Social Contract model

I ran my value theory of time past chat GPT4 and asked to it rehash it a bit for me with respect to social contracts and this is what it came up with it seems to convey the intent fairly effectively.

“Your argument is clear in its essence, but it can be made more coherent and succinct. Here’s a revised version:

“Imagine an overarching social contract theory so fundamental and straightforward that it encompasses all existing social contracts, ranging from individuals, families, political parties, religions, all the way to international organizations like the United Nations. It does so without disturbing the unique functionalities of these social contracts; everything changes, yet nothing does.

This overarching theory is so elementary that it brings forth remarkable emergent properties, one of them being the provision of benefits to all its members. The theory creates a reality identical to ours but adds a new depth to it. It defines a universal concept of time and embeds it within every aspect of life, creating a cohesive framework within which every culture can coexist harmoniously.

The uniqueness of this theory lies in its simplicity. It holds a single maxim that is also its axiom: the absolute ownership of one’s time. A notion so intuitive, it’s as if we were born with it. This ownership is then ceded to the culture one belongs to, with no other obligations.

This overarching theory yields emergent properties that spring from the logic of its singular maxim. It allows individuals to freely choose their affiliations, and not be bound by cultures, customs, political parties, or groups with which they do not identify or consent. It also offers mechanisms to define morality, both subjectively within each culture, and objectively for interactions across cultures.

In this structure, each culture has the autonomy to exist without interference as long as it does not impose obligations on others. It allows for the organic segregation of intolerant cultures and the coexistence of tolerant ones. Therefore, an intolerant culture would naturally isolate itself, while the tolerant ones interact freely. This pattern could bring about profound changes in our socio-political environment, encouraging responsibility and accountability while respecting the diversity of cultures.”

This is a simplified version of your original argument. It outlines the main ideas and highlights the unique aspects of your proposed social contract theory. I hope this revised version is helpful.” 

This page is still very incomplete but the summary by chat GPT above explains it fairly well. It would be best to read The Logic page to understand how this page is going to be framed in the end… just trying to figure out how to accomplish that in a coherent, logical manner.. need some time to rehash it a bit… but in essence once one defines the contribution benefit or primary taxation model as well as the primary justice model these must be objectively fair and apart from that the social contract model must be as simple as possible as it needs to encompass or bound every other social contract that exits, it in fact unlocks political pluralism, something that any complexity would run the risk of compromising. So any complexity here would need to be very carefully thought about they would in essence be unjust and bias a certain segment of society so any complexity must result in a benefit to all. This model apart from being the home of the primary economic model, taxation and benefit, as well as the primary justice model, it could also define processes and protocols that can be applied to the pooled resources to unlock various mechanisms they would include the possibility of a, albeit unjust, universal basic income as well as other basic protocols. The societal specific laws and customs or customary law would be introduced at the next level this would equate to the federal law vs state law in the United States. With the federal law being extremely simple and also able to get superseded by state law or custom the reverse of the current status where federal law is supreme and state law or custom is subservient. The only difference is that local community law and customary law are binding on the community members, but can only be imposed on others if they are aware of the law or custom and transgress it within the cultural space the laws are applicable to, if they are not aware of the law they will be made aware of it on the first transgression and be reprimanded for cultural insensitivity and disrespect and the second transgression will result in sanction, unless of course the transgressors culture also deems it immoral then he will be sanctioned as per his culture and made aware of the possible sanction that will be applied, as per the defendants culture, pending the next transgression. Entrenching cultural relativism and respect for others culture in their cultural space.

This model differs fundamentally from other models in that it defines the space that all constitutions exist in, this allows for certain things to happen or exist that could not exist before. The main difference is that it creates a space where a social contract can exist that allows for political pluralism and where the chosen political model is independent of the primary or universal economic (contribution and benefit) model as well as equally independent of the primary universal justice model, it in effect extracts these from the purview of the political model but still allows those political models the ability to impose their own sub models of these two functions at the next lower level much like state law and state taxes. The reason this can be done is due to the fact that value and justice can be defined in a simple, logical, and hopefully universally objective acceptable way, reduced to their genesis and that removes the requirement for any political oversight as it now becomes a logical, fair and ethically sound objective process. That frees up the political models to not have to be elected and imposed on those that don’t agree with a particular ideology but rather allows any and all political models to co-exist within the same geographic boundaries. In much he same way as religions were freed up during the enlightenment period to no longer be tied to the current governing structure, authority or geographic area and thus imposed on all, but allows the individual to choose ones political home very much the same way as religion is now a choice in most democratic societies today.

