[p2p-research] Who Issues the Money that National Governments then Borrow?

[Michel Bauwens]

you ask, *WHO* should create the Money.
which is of course a legimate ethical consideration,

empirically of course, we have state-issued, private-issued and
citizen-issued, with the latter being the weakest, and the first having been
mostly replaced by the second ..

in my view it amounts to four important characteristics: 1) trust in the
issuers; 2) what you can do with it (network effect of acceptance, does a
derivative of 1); 3) ease of use and complexity of usage; 4) governnance -
enforcement against abuse of system . And I'd like to add a fight:
"necessity is the mother of invention", i.e. it would require a severe
breakdown of the existing system before alternatives will become seriously
considered ... it is because this is marginally happening that local
communities are now turning to such alternatives ... but most attempts fail

most peer-issued systems cannot break through 1 and 2; those that did, like
in Argentina, fell victim to 4)

of course, it's nice to imagine a world where everyone is using
citizen-issued money and ask who would not use it ... unfortunately, were
not there, we're still at: how can get just a few people to get willing to
experiment in the first place ..

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com>wrote:

> Michel Bauwens wrote:
> > there is nothing wrong per se in creating money out of thin air
> > as long as it is matched by productive activities,
>
> That may be true.  But that is not what I am asking.
>
> My question is *WHO* should create the Money.
>
> For example, let's say we invented a new P2P Money that began to be
> popular enough that it could realistically be used as a medium of exchange.
>
> Now imagine this new Money was designed to be "declared into
> existence" in limited amounts by each peer...  By the way, I think
> this is how BitCoin works.
>
> My question then becomes: Under what conditions would a peer choose to
> NOT issue his allotted amount for the year?
>
> I can see peers might borrow from each other AFTER they have already
> reached their issuance limit, but why would they choose to forgo
> issuing the initial amount they were allowed?
>
>
> I just noticed this sounds alot like the Basic Income idea.  Each
> citizen is *given* a certain amount of Money each year.
>
> If this system were in place, would any of us choose to NOT accept
> that handout in favor of instead trying to get a loan from someone
> else?
>
> Assuming it is better to get the loan, what are the benefits to
> entering into debt as opposed to remaining solvent?
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Patrick Anderson
> Social Sufficiency Coalition
> http://SourceFreedom.BlogSpot.com <http://sourcefreedom.blogspot.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>



-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100717/b42a0f15/attachment.html>