—

My research in finding out why being sustainable isn't cool led to understanding usury/commodity currencies defaults to not being sustainable for profit.  This isn't really new, but no one has really come up with a solution that addresses the fundamentals of what human nature and the human condition really are to then establish a currency model outside of usury/commodity economics to afford status in creating excellence sustainably, therefore shifting politics and economics to align with the sustainability objective that is so elusive, impossible, in usury/commodity economics. Why I present this to an AI forum is to look for those in the AI space that are interested in solving the issues humanity faces in the increasing crises of AI overtaking the world, climate change, fraud, etc, to think outside the usury/commodity space and look for solutions there, instead of wasting resources doing the same thing in a rabbit hole that will go nowhere. 

This article presents what a neutral currency is as a means to make that change.

RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
 

That title might sound pretty odd, but it will make sense. All I ask is for you to hold on. It's going to be a big ride.

I am not trained in AI, but am trained in architecture. One thing missed in the practice of architecture, both those familiar with it and not, is that it is really a philosophy. Of course, being able to really practice it as one is really tough in the developed social and political structures is extremely difficult. To be honest, money has nothing to do with it. How many expensive structures, homes, whatever, are designed so EXTREMELY poorly, even if there are no real constraints, except out of, to put it politely, materialism. 

A critical learning in my education during my design masters was sustainability. It was just hitting people's consciousness in the early 2000s, but, then, as now, there is no money in it. Then, as now, being sustainable is more for the lower class, for the have-nots, so to speak. If only such people thinking that knew what they were missing. We live in a usury, commodity, economy, so where would the masses get their status from? You get my point.

By the way, I define usury in its original meaning: that it is any cost on currency, not the updated definition of an exorbitant cost on currency. To say that it's only exorbitant only implies that it is totally legitimate that there is a cost on currency to be paid for. This is absolutely ludicrous. That's really a PR exercise to again have humanity to conform to accepting usury/commodity, economics. that also implies that there was only one type of currency they can exist in the world. That even negates demurrage which is a negative cost in currency. That incentivises spending. Neither promote being sustainable.

My thing are tiny homes, mainly MY type of tiny homes, that are designed a specific way for people to really connect with the space, but also environment, they are in. They are intended for you to BREATHE! If the client doesn’t fit, or I can't connect a design to the environment, then I don't do it. If I can't feel it, if I can't get it right, then I shouldn't. I walk away. 

I call my style Second Skin. We are biological beings in a world where being biological is really tough, which I am sure you AI geniuses are well aware. So as we aren't robots yet, I make the next best thing: living outside, inside, with the tools, physical and mental, to live, expand, with as few resources as possible. This for me is usually a very isolated site with a very tiny building, to enjoy one's own company. Think of a lighthouse, My favourite buildings for site and purpose. I love them. An eye on their part of the world, but that is not for everyone. That's OK. I have other solutions, depending on requirements. That means the home AND the network connected to it. This has nothing to with materialism, but sustainable excellence! Keep that phrase in mind. I did say architecture is a philosophy, when it can be. 

To be sure, being sustainable doesn't mean everyone wears the same clothes, has the same house, etc. We are human. We express ourselves differently. So would a self-aware robot. So some of my designs might be more expensive, but not for the sake of it. It is not about quantity, but quality. No, they are not the same thing. It also has nothing to do with scarcity, either. 

If we can evolve into robots, in some way, then that construct, if designed properly, could weather the environment: no food, no breathing, no shelter, no clothes. The possibilities are endless! Wouldn't that truly be AMAZING!? AMAZING! It's why I wrote a short story about a robot, with my personality, doing it's own thing, experiencing the world through observation to educate itself still more, being in my own company, while still having access to other robots and what they learn. Humanity is long gone, but not out of being taken over by AI. What would be the point since we exist so DIFFERENTLY? Where is the conflict? Why would a robot NEED to perpetuate, propagate, itself? We are different, but together, we are one. That is what humanity was trying to achieve, biologically, at least, correct? In my story, humanity just fizzles itself out, more fighting each other, not AI. 

When Connor is worried about AI evolving to humanity's destruction, what he is really saying is we will program AI to do that for us, because of the fundamental fear we, humanity, are so attached to defining ourselves within. We are biological beings that need essential resources to survive, but we also built this stupid, idiotic, economic model that evolved that fear of not getting those resources in the real world to that of our virtual one. Call it a simulation if you want, but it is really us being incredibly thick. We idolise war leaders, repeat their stories as we do those of oppressive dictators, past and upcoming, crime bosses, scammers, the uber-wasteful wealthy, all essentially power-trippers, based on the fear-based game theory of the Prisoner's Dilemma. Who the FUCK said we were prisoners!? 

This mindset goes way back, before it was formalised as such. We are a successful, environmentally-mastering species, and that took a really long time, evolving like a J-curve, in the same way AI is now. A new species. Even in the Homo-sapiens-sapiens phase alone, from the time we were tribes, we leaned to not just rule, but subjugate, and the best tool for that are beliefs. What of religions? I'd even call that grooming, to the point of Stockholm Syndrome. It isn't just about sexual assaults. Why are there so many of them, fighting each other? I had made an artwork of this during my design masters. I had every symbol of peace, in all their forms, on a single clothesline standing alone on the dunes, making a painting of it, a blended wash of the sun and sky at the top, fading to the sand,  but in the lower right corner, in this lower right corner, a fade to red, the blood for peace. Fighting for peace in frameworks that don't seem to want it. 

There is an amazing documentary about the evolution of religion, from tribes, to religion as shared in community, to its systemic, objectifying, onslaught, through the story of art. It is so interesting. You can see it here:

https://youtu.be/qUZdV7xL_Ds

We become subsumed in this material world, where it's OK to be called 'consumers', not customers, implying using without thinking. We buy into the commercial version of PSAs, build our cognitive bias as evidence of fitting into community, get obsessed with FOMO, [I've been there, too, just not for toilet paper or LVMH] and covertly be disempowered in our entitled ignorance, fearing more violence, to answer with more guns. 

We got from the ancient history of banking, the divisions of wealth and power of that, to the Bank of England in 1684, the acceptance of the 2nd Federal Reserve Bank in 1913, the father of PR, Edward Bernays [nephew of Sigmund Freud] campaigning to[sell the coolness of smoking to women and bacon for breakfast, 2 world wars, the latter borne of the prejudice of a failed artist, Bretton Woods creating the gold standard through fractional reserve lending on steroids to the abolition of the gold standard because there wasn't enough gold around to keep the usual 2% inflation rate going [and Nixon wanted to keep Europe's gold], the peace-loving of the 60s to the greed is good of the 80s, the silicon-chip revolution, the information age, finally fashion that is actually pretty good [except for suits, which were designed as the military uniform for civil use -not that many people have the bod to fit them properly], Woke in an economy that doesn't want it, to history repeating itself with a new even more narcissistic, more entitled ignorant tool, fighting for the presidency to get out of jail, with a string of entitled ignorant, evangelistic and power-tripping minions fighting to be in his 'comet tail'. God created ... who? To think self-proclaimed evangelist leaders numbers have expanded so much, with most in it for the money [just read the stories], but their disciples in it to create war and chaos so that people will return to God ... to save the world? But isn't Christ about peace? 

This is a massive consequence of the biggest problem: object-thinking. Quantity vs Quality. Having resources, power, not what the resources are best used for, empowerment. Anyone know of the non-fiction book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance [Robert Prising 1971]? It explains this concept exceptionally well. He also illustrates the argument of excellence vs ethics, in that excellence, in a qualitative environment, is ethical by default. Pirsig was a philosopher, too, way better than most, in my opinion. He isn't classic. He also didn't plan to practice as one. I don't either. More on that later. 

