THE ECONOMIC MODEL OR CONTRIBUTION AND BENEFIT STRUCTURE

The logic of the concept, one must always consider the logic first. It needs to be sound, fair, just and acceptable to all… The implementation is another issue, but the logic needs to make sense. The logic is that everyone contributes equally, and everyone benefits equally. As time appears to be the universal definition of value, the only way to add value, or contribute, to a society is to invest time productively or the proceeds of that productively spent time. Some food for thought is that you cannot create value without investing time productively, it is an impossibility. If there is a way please enlighten me as I would like to go on holiday for the rest of my life and somehow create value in the process. One proof that points to time being the genesis of value.

In its purest unadulterated form it is morally correct and sound but it has some mechanism that allow for protocols that unlock some interesting outcomes that address the unfounded perceived immoral stance but first let’s look at the pure unadulterated form. So everyone contributes 50% of their time towards the social contract. So you get the benefit of 50% and everyone else gets the benefit of 50% so if you are productive with your time you create value you can substitute your time with value that you created using your time. It is all pooled universal expenses are paid then the balance is returned to everyone at the same pro rata rate that they contributed. So you in effect get most of your taxed value back. Now you can implement some interesting protocols with this returned value, as well as the pooled value prior to it being returned. But we are now corrupting or adulterating the system as this now is where consideration of others come into play. One could say the the individual getting his value back cannot realize it himself but has to use it to either employ others with some simple restrictions or protocols or one could use it to benefit social projects or you could donate it to your political party of choice to use as they deem appropriate or as you instruct them to. One could say that one could use the pooled value to create a very rudimentary universal basic income, counter intuitively, it could possibly be the individuals choice as to how much is contributed. This unlocks what could be considered better than the ideal of socialism, within the architecture of capitalism. Some very interesting outcomes can be achieved using this model. One must always remember that for one culture to place a undue obligation on another without its consent is immoral. This model unlocks the ability for a architecture that is one up from a democracy, there are no elections you just support the party that aligns with your values. This again is seemingly counterintuitive but it’s actually reasonable and sound. It allows a socialist or communist community in fact any ideology to exist within the same geographic boundaries as the most capitalistic ideologies. In fact it encourages it without have those ideologies imposed on you. It unlocks political pluralism as well as economic pluralism. If a culture feels that it needs to have its own unique space this ideology also allows that they can isolate themselves if they do wish so as to not expose themselves or their members to other ideologies they feel are evil as many socialists feel capitalism is.

With this architecture the flow of contribution capital through the society is altered, as the current governments appear to not be capable of understanding what the purpose of a social compact in society is. They are blindly entrusted by all to be honest and impartial and provide, above all, safety, and security for those in the society they govern over. That is a primary condition of the consent given to be governed, by the governed. Instead, they abuse the sanctity of this trust and end up being corrupt and incompetent. This architecture allows for a reality to exist that politicians now have to be servants of the society they purport to represent and are only entrusted with means and value if they perform. So instead of the money being injected at the top and filtering its way down through the corrupt system with very little getting to the base where it is needed. It is injected in at the base where no one can steal it and it will filter its way up to the politicians. 

This compact or architecture is sound and just. It allows for everyone and anyone to create as much value as they want, as per the best capitalist system or it allows them to be compliant labor as per the best socialist model as and when required. It combines the best tenets or principals of the capitalist system with the best tenets or principals of the socialist ideology.

The contribution, or taxation mechanism, effectively makes everyone a fifty percent shareholder in everyone else’s business so it’s in everyone’s interests to make the other business work more efficiently. At this stage one only needs to consider the logic.

Apart from the moral contribution that everyone is expected to make by default. This is to create and uphold the social contract, and includes being law abiding and respecting others’ time, that allows for peace and harmony to exist, there is also a value contribution or tax that is the core of the socio-economic model. 

Under the current architecture this value contribution is a very biased value contribution towards a few productive members of that society, that offsets the issues caused by the incapacity or inability of others to contribute or create value of their own volition.

