Stephen thanks, sorry also I misinterpreted your intention, now I understand more of what you mean.
Your compulsion is a good one, I know it well and share with you.
The question of money creation, and how to define it in a good, ethical way is obviously fundamental.
I believe we’ve always had that wrong, and it is one of the things that really has to be corrected.
Any scheme that can’t answer it meaningfully is surely not complete, and can’t succeed until it is put right.
To answer it in my own mind, I had to dig deep into the philosophy of value; what it means to be human, what it is about us that makes every individual of us very special, what is our actual function in the grand scheme of nature; the reason we should be directly rewarded for it; the thing that must be directly monetised in order to reflect the way nature really works, and thus unleash the true full power of humanity to get on with its real function in the grand scheme.
I’ve written many articles during my progression along the path towards getting a more whole, clearer picture of that.
Right here, you and I are creating value between us by analysing what we both wish to ultimately get from the system; the same benefits that we believe should be available to all people, the equal opportunity to be fairly rewarded.
A human individual is a system with inputs and outputs.
An economy is a system with inputs and outputs.
The collective of humans plug together with the economy to form a system of systems.
The human individual already exists and can’t be remodelled, not that we should wish to.
Whereas the economy is the thing we are designing, to meet the human needs, its inputs, its outputs, and what it does with those.
The economy should be an instrument, used by humanity, to increase its power in the grand scheme of nature.
So we must model the human individual system authentically, in an impersonal way, at its simplest, most fundamental level, in order to design the most appropriate economic system for it.
Most simply, what are its inputs and outputs?
The human consumes energy, every day, that it lives.
This is its simplest, most fundamental requirement.
The human also consumes and processes information, via its senses.
As its output, the human system produces value, which is applied information as its simplest, most fundamental function.
Value is that which is added to the grand scheme in a way that improves it, in the eyes of all humans, all creatures, and all life.
The value output by a human can vary from hugely negative, to hugely positive.
We have some more formal definitions and a clearer understanding of the meaning of information, and value, from the studies of information theory, and network theory, and how businesses are currently able to leverage revenue from this, sometimes incorrectly.
We must design the economic system in such a way that the transfer of revenue always aligns with the transfer of value.
It should not be possible to transfer revenue, with no transfer of value, or worse, a transfer of value in the wrong direction, as is so obviously possible currently.
Getting this right will ensure that in future, all individual human interest naturally aligns with the interests of the collective.
The economy can enable this by activating and maximising the value produced by every human in such a way that the rewards available to every individual are positively influenced by their interactions with the collective.
In other words, everyone is rewarded for doing good.
Looking closer again at input, all humans consume more or less the same amount of energy, every day that they live, and from one individual to the next.
All energy comes from the sun, at its root source.
The sun generates energy at a roughly constant rate, for all time.
Summing up with the appropriate analogy:
In terms of nature, and reality, humans take information, and process this with sun energy, to produce value.
Two inputs, and one output.
In terms of the human construct of economy, we see humans take revenue, and information, to create value.
Again, two inputs, and one output.
We see that the only difference between the actual system of nature, and our economical construct, is in the actual natural case; consumption of energy occurs, whereas in the constructed case, consumption of revenue occurs.
The information consumed, and the process carried out on these, in each case, is independent of our schema.
Value has the same meaning in both cases.
In physical reality, the human has little control over how much energy they consume, and that amount bears little or no relation to the actual amount of value they produce.
The quality of human output is all on the quality of information input, and the processing done on this.
It is sufficient to know only that a human consumes roughly the same amount of energy every day, to produce its output.
So, finally in conclusion, to model the economic human most closely with the actual, physical human, we must provide our constructed revenue input which mimics our consumption of the energy of the sun.
The human has no control over that, other than to set an arbitrary initial amount at the system design stage.
The things which vary in nature, thus the things over which the actual physical human has control, is the information input, and the value output.
The revenue available to each human must mimic the simple action of their own body’s consumption of sun energy every day.
Thus the input revenue available to each human should be a simple, preset amount.
Their output then comprises their own application of the energy (revenue) received, combined with the information received, and the subsequent value of that output is what the collective evaluate it to be.
A person’s rewards then can vary hugely, depending on what value the collective see it as outputting.
Our economic system must mimic that authentically.
There is no such thing as scarcity of sun energy. Our portion of it is available for every human, every day. Without that, we are nothing, and we cannot usefully consume more of it than we do naturally, every day.
I think this should be the basis of money (revenue) generation for all humans, with maybe a variation on that, to cover revenue generation for companies and organisations, or maybe not. Further analysis is needed there, taking into account all humans can allocate their own funds to those.
Sorry for the rambling reply, but I hope it makes some sense to you.