This structure allows any political ideology to exist whether it be socialist or capitalist within the same geographic boundaries. It is in effect the ideal of both extremes. It’s a capitalist system where one can create as much wealth, or benefit, as you wish as long as you pay your tax, everyone who benefits contributes equally, your contribution is not limited to financial gain but where this contribution is less that the benefit it is complimented with the contribution of time, even the beggar on the side of the road, if he gets some gain in value he pays his fair share or dues, or taxes, your culture fundamentally dictates your value to society. It’s a socialist system in that everyone essentially contributes equally and everyone benefits equally albeit a bit abstract at first. 

It is the ideal socialist model for those who prefer that ideology. They can now create their own socialist model where they can now exist within other ideologies or they can acquire their own piece of land and isolate themselves to practice their ideology in peace and quiet, create their own rules and as long as they pay tax when they make a gain they are free to implement their own model and see how it goes, with the help of capitalism. That is the general gist of this architecture, as mentioned its a paradigm shift from the current architecture where we have a “dictatorial” democracy where the will, or ideology, of some is imposed on the rest. This is the ideal of democracy as there essentially is no requirement for elections you just join the party you feel benefits you the most and your tax money that is returned to you can go straight to the party or institution of your choice. Because value and justice are undefined in the current architecture they cannot be separated from the political ideology or model, that is the reality of the current architecture. If we can define these two concepts that allows for them to be isolated and dealt with individually within their own models and implemented irrespective of the political ideology or model chosen by the individuals of a community.

At its core is the reality that, to create value in any society or culture, no matter how it is constituted or what its core ideology is, one needs to invest time, or value. This value fundamentally is time, but it is limited to productive time. Productive time is time that your community deems of value to them and its measure is the value that your community places on it by the financial remuneration your community or society compensates you with, of their own volition, for that investment of your time or value.

You fundamentally are the only one who can increase the value of your time, again this is accomplished through the productive investment of your time in yourself, through learning or educating yourself to enable you to provide a skill or talent that your community or culture or, if you are lucky, other cultures may also deem to be of value to them. The better your ability to perform or provide that skill, the more valuable it will be perceived by those requiring it.

Also at its core is the other fundamental reality that for some strange reason generally no one appears to know the first three words of the constitution that they are bound by. They do however inherently, or instinctively, or subconsciously, know what is morally or ethically correct. Many cannot even read or write but they manage to live their whole lives without ever being accused of transgressing, what in many cases is, a very complex set of rules or constitution. There is or must be a very basic logic that one can apply somehow. That logic it appears is based in time and how one interacts with it, more specifically how you interact with, or affect, the time of other conscious minds. It appears to be not limited to, or endemic to, the human experience but all conscious minds. Its a law of nature or a universal common law or a law of the universe, much the same as gravity is also a universal law or law of the universe.

In order to address the socio-economic issues that we experience today, like corruption, racism, unjust and inefficient justice system, inefficiency and incompetence in the political system, not being able to hold the executive to account, etc. something very fundamental has to happen or change or possibly be defined. It is not just going to be a law that sorts this out, in fact laws appear to accentuate, perpetuate and entrench these issues. There will need to be something that fundamentally changes or redefines our understanding of how we perceive and interact with one another, possibly on another level of consciousness. This is a proposal for a model that is based on a logic that appears to exists in the “state of nature” or “original state” that gives a bit of insight as to how it can potentially address the socio-economic issues currently at hand. It’s a fundamental deviation from the architecture of the current systems, and puts in a proposal for an alternate architecture that is somehow very familiar but also not. It is based on the definition of the “law of nature” that appears to dictate that one has absolute right to ownership of ones time, in other words the freedom or right to choose how you spend your time.

This “law of nature” is the basis or skeleton for the architecture of this model and the components that are problematic, that make it unacceptable in its raw form, are addressed with acceptable protocols. These problematic portions, with respect to the law of nature, are primarily to do with determining injustices and the procedures for recourse, in other words the dispensing of justice. The second problematic portion, that has nothing to do with justice but is to do with the primary economic model or primary flow of value, it needs to be simple, fair, just and importantly, primarily independent of the political framework at this juncture. The local political framework must source its revenue by consent from those it serves or benefits. On the face of it this appears to have many paradoxes, but on closer consideration they seem to resolve themselves. This model or ideology allows space for all religions, cultures and political ideologies to co-exist, as long as they respect the basic rules and right for others to do the same, or choose their own religions, cultures and political ideologies. Cultures, religions and political ideologies are by definition different and unique that is what makes them special. To try to force them to alter or change themselves, if they don’t affect you, is fundamentally a crime. This ideology has no aspirations of defining anything to do with the afterlife that is whatever you, your culture or religion believe. It is only to do with your existence in this reality or the here and now.

