8 Comments

Will you consider a rule, of inclusion for international banking regulation: All sovereign debt, money creation, shall be financed with equal quantum Shares of global fiat credit that may be claimed by each adult human being on the planet, held in trust with local deposit banks, administered by local fiduciaries and actuaries exclusively for secure sovereign investment at a fixed and sustainable rate, as part of an actual local social contract.

“Social Contract between and among People and Governments” (1min)

https://link.medium.com/AtaWSEUJU6

Fixing the value of a Share at $1,000,000 USD and the sovereign rate at 1.25% per annum establishes a stable, sustainable, regenerative, inclusive, abundant, and ethical global economic system with mathematical certainty. All money will then have the precise convenience value of using 1.25% per annum options to purchase human labor instead of barter. Mathematically distinct from money created at any other rate. The value of a self referential mathematical function can't be affected by fluctuations in the cost or valuation of any other thing. We will know regardless what currency is in hand it was created for secure sovereign investment and someone somewhere is paying 1.25% per annum on it we each share equally.

The psychological effects of being structurally included as equal financiers of our global economic system can't be quantified, but are most likely positive and profound.

I've been addressing imagined concerns for over a decade consistently illuminating additional benefit. Without logical argument against manifesting.

The rule is reasonably adopted by international banking regulators simply because it achieves stated goals. Similarly with UNGA and sustainable development goals. A reasonable settlement of suit brought to The Hague by any Nation or Nations for global parity in money creation. As global free trade agreement, once we agree on the money, there isn't much else to negotiate.

Thanks for your observations and kind indulgence

Expand full comment

What a wonderful article, Roman! In my work (ex: https://link.medium.com/LpLt3vyWqkb) I take this all the way up to a framework for whole-Earth self-design, reframing moral growth in terms of Meadows' "power to transcend paradigms". Curious to hear your thoughts!

Expand full comment

I agree that human nature is not entirely set in stone, and is modulated by environment. However, it's just as false to say that humans are entirely blank slates as well, and while I'm not sure if that's what you were implying that's what I got from your Krishnamurti quote. Moreover, the 20th century at least has a mixed if not outright dire record of technocratic controls failing.

Essentially, crypto as an ideology leans heavily on a prior that organic change (such as those in markets) is healthier than top-down technocratic dictat, and that an potential change presented in the language of code and voted for with nodes is, while not perfect, superior to one decided in the offices of a tech giant or in the ocean of spin surrounding national politics.

It probably also requires a prior that government != "things we do together"; In other words, that the State does not represent you and at least puts its goals & self-interest before yours, if it accounts for your interests at all. It sees government in the way a book like The Dictator's Handbook would see it, that government is only concerned with its constituents to the extent they make up a coherent voting block that can threaten power and is otherwise only concerned with maintaining the loyalty of key supporters (keys to power). Given what it takes to become a key to power in a dictatorship or democracy, learning how to read code is a small obstacle to participation in block chain governance.

As Scott writes, we will lift something to heaven, but until the time we can kill it, we must still pay the minimum fealty to Gnon.

Expand full comment