Let's assume for just a second, that a contract could be agreed upon that would double everyone's net income.

It would be based on a new "electronic dollar/pound/whatever" and have the value of the local currency.

It would be a "World-owned" electronic currency that cannot be traded (in the money market) since its' value is dependent upon which country it was earned in.

Therefore, the contract must include a price freeze on all current technology... including raw materials. New technology can get whatever it can get (name your price).

The purpose of this "Supplemental Income" is to boost the economies of the world by giving the people (poor people like me... and you?) who spend it more money to spend... which creates more jobs.

It also creates a bias toward new technology, I imagine.

Suggestion: We should try to bring the salaries of less fortunate countries in line with the rest of the world with other supplements. (I like to travel. I don't particularly care for the poverty in some of the places I visit)

Good for the world or bad?

The system you are suggesting is crude communism.

 

Other than that all 'share the wealth' ideologies are inherently flawed. If you share out the cash across the world each person would get around £247.

Isn't this seignorage? Or am I using the wrong terms?

 

To get something like this going there has to be a powerful world institution of some sort that will handle this redistribution of wealth.

 

This isn't really sharing the wealth, just redistributing money from rich people, who don't really need the money, to poor people who really need the money. Within states this happens happens all the time and is handled by the government. At an international level, however, it doesn't really happen because there is no world taxing organisation, although redistribution does occur through foreign aid. However, foreign aid very often just puts money into the hands of dictators, thereby oppressing the actual people even more.

That is one reason the Chinese are able to make products so much cheaper than anywhere else. Their currency valuation is far different from the rest of the world's, when it comes down to what a yaun will buy.

 

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:T6xBm_kryl0J:www.oxusresearch.com/downloads/em150104.pdf+chinese+yen+valuation&hl=en&lr=lang_en|lang_de

 

Sorry the link doesn't work - the original document is PDF, I tried to link to the HTML version. Go to Google and type in "Chinese Yaun Valuation"

Please keep in mind, everyone, this is supplemental income (Mo' Money), not "instead of Money".

 

thks,

 

eb

Money that's worth nothing? Not a sound economic principle, I'm afraid.

Now, how can money be worth nothing? It wouldn't be money then, would it?

You nut!

 

I mean that with the greatest good will.

 

I have figured out that money is no more than a form of pecking order place holder, kind of like the rank on a soldiers uniform.

what you are suggesting is to give everyone a promotion.

 

knock knock, think about it.

 

hello...it's all relative.

Now, how can money be worth nothing? It wouldn't be money then, would it?

Good, you seem to appreciate the problem with your theory. Money, by definition, must be worth something. A keen grasp on economics is not required to spot the problem here.