John, the reason I asked, is that when we follow the logic of free money through to conclusion, it appears to negate the need for government, by removing the incentive to profit.

It also eliminates poverty, inequality, and crime.

And a society which no longer has the incentive to profit no longer needs to have the structure of government.

I have to admit working on this same problem a long time, my strategy has been to gather user requirements all along, quite a few years now, for a system which might or might not happen.

With these requirements formally captured and analysed, we can much more clearly see what is needed, to meet them.

Designing something is so much simpler, when we recognise that a key part of the solution has already been handed to us on a plate.

Free money.

Evidently, everyone invested in the current system hates that idea.

But they have no choice.

Free money is the only way out, and they are taking it.

Each time more is issued, another nail goes into the coffin of the old system, as the credibility of free money goes up (Indicated by the market value of the currency).

If the maths of Gini economics is correct, and I believe it is, it will not be long before it becomes apparent that the free money issued which has the most beneficial effect on the respective currency, is when it is given out to those who need it most.

Pretty soon, like all workers, still remaining in all jobs, the bankers will be thinking "I no longer need to do this business, to stay rich myself, how can I automate it, and bow out?".

Cue the cryptocurrency solution.