Except that isn’t the direct energy conversion of a unit of energy. I’m talking basing the economy off of an objective scientific standard.
The petrodollar isn’t a good example because it just mandates that oil be traded for in USD, meaning it forced the demand for USD, but the dollar isn’t a direct conversion for a unit of oil.
My basis is that electricity (or power in the physics sense) is the currency of reality. Energy states configures matter and govern how it behaves.
On an economic level, the entire process of pulling ore from the ground, refining it, and turning it into a finished good requires equipment, which is another sub process requiring some material and energy cost, and energy to run the process.
Since we have entered an age where information can be easily gathered via sensors, and processed so quickly, we can transfer to an economy that uses energy as currency directly. Especially as humans are further and further removed from the labor process via technology.
In my opinion, Marx was right about the abolition of private ownership. Ownership is a social contract, and social contracts can change.
A lot of wealth disparities come from this system of land ownership that promotes inefficient use of prime real estate through perverse incentives. And an entrenched class of landed gentry will always push a country towards autocracy.
I’ve been thinking about what comes after, and I think an energy based economy is the future.
Using watts as a currency, since any action in reality requires energy to change it’s state. Biological or otherwise.
Covering everyone’s basic needs and then distributing the surpluses of energy to people to engage in commerce, research, recreation, etc.
It removes the speculative nature of money, which is a side effect of the abstraction from reality that money is.
energy is the currency of civilization.
I mean… That’s kinda been a thing since the establishment of the petrodollar.
Except that isn’t the direct energy conversion of a unit of energy. I’m talking basing the economy off of an objective scientific standard.
The petrodollar isn’t a good example because it just mandates that oil be traded for in USD, meaning it forced the demand for USD, but the dollar isn’t a direct conversion for a unit of oil.
My basis is that electricity (or power in the physics sense) is the currency of reality. Energy states configures matter and govern how it behaves. On an economic level, the entire process of pulling ore from the ground, refining it, and turning it into a finished good requires equipment, which is another sub process requiring some material and energy cost, and energy to run the process. Since we have entered an age where information can be easily gathered via sensors, and processed so quickly, we can transfer to an economy that uses energy as currency directly. Especially as humans are further and further removed from the labor process via technology.
Why would rich people let money become obsolete?
I don’t think they are going to have a choice in the end.
Wouldn’t they just monpolize solar energy by hoarding the silicon resources? I feel like this wouldn’t solve exploitation or wealth disparities.
In my opinion, Marx was right about the abolition of private ownership. Ownership is a social contract, and social contracts can change. A lot of wealth disparities come from this system of land ownership that promotes inefficient use of prime real estate through perverse incentives. And an entrenched class of landed gentry will always push a country towards autocracy.