Re: [ox-en] The question of transition and the role of money (was: money jugglers)
- From: magius <gmagius gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:51:15 +0100
2009/2/24 Stefan Meretz <stefan meretz.de>:
Then you would say, that "alternative money" is not that bad as
"capitalist money". This is a theoretical question. And my answer, which
I explained earlier here, is, that "money" is only the symbol for the
underlying mechanism of "equivalent exchange". Equivalent exchange is
only necessary in a society, where separated producers have to exchange
their products on markets and find a way to make this exchange just.
Imho this approach simplifies too much the problem.
On 2003 I was a participant to an italian group of work that tried to
define a different monetary system. Our goal was to solve not only the
problem of how the exchange works but also the access for individuals
to wealth produced by society. Basicly we designed a system in which
wealth production is integrated with social redistribution of it.
We adopted a kind of money invented by Silvio Gesell in twenties
called "free money". Free money is money issued with a negative rate,
a money that constantly loose value. If money loose value, you have a
way to automatically decrease the monetary mass and so to not generate
inflation if you inflate constantly this mass.
In our system the monetary mass is inflated issuing money to give to
all system participants a "social dividend" that someone calls
universal citizenship income. Each participant receives a basic
income, issued in a negative rate money, to fund their basic needs,
not related to work.
When the monetary mass provided for the distribution of the "social
dividend" is put in the system, a mass of the same value is issued for
a "social lend", that is available to everyone ask for it. Each
participant infact can ask to the "people's bank" (similar to one
defined by Proudhon) a lend to fund a project that creates wealth
within the system.
In this way wealth creation (and its monetary mass issued for "social
lend") is strictly connected with wealth redistribution (and its
monetary mass issued for "social dividend").
Personally I agree with you positions about free software as a
non-exchange system, that's the real commonism germ form, but I really
don't know how to define, using the range you prospect, our system.
Is our alternative money system a way for transition? Imho yes,
because in our system capitalist accumulation is abolished and
negative value is a sort of "practical education" to value abolition,
using a "hacked" value!
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de