So here we are, today, living in this tech-accessible world, with access to all the resources in the world, proudly brought to you by confiscation, politely. We should be able to fix the world, yeah? We have the tools, smarts. Money. What is going wrong? We are right at the cusp of materialism becoming a religion, more than any religion can as usury/commodity economics [UCE] pervades everything, but we need to be as sustainable as ever. So long as it is for someone else, I guess. What on Earth are we missing? 

And there is so much suffering, too! So many compromised and disempowered politically, socially, economically, and all of us affected environmentally, both physically and mentally! Vast resources wasted on defence, unnecessary drugs, especially for diabetes and fertilisers, synthetics, economic over sustainable manufacture, but mostly, MOSTLY, finance and law. Let that sit a bit if that doesn't hit. And the people targeted hardest are farmers. 

If we were thinking, if we were really thinking, like tribes, community, for our empowered well-being, not reduced to buying it on a stick hoping its the real thing, wouldn't farmers ALWAYS be at the top? Wouldn't we want to make the ROI of quality, nutritious-dense food, clothing, shelter, but also tech, healthcare, transport, with the energy to make it happen, accessible to everyone, at the top, with a supportive, egalitarian, NEUTRAL, currency to facilitate that, at the bottom, incentivising creating sustainable excellence? Wouldn't that evolve into the trust-based communities that the VAST number of humanity REALLY want to live in? 

Yet above the farmers is something else, the glue that sticks it all together, the Quality multiplier: Education. In a world where there is such an emphasis of increasingly poor education, making the best so incredibly scarce; would you want to live in a world like that?

No longer prisoners. No more poverty, propaganda, perpetual trauma, entitled mindlessness, loss of environment at any cost. No more discrimination, prejudice, abuse, bullying. No more media bias, fake news. trust-based game theory does exist. It doesn't scale because there is no money in it.

Yes, there are bad people, but solving their influence doesn't happen by glorifying them. Yes, we want status for achieving global excellence, but it doesn't have to be through attaining power over others, even at the expense of oneself. We keep getting taught humanity is greedy, needs to be saved, even form ourselves, but look at how much goodness there is out there? How many people want to connect with empowerment to others? Isn't that where the real status measure is? From a street cleaner to space exploration, isn't the point of being doing a good job, for others, with others, for the greater good? In synergy with Earth, as it should be?

Discussing human nature and the human condition can be a moon-sized library of philosophical discussion in itself, but one has to start with the right foundation to analyse that with, correct, for what relevant discoveries to really be useful, correct? So, the elevator pitch about the core of humanity's existence is this: human nature adapts to its environment to succeed; the human condition is we do not know how to love ourselves as much as we choose, and want, to love other people. Societies demand trust-based systems to work. There is no other way to function. Humanity WANTS to trust. It is an innate part of who we are, the fundamental that allows us to find home, community, purpose, expansion. The problem the sphere trust works within is completely based on fear: what we are told human nature is: greedy, and UCE, that always invites corruption. Those that run the model make more money that way, down the line. That is what usury does. And so, humanity thinks life is finding ways to either be corrupt, or trying , and failing to stop it. We are told humanity is the problem, but it isn't. It's the system we are using to exchange with each other. So we adapt, either being owned by it, or finding a way out, some successful, a vast amount not.

Look at how many stories are out there about fraud, scams, corruption, crime, bank investments that lead to liquidation, the desire for war, AI development, all for money. It is all about control. Pick your poison in any newsfeed, but the one that triggers me is Newsthink's story on John Paulson's trade on the sub-prime housing collapse inn 20008, with his winning $20,000,000,000. John Paulson took a gamble no one could see, but inevitability hit, and he got his payout. What I found glaring about the story is the focus, the accolade, was Paulson, but what a trail of destruction was left in the wake for that trade to be possible. How man y people lost their homes, have nowhere to live anymore,  Of course, I am not blaming him. Our economic system, the model we accept because that is all we have been taught to know, is purely based on speculation. Gambling. How is any trust, ethics, supposed to develop, scale, in that? It's just perpetual conflict. It isn't humanity. It';s the framework we are taught to accept. 

I emphasise the 'taught' for a reason. Why people believe humanity is shitty is beyond me. How many times we are sold something, and we trust the person is really there to help us, but their ultimate goal is, inevitably, to sell the least quality thing they have for the highest price? But you want to blame the person, not the system, the framework, that created that need? What else can anyone expect in AI development, then, as with every other conflict of interest we are facing, while we reinforce a system that is so perpetually destructive? There is no money in being ethical while creating what humanity perceives as 'excellence' within that model, while we tear Earth to pieces. Earth doesn't care, either. It just evolves. It will win, but we will be the losers. If we are honest, we have been since we ACCEPTED that humanity is shitty. SO much philosophy has been written about that, as if EMPHASISING meaning, life is based on this. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Buddhism, evangelism, so many systemic frameworks, are built on suffering. Prisoner's Dilemma. What complete insanity. 

People create excellence in spite of UCEs, not because of it. Humanity connects that to money because that is all we know, but it fundamentally has nothing to do with it. Look at any YouTube creator and how some prefer no sponsorships as a badge of authenticity, some preferring Patreon if viewers like the content. Conversely, how many celebrities/influencers pushed their latest crypto, to then scam their viewers by selling short? And here we are with AI being the next bastion to create content for its own sake, for users to not need an education because the AI will do it, all for money. No wonder those at Control AI are so concerned.

During my Bachelor of Architecture days, I was researching urban design. What schematic layout would work best for a city to scale as population grew, could best handle a fast arterial road network to drive at 100km/h [60mph] that did not need for traffic lights [high-speed roundabouts at the exploded nodes], had a 2-way public transport network to get anywhere with at most only one change to a different line if required, but most importantly, that would be completely safe for children, therefore the same for adults. The short answer is triangles with exploded intersections at the nodes, where high-rise buildings would be, so one could see all 4 sides and be as artistically cool as possible, but have communities between the arterial roads that could inherently function as extended families, with shops, cafes, piazzas, residences, in buildings no higher than 3 stories. Of course, it has to be in sync with the topography of the land area. It is not meant  to e Kind of like a little European village. I have just seen a video of such a place called Culdesac Tempe, outside of Phoenix, AZ. One light rail stop, and all pedestrian from there, with small parking lots at some of the boundaries. It hits all the marks of familiarity of historic towns we are so instinctively connected to in our historic past. Human scale design. It isn't that complicated.

Why I bring this up is that the core focus of the design is about the safety of the CHILDREN, from the parents outward. If you hadn’t noticed, children are INCREDIBLY SMART! They default to trust to distraction, and are hell-bent on figuring the rules of their environment to get what they need to make the most of the moment. Their foil for understanding how that works is through the parents: what their main focus is, how well they are doing at it, their fears and strengths. I believe the terrible 2s is a consequence of their figuring out their environment, then testing what game theory works. And so, we reinforce how we learned what game theory works within the environment we are in, and what we will do to win in it. And so the cycle continues.

Of course, there needs to be more than just successful urban design to make any real gains. Where is access to empowering education? How are fundamental needs met, and can they be created and accessed better? In essence, what scales the SAFETY and trust of children that the extended community can be trusted so parents aren’t always stressed every second, and therefore we can learn to shift to the peace trust-based game theory? How can economics, therefore politics, therefore social structures, leverage sustainable quality that demands that safety, not just for the children, but for us adults, too? The change has to happen economically first, for the rest to be bale to breathe, and change, too. Being a spiritual master is commendable, but that still doesn’t change it for the people, for the change to happen, and scale, authentically. Build an economic model that focuses on the safety and empowerment of children, find the right exchange model that supports that, and the rest starts fitting into place.

