[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by mhss1992

And I bet you'd give that answer to any system I proposed.

If the system doesn't solve anything, then yeah, I'm going to say it doesn't solve anything.

Originally Posted by mhss1992

The difference is that there would be no direct exchange. Your privileges would be based on your credit level, but there would be no paper to give others when you acquired something. Perhaps a card like an ID would be enough.

Most basic services would be free, research would be free and there would still exist an incentive for work. There would have to be boundaries due to material limitations, but still, why wouldn't it be better?

It doesn't matter how you word this stuff. You cannot handwave costs by just making random assumptions and redefining things.

You're basically saying "Work X amount and you'll have a score increase -- and this score determines what you can buy." We hit a score of 100,000 or something and now we can buy a house. It doesn't matter that this variable isn't "exchangeable." If you're going to say "these are all the items you can achieve with this score," then it's the same as if we had a monetary system where we could pay a dollar amount equal to the sum of the prices of the items in question.

Renaming the system to be in terms of "nonexchangeable credits" doesn't get us anywhere. It's still an exchange -- we're exchanging goods and services. The utility increase of my work output results in an ability to purchase the outputs of others. Only now you're basically limiting what people can actually have.