As far as I can tell, economies benefit from money moving around rapidly; it creates jobs, and it encourages people to focus more on production than marketing. So why does tax discourage the movement of money by taking some of it each time it moves?
Instead, the opposite should be done: Target money that stagnates.
Of course, it's an almost impossible system to manage to tax unmoving money directly, so instead what should be done is decrease the value of money over time.
So what one could do is, on an annual basis, half the value of all current currency by creating a new dollar worth twice as much as the last.
So the 2016 dollar would be worth two 2015 dollars, four 2014 dollars, etc.
What economic effects might this have?
>>67833158
Already thought of lad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demurrage_(currency)
http://www.geokey.de/literatur/doc/neo.pdf
>>67833926
It's a fairly obvious concept I suppose, but why isn't it implemented in anything larger than a small region of a small country?
>>67834489
because increasing the velocity of money alongside a currency that rusts leads to no usury, and that isn't in the bankers' interests who run money through debt
>>67835041
Right, because your country is under the mercy of bankers.
>>67835485
Yes. The current system is unsustainable but it continues anyway to the detriment of everyone
>>67833158
It sounds very good but of course people will find ways around it. A very rich person needs to simply purchase a phony item and then have the money sent back to them.
How do you propose to find money which isn't moving?
Another issue I see is it encourages people to not save money towards large expenses such as houses and cars.
>>67836465
>how do you propose to find money which isn't moving?
You don't need to, just have a decaying value.
>encourages people to not save money towards large expenses
Good point, though you could always buy liquid assets.
>>67836465
That's the basis of the theory, is that money can't be a store of wealth and a unit of exchange at the same time, lest it be hoarded and artificially lower the money supply leading to boo and bust cycles.
On saving, it is discouraged, but at the same time loans are much safer to take out as predatory interest is not viable. If you have an extra million laying around, you can either let i depreciate over time, or offer it to someone else and get a million back over time without loss.
http://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/
Men actually pay their bills and taxes ahead of time, and long term investment is encouraged
>>67833158
>decrease the value of money over time
Inflation ring a bell?
>>67837891
Inflation is the increase in the money supply so that the total value of money drops. It's a separate concept
We have inflation
THE HOUSING MARKET.
Oh, a neat feature of this system: You don't need taxes.
The government effectively takes half the money in the economy for itself every year, by printing more money so that all the money that was in the economy is worth half as much.
>>67833158
Rich people who sit on wealth would just sink most of their money into assets that can be quickly liquidated.
>>67838172
That's certainly an interesting way of looking at it.
>>67833158
Money has intrinsic value, you are talking about Currency.
Money is sterile, it should not replicate itself like a living organism.
>>67838172
>half the money
no proposals have ever suggested more than a 1% decrease each month meaning 12% each year.
Also, the money isn't taxed, it's removed completely from circulation.
>>67838364
That's a good thing.
Buy gold, you support mining.
Buy shares in a company, you support the company.
>>67833158
Lol this has a name bogan, it's called lowering the interest rate
I've pondered this concept for quite a while though as a way to incentive long term investment in items that have a strong intrinsic value such as a farm that produces food for my family. This would pull that economic activity out of the market and push many people to reject being the specialists that the division of labor relies on, choosing to be generalists instead, engaging in activities that benefit them directly without the need for using a rapidly decaying currency to exchange goods and services with others. If we all buy farms and go back to a primarily self sufficient agrarian society, the velocity of money will drop as very little trade will continue to exist.
>>67838861
lowering interest rates to encourage inflation through debt isn't the same as a demurrage system
>>67838861
Interest rates are already very low and several countries are talking about negative rates but companies are still hording cash.
>>67839476
That's another part of the school. Money holds an indisputable advantage over goods because it does not decay. Real growth and value can not be represented in an economy based on Finance, debt, and speculation
>>67833158
Rare original incoming