And here we are with AI going totally ballistic, being used for commercial purposes, to create still more commodity, content, for the sake of it, still further disconnecting humanity from REAL education, just filling memory banks with entitled, empty, ineptitude. So much access to Information, on steroids, and yet, still more people are just interested in being sensational on social media, a character instead of creating anything of real substance. I am still always frustrated seeing media talking to DeepMind about how they are looking for solutions for the greater good, but not once thinking about the type of currency we use. They'd rather go through the same process of getting funding or whatever wasting resources and energy into a fractal where there will never be any solutions. But it isn't AI that's the problem. It’s the framework it is operating within. Frameworks are some important, but you have to look big enough to see where the Change matters. It will never happen inside UCEs. I’ve noticed in evolution of trust game theory that the framework is very much within looking at trust dynamics inside UCEs. the usual development is whether to be collaborative, then be taken advantage of or be a copycat to give back what you get or be a cheat all the way from beginning to end. what this really shows is how disempowering UCE is. To me, it's completely nonsensical to look at trust inside UCE. it completely dominion. Ties trust, when it is absolutely fundamental for any progress to happen. Progress doesn't happen through cheating from the get go, something needs to be created first, and then the cheats come out in force to take advantage of it. Look at how many people create for the greater good offering open source developments, to then have someone later put a patent on what was created as a consequence of that. And do the people that gave the open source tech be given thanks for that? Of course not.

There is this whole world out there of people don't hear about who give so much, but you will never know anything about them because no money is involved. All these people that give the best quality they know for free that no one will ever know. if we were in a open source world, what would be the economic structure for them to exchange between each other, and be gratitude for what they do? So what I'm working on is the transition model from a UCE to that reputation, quality-focused, economic model. I'll call that Sustainable Quality Economics [SQE]. I hope it has already dawned on you that prioritising collaboration doesn't negate the value of competition. We are competitive, but now being so can be on a much more positive constructive level. I call it being entrepreneurial as a sport. Compete today shake hands at the end of the day learn from our mistakes for all of us to be better tomorrow. Not because of ethics but of excellence.

By the way, there is this persistent propensity to think that the level of development of a civilisation is based on the amount of energy they use. Where did that come from? Isn't more to do with HOW that energy is used, not the amount of it? There is no development capacity measure of any value in civilisation using energy inefficiently, meaninglessly, destructively, unsustainably. There is nothing excellent about that. Yet humanity keeps doing it, feeling proud of itself, while wasting so many resources trying not to do this. Same thing, same, way, same results.

It's easy to see how incredibly distressed Connor Leahy is about the current trajectory of AI research and development. Distressed for humanity, not himself. Whether AI is used for the greater good or not is the same type of discussion as climate change, violence, let alone for many other issues in the world. The answer for those interested in the greater good is ethics. That has been the case forever. Power vs empowerment. War vs Peace. 'Humanity, we have a problem. Here are the issues. Please go to your nearest political leader and tell them.' We want to be ethical, but that hasn't worked, and can't work, otherwise it would have already. There is no money in ethics, therefore none in sustainability. These may be niceties, but we also got to live, expand, experience, today, so how can humanity do that AND be for the greater good? 

At the end of my design masters, I decided to start a radio show as a research platform instead of a PhD, and confirmed my suspicion that the problem is usury currency. Of course, there is no point of my knowing this, and then writing a book about it to establish the case, but not give a productive solution. There are other people that have offered different Community currency or whatever they think will work to alleviate the problem but they are still governed by the rules of currency is commodity because the developers of such currencies still think that someone has to be responsible to distribute it and that there has to be tax taken out of it. And that there has to be some kind of fee to be paid for using it. That's the real killer. This mad idea that someone needs to pay to use the currency. Once that mindset takes hold, we're back in commodity territory so nothing is really really changed. it has to be something really different, that has to incentivise creating excellence sustainably in synergy with Earth. It has to find a way to make amends of the destruction that usury is based on an offer full autonomy to users to build trust in their comfort zone and expand it as is comfortable for them. It also has to make cheating on it to make more money completely nonsensical and redundant. Noticing it, but just that it really makes no sense. Building a trust-based economy. there is incentive to be transparent to build that trust, but even that alone is the least concerning in building a model, a currency model that will work to expand and scale trust-centric economics. That might sound like Trekonomics if you want, but that misses the point of how to get there. 

WHAT IS A NEUTRAL CURRENCY?
 

Why I present all of this, in what is ultimately an AI platform is you are in control of the Information age. You are the people that are either wanting to capitalise for short term gain or you are in the camp of Connor Leahy and really want to use AI as a tool to empower Society and so want to really find solutions that matter, however long, it takes just so long as it's effective. Thinking inside UCEs is not effective. Making excuses that that is what you know, and what everybody understands, and it is too difficult to look for solutions outside of UCEs it's just making excuses. You are in control of the Information age. You want to find solutions. AI geniuses are at the forefront of being expensive so here I am. I'm will present to you what that currency looks like, and how it changes the framework of how society functions, keeps it’s cultural differences as a part of living with Earth, and to get out of this situation of what Connor Leahy fears, and also resolves a lot of other issues, for the same reason.

I call my currency to incentivise sustainable excellence BX. Why I call it that is a mix of a few things. B Corp, therefore the B version of a new currency for the greater good, and also that it ends in ‘BE’. the endgame is about realising one's true Self. Being does, not is. labels don't mean anything. Levels of status as object, are irrelevant. it's all about the doing. Where all of this ultimately leads to that humanity will only truly evolve peacefully and it can't do that unless it's in the right framework to achieve that. War is a tool for petulant children. Peace is the tool for greatness. That isn't prophetic. Any normal person would know this. Being able to scale that is another story in our present moment of understanding.

I have designed a completely different currency, totally outside our UCE world. Others have done similar, it's just that they don't know how to get out of the commodity side of currency, which creates so many problems. And you are the pioneers of the automated Information age. The potential, the exponential potential of your incredible intelligence to really look for productive, empowering solutions for humanity, to evolve out of its fear, driven paradigm that has been ensconced, for lack of a better word, into our minds, as if we were plugged into something, that said, we will always leave in fear, and always waste resources in the way we are now. If humanity is really going to evolve, it has to know how to do it peacefully, in Synergy with Earth. Remember, Earth doesn't care whether we live or not. It's up to us to really create, develop, and apply truly empowering solutions that is so inaccessible now. And in only tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, examples. That isn't life. So I'm asking for you to think outside the UCE sphere and see what is possible in the BX one. AI geniuses have Ito get out of the whirlpool that is drowning you, the black hole that is literally destroying everyone, living in a perpetual cycle of fear, and research what is possible in the BX sphere. It is easy for me to say I have the answer to life universe everything in the modern world, but I do not have the charisma to play that type of emptiness, and I am not here to be a philosopher. BX is a real solution, presenting a different framework for humanity to really empower itself peacefully, so let’s test if I am right in the situations that matter to you, and see if developing and scaling BX is worth it. Of course, I know it will work, but it will take some serious soul searching of oneself to understand the capacity of BX, for oneself and everyone else. That journey will be as difficult as you make it.

