• howrar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      Sounds like something that would be trivial for the wealthy to circumvent while being very expensive for the poor to do the same. Someone with the means can just pay someone to continuously refresh their money with new money. Unclear on how people will deal with transactions when different bills have different values from what’s written on them.

        • howrar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          They live hand to mouth.

          And they’ll stay there if they can’t save up any money.

            • howrar@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 days ago

              Most likely you’ll be getting the older bills that are close to expiry if you’re poor. It doesn’t matter how much time they’re given when they’re minted.

              • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                6 days ago

                If they spend at around the equivliance of at new minted bill and youre not trying to save them, what does it matter?

                If you are trying to save youre not keeping hard cash youre investing it. So then we would see a lot more investment spurring on growth.

    • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Isn’t that almost the same thing? No way a dollar bill that is 1 day before expired would have the same value as a dollar bill that expires in a year.

      Or do you except a shop would have to accept a bill that expires in 10 seconds and they won’t be able to do anything with it? Would you be fine if your employer paid you with bills that expire in 2 days?

      • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Well, its a thought. There are a lot of variables to capitalism. Just thinking of ways to improve the system if there are people who are dead set on keeping it forever. Maybe it should lose value. If, say it was a 50 year expiration date, the exchange that generated the value has long since past.

        You could also implement a buy back where the government gives you a flat rate on expired currency or a tax write off but you have to meet a minimum threshold.

        To me its important to recognize thst money is what we say it is. We can do whatever we like with it.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 days ago

          Again, at 2% yearly inflation, the money would have only 37% of its original value after 50 years. And inflation tends to get higher.

          People who “hoard money” usually invest it into something.

          • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 days ago

            If you think thats fine, thats ok. We arent changing anything here today and most likely ever. So if you wont engage because you think your going to teach me something today, jokes on you.

                • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 days ago

                  Sure. But please, if preventing hording cash is not what you want to achieve, please explain what issue you are trying to solve. And if it is, why do you believe people do hoard cash despite inflation? I think that is what I don’t understand.

                  • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 days ago

                    The problem Im trying to solve is removing people from the economy who have an unfair advantage. Luck dictates class, lifestyle, and positions of power. It makes sense to me that if we want more efficient and balanced society we need to remove the people with entrenched power who dont deserve it. People who have gambled their way to the top.

                    If someone before you did something great, sure maybe you should be able to live off that wealth as some sort of gratitude to your elder. If decendents are allowed an advantage, that advantage should have an expiration date and maybe that will motivate them to be better.

                    Thats my outlook.

                    This mechanism is one I considered to address this, in a way. A more direct way may blend into socialism or communism but I believe in meritocracy and capitalism to some extent. So maybe this comprise would actually accomplish more of what Id like to see done and its hyper capitalistic.

                    As far as the question, “what about what we have now” I’ve spoke about that elsewhere. Essentially we all accept people invest their wealth and are generally not all liquid.