This model addresses the socio-economic space in a slightly different manner it allows the individual and his immediate society far more freedom to determine what his contribution to the society in which he exists is. The current systems of government all have the flow of capital inextricably linked to the elected or imposed political body. This results in democracies where all the tax revenue is channeled through them into the community as they see fit. This is fine as long as the authority are honest and morally sound and treat all equally. As every elected government has shown these are tenets that they all profess their representatives to have but in reality very few posses. The fact that the system embeds or entrusts the flow of capital to the elected or imposed political party, means that one has to have elections at regular intervals to confirm that the elected authority still have the authority of the majority of voters. This can result in a ineptocracy where productive members of society who are the engines or drivers of the economy are maligned, neglected and abused as they are the minority when it comes to voting and dictating policy.

If one can separate the primary flow of capital from the broader political system and then introduce it once the primary redistribution has already occurred that would result in the following:

• Reverse the primary direction of flow of tax income or contribution capital through the system. Instead of it being injected at the top and having to filter or pass down through multiple institutions and organizations it is injected at the base or grass roots and then through secondary taxation in that community passes up to the local authority as a municipal tax and a political party tax for politicians levied on that parties members, its best thought of as similar in concept to a city state.
• Tax benefit getting to those it needs to get to without passing through the hands of, in our case, corrupt politicians. It pretty much eliminates the ability for fraud and corruption to occur.
• It creates the reality where a political parties are “freed up geographically” as it were and are not bound by rigid geographic boundaries, but rather by the ideology that they purport to advance.
• It creates the reality where political parties can now serve their constituents or members and not have to be elected to do so. Removing the need or requirement for conventional elections that are costly and don’t benefit all.
• It creates the paradigm where political parties are funded by their members to enable them to provide services or infrastructure those members, if those members feel they are being neglected. Those members being able to tangibly see the benefit of their contributions and withhold any further contributions if they feel that the political body was not being honest and fair or corrupt. 

In very basic terms instead of capital being injected at the apex of the political system of society by treasury, where it filters down through to the base, where hopefully some will pass all the corrupt and fraudulent pitfalls along the way, sticky fingered politicians and their corrupt friends, to, hopefully, reach those whose benefit it is intended for. It is instead injected at the base or grass roots and then filters its way up. This creates the architecture to eliminate, or at least get a handle on, the mechanisms that allows for fraud and corruption, the unjust extraction of wealth, that some in government feel they are somehow entitled to. To govern is a privilege and not a right.

It creates the architecture for a “pure democracy” rather that the “dictatorial” democracy that we currently have (South Africa). There are no elections, or at least no need for elections at the primary or uppermost level as it is not a democracy but unanimity, and sovereignty in this model is heavily placed in the individual by his chosen reasonable peer. Elections can be held at the lower levels within the unique components of that community, depending on the lower level architecture adopted by that community or culture. 

In layman’s terms it assumes that we all value our time, it is a asset, or property of the individual spending it. It is all you are born with, you spend it your whole life and you die with none. It’s the one asset we all have in common and because of the unique nature of that relationship it’s absoluteness and the fact that we all like to live or value our time and especially our time going forward or future time, it allows us to define certain things among them value or time. Time appears to define value, or is the default currency of value, it provides us with a universal definition of value common to all conscious minds, it provides a universal parity or common denominator for value applicable to all conscious minds. It has an inherent logic, that then also allows one to also define justice, as justice appears to be the protection of value. It appears to be the core tenet or axiom in the universal compact or default compact that exists, the “law of nature”. These definitions are so basic and are the core axioms of the logic that creates the “default state” or state of nature or, law of nature, and should therefor be acceptable to all. This enables one to use this default as a template to create a social compact or contract that should be acceptable to all, after all when all else fails it appears to be the default law or rule applicable to all conscious minds.

It is founded on a logic centered on the reality that for you to have absolute freedom you need to take absolute responsibility and ownership for your actions, and you have to submit to recourse when accused of a injustice, you have no choice, but mechanisms or protocols put in place to allow for compensation for you for the inconvenience if you are innocent. The model has the principal of absolute ownership, as well as the accountability and responsibility associated with that ownership and recourse for when you infringe on others right to that ownership. The apex, or genesis, all starting with absolute ownership of your time and that absolute ownership passing on to everything you convert that time into. It is fair, and just, and appears to be fairly consistent with all just laws that exist in what one would consider a civilized or just society today.

