Is not immoral to charge interest on money lending, is just the way money works as it is today.
But money is not a product, is more like a contract between all its users. And that contract can be flawed and lead to undesirable effects.
Money is a product because it produces a service. Just like a bus ticket allows me to take the bus, money allows me to trade with other people. Money is just a product. The fact that the product raises from social interaction as a kind of implied contract or agreement does not change the fact that money is a product.
Exactly. And the same could happen with happen with capital yields. Only when some lack of a certain capital good is in place can that capital produce yield.
If the demand for that capital was fully satisfied, the capital yield would tend to zero.
By competition between the capitals of the same type, the yield would drop to zero, but capital not only has to compete with the capitals of its same type, but with all the capital.
No exactly with all the rest, but yeah, there are level of substitution.
Money is artificially scarce
Depends on the system. If you mean in the present monetary system, no, money is not artificially scarce (except in some puntual moments), the problem is the distribution and management.
and is the only capital whose yields cannot drop to zero by competition.
Well, the Fed has the federal fund rate at 0 right now... The thing is that the yields of nothing never get to 0. Its a tendency.
Ironically is also the only capital that doesn't produce anything of value.
See, this is where you have it wrong. Money produces a service of very important value. It allows people to trade (avoiding barter). This is an incredible service that I think you take for granted, but without it developed human civilizations could not exist.
Freicoin would start with no value at all, just like bitcoin did. I don't believe you can expect inflation from there.
You believe that no one would accept it, but if some people did; How would it produce poverty?
Why demurrage is not producing poverty in the communities that operate with it?
I was assuming that a working currency changes to Freicoin system. If it has to start from zero, I dont think it would be widely adopted, maybe only by ideology. And in case it was adopted by ideology competition would end up taking over.
Ehm...It's a system that monetizes mostly debt, but everyone can do it to the extend their partners trust them, not only banks. I hope I can contribute with the implementation soon.
Maybe I have the system wrong, but monetizes a service or a product. If I give you a product, now I have credit with you at Ripple. Now I can use that credit with someone that thinks you are trustworthy. Well, yeah, you are monetizing the debt. Its still fine. There is nothing wrong on trading the debts.
Fair enough, but there's examples of free money operating right now, look at how many times "Liquidity Tax", "Circulation Incentive", "Demurrage" or "circulation-protection fee" appears in
this list.
Youll have to be more specific. The list is huge.
You're judging freicoin without having even started so I guess that we can.
See above.
The difference is that profits disappear by competition and capital yields are artificially maintained "high" by the current design of money.
Actually no. The interest are not mantained artificially high. The problem in the present system is the way money is distributed and managed. Again, the Fed has the fed fund rate at 0%.
Simply by competing "dishonestly" with other capitals. The accumulation of every type of capital stops when that type of capital yields less than money itself (which as said doesn't produce any good or service on its own).
I think you are getting it upside down. Money produces a yield because there are people willing to borrow it. If nobody borrows money does not produce interest.
Now if there are no real world projects that are profitable at a certain interest rate, nobody will borrow. Therefore money will yield absolutely nothing. What savers will do (through the financial system) is lower interest rates until they find someone willing to borrow, meaning that the yield of capital will be higher than the interest of money. Does that makes sense?