Money Like Water
There would be no need for hoarding.
Only food and air are as vital to human life as water is. Yet, we do not hoard water. We don’t seek to cling with dear life to every drop of it that comes our way. To be sure, we are learning on this ever-more-crowded planet that we have been taking water for granted for — well, forever — but we use what we need (and more) of what is there and go on about our business.
That is not people’s attitude regarding money. When it comes to money, people are loath to part with a single unit of currency they are not choosing to spend — and even then, people often part with their money with the most extreme reluctance.
Why that difference in our attitude?
One reason for that difference in attitude is the uncertainty related to money. There is no assurance that it will be there tomorrow the same as it was today. From the personal level to the global scale, monetary disaster could strike at any time. To indulge in a bit of U.S. American vernacular, the flow of money can stop ‘on a dime’.
Indeed, the desire most for being ‘rich’ stems mostly from the monetary security that comes with it. A passable definition of “rich” is ‘not having to worry about money’. Of course, there might not be any such thing as being in that position, especially these days, where the sudden collapse of civilization itself is a viable concern, an event that would make mere physical survival the new goal of even the (formerly) wealthiest people.
I have developed a monetary paradigm that would be implemented in the existing economic system in which the flow of money would be absolutely, positively guaranteed. Moreover, that money would flow directly to individuals, in the form of an income (in an amount a person could actually live on). It would be paid to people of retirement age and adults unable to work, and it would be the minimum income for people employed in any business or government — and everyone who needed a job would absolutely, positively have one. It would be bulletproof. [The same process could be used to fund government (at all levels, from local to central ), thus eliminating using taxes/public debt for that purpose — as long as government anywhere did not exceed its allotted funding (and should that happen at least taxes would have been reset at zero).]
That flow of money would be even more certain than the flow of water in the greatest river or the deepest spring. There would be an income for which any (adult) citizen [any nation could adopt the paradigm] could become eligible that would be impervious to human foibles and natural disasters. It would actually make civilization itself more viable than it has ever been. No one wise enough to live within the means that income would provide would have to worry about money ever again. At long last, everyone really could be rich.
______________
more about the paradigm:
“Same Economy, Way Better Outcomes for Society” and “Paradigm Shift:” the former focuses on details regarding the implementation of the paradigm (with the U.S. as the illustrative example) while the latter relates the paradigm in a much more technical but more generic way. For those who prefer more income equality there is “The Unnecessariness of Marxism” (for society to go where Marx foresaw). All linked articles are in Medium, but not behind the paywall.