You must login to vote
CHAPTER SIX - FINANCIAL
In the Perfect Society, money will be a useful tool of exchange to be
used for payment of labor or services and to purchase products, in the
manner of this definition from the Miriam and Webster dictionary:
# Main Entry: mon-ey
# Function: noun
# Inflected Form(s): plural moneys or mon-ies
# Usage: often attributive
# Etymology: Middle English moneye, from Middle French moneie,
# .......... from Latin moneta mint, money
# Date: 14th century
# 1 : something generally accepted as a medium of exchange, a
# ... measure of value, or a means of payment: as a : officially
# ... coined or stamped metal currency b : MONEY OF ACCOUNT
# ... c : PAPER MONEY
I once had the experience of being in a country where I was paid in
U.S. dollars and the local currency was exchanged at about a 4 local
for one U.S. dollar rate. The local economy was rebuilding after a war
and local prices for goods, services and labor were quite low compared
to the United States.
This situation was workable because, at that time, there was not a
single world economy, instead it was a bunch of local economies trading
among one another.
This "unequal exchange rate" situation enabled nations to build up
their local economies by pricing their labor and products less than
similar labor and products sold elsewhere. This practice enabled West
Germany and Japan to build up their domestic economies after WWII.
In that situation, which is still active in this present day economy, a
carpenter in one geographic place can get paid less than a carpenter
living in another geographic place, who works for the same hours to
build the same product. Remember, this only works because most prices
in the local economy are less than similar prices in other economies.
In the perfect society (after the transition period) there will be
equal pay for equal work regardless of the age, or sex of the worker or
the place of employment. There will be pay differences only based upon
skill level and productivity of the worker.
There will be NO poverty in the perfect society, because in the price
of ALL that the earth produces, whether plant, mineral or other
resources, there will be a portion that will go into an Earth Council
fund and a portion from that fund will be distributed to each person.
The earth's produce and resources will be "owned" by each and every
resident of this earth, therefore, each and every resident will have an
equal economic share in the income so produced. That "income share"
will be distributed by the Earth Council. Of course, the owner share
is just the basic part of the total product price.
And, this means that the resources now owned by corporations or
governments and taxed by local or national governments, will have to be
acquired and the local or national taxes ended.
However, since those local or national governments would be replaced by
the Area or Regional governments, and since different means of raising
funds would be done by the "new" governments, the loss of those tax
revenues would not be a problem.
In the perfect society, there will be no need for national militaries
because there will be no wars, and there will be no corruption, nor
will there be inefficient "pork-barrel" programs funded by politicians
in order to obtain votes, hence the "cost" of ALL of the perfect
society's governments will be considerably lower than the current
governments cost, even though there will be increased social programs.
***MIN/MAX INCOME LEVELS***
That "share" in the earth's resources will effectively produce a
minimum income for each person on this earth, with the children's
"share" being distributed to the parents. That will be the "minimum
income". Which now leaves the concept of a maximum income to explore.
Income has four basic functions:
.. 1.) Provide for necessities (food, clothing, shelter).
.. 2.) Provide for a reserve fund to handle unexpected contingencies.
.. 3.) Provide for incentive (a means to "better" one's self).
.. 4.) Provide for investment.
Money is NOT evil! To want to "better" one's self is a normal human
trait, and money is one (certainly not the only) useful method for
measuring one's progress. Other useful methods for measuring progress
are educational, emotional, and physical gauges.
Although money is a useful method for measurement of progress and
growth, its "incentive usefulness" diminishes with size. For example,
once it was considered that a millionaire was wealthy, but now it must
be multiple millions or even billions to be considered wealthy.
But there is very little useful benefit to a "high income" that an
economy can receive beyond a certain point. For example, in today's
society, it use to be that the Chief Executive Officer's pay was 20 to
25 times the average workers pay, but recently some corporate officer's
pay were 500 or more times their average employees pay.
Did the corporations get more for their money? NO! For the most part
the corporation received inferior services aimed at short-term stock
price manipulation which often resulted in excessive long-term losses.
Did the individuals profit from their excessive pay? In many instances
they priced themselves out of the "market". Did society gain? Again, in
most instances the answer is No! Many "common people" lost money.
So, the **fair** position, in the perfect society, is for people to be
able to receive an increased pay based upon their education, their
skill level, and their productivity, but within a reasonable range.
There should be a sufficient distance between the minimum and the
maximum financial levels in order to promote individual incentive, but
not so high as to lose the benefit to society from that "financial
incentive". A reasonable "financial incentive" is a benefit to society
because it promotes innovation and invention. An unreasonably high
incentive removes financial capital from best benefitting society by
concentrating too much money in the control of too few.
The residents of the perfect society will vote on the minimum and
maximum income levels.
It has been fashionable, for some people in the United States, to speak
about a "trickle down" economy.
Their concept seems to be that if tax breaks and other financial
incentives are made available for the wealthy, then the wealthy will
use that extra money in order to build businesses, which in turn will
mean jobs and more employment for the lower income people. Thus the
money will eventually "trickle down" to the lower income people. At
least that is what they **claim** will occur.
The perfect society will be a "trickle up" society with the concept
being that if the income of the common person is sufficient to provide
for necessities, reserve funds, incentive, and investment, then such
persons will be able to make purchases which will provide the business
owner with sufficient income to make a profit. Thus, the money will
"trickle up" to the higher income levels, and everyone will benefit.