4 ms·

> However is there not a slippery slope towards preventing people buying (say) unhealthy food? Would that be such a bad thing.....? Again statistics would say

> However is there not a slippery slope towards preventing people buying (say) unhealthy food? Would that be such a bad thing.....? Again statistics would say people can't help themselves in that department.

gilleain 4y ago
Ok, and then it goes to alcohol, sugar, meat, and fuel as items that people can't help themselves to stop buying? I mean, this is what consumption taxes do. A tax on sugar makes it more expensive to buy a sweet drink, so you can buy less of them for the same money. By putting it into the programming of the money, you make the control more precise - you can only buy 1 sugary drink a day, for example.
- InCityDreams 4y ago
  What if someone is doing exercise/ heavy work and need more sugar, for example?
  - gilleain 4y ago
    Sure, that's one flaw in the (dystopian) plan. I'm sure there are many others. I guess the horrible bureucratic solution would be to get a 'sugar license' or similar. To be clear, this would be a nightmare, I think!
- tough 4y ago
  then you create a black market of non-sugary drinkers reselling their allowance to the sugar-addicted
throwaway98797 4y ago
freedom isn’t free that’s a terrifying world of control nothing like a perfect life of 90 years of eating grain and meat in the proper proportions no thank you
- swarnie 4y ago
  Everyone seems very confused. The old pound isn't going away, you can still blow your own money on a corn dog and cocaine if you so wish (under this hypothetical system).
  - starkd 4y ago
    Of course not. But these are long term concerns that are very real. Too much convenience can very easily take away the frictions that allow a governing authority to act. These are uninintended consequences involved in displacing a legacy system.
thworp 4y ago
When I read comments like yours I can't help but wonder if sheltered naivety (from living under somewhat reasonable governments) or ulterior motives leads to statements like this. Would you agree to your town council deciding what things you can buy with your wages? No? Then why is an even more distant institution any more competent on that front?

gilleain 4y ago

Ok, and then it goes to alcohol, sugar, meat, and fuel as items that people can't help themselves to stop buying? I mean, this is what consumption taxes do. A tax on sugar makes it more expensive to buy a sweet drink, so you can buy less of them for the same money. By putting it into the programming of the money, you make the control more precise - you can only buy 1 sugary drink a day, for example.

InCityDreams 4y ago
What if someone is doing exercise/ heavy work and need more sugar, for example?
- gilleain 4y ago
  Sure, that's one flaw in the (dystopian) plan. I'm sure there are many others. I guess the horrible bureucratic solution would be to get a 'sugar license' or similar. To be clear, this would be a nightmare, I think!
tough 4y ago
then you create a black market of non-sugary drinkers reselling their allowance to the sugar-addicted

throwaway98797 4y ago

freedom isn’t free that’s a terrifying world of control nothing like a perfect life of 90 years of eating grain and meat in the proper proportions no thank you

swarnie 4y ago
Everyone seems very confused. The old pound isn't going away, you can still blow your own money on a corn dog and cocaine if you so wish (under this hypothetical system).
- starkd 4y ago
  Of course not. But these are long term concerns that are very real. Too much convenience can very easily take away the frictions that allow a governing authority to act. These are uninintended consequences involved in displacing a legacy system.

thworp 4y ago

When I read comments like yours I can't help but wonder if sheltered naivety (from living under somewhat reasonable governments) or ulterior motives leads to statements like this. Would you agree to your town council deciding what things you can buy with your wages? No? Then why is an even more distant institution any more competent on that front?