For the record, this includes the “nice” landlord in your family who’s “one of the good ones.” We’re actually coming for them first just so you stop posting pro-landlord propaganda.
For the record, this includes the “nice” landlord in your family who’s “one of the good ones.” We’re actually coming for them first just so you stop posting pro-landlord propaganda.
That’s an interesting idea that lends itself to some nightmares, but maybe good things too. But I feel like people would quickly set up exchanges. If I have hotel credits I don’t want to use and you have concert tokens you don’t want to use , we’ll try pretty hard to find a way to trade.
Seems like unique currencies for different transactions vs. one standardized state currency would certainly be a step in the right direction.
Isn’t that essentially what we have now with foreign currencies? It doesn’t seem to do much to curb international transactions, except create an industry of middle-men exchangers.
Maybe I misunderstood, but I was thinking more along the lines of: I’m a tailor, and you’re a farmer. I need food now, but you will need 3 shirts in the future. I give you tokens to use for the shirts when you need them, and in exchange you give me some food. So it wouldn’t be a state currency, but something we might use for convenience in agreeing to a trade. Admittedly, I just thought this was what was being discussed, and I haven’t given it much further thought.
If we’re doing digital currencies, there could be caps or diminishing returns put on things. I don’t really have a problem with people exchanging based on what they prefer, it’s the accumulation of wealth that could result that’s a problem, and it seems like caps could solve that.