The current system does this by providing a mechanism for charity or value benefit for some, generally termed grants, without any value contribution from their side. Bear in mind that in an ideal society everyone would create their own value, so the only contribution would be the moral contribution and a minimal amount for the maintenance of the system and for those who would be mentally incapable of or too frail or incapacitated to have the ability create their own value.

In the current architecture, there is a vague definition of value and it’s somehow associated with an increase in monetary or asset value… somehow. Now as everyone doesn’t possess or have this ability to create this limited narrow definition of value, and as there are many who are incapable, or for some reason have no inclination of being productive in order to create this definition of value, not everyone has the ability to contribute. Contribution is therefore heavily biased, as mentioned, towards those that are productive and can create value measured in monetary terms or its equivalent asset value. So, the logic that “everyone contributes equally”, although it sounds nice, cannot exist in the current reality or architecture.

Now as this model is a component of the larger ideology or architecture, and that ideology’s logic’s core or basic axiom is that time defines value and that time is viewed as an asset. Ownership of that time is absolute, this architecture creates a reality where that logic that “everyone contributes equally” can now exist and be sound. After all, we all have time and have been given it in equal measure. Those that traditionally had no means of contributing under the current architecture now have the means to contribute under this architecture.

So as everyone has time, and if time defines value, this then creates the reality for everyone to then contribute value towards society, apart from the moral component of contribution. So, the logic “that everyone contributes equally” now can exist and be sound. Again, the implementation is possibly another story, but the reality, or architecture can exist for the logic to exist and be sound. As everyone has time and if time defines value, then everyone logically has the ability to contribute equally.

So, the logic is sound.

Now one needs to create an ideology, or architecture, where this logic can be implemented and exist.

In its ideal form it’s a bit of a hybrid model with the tenets of all the best components of the capitalist system combined with all the best tenets or attributes of the socialist system. 

But better than that it also caters for those who are totally unemployable or lazy or do not want to contribute at all. That benefit albeit a very meagre stipend is enough to buy some food but anything else they would need to work for. But always bear in mind they are not entitled to anything as they do not contribute.   

The implementation of the logic.

This economic or taxation system works on the simple logic that has the following core axioms.

• Everyone contributes equally, everyone benefits equally.
• You cannot or should not benefit more than you contribute. That is unjust.
• You cannot or should not benefit less than you contribute as that is also unjust.

I think all the loopholes for abuse are dealt with…

• And the logic that everyone contributes equally, and everyone benefits equally is good and sound and implementable.
• Everyone who potentially wants to work has the greatest chance of being offered a job.
• It is self-correcting and the benefit is directly proportional to the productivity of the society as a whole. It is in everyone’s best interest to be as productive as possible.
• It allows for a person to sit on the beach the whole day if that is what they want to do, they must be able to live on, and comfortable with, the stipend.

Again, the logic appears to be sound. It’s the logic we’re looking at here…

It creates the same effect or reality as everyone being a 50% shareholder in everyone else’s business, without actually buying shares.

So those who are most productive and contribute more financially will benefit financially and the balance of their contribution made up with access to universal labor. Their benefit will almost equal their contribution.

Those who are productive will receive most of their contribution back as well as access to some universal labor. Their benefit will almost equal their contribution.

Those who cannot create value will need to get employment as they currently do. Again, their benefit will almost equal their contribution.

Those who want employment but cannot get conventional employment will now be universal labor for those who have legitimate access to them. Their benefit will almost equal, if not exceed, their contribution.

The elderly (retired) and severely handicapped. They only benefit.

So a socialist party can lay claim to the 50% of the time and tax that that their members contribute as well as any universal basic income that they may be available. This gives them free paid for labour and access to some capital to buy a few farms grow their food and build their own schools and hospitals staffed with their own members. It’s again a bit counterintuitive but the logic and reasoning is sound.