Lunatic Or Problem Solver?
I claim to have come up with a monetary paradigm that would absolutely, positively guarantee the following outcomes for society:
- the existing economy completely stable and fully self-regulating (with built-in safeguards against inflation)
- a bulletproof income available for any adult citizen that would not involve taxes or debt, to be based on the current median income (so in the U.S., say, $15/hr.; $600/wk.; $31,200/yr.)
- no unemployment (at no cost to anyone)
- no poverty (without having to redistribute anything)
- no taxes (of any kind)
- no public debt (at any level of government)
- more sustainability (even without additional regulations or any changes in behavior because demographics would govern output — passively)
- all with no limit on income/wealth.
There is no ‘catch’. There is no hidden cost.
Either I am completely delusional or I am correct. There is no third option.
If I am delusional it should be easy for any rational person to find some fatal flaw in my paradigm. Surely anyone who has done so would apprise me of that finding.
Yet, no one has. I can’t imagine why, but people have objected to it, some quite vociferously, and people have come up with words, including stunning inaccuracies and gross misrepresentations, to justify to themselves rejecting it. Still, no one has ever pointed out to me an actual flaw in it.
Given that, and given what this paradigm promises, why aren’t people who are aware of it advocating for it? Perhaps people are, but I have seen no evidence of that, either. I know that nothing has been posted on Medium advocating for it by anyone other than me — unless it was done without mentioning my name (which would be fine by me, but unlikely). [As my fellow writers here know, we are notified if our name gets mentioned in a post.] I simply cannot understand it.