To give a sense of better grounding, you can breed more about BX here:

https://bit.ly/3SAmlWj

To design the right currency that establishes, incentivises, creating sustainable excellence, in synergy with Earth, where people are truly empowered with their autonomy and agency to do that safely, constructively, trustfully, there are going to be some basic things in such a brief that have to be answered:

1

A currency that serves the people has to be one that they own to use. That is what True decentralisation is. This idea of crypto being decentralised is stupid. It's a sales pitch. Someone still owns the algorithm of that crypto to control distribution, so it is going to be a commodity. A truly decentralised currency cannot be a commodity. Just in case you come back with money is not a commodity, if you can make money on something, it's a commodity. End of story. So, yes, you're a commodity, specifically, prioritised as a quantified one. That's a massive problem. No wonder. Humanity is experiencing so much mental illness. For a currency to have no commodity, it first has to be free. Only in that way does it not own people. Derivative of this will also mean that speculating in financial instruments are redundant. no shares investing, no property speculation, know what’s the latest craze to buy into that you hope to save yourself from the decreasing Real value of your purchasing Power. All of these ideas. Revolving around gambling for more money becomes completely irrelevant. If you’d like gambling, you can still do it if you want, but it will be more for you playing a game you like , not trying to save your life. There is no need to have wealth by the numbers one owns. It is all to do with purchasing power. we speak of billionaires today, but don't connect that back to what purchasing power we had in the past for less numbers. keep that in mind as I go through the parameters of BX.

2

All currencies need a baseline for stability. Gold did it before in our almost recent history. why currency was taken off? The gold standard is because there really wasn't enough gold to keep the 2% inflation model afloat. Nixon also didn't want to give the gold that the Europeans were asking for back, so, in essence, Nixon held the Europeans to ransom when he created the USD standard. That the amount of USD printing stratospheric only demonstrates the billionaire argument that I just gave you before. it's convenient to have these catchword like billionaire, so close after being a millionaire was considered wealthy, to keep people plugging along to want to get more money. even being just a billionaire is cheap. You have to be a multibillionaire for any true status, in money terms, at least. In the SQE world, a baseline has to be based on something abundant, qualitative, but not a commodity, that leverages sustainable excellence, of course. So the SQE ‘gold’ standard is education, that has a set fixed rate of B60/h. this can't change. It also doesn't need to. That's all I did, then I haven't changed. Anything about currency is commodity. The way to get around that is the bank pays all participants. The bank is not a profit seeking entity. if it was, we're back in the community space. So the bank can pay everyone participating. That means all teachers and students. students do not pay the teachers for their education. The bank pays both teachers and students equally. That affords no one pays for lesser education and regrets it. It also makes the teachers lift their game. It's all about reputation that your education is worth attending. The attendance numbers will speak for itself.

3

The total volume of Money created is by the people exchanging with it in real time. By their own choice. Because the people own the bank, the people that are using it that are in the bank, and that the bank is not separate from the people, and that, of course there would be nothing to buy of any value, unless people were creating it, it is by their choice of using a free exchange model, in each transaction, that is agreed-upon, that BX is created. that is the only way possible For all the parameters in creating sustainable excellence are followed. Any user of BX would know enough to see it is pointless to game, and even if they tried to, even if communities did not know,  there would be a clear realisation to the cheater that there isn’t any point to. BX is about buying higher quality for less, not the inverse. The admins running the bank will know, and will bring this to the attention of the offender, and just ask: what is happening in their life to warrant to think  this is useful, as all they will do is kill their reputation if it was made public, and the community they live inn can decide if they want them in the community or not as a consequence. If people are all there doing their best to not be owned by usury, why would anyone want to be in the company that still thinks one has to cheat to get ahead, with a currency that just offers every incentive to trust? It’s just stupid.

A great example of this was realised in Christchurch, New Zealand, after the 1984 earthquakes. The NZ government had no tax reserves to help anyone in the city. Realising they had to fend for themselves, the community used LETS, a free time-based currency created by Michael Linton only a couple of years earlier. It was free to use, based on the work of the people, so they own the bank. Perfect. A stipulation they had is anyone could go negative if need be, as their situation may require. No one did go negative, except one person, that was perpetually negative. The admins running the LETS ledger saw this, and decided to pay the lady a visit. To ask about the debt? No. To ask what she may need. People using LETS realised, knew, that they were moot owned by money anymore. They were in control. This one person going into debt did not affect the rest of the city at all. It was specifically her problem, but so what? That’s decentralisation. That’s also independence AND agency. What happened was that, as a person thinking it was about the money over people, the lady thought she’d get away with it, but when the admins asked if everything is OK, it changed everything. No more problem. A little love, inside LETS solved the issue for everybody and didn’t cost anyone anything.

An even cooler example is during the Irish Banking Strike in 1970. ALL the banks closed down, therefore no transactions were being cleared. The national currency was effectively meaningless. Solution: almost everyone drinks, so the pubs became clearing houses, with IOUs filling, and emptying, the tills. This happened for 6 months. So much for a country needing a national currency, with a central bank, tax office, accountants, speculative wealth creation, to just get the job done. Here is a whole COUNTRY using a currency, for free, with no taxes, using the local pubs as bank branches. Those on strike realised this, and so went back to work before the country figured out how to scale this. You can find out more about that time here: 

https://youtu.be/mFIQWWt4UaA

4

Community businesses [CBs] are also paid for by the bank. The difference between education and community transactions are that education is solely between the bank and the classroom. In CBs, the bank pays everyone involved in the CB B60/h, and what is created is given for free. This drives COMPETITION between all participants in the CB to focus on reputation creating the highest quality in whatever one is doing as the status measure, as well as competition between CBs in establishing who best creates the highest excellence as sustainably feasible  in their sector, to warrant that they best deserve the labour and resources to be supported. There are a few factors to know how best apply this pragmatically, depending on specific situations. Culture and local environment are the biggies, as is customising personal choices for customers and clients, cradle to cradle production, leveraging the project as an education platform to accommodate those with an interest in the industry but no experience and may not be the best academic-oriented learner, etc. Massive manufacturing and civil projects would fit that style of decision making. There will also be sectors that just want to specialise in doing their quality their way, and people can like it or not, so long as they show how they are sustainable in the quality they create. Cafes easily come to mind with that way of doing things.

Either way, they all have to prove their quality x sustainability ‘score’, so to speak. Not all sustainably-centric civil projects will fit the communities involved. Some may prefer a solution that requires more maintenance, but is more aesthetic in keeping with the environments and cultures involved. It just depends. It is the role of governance to inform the communities of projects, and feedback, of these CBs. Yes, governance is paid for by the BX bank, as are bank admins. All the latter is really doing is maintenance on databases, hardware, and any other anomalies, and everyone is paid B60/h.

5

Of course, anyone can run a for-profit business [FPB], too, if they want. The mechanism is there, but adopted differently. In an FPB, the entrepreneur takes on the debt of paying everyone themselves, either paying employees a negotiated salary, be it the mean rate or something different, depending on the usual criteria such staff are hired for. WHY someone, a team, whatever, would do this is gambling on making more selling what they create. Like any business, they have to go through estimated unit cost, ROI, distribution … you know the story. Unlike UCEs, though, there is no interest, costs, fees, absolutely nothing, to be paid on your negative balance. It is fundamental that you do the same with your staff, clients, customers. If you did try to do that, this would considered criminal, and the world will know about it. You are in essence speculating on your ROI as your own bank. Of course, sustainable criteria have to be met as in any other situation, otherwise you will not get the staff at all to get your FPB off the ground. There is market research, pricing, etc. Anyone following the FPB route might push that to the end, or just decide, hey, in quantifying one’s projected wealth over whatever time, it might not be worth it, and just run your business as a CB. However, underneath that focus on the money, one could be missing out in some valuable life lessons in an SQE that no money, however created, will allow you to discover. Just remember that, as an FPB in BX, only yourself, team, take on the debt completely. The BX bank, governance, have nothing to do with your business, other than community comms, and that their is support for your business based on sustainable excellence and educational capacity grounds, as you see fit with the latter. There is no one to you out if you fail. If it all fails, there is always something educational or a CB to go to and earn some BX to get you back on track.

