This is my first post. Please tell me if I am doing it in wrong manner. Also I am not a native English speaker, please ask questions if what's written is not clear.

 Hi everyone, I think AGI is a very hot topic these days. There are plenty of topics to talk about, but I would like to talk about how our society can be changed to adapt to such an AGI. Especially I give a new idea of economic system want people to discuss and give me some feedbacks.


Introduction

 Today, the world is becoming increasingly convenient due to the development of technology. While people's demands are fulfilled by convenient technology, the labor of people is being replaced by technology, making it harder to be evaluated. More specifically, goods and services provided by companies that monopolize technology are consumed by the masses and make a lot of profit, while goods and services provided by the average person are less valued and earning money is more difficult through efforts.
 This trend is not a new one, but it is expected to be reinforced in coming future, especially with the recent remarkable development of artificial intelligence and its implementation in society. In order to resolve the disparities brought about by such a side effect of technological development, I give an analysis to the issue and suggest an idea of a new economic system based on the analysis.

 

Analysis

 A society is a form of reciprocity among individuals who compose the society. In general, there are multiple forms of reciprocity, and our current social system is one of them. There are various ways to attribute social problems, but here we will consider social problems as occurring in conjunction with a social system. Problems that occur in our contemporary society are caused by the social system we live, and if we change the system (i.e., the form of reciprocity), social problems can also be changed and potentially be resolved.

 In today's free market based society, each individual participant makes his or her daily life possible through the exchange of goods and services. In order to facilitate this exchange, "money" is invented to give each good or service an indicator of value. People provide goods and services and exchange them for the appropriate amount of "money", which is later exchanged for other goods and services necessary for daily life. For example, if you work for a company, you provide your labor as a service in exchange for "money" in the form of a salary, which you use to buy food or pay rent. 
 If the goods and services provided are not appreciated, the person will not have enough to live on and will fall into poverty. Of course, to prevent this from happening, people try to find ways that the goods and services they provide are well valued. However, since the exchange of goods and services is subject to exchange rates, the value of the goods and services is a relative measure of their value. Therefore, when one group of goods and services are highly appreciated, a decrease in the value of the other part is inevitable.

 Scientific and technological development has the aspect of improving the efficiency of tasks that previously required a substantial amount of effort and cost. This allows those who possess the technology to provide goods and services more easily and in larger quantities than in the past. On the other hand, those who do not possess the technology are left to provide the same goods and services in the conventional quantity with the conventional amount of effort and cost. 
 Let A be a good or service that can be produced in large quantities through technological development, and let B be another good or service that cannot be mass-produced through technological development. If A and B are exchanged at the same rate as before even after A can be mass-produced, B will be exchanged immediately and will be in short supply, and no more A can be produced to exchange for B. If the rate is changed so that A and B can always be exchanged, this means that more A will be used to exchange B than before. In either case, those who produce A with conventional effort and cost will have a reduced chance of obtaining B, and if B is necessary for their livelihood, they will find it difficult to make ends meet.

 From the above discussion, it is clear that although science and technology are supposed to enrich people's lives, their impact on the reciprocal relationship of exchange of goods and services is an increase in the gap between those who own and use technology and those who do not. In particular, the recent remarkable development of artificial intelligence is expected to have a tremendous impact on such reciprocity between people. Therefore, we would like to consider other forms of reciprocity.

 In a reciprocal relationship of exchange of goods and services, people obtain the necessities of life through the exchange of goods and services, and this can be interpreted as society's evaluation of a person through the filter of goods and services provided by that person. However, a person's importance to the reciprocal relationship does not depend solely on the goods and services he or she provides. As long as the evaluation of people is limited to goods and services, we cannot overcome the negative aspects of technological development. Here, I give an idea of a reciprocal system that removes such restrictions and thus, will overcome the issue.

 

Description of the system

All participants (KYC) will receive a certain amount of Token A on a regular basis through blockchain technology. Token A cannot be used as currency by itself and is lost after a certain period of time so that it cannot be stored. The owner of token A allocates it to other participants, who in turn receive token B. Token B functions as currency and can be used to pay for goods and services.

 Assume that the exchange is done with a KYC policy (that means the identity of the account or wallet is verified, so that each accounts and participants have one-to-one correspondence.). This is to prevent one person from spamming many fake accounts and receiving a large amount of token A, and also to make it easier to add features to token A or B.

 Assume that it is not possible to determine whose token A generates whose token B, and that the timing of its generation is random within a certain period of time. This makes it difficult for participants to negotiate or force others to assign token A to them in order to obtain token B. For the same reason, token A, once allocated, can be revoked before the creation of token B is finalized. 

This system is designed with the wish that appreciation and a willingness to support the subject will lead to evaluation of that subject. Ideally, token A holders would allocate tokens to receivers based those feelings. If the same thing is attempted through a conventional money-based donation mechanism, issues arise such as people's gratitude and support conflicting with their reluctance to donate money, and people without money are less likely to have their gratitude and support reflected. Token A avoids those problems by being designed so that it is given equally to everyone and has no use than to support others.

 

Further discussion

There is plenty of room to improve or optimize the system. Here is some example:

  • We may want to set an upper limit on the receipt of token A or adjust the dependency of how much of token B can be generated from received token A, so that token B will not be monopolized by dictators and gurus, who are fanatically supported.
  • We may want to set allocation rules, such as setting an upper limit on the allocation of token A from one to another person for a certain period of time so that tokens are not concentrated only in limited relationships such as family and close friends.
  • It might be a good idea to add features such as tax collection to ensure the scarcity of Token B, or to allow for moderate inflation and adjust the generation of token B by token A to a certain percentage of the total.
  • It might be a good idea to engineer the token A so that when it is not allocated to an individual it is stored in a way that they are not possessed by any individual, and then be allocated to a public utility by vote.

 

I am not an economist, therefore there may be some fatal oversight in the system. But I am happy to know if there is anything wrong. 
Finally, I wish my beloved science and technology will make our world batter instead of bring us a disaster.

New Comment
1 comment, sorted by Click to highlight new comments since: Today at 10:58 PM

Summarizing in different words: 

B tokens are the currency of a normal, money-based economy. But, there is also a regular gift period, in which everyone gets to give away a fixed amount of new B tokens to whoever they want. (The new B tokens come by converting the A tokens, that everyone receives as a fixed regular gift-giving income.)

Well, at least it seems viable! Hopefully someone with economic knowledge can comment on how such an economy might behave.