Stephen, thanks for your response, because I know if you still have doubts, as another who is actively and honestly pursuing the best for humanity, I still have work to do, because if you don’t understand it, very few others will, I fear, because I, and probably most people who know you, perceive you to have well above average ability to analyse things.
In most of my recent stories, I’ve tried to emphasise that the moral and ethical justification for the creation of free money is that it mimics the action of the sun, which empowers all things for free.
There is no contract between the sun and anything else in nature to do anything, it just does it.
White supremacy seems to me to be just another negative division, an infinity of which are created when the illusion of scarcity is played out, which is only possible by ignoring the sun.
In fact, we could even look at the phenomenon of the sun’s action being ignored by humanity as the real puzzle in nature, as individuals, especially in learned circles it seems, we think humanity is so clever, and yet, we still persist with that, the real illusion, after thousands of years of human hardship labouring under it, we still try to find ways to defend our illusion, using arguments which seem to me like yours.
Adding to the puzzle, there is no shortage of mathematical analyses of the sun.
I would argue that there, is the mathematical proof you question, and which I’ve simply built on.
Fom that solid foundation of physics, is where I drew the maths used in the story showing how free money operates in economics, just like an electrical or hydraulic circuit, which is briefly switched on, each time a discreet packet of free money is issued, an operational Engineering circuit, which can be expanded to include all human activity.
I showed there also how the circuit can be exercised by specific example to underpin the Gini coefficient, a popular mathematical construct of economists, by my understanding, and I hope also yours.
I also described in that story the action of humanity acting collectively as a kind of all-seeing regulator, via the internet, and the markets, the action of which I’ve covered in many other stories, applying Metcalfe’s law, another solid mathematical foundation, with economic implications.
You indicated previously your mistrust of market forces.
It seems to me that some understanding of the effects of false scarcity is maybe needed, to see how it has negatively influenced market forces to date, to produce some of the false market effects seen in the past, which one might mistakenly use to characterise market behaviour under all circumstances.
People trading for the purpose of making a profit, only happens when we perceive scarcity.
If we are trading with free money, there is no incentive to seek profit.
If we do not perceive scarcity, for example if we are trading with free money, then we we trade to define what has value, which is a superset of voting, and as such has the potential to rapidly supersede politics altogether.
Pure market forces, in the absence of the illusion of scarcity, are what defines all things of value to humans. By those, we define what has value in our world.
By those, we manifest what has value in our world.
That is absolute democracy in action, a thing that surely is ethical.
In my opinion, continuing to ignore how the unlimited energy economy of the sun works in nature, in the presence of modern technology, is the real moral failing of humanity.
If that doesn’t convince you, then I don’t know what will, my friend.