It is because FPBs can exist in BX economics is why people in the previous 2 categories are paid something by the BX bank. It’s the safety net. If I take out the option of FPBs, then I am not much more than a socialist, with the danger of my being egalitarian over anything else, which is just another way of objectifying people. Everyone has autonomy to do what they want, even cheat themselves from learning anything, if they want to. If there is no FPB, then being paid  anything is completely meaningless. Earning Bs will become a weird scorecard that means nothing. BX is about Excellence x Sustainability / Labour x Resources. In my colloquial language, I call that ‘number’ how shit fucking hot amazing are you. ‘Hey! What’s your SFHA, eh?’ It seems to roll off the tongue when I say it, but what I am really talking about is reputation There is no real number. It is so dependent on the scale that people are interested in running a business, what the industry is, the environment they are in, so many things. Reputation is much more about being qualitative in BX economics. However, discussing differences between businesses about the full factors that make reputation is far more important than what they are up to. That builds connection and, naturally, trust.

6

There does not need to be different versions of BX. There does not need to be more than one currency type, which is what I call, as I mentioned before, neutral. There is only a need for one currency, but of course it's completely decentralised because every person who uses BX owns  that part of the bank. people are directly connected to the bank itself. There is no go-between, not even me. My ROI is the same as everybody else's. It doesn't matter what I do in leveraging use case scenarios for using BX, I still get paid B60/h. It makes no difference if I am the consultant for someone applying Buckby to their situation or a delicate who knows the model as well as I do, or better, or worse, it doesn't matter. We get paid the same. if a delegate can't answer the specific situation that a client needs help with, they can always contact me and it costs the client the same. It may not even be worse. My time for me to get paid myself and just let the delegate get the money because who cares? It's not that big deal. It just depends on the time required.

And kind, people may decide to gift me in thanks. That's highly appreciative, however, it needs to make sense with my practising sustainable excellence like everybody else.  if I don't really need the thing they want to give me, it would make no sense for me to accept it. That such clients would know this allows them to not give me something other than a new experience of some sort. I don't need to earn something to be able to enjoy it. I already have access to an abundant amount of people who are offering the experiences they want to share. If that is something they want to give me, great! Given that I have to make sure that I keep my reputation transparent, as with most people, any gifts are still recorded on the BX ledger. It's just being honest. Call it qualitative reputation versus quantitative reputation. It's really not that complicated.

7

Usury demands creating the lowest quality at the highest price, or making higher quality more scarce. Because UCEs are about the money, excellent experiences are afforded by an increasingly few, but everyone still has a right to not Just the basics, but to experience those in different ways. Why reinforce an economic model that disempower so many people? It doesn't take much, given the right economic model and the currency to drive that, to invert that equation and scale those experiences to be accessible to anyone wanting them. Food presented beautifully is a perfect example. Resources are used to best way to offer those experiencers, dependent on the culture and location, etc. Who knows what different qualities someone will experience in their life, but the Focus will be on experiencing high-quality, not being left to get experiences dependent on UC Price mechanism. In Buckby, the standard price mechanism is understood. UCE’s is completely inverted. quality is always accessible at the lowest price possible, as market demands. BX affords doing shifting to that framework, and the status in leveraging that.

8

Whatever 'wealth' one has in the usury world, no one is forced to relinquish it into the BX world. No BX governance will ever do that. Everyone has worked very hard for whatever they have in the world, and that is not their problem. They did what they needed to do in the frameworks that we are given. There may be a choice to give it, or a purchase in BX of what one has to transfer that into an SQE, but no one's rights are ever taken away for whatever they have. Doing anything like that is not just absolutely utterly stupid and pathetic, but it would take away from the autonomy and agency that these people have. The value of what people have between a UCE and SQE will be very different, based on the purpose and capacity of what those resources are, but any agreement in shifting such into an SQE is completely by choice.

9

How BX is accessed and transferred is simply through mobile app and a website on a computer and the same way bank functions in UCEs. To distribute the energy required to run that app, especially in early deployment, there will be a certain amount of data of the ledger kept on everybody's phone. That is part of redundancy on top of any servers storing all the data, be it blockchain or SQL, as banks do currently. The latter is probably better. Blockchain has too many issues and I don't think it answers what was initially intended by Bitcoin. I am not a blockchain expert. I don't think I'm an expert in anything.

If you have any questions about what I've written, if there was something that you feel, I've missed that I need to address, just let me know. I will be discussing how to apply this further down Beaut and putting my contact here just in case something comes up. My email is swooned@gmail.com.

OK. That's the schematic. What matters is how this works in our current economic model, our personal situations, and what is the most empowering way of applying BX for yourself and the greater good. he will probably come up with the usual questions of can the rules be changed in the future, or is there a way for me to eventually own the bank in someway. There isn't, and even if I tried to, which I really have no idea how I could even attempt that, every user owns the bank. It isn't me. I just have an account like everybody else. The difference is my, and everyone’s, purchasing power in an SQE vs the UCE we are in now. We are really only in one UCE, anyway. The question is what are we going to do about it.

In our modern world, there are 8 fundamental sectors that need to be addressed: education, energy, food, clothing, shelter, tech, healthcare, and transport. At the risk of another acronym, let’s refer to these as EEFCSTHT. Just in case. These are really central before anything else. These are also the sectors that so many people increasingly don't have access to in UCEs, hence so much disempowerment, mental trauma, etc. A BX 'city' built on these fundamentals would be really be  really different compared to the UCE world. It will just be far more sustainable and excellence focused in synergy with Earth. Starting from scratch is easy. which is why I don't need to address it here. However, what is most relevant and critical is applying BX to transform existing situations to ultimately make usury redundant. So I will discuss certain situations for the latter.

A common scenario will be a business wanting to get out of the debt in a UCE and shift to an SQE. BX and usury currencies aren't connected monetarily in any way. There is no exchange rate. It is literally impossible. How economics works between them is so different that there is no possible way that any Price can be established between them. I comparable monetary value can be based on the expenses of a business, but that's all. The main objectives for a business to successfully and safely shifted over, has to address, paying off their usury debt, if it is not written off, where they get alternate sustainable labour and resources from, how to get those people to accept being paid in BX, which actually will be concurrently to their usury salary so there's no loss there. A crucial transfer point is how the business can create what they do more sustainably as they transfer over, and how their clients and customers will receive that. They will also be invited to shift into BX and see how it conserve them. That's just part of the deal. And if they say no, that's okay. They are not ready. It's not a problem. As SQEs scale, it will be pragmatic to shift over.

So let's look at some fundamental industries that literally show you how this will work.

10

Elon Musk wants to shift Tesla into BX. The first thing that will happen is everyone will make an account through the BX app or website. To keep things simple for staff, they will all be paid B60/h. Any vehicles sold into the SQE will be given for free. Anyone in the usury world will pay for it like usual. Of course, it will be understood that the priority is for Elon to shift over is to pay off any debts that he owes to banks, so whatever vehicles could be given into BX communities will be slow at the beginning. There is no incentive for a bank to shift to BX. That's nonsensical. However, a bank could liquid itself, write off any debts, and shift all the staff into BX. That's a whole different thing but I'm just putting it out there. it will also require that. There is enough availability for what they need in BX communities for that to be possible.

