[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Taler] Taler and UBI

From: Jacob Bachmeyer
Subject: Re: [Taler] Taler and UBI
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 20:49:06 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20090807 SeaMonkey/1.1.17 Mnenhy/

Sebastian Javier Marchano wrote:
Not UBI is implemented in the same way, but what you can expect from an UBI is: * prevent accumulation of capital: denomination that daily/weekly expires. If the person didn't use the money, it is lost. Since this kind of money it's intended to be used for basic needs (like transport or food) this may not be bad. Note: it's lost from the person perspective, from the bank perspective it is saved.

If I understand correctly, that is simple enough: UBI tokens would not be refreshable and UBI would need to be in frequently-issued small amounts. Since UBI would need to be automated anyway, this is practical, but potentially dangerous to the economy: currency must be /durable/ and expiring tokens are not. That creates perverse incentives.

* prevent spending UBI money on other products/services that are not basic need: implement as the age protocol.

This is the feature creep that I warned about when the age protocol was proposed. It causes the same economic distortions, too: UBI with restricted tokens will inflate the prices of basic goods by increasing the propensity to spend, as the UBI tokens are otherwise worthless. There is a fair risk that this would lead to an underground economy using "basic goods" as currency.

-- Jacob

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]