But for this to exist there needs to be a accepted universal parity for value and that would appear to be time, we all value our time, and for that value to have effect you have to value and respect others time.

Protocols for this model to exist.

As with the current systems or models, when you are born you are given a unique ID number, this is then expanded on a bit. But it is all your choice if you don’t want to make use of them then you don’t need to, it is your choice but you will always pay tax, and be subject to recourse if you commit an injustice. 

That unique ID no is then:

• A unique identifier for you.
• Attached to a fingerprint that is unique to you.
• Attached to a unique DNA sample that is yours.

When you reach the age that your culture deems the of consent you can get the following if you want, your ID No attached to a:

• It is a unique bank account number for you to use if you want to. Your benefit, in this architecture, is paid into his bank account you have associated with your with your ID no.
• It is a unique cell phone number linked to your current one if you want to.
• It is a unique email address for yourself if you want to. 
• A record of your cultural or political bias if you want it recorded. If you cede your rights to a culture, or political party, they then in effect become your guardian. Or chief as in African culture. Your political home as it were.
• Your citizen record. A record of any injustices committed against or by you for determining and recording any precedent that may be required to prevent you from repeating an injustice that you may have committed. I.e. closing up loopholes that you are making use of, laws specifically designed for you, or your precedent.

This information is all kept in a central registry along with all transcripts of all court proceedings that are available for you to allow anyone to access at any time, but always available to your peer or presiding officer in any court proceedings. All kept by the department of home affairs. 

Home affairs is one of the few institutions paid for with your tax money before the universal benefit is distributed and paid. Along with all transcripts of all court proceedings that are available for you to allow anyone to access at any time, but always available to the presiding officer in any court proceedings. A employer can request this information if they wish and you can refuse, but then you have something to hide and will probably not get the job or get asked to leave or fired. 

Concepts like justice, education, religion and other social norms and cultural rituals are all by definition, subject to cultural biases. These are specific and unique tenets that make a culture a culture. The one commonality with every individual member of that culture is that they value time and when the chips are down the “law of nature” prevails it’s the subconscious default that kicks in when presented with a life threatening situation, or situation that, you perceive, negatively impacts or effects what you value. It’s the fight or flight mechanism that every conscious mind relies on for survival or self preservation. Cultures are all special and unique and just because you may not agree with a specific tenet, practice or component of a culture or a ritual, as long as it is not forced on you, or does not affect you, you cannot condemn it. Just as those outside of your culture cannot dictate to you how you should practice your culture, as long as you keep it within your cultural community. 

Primarily it would appear what this architecture does is to separate politics, justice and the primary flow of capital. The current systems try to do it especially the political and judicial but as can be seen they are still connected, Trump can pardon on a whim and in our case our ex president Jacob Zuma gets undue benefit and undue reprieve from justice, enabled by the political system, it is unfair and unjust. All current political models tie the state inextricably to the economic architecture, forcing all primary tax to go through and be distributed by this entity. This is where the integrity of the current political incumbent is put to the test, and almost always fails, corruption and fraud result undue extraction of wealth by those with access to this process. This model deviates fundamentally from this norm, and separates the flow of primary contributions from the political organs. In effect bypassing them and removing major areas for fraud to be committed and their ability to corrupt. When one thinks of it the tax you pay is for the benefit of everyone, especially those with the least ability to create value of their own volition, so why not give it to everyone and then they can decide where it is best utilized. This architecture, through its contribution mechanism, effectively makes everyone a 50% shareholder in everyone else’s business.

If you live in a community where the local authority provide a service that would then be paid for by a local tax levied equally on ALL who live in that community or make use of that service. Political parties would now effectively need to reinvent themselves, in effect becoming servants of those they purport to represent, as it should be.

As you can see this model creates the default where everyone has something to start off with. That is a fundamental deviation from the current system where by default many in the society have nothing. This now creates the paradigm where everyone now has something to loose if they agitate or disrupt anyone who is productive. And as such they will want to put in effort to maintain the system in a just manner. This is a universal shift in the perception of our reality. As everyone in this architecture now has the ability for a universal income, that income can be attached when a injustice has occurred. As a example, if you don’t pay your utility bill, you will go to court, a judgement will be made and it will be collected from your universal income before it is distributed to you, if your debt is more than your benefit then it’s collected from your political party or whoever or whatever guardian you have ceded your time to, they then need to educate you on using or extracting value without paying for it.

Still working on it …getting there slowly..