of monetary incentive, but are just assigned to you based on the skills and use you're assessed for.
This somehow has to be overseen by a sort of committee and somehow some checks and balances should be in place to prevent anyone from playing the system.
This is probably pretty problematic on its own. But it should also be implemented almost globally, as we currently require international trades and such as well, so they also should be incentivised to give up goods without any immediate compensation.