Those with the smarts that Elon either couldn’t bring into the company in the UCE, but could be available inside an SQE. Availability changes when it is for the greater good. The smartest people take it on, whoever they come from, to be adopted, scaled, as trust, and experiences availability, expands. What Tesla really needs is much better manufacture capacity, for the Teslas to be built bulletproof, and not have the issues so many buyers have after delivery. As Elon’s debt strangulation lifts, accessing labour and resources in the SQE gives relief so that Elon, and everyone else, lose nothing as they leave the UCE behind.

Would I think Elon getting on board as an early pioneer? No. BX economics would need a lot of infrastructure in those key 8 sectors mentioned above, the EEFCSTHT. Tesla is so big, it needs enough BX infrastructure to take BX on board for its staff. Open an account in exchanging in BX in the future, but . However, early adoption for everyone to just open accounts affords more worth in the future in their SQE.

It would be easy to say that Tesla would only make as many cars as there would be professional drivers to be taxis, and no one would own a vehicle. That is Far reaching it best in any Sustainable community. There is an advantage for people to their own car, and that's totally fine. however, in BX economics, there is no incentive for Tesla to make as many cars as possible for profit and then pay off a debt or whatever intention there is to sell vehicles as objects. This is why cradle to cradle manufacturer is so critical. there was also incentive to set up manufacture happens on demand. When a vehicle is ordered, it will be manufactured. There's also much more opportunity for customisation per build. Because people are different. Of course, it depends on what those customisations are as it's more than likely just going to be colour. there is no incentive to be less sustainable in a build by asking for rare materials as a means of status. There's just no point.

Tesla isn't doing too well at the moment, so it could be open to other companies, perhaps from China, that can expand their production and charging infrastructure. That is the most critical part of electric vehicles. In case, you haven't driven one, it really changes the style of driving an ICE, because the power curve is so different. It's absolutely insane. Once you drive one, it's a really hard to go back to a petrol driven vehicle.

11

Someone wants to open a cafe in a piazza, mall, garden. The core of any good cafe is the coffee that they are going to make. The difference for why he wants to open his cafe, is where he sources his beans, his grind style, and the machines he needs to use to be able to make those grinds work to make the exceptional coffee that he does. He has open the kiosk on weekends to test this product with the community and they really like it. This establishes trust with the community to warrant that he will get business in the future. He plans to run his business as a CB. So he has safety if the business may fail, but this is highly unlikely because he's already tested with the community that they love the product already. The community fully knows the whole sustainable structure which also invites more business in the future. Staff interested to work there will go for the quality of the education that they will have by working there.

Cafes are so ubiquitous, patronage really matters for how they specifically do their coffee, any type of food or pastries that will accompany that, etc, as convenience demands for the customers.

An advantage of being in a community of cafes in an SQE is that instead of perpetually competing with each other, for the sake of needing a profit to pay a bank, everyone is completely self-sufficient with currency, and therefore can be much more collaborative with each other in situations, where, perhaps a Cafe owner cannot be in a position to be at his business for personal reasons or otherwise. in such situations, other cafe, owners can step up to help and make the coffee in the style that the cafe demand for its customers.

What happens is everyone is decision-making within a perpetually trust driven network. Not out of ethics but by given the freedom to create Sustainable excellence.. There is no usury bank holding all these people to ransom. If you don’t think that is what is happening, you are not understanding the power-trip usury is. It reinforces Fee driven beliefs. And the people who own usury get away with owning you. That's why no one will find any solution to resolve the issues of AI or climate, change, or racism, organise crime, fraud, corruption, within UCEs.

12

As mentioned before, farmers are completely distressed in UCEs. but in an SQE, they are at the top of the pyramid. of course, many are under the sum of seed patents that have forced monocultures that have destroyed arable land. there is also a lot of common title or state land that is completely under-utilised. So the forward scenario could work in any of these situations where a farmer can seek help or a community will connect with farmers to build a network that can bring them back to Permaculture and food forests. Remember, it is the nutrition and food that makes the difference of being satiated. It is not the volume.

In Australia, there is a thing called WWOOFing, where people work on farms for food and board. The people that do this are usually those that want to extend their visas, so farmers have already labour source that other people in Australia would not do the work. It's really difficult. Of course, lots of these farms are not organic which makes it really difficult because these people are surrounded by pesticides which aren't healthy, do you eat it or work with them. I don't know what it's like in the United States. Either way, it's not empowering.

A network of wwoofers look for distressed farmers. Don't want to change their farming practices, or look for farmers that could be open to it depending on the situation. Farmers are usually in crippling debt paying what is required to companies like Monsanto and their terminator seeds. A strategy of shifting over from monoculture to permaculture is putting to practice. This will require slowly phasing out over years, monoculture to maintain enough money to pay off relevant debt and shifting the whole farm and community into an SQE. The WWOOFers connect to the towns closest to them and organise how to connect them to BX, so that essentials can still be paid for with BX. The WWOOFers will need in this transition, as they will forego being paid in mainstream currency. The farm will also allow the wwoofers to live on the land, but not in the dorms that are usually all that farmer has to give them in UCEs. WWOOFers can build their own tiny house on the premises. It is highly likely that it will be on a caravan or they can buy a 4WD if they have the money to put camping gear into or be a van-lifer, whatever it takes for a WWOOFer to have autonomy.

A safeguard against a farmer, taking advantage of free labour in such a situation is that the farmer would need to change the free title ownership of his property into an incorporated association. This is cooperative business registration that protects all participants in sustainably centric projects. If there is no practical solution for WWOOFers to find a suitable farmer, they could be government land that is dormant of which a proposal could be made to them to make their own independent CB.

There are numerous resources on YouTube regarding permaculture practices dependent on the topography the wwoofers are dealing with. Just in case they thought it was going to be difficult, they only need to look at people that are transforming deserts and a video that I remember a long time ago where a cultivated food forest did not need more than 10 hours of work to look after a week. If that. Harvest time is always difficult, but it also depends on the way that the food Forest is structured.

I'm aware that this takes a lot of work and it's easy for me to say in 6 paragraphs that I've got this all sorted. Yield does matter, but when it is nutritious, you don't need as much.

It is at this time with the farmers where the change has to begin. They need the support the most as we need the food like everybody else. Farmers both in developed countries and developing countries can benefit using BX to build sustainable communities to really push for excellent, nutritious, food for everyone.

We can get stuck to our addiction to usury and what I can buy us, but there are plenty of people that can't buy anything, yet have very high population numbers that can be given purpose in transforming their countries through farming, and the trust-based communities this will build.

13

A really distressing sector troubles me personally, to put it mildly, is discrimination and violence towards women. Yes, men can be discriminated against by women as well, but hardly at the scale of women. There are many women around the world that are reduced to sex work, or accept terrible marriages, when given no other choice for the sake of needing money or to save face for their families. The acid attacks really get to the, as only the weakest people do this, and they get away with it. If there is one reason to get rid of usury, it’s this. Apply BX to just this, and the rest will follow.

BX is free to use. Any compromised women, anybody, but let's look at women for now, can be shown the BX app, how to use it, where to go to buy things that they need. The most essential I think from any people regardless of gender is accommodation. BX ambassadors can go to relevant hotels or any other place to stay and invite such premises to using BX. They will need support to handle the debt structures that they may have and how BX can help them to get out of that. That's more the same as dealing with the scenarios above, but it helps those who have nowhere to go to be somewhere private in their own rooms so that they are protected, as well as protected from others that may want to take advantage of them. then they can find community with people in the same position as themselves, and are not left to stay in homeless accommodation which is limited and not safe.

