Hmm, Your system appears to grant every person the right to print money by their merely being present.
No, nothing is being 'printed' and this is not mere semantics on my part.
This will fail, for the following reason, unless when present, you trade food, water, entertainment , or something else of worth , then you being present have no value and only becomes a deduction in my potential trading value.
Again, no. Bitcoin and all modern digitised monetary systems are merely simulations. There is no 'value', only the perception of 'value', which is itself a misperception based on the belief that things (and unreal digital abstractions of things) can become something more than what they are simply by an act of faith.
Feed Store accepts credit from everyone that buys from them, Everyone that pays them uses only their credit, Feed Store runs out of Product , and goes to buy more, their vendors deny any more product on credit and require something of actual worth, which the Feed Store owner is unable to give them.
What is this 'credit' you're referring to? Is it any different from the credit people use all the time to purchase goods and services? What do you think you are doing when you use a credit or debit card to 'pay' for a product? You are simply moving a digital representation of a number from a digital abstraction called 'your account' to another digital abstraction associated with the business owner. There is nothing of real value or worth being transferred and yet business owners are perfectly happy to let you 'pay' in this manner. Why? Because of the perception/misperception that the number that appears in their bank account has 'value', primarily because it's prefixed with a symbol (£/$) that people associate with the term 'money'. What makes you think they would not be equally happy under my system? If a business owner receives 100 'credits' under the existing system and 100 'credits' under my system then what's the difference? The difference (and it's the only difference) lies in how those credits are generated: as a debt under the existing system, as a gift under my system.
How on earth do you think the existing debt based system came into existence? Do you think we all collectively woke up one morning and said "I think it would be a great idea to surrender control of the money supply to organisations called 'banks' and allow them to issue something called 'money' as a debt that we have to pay back?" If such a system did not exist today and you were asked to sanction its approval then what would you say? I submit that your response would be something along the lines of "f**k off, that's a scam", and yet here you are today using just such a system and accepting its illusion of 'value'. Why? Don't tell me it's because you don't have a choice, because you
do have a choice. I'm giving you one right now.
The more illusion, the faster a system will fail.
How can a digital simulation of money become more illusory than it already is? Simulated money will always be an illusion, but because it is a simulation we do not have to accept the 'rules' coded into it as if they are the Ten Commandments. Instead, we can select the relevant sections of source code, hit the delete button, and start over.
HS