For getting on
for two decades now, I’ve been predicting a multiple currency world and multiple
currency lives.
There is
evidence here and there – euros in phone boxes, the rise of local currencies –
but, generally speaking, it steadfastly refuses to happen. Though I’m still convinced that it will.
It doesn’t
help that I happen to live in the most boneheadedly conservative nation on earth
when it comes to thinking about money. Most English
people seem to feel it was created by God around Day Six of the Genesis and hasn't changed much since.
Then along came
bitcoin. It was clear evidence that I had been on the right track, but I’m afraid I found it almost as irritating as it did before.
Not only is
bitcoin doomed to be an inflationary speculative flash in the pan (I humbly
submit) but its origins and structure and means of creation are the very
opposite of transparent. Its inventor
remains secret, for goodness sake.
But most
irritating of all, it seems to have prodded a whole rage of misunderstandings
to emerge, and there was another one on Monday in the Daily Telegraph, which I've just been shown (thanks,
Jock).
It says that
Hull City Council has started ‘mining’ their own digital currency in order to
pay to volunteers, on the grounds that HMRC doesn't recognise digital
currencies until they get converted into cash.
It is quite
difficult to know where to start on this one, but let's have a go.
1.
It isn't true that HMRC doesn't recognise
digital currencies. For years, they have
reserved the right to tax air miles and a range of other local currencies, if they are a major source of income. In
fact, the Fininish government began taxing time credits to volunteers last September.
2.
There are already very successful means of
paying volunteers, in the form of time banks and time credits operating all
over the country without the need to resort to complex 'mining'.
3. Paying volunteers is anyway a ticklish
business. You have to make sure that it
doesn't dampen their basic altruistic motivation, which means that credits need
to be mere recognition of people’s efforts, and in no way exchangeable for any
other kind of cash - because that would undermine their motivation in the medium term.
4. Hullcoin will find that the existing tax and
benefits regulations apply to them, which means that – if their currency just recognises volunteering – then earnings will not be subject to tax and benefits, unless they are
used to buy goods and except in the case of incapacity benefit. Nothing to do with digital disregarding
digital money.
5. In fact, it comes under the EU e-money directive, and has done for years.
This is
irritating partly because it is another example of a local authority which seems
not to have asked advice before getting involved in new kinds of money (Isle of Wight County Council was prosecuted in 1997 for minting its own ecu coins).
I might be wrong: the Telegraph report might be wholly inaccurate.
But it is mainly
irritating because it encourages the fantasy that some digital currencies are
an unregulated area, a virgin territory ripe for exploitation.
My fear is that this will encourage the great Napoleonic controllers (Bank de France, Bundesbank spring to mind) to clamp down on what is a vital area of innovation: new kinds of money.
Because there is no area of modern life where we need innovative thinking than in money, and there is a long way to go. Where we are heading is unknown but I would be prepared to lay a bet that bitcoin will not be there.
There are two regular forms of currency in common use in the UK which, from time to time, spectacularly increase in value compared to the pound. They are called first and second class stamps.
ReplyDeleteIf you're truly interested in the possibilities of multi-currency economies, perhaps this book will be of interest "Money Emission for Everyone" - it also mentions postage stamps as a prime example of authentically emitted currency!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kabatinte.net/shop/5.shtml