3 ms·

I completely agree it's non-trivial to convince people to adopt this system. However, once adopted, I don't think the 1 to 1 problem highlighted in this chain e

I completely agree it's non-trivial to convince people to adopt this system. However, once adopted, I don't think the 1 to 1 problem highlighted in this chain exists. If I had to give a very simple argument for why adopt, I think it would have to come from a place of "UBI would work if we all did X and you could still make money that could be exchanged for good and services with a similar inflation rate, so this currency is better than dollars. We should switch to it. Don't believe it will work? Look at Bitcoin!" In that way, pointing at Bitcoin naively can actually have value to validate the possibility of the coin's success. The biggest problem is of course not convincing one grocer, but the whole world at once. > "The question is, who is going to put them in, and for what purpose?" I fully agree with the question and its importance. I think the answer is everyone at once on the premise of "we're all in this together" and for the reason of "pursuit of a better social system". I don't think this will likely happen, but I think that theoretically, it's possible to function (the concept not this specific coin, which would need quite a lot more study to make this claim with). My hope is that given study and time, this idea has the potential to inspire a final system that could eventually be implemented this way in say 100 years, maybe sooner, maybe later. PS: Did not downvote, even if I disagree I appreciate the substance and am sad to see the downvote on such a substantive discussion.

PeterisP 9y ago
The adoption problem is that it should be expected to be asymmetrical - most of the would-be-net-recipients would join early, most of the would-be-net-donors would join late or never. And this transition period matters a lot. If a system doesn't provide a solid benefit during the early transition, then it's worthless to discuss how it would work once adopted since it won't be, it can't be. See Bitcoin for example - it provides a solid financial benefit to early adopters, early investors. Without that benefit, it wouldn't get widely adopted and would be worthless.
- adjkant 9y ago
  The transition does indeed matter a lot. I think there are other transition methods you are missing though. Look at how the US switched quite quickly to chip readers. I could also imagine a system where US dollars (or insert currency here) and UBICoin exist together for some time, but dollars are only valid if you were born after year X. Merchants would accept both during this transition time with an exchange rate. There is a ton to discuss in terms of transition. I don't think the transition being another unsolved problem invalidates the entire idea, particularly when virtually no time has been spent examining the transition options.

PeterisP 9y ago

The adoption problem is that it should be expected to be asymmetrical - most of the would-be-net-recipients would join early, most of the would-be-net-donors would join late or never. And this transition period matters a lot. If a system doesn't provide a solid benefit during the early transition, then it's worthless to discuss how it would work once adopted since it won't be, it can't be. See Bitcoin for example - it provides a solid financial benefit to early adopters, early investors. Without that benefit, it wouldn't get widely adopted and would be worthless.

adjkant 9y ago
The transition does indeed matter a lot. I think there are other transition methods you are missing though. Look at how the US switched quite quickly to chip readers. I could also imagine a system where US dollars (or insert currency here) and UBICoin exist together for some time, but dollars are only valid if you were born after year X. Merchants would accept both during this transition time with an exchange rate. There is a ton to discuss in terms of transition. I don't think the transition being another unsolved problem invalidates the entire idea, particularly when virtually no time has been spent examining the transition options.