Topic: Can Crypto redefine current economic models? - page 6. (Read 932 times)

This is not only true, but it's a problem that needs to be addressed.

Do you think that redistribution/donation/sharing of profits from private companies could be a solution? Would you support companies that do this (Keeping in mind that their products are good, same quality as existing ones)?

From your text, one could understand that sharing is necessary, why do you think this (Would love to go deeper)?

This has been a topic of discussion ever since automation became more and more common. Right now making a car requires so much less people than it did 100 years ago when everything was personally handled. Even when ford discovered the assembly line it was still required to run by people but now look at any tesla car making video and you can see most of it is built by robots and not people and even with 100 people you can build a car manufacturing ground that builds thousands of tesla every month.

Has that changed anything in our society? Yes it managed to make some people very rich while others very poor and people stopped working on those factories (or outsourced to cheaper places). Unfortunately when few get rich and many stays poor the system is inclined to keep it that way instead of sharing that wealth over all to all humanity.

So, let's say that businesses and private entities start to compete on intrinsic value propositions and not superficial/material value.

Let's say that there is an crypto exchange (Complies with the characteristics of a company that can earn millions of dollars with very few employees), with the same engine and quality than the rest of the available ones, that donates 20% (For the example) of profits where the same clients choose where these funds should be redirected to (They choose the donation destiny). Would you, as a user, prefer to use that platform where it provides a purpose/ethical based value proposition towards the future?

Another example...

Let's say a Mining Company, that can earn thousand and millions of dollars with less than 10 employees, donates a 20% (Again, for the example) of their profits to social and environmental impact initiatives. As an investor, would you want to invest in it? Maybe, you have less profits, but you have a clean company that starts to become important to the areas/regions they impact.

Last example...
With the digital banking era, banks can also scale 100x on clients while scaling 10x in employees. Let's say that this bank started to donate part of their profits to bancarize unbanked people, to help refugees, to donate towards social and environmental impact. Would you, as a customer, prefer to use a bank of that style or would like traditional service? (Being that the experience would be similar/the same to other digital banks)

It's interesting to understand the view of users towards their companies.

A future where more human/environmental value in the products is desired, but is it essential? Does it make the difference for clients? Do clients really want to use products/services that are helping to change the world by donating where their clients choose and paying taxes, or they don't really matter and prefer to use normal services that try to keep as much as profit and their only contribution is paying taxes?


Banks would need to start providing crypto services. Or crypto companies would need to provide banking services, right?

Crypto has a lot of room to grow, but I believe government currency will remain dominant.  There is just too much volatility in bitcoin to be widely used right now.  Also, people like the safety that banks and credit cards provide.  If your crypto gets stolen you have virtually zero chance to recover it.

I think this has already happened. Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have already changed traditional economy models, not in large extent and not officialy but there is certainly some influence. Positive regulation would intiate further changes but it's hard to expect that on a global scale.
To my opinion economy based on.a blockchain technology is future but changes are happening very slowly and businesses are still reluctant to implement it.

This is the point of view of the normality. a country needs a ruling organization and needs a set of laws to better manage a country.
Our world should not have such ambiguous rules. I understand that volunteering will make people more comfortable and less pressured, but will it come to a good goal?
The answer is never. a good country when and only when there is a righteous government. We need to contribute taxes to build the country and only 1 person can make decisions.
a country that is too free will cause people to rebel in different negative directions.

A more blockchain based economy would increase the level of automation,which means less workforce required,but I'm not sure that it will help for a fair redistribution of wealth.The current tech corporations have little amount of employees,but they have lots of other costs and they invest a lot in startups.
There's no easy answer for your question.

Maybe the way we look at what gives you something or not should be changed. Donating money or estimulating purpose based endeavours (call it Social/Environmental Impact businesses, NGOs, etc.), just like one of the biggest brands in the world, Patagonia, also adds lots of value towards the company. Clean and sustainable companies are gaining more value everyday!

Let's say we don't look at the tax benefits, but we keep it 100% purpose driven, aiming towards an automated future where people will need to help other people; jobs will be very scarce.


And, if instead of companies deciding, we let the people decide where these companies should redirect the funds to, in an open, decentralized way, with the implementation of an ethical protocol?

What if clients/users chose where their providing/service companies should direct these part of the funds destined to positive change, giving the people the power of how the money should be used?

The problem with governments is that with liquid democracies being possible again (last time was in the greek cities, when citizens; voters; were very few and they could all get together and vote), why not allowing people to take part in the decision?

No, if I own a business it's not to give the money back to someone that gives me nothing.
On the other side, a company earning millions of USD should pay the proper taxes to the country and stop making any kind of scheme possible to avoid paying the taxes. Like Google, Amazon and so on are doing.

So in other words, it means to give the political power to companies to decide for us.


What about recording every Govt.'s transactions in a blockchain where everybody can see where our money goes and how it's used?

Everyday, with the advancements in AI, Robotics, Blockchain, etc. an automated future is being created.
If we think about it, and as an example, doctors (machines) will be able to process all of the medical cases in the world and diagnose based on that; being much better than a Human doctor whose experience is limited.
With this happening across every industry, it's not that some jobs will be lost, all of the jobs will be lost.

This takes us to a new paradigm:
If only tech companies make money (They have the technology), and they have no/very few employees, capital concentration would be massive.

Do you think it would be possible, that with Blockchain and Crypto, we could solve that problem by redirecting part of the profits of private entities/companies to the people, NGOs, Social and Impact Entreprises, rather than these companies paying tax to the government and then the government redistributing?

Do you think that a company, capable of earning US$ Millions with few or almost no employees, should/could give back part of what they earn to create social good and social help?

In the past and present, some governments took/take this money from the companies/people to redistribute it and gain political strength, known as socialism.

But if actually, companies in the future did it by themselves, becoming Social Benefit Companies, with them deciding who or what they want to help with (Or even giving the power of choice to their clients), where using their products would also mean helping other people, would that actually create a whole different mindset and ethic code from a corporate point of view?

What would happen if every automated business across the world donated/redirected part of their profits to help the rest of the population and to help create positive change in societies and the environment?

What would you say?