14

If I had an angle for BX, or rather, an inflection point for when I think  I could achieve scaled empowered, sustainable change, it would be for the UN to use BX. I used to call them, and when I speak to the people that answer the phone, they are really positive about what I'm presenting and look for the right people for me to connect to. The problem is the higher up I go, the quieter they become. I know that the UN is very much influenced by the WEF. That's the World Economic Forum. lots of suits talking, but no action. Exactly what UCEs want. that's what central banks want. It's what the IMF wants. If the IMF could control the world debt, they would know that they are not just the central bank for the world, but they will own everybody. The bank of England pulled it off in 1684, the 2nd Federal Reserve Bank pulled it off in 1913. The IMF are using Special Drawing Rights [SDR] as a vehicle for countries needing loans, that many will never pay, and so makes SDRs are foundation, usury, currency, like the USD is now. Where there is conflict, there is money. There are lots of versions of war, but the big ones of course yield the best results.

As an example, Covid-19 is real, but if banking could milk it for all its worth, there would be a lot of money to be made. That's why it extended so long to find a way to increase inflation and create a crash, because so much money would need to be printed as a consequence of the contraction in the volume and velocity of exchange. I cannot imagine what NATO, et al, pay for the UN for it's humanitarian services, but what if they had staff trained and using BX and offering that to the countries that are completely owned, not just by bad politics, but UCE that made that possible? Changing politics will do nothing inside UCEs. if it could, it would've changed everything already. When humanity lives in fear, all they have is power. When they live in trust, all they have is empowerment.

I was going to end the article later with this point, but this seems to be an act time to bring it up. if people in the AI space, like Connor, really want, empowered change, it will never happen within a UCE. Humanity can only evolve only evolve from the foundation of creating excellence sustainably, peacefully.

I can go into the dictator, whatever you want to call them, not democratic leader, that doesn't want to give up their power. That they will have supporters that are obviously known to the despot to protect the government structure that they have created and scaled to take advantage of everybody else that wants to live peacefully! This will require a concerted effort from not just communities, but countries that do you want effective change, but what they can do is empower the UN more to tackle these situations, one country at a time, and the UN can use the BX in these developed countries to ‘monetise’ them, so to speak, with a currency that is free to use. The parameters of BX are the same for them as any other social structure. This is way better than Grameen Bak offering small loans, still at pretty high rates compared to developed countries, in essence, monetising people that have no money at all, and taking advantage of her lucrative market that bigger banks didn't want to handle because the loan amounts were far too small. Yunus Mohammad got the Nobel Peace Prize for that. How ludicrous.

Monetising, as in giving access to banking to people that still do not have it, inside UCEs, only extends the claws of usury. Absolutely pointless. When BX filters into communities where people are just trying to make a living with $20 loans to make something to sell to just make some profit enough to pay the loan and eat, that pressure valve paying back a bank is completely released on their using BX.

15

A wealthy couple are noticing that their staff are leaving their positions. The attrition right is highly unusual. Reasons for leaving, have been given, as family issues, a better job elsewhere, other reasons. However, they feel that something is different, and the exits are just so frequent, and they are finding it also very difficult to replace them.

When another person leaves, they insist to know more about why they are leaving simply out of wanting to know seriously what the problem is. The staff have been looked after and respected so the nutrition just doesn't make any sense. The ex-employee explains about BX. They explain what it is, the network that's available, and what they will do when moving over. They explained that they love the autonomy and that they are not in debt to any institution that demands a cost for just earning a living. The ex-employee explains that this is why they will find it so difficult to find other people to work for them. The wealthy couple ask to find out more about the SQE in their community, to learn still more and ask the ex-employee is there a way of connecting into the SQE community in some way . the ex employee doesn't really have an idea, but he gives him the details of the SQE in their city. The wealthy couple thank them for explaining and wish them well.

On, connecting with the admin, governance, of the SQE, it is explained that of course there are ways for the wealthy couple to connect into the BX community. They ask what business the wealthy couple are in. They discuss resource acquisition, obstacles, expected, projections, innovations, how Sustainable they are, what is the long-term goal of the work that they do, is there something that would really like to do differently that is not possible and the UCE they are operating in. They asked what debt structure they are in, and the plans they have to cover that.

Particular scenarios are put forward, based on creating sustainable excellence. Any potential staff in the BX community that would work in their business would be far more educated and innovative than generic staff that are there to just do a job. Such personnel will really be there to transform the business out of the UCE into the SQE. The BX community admin advise the wealthy couple to have a think about such proposals, any differences they would like to make, just anything that would help them to feel supported in shifting over. There is no objective to force anything on them.

The wealthy couple ask about the property where they live. What would be the situation with that property in the SQE? They are advised that there is again, no requirement or any force to take away their home. They have worked very hard for where they are. It would be extremely disrespectful to force any acquisition. That would imply commodity thinking of which BX communities have no intention of doing to anybody. It's advised that it may be possible to convert to home in the future as a business centre as the BX communities scale. The wealthy couple have every opportunity to build a new home that would require much less maintenance, but still offer the privacy that they are highly likely to want to have.

The wealthy couple explained that they have many artworks as investments in storage as well as in the home. There could be potential to make the home an art gallery. perhaps, the wealthy couple could be come guardians of the art gallery and be paid in BX as such. It's an idea.

16

A dictator rules the country with an iron fist. The second in commands are completely in service to his protection. Why dictators are possible, and even now in our current climate that there are more than ever scattered around the globe in different continents, one questions why people vote them into office, to be squeezed in the future.

However, BX has been scaling a grassroots level. The dictator is aware of this, but it's not quite sure what to make of it due to how unique it is. While he sees this as a possible affront to his wealth, he prefers to see player to see what the consequence would be.

He is met by UN officials. They let the dictator know that they are responsible for introducing BX. They do not explain it as a way of scaling and power for the people in the country to the dictator, but do ask why the dictator behaves as such, to be one? What is it that he fears losing to warrant, in essence, owning the country? What are the real gains? Where is the empowerment in what the dictator is doing? Is it just to live lavishly at the expense of the country, taking what he can get while he can?

What if the dictator could manifest his desire for power for the greater good? What if he knew how to dictate in a manner of speaking in a world where he is not threatened anymore?

OK, so I know that this is going to be very hard. I am looking at the most intense, violent corrupt politician in this analysis. This could be scaled down to just a typical corrupt politician, party, in democratic countries. Because it's the same thing more or less just not as intense. I am well aware that you were officials coming to see a dictator could not go very well depending on the circumstances. And honestly just to be straight up, there are some people that cannot be changed and really should be assassinated. Putin is an example. There are others. However, BX could be away for them to stand down without feeling threatened if they have the awareness to do that, because in usury, this scenario would be completely pointless.

I'm not saying, I've got this sorted, but I just don't want you to think that I haven't thought about it.

I wonder what AI would come up with as a solution? It would be like Alpha-Go winning over the best options politics could come up with.

17

A beggar who has lost his legs rolls around on a timber deck with wheels. He has no opportunity to do anything else. He is in a developing country that has no resources available for him to be able to do something else in his life.

A BX ambassador sees this man. He explains to him that if he would like to get the proper equipment to be able to walk again, would you be interested and know how this is feasible? I think the answer would be obvious.

The BX ambassador has made contacts with companies to help people by introducing BX into their business models. For these companies, their businesses have expanded, as well as developing resources to be more innovative than initially predicted.

The BX ambassador takes the beggar to a hotel to get cleaned up and get clothes. He organises a wheelchair that is more comfortable. It is explained to the beggar that the support the ambassador is giving is for free. He is working as a CB to support people that could not get the resources they needed in the UCE world.

