The benefits of Open Money (OM) from experience

Most of the articles describing the OM system are devoted to the same proposals and general conclusions, however, they are most understandable for those who have experience in a particular activity where a particular proposal or function of OM would be useful. Let’s look at some of the main proposals, in my opinion.

Simplification of business activities

Any participant in the OM system has the right to entrepreneurial activity, which he can organize without a single document and any reporting. All interactions, from the issuance of salaries to the payment of goods from suppliers, can take place using a personal electronic account and contracts associated with it. This simplifies both the opportunity to engage in entrepreneurial activity and this activity itself, since it saves it from a huge amount of processing and an inherently useless document flow.

 This factor alone, other things being equal, makes any enterprise in the United States more efficient and profitable, as it eliminates the labor costs of accounting. The environment of electronic money and contracts initially includes the ability to track the movement of all funds.

The accessibility of entrepreneurial activity for many will create better conditions for competition, which will contribute to the development of the economy as a whole.

Arbitration of contracts in OM

The openness of contracts in OM minimizes the risk of non-fulfillment. The benefit of being sure that the contract will be fulfilled is understandable to a person who agreed on something and was deceived or could not achieve the fulfillment of the contract. An outsider will say that a paper contract has been invented for these purposes for a long time and in case of non-fulfillment there is a court. But for a person without real experience of these cases, it will not be clear how easy it will be to use the court or any other state instrument of justice. The experience of conflict resolution in this way will tell you that appealing to official authorities in terms of time and effort can surpass even a positive outcome of a case, in fact making justice itself useless.

 The riskiness of many small agreements leads to the fact that they simply do not occur, which affects small businesses, since in such conditions it is easier to sue only large players who have their own legal department and funds for the court.It should also be understood that the institutions of justice will never offer a solution that helps to eliminate the need for them as much as possible.

Instead of the usual courts that exist for the general budget, the OM system will have its own arbitration, the existence of which will be fully paid for by the parties to the conflict themselves. That is, the resolution of any dispute under the contract will be paid only by the disputants themselves. The amount of this payment and the arbitrator himself is determined in advance, at the conclusion of the contract, as well as after, at the price for which the arbitrator found and agreed by the parties will be ready to resolve the dispute.

The effectiveness of public institutions

In the OM system, personal income depends entirely on the user’s actions, the system creates a form of free market that is close to ideal. The benefits of the fact that a person can take care of himself in the best way, without any control from above, have been expressed many times by many economists and this is understandable to any entrepreneur.  Nevertheless, in practice, such benefits are not so obvious, especially for people who are on state support. They could get used to the fact that their work is no longer focused on results, but on the execution of orders from above, on which their well-being primarily depends.

Some of these people with public service experience may understand the futility of their work, which is aimed only at maintaining tradition and over time has become a ritual that has little connection with processes that are really useful to society.

Among these kinds of useless activities, it is necessary to eradicate at its very root, forming state institutions so that they first of all struggle with the very cause of the problem, and not its consequences, even though they deprive themselves of the very work associated with correcting this problem.

Such areas include medicine, law enforcement and fire services, and all those departments that prevent processes that are clearly undesirable for society and their consequences. All these departments will similarly maintain their hierarchical structure, but they will become more dependent not on orders from above, but on the results of their activities, which will be transparent and understandable to any participant in the OM.

Respect for nature

The benefits of caring for nature are important for anyone thinking about the future. To do this, it is necessary to create conditions that it was as simple as possible and was not a burden as it is now, since manufacturers are forced to compete for profit in an environment where most turn a blind eye to respect for nature. 

The benefits of a healthy living environment

The benefits of a healthy diet are understandable for anyone who is no longer quite a child and has some experience in choosing their own food, lifestyle and living environment, etc. With age, the value of healthy foods and a clean environment somehow affects a person. Medicine and dietetics, as well as ecology, should not work to justify what manufacturers offer in order to reduce the cost, for example, various kinds of preservatives, margarines and so on. To protect a healthy diet from natural products grown so that they contain more vitamins and all those substances that they should be, they grow in a natural environment. In this regard, our economy should work not for profit, but for health.

Government institutions

The benefits of medicine, education and other things that are under the jurisdiction of the state would be higher if people could more control and influence how all this is implemented. When faced with any such activity from the inside, you can find a lot of useless processes, for example, the submission of various kinds of reports that employees of various departments are forced to perform.

 The basis for such changes may be the personal interest of the management first of all, which should be, as in any business, dependent on the opinion or even better long-term results of the client. To track these results, honest independent statistics are needed, which can also be organized in the OM system. 

And once again, the best result of the activities of any state institution, be it law enforcement or healthcare, should be a natural reduction in the need for itself, without prejudice to the cause.

Democracy again

The best way to take care of justice and the common good is for the state, which depends on the will of the people. Perhaps we and almost no one else have such an experience of a real legal democracy. And I often hear about some kind of stupidity of the majority, nevertheless, such stupidity, in my opinion, stems from the above reasons, that is, based on the already existing not the best social structure, expressed primarily in the fact that a person is engaged not in a really useful thing, but in some kind of imitation of what was once useful or someone the authorities decided that it was useful, generally in a way that creates more of an appearance of benefit than is really useful.

 Here it is also necessary to separate the actions of a person forced to survive in given conditions and how he would like it to be. I still hope that the majority is striving for some kind of good, otherwise they simply would not have survived. Or you can imagine an example of a situation where a person needs to stock up on firewood for the winter. If he sees that everyone is trying to stock up as much as possible by cutting down all the trees, then he will act the same way, cutting down the forest together with everyone. But if he sees that everyone is stocking up on wood exactly as much as they need, then he can safely do the same. I assume that everyone, at least in their thoughts, has such a measure and is always ready to support it so that it becomes a general law, even if they themselves violate this law.

I assume that in order to solve more complex and promising tasks, the opinion of units more capable of looking into the future is more significant, in this case, their competence should include the ability to convince, to find an approach to the majority, which should be led to the correct conclusion in their opinion.

 I would like to summarize that in many ways the ML system does not change existing laws and ideas about how the state should work – all these views have long been developed and generalized. The OM system allows them to be effectively and fully implemented, including the principles of democracy, free market and everything that should be implemented by a modern state anyway.