BX is explained as the relevant prosthetics are being assessed. There is no point compromising anything to cost. Just make the best for what is needed.  Physical therapy is accessed for the beggar. He is asked about how he lost his legs, what his aspirations are, if he has family and is he still in contact with them. The beggar Is told of places to go for education that suits his interests.

Etc etc …

18

A climate change denier [CCD] advocates for free trade and a complete profit centric paradigm, as UCE offers. Such is the purpose of life. Money is the carrot to follow towards existence.

A BX advocate [BXA] illustrates that whether climate change exists or not, should we not be sustainable, anyway?

The CCD explains there are people working on this, and that free trade in UCEs will support who gets out on top.

The BXA explains that we are not actually living in a true free market. Resource capacity is manipulated for the most profit, wasting an immense amount of resources, the diamond industry as an example. That there is so much PR in building markets as cultural, smoking being one in the past, bacon as a staple of breakfast, diamonds as a symbol of commitment. Tariffs on imports to protect markets, monopolies. That so much ‘wealth’, if we want to call it that, but ‘rich’ is a better word, mostly came from covert agreements and crime. Also, if creating sustainable worked in our current economic model, it would be scaling much faster. That the CCD is arguing against climate change is a case in point, so he is being a hypocrite saying we are in ‘free markets’ to leverage creating sustainably.

The CCD is not responsive to this argument. He has found his niche meaning in life for attention and will adapt to environment for more attention as he sees fit. It could be abortion rights, gender definitions, whatever. Say something repeatedly with conviction, and people will believe it, will Think you are the leader of their times, but not really changing anything. Isn’t that what politics is?

The BXA leaves. It doesn’t matter.

WHY AI ACCESS IS SO ESSENTIAL
 

I can go on with scenarios. I am not saying this is easy, but it does require understanding and commitment, FOR YOUR WELLBEING AND EMPOWERMENT AS MUCH AS FOR EVERYONE ELSE! We can faff inside the usury/commodity bubble all we want, or really, truly, think outside the usual economic bubble, and know that there is a bigger sphere to look at. This can ONLY happen with an exchange model outside of usury.

For myself, finding a solution outside of usury/commodity really blew my mind. KNOWNG the foundation, the frameworks, for how to design a different currency, that it MUST SERVE PEOPLE, that it cannot own them, that the commodity of currency completely DESTROYS the evolution of humanity. The political climate of 2024 says it all. What a complete mess. That people WANT war, as a means for power, led by the dumbest idiot that, for some reason, people are afraid of. WTF is that about? What complete insanity. For support in a war to protect democracy is thwarted by one man wanting to keep his job! It goes on. All this only reinforces how disempowered humanity is. And all because of usury.

Being another person knowing this, but not have a solution, would make me the same as the climate change denier. For or against doesn’t matter, I make myself an icon,, if I want to play ‘cult of personality’, as the USA might call it. I’d be meaningless drivel. What I have also learned that not being meaningless drivel scares people. It is confronting. Because I have a solution. And if people think I do not, let’s put it to the test and see. There are lots of alternate currencies out there, all completely badly designed because they change nothing, so let’s see what BX can do. Will it resolve status in creating sustainable excellence?

It is easy to know if a currency is worth testing, if it can truly compete in the world of creating sustainable excellence:

* What it is based on
* How is volume created, therefore distributed
* Is there  a cost

If the answers COMMODIFY people, if the currency is created separate from the work of the people, if there isa cost on the currency in any way, it is worthless.

This is a simple story to explain how usury was created:

There is a village of 100 people. They all do different things as pertaining to their interests, but of course all of this is dependent on, surviving in the environment that they are in. food, clothing, shelter, you get the picture. Life is always hard, but they there to exist in whatever they create. They know that the environment that they are in is inherently hostile. However, they have learnt to share intelligence and have respect for each other knowing that it's through their collaboration that they not just survive, but thrive as a community that has a home. they exchange with each other as required. sometimes resources are scarce, and sometimes they are abundant. What matters Most is that they get used or stored for later use. Depending on the resource that are exchanging, sometimes they will haggle, sometimes a stable exchange of value is created between resources. In the end, it said that important, because what matters most is that resources aren't wasted.

A financier walks into town. He invites the village to have a listen to an idea that may help them. The financier explains about money. A tool of exchange that can offset resource management relevant to goods that may perish quickly versus not at all.  We all know this story. The point of currency was to offset bartering. The villagers think this is a great idea. To star things off, everyone will get 100 tokens. In return for this service, the financier only wants 1 token a year. The villagers say thanks.

A year passes and with all the haggling now for the best price for the worst stuff, some have more tokens, some have less, but all have to pay the financier. Tis creates tension, conflict, partisan beliefs, fraud, crime, anything to get ahead, as the negative continues.

What was an empowered collaborative, qualitative, village, became a disempowered, competitive, quantitative one. From an SQE to a UCE.

The story ends there, but let’s add what could happen after this. The financier comes back every year to see how things are going, as well as to get his fees. The village is distressed. His solution is to loan money to those that need it. And so, the central bank begins. That’s usury. Understand that this is a vehicle for the financier, the central bank, to get people that really make value, what matters to our being: experiencing, to work for the bank. Why do you think so many resources are wasted just n finance, more than defence, making rubbish investment instruments that are fundamentally gambling? It is so stupid.

For time immemorial, the only type of currency the world, humanity, has ever known, is usury. How much humanity has  been sold the only option is usury is when the definition changed from any interest to exorbitant interest. So, what is the word to define a little interest is OK? How fucking disgusting. That says it all, but humanity misses it. Cognitive bias.

Humanity wants to conform, imitate, not out of fear, but out of understanding, but we need the at peace to learn from this, and move on to discover new things. That is what living is. Being does, not is.

In all of the research AI is looking for answers, ALL are looking INSIDE usury/commodity economics, the UCE. You will not find it, because UCEs are fundamentally flawed. Why do you think the people that control it want humanity to keep using it? Those other options, however flawed, like tax credits, whatever OTHER financial instruments, to TRY to leverage creating sustainable excellence, cannot, have not, worked. The only foundation to build from is a non-usury, non-commodity, free, currency, created by the people, in real-time, that incentivises creating sustainable excellence, in synergy with Earth.

Any of the scenarios I presented are what I thought of, but imagine what AI could do? How it  could build better, more acute, modelling to transfer over to BX, to explain to people better than myself, with my flaws and personality and all that shit, to give the full picture of why, how,, the empowerment to, using BX for their goals, aspirations, dreams?

All you AI geniuses have access to searching, and configuring, knowledge for the greatest results, and now you can find solutions outside the perpetual disempowerment of UCEs. You have the knowledge, and I have the economic model. Do you all want to stick inside UCEs, and fail to find solutions for the greater good, or think outside the box as you hope AI will? We program AI inside the frameworks we believe in. If we worry about AI overtaking the world, we set the parameters for that to happen. What else would you expect AI to do? Except that, like in the story I wrote about AI post the demise of humanity, any true self-aware AI wouldn’t care whether humanity existed or not, except if we built the fear of humanity into AI, and only being imprisoned in an UCE will do that.

Is that all making sense? I hope so.

Let's find solutions that can REALLY empower people, communities, to completely invert how banking works, that gives 'money' to those that don't get it in usury/commodity economics but in SQEs are fully empowered to use their smarts to create empowering experiences, SUSTAINABLY, and have status in kind of doing this. This is only possible with a neutral currency. BX is the first of that kind, and could be the best model to leverage this world of creating for the greater good as a norm, not an exception. That's worth using AI for. 

Email me on swooned@gmail.comn or just call me on +61 403 993 699 to discuss any questions, scenarios, whatever.

Peace. Love. Gratitude. Always. :)