@The Sceptical Chymist
With the second part of your response I am with you! With the second part of the first part, I believe you!
I know a few people working in the social benefit field. Not in the field of child support, but in the field of governement's retirement program. In my country it is based on points.
Basically you made 39.000 Euro a year, you get 1 retirement point RP). 1 RP is worth 36 Euro retirement payment, when you reach the age of 65/67. There are some limits, but f.E. if you made just 30.000 Euro a year, you just get 0.8 RP for this year.
So this is tokenization by the german governement, without a blockchain - in Real Life.
The problem with that, the retirement plans are shitty managed + there is a lot of costly bureaucracy, and - and now we coming to my friends - the RP's are just created by 4 eyes. One of my friend is a lesbian, who is getting the payroll paper (in reality it is the sum payed for the retirement plan on two sheets of paper) and put it in a computer. And the RP is created. But before it is send in the main network, the superior worker is double checking it. (And once a year another superior worker is doublechecking if the income and outflow is fitting. But not checking the creation of the RPs)
So I told you my friend is lesbian. And sometimes she likes her female superior worker more than just to work with. So guess what will happen, when they need some extra money for the holiday vaccation? Simular are social benefit checks here, and f.E. the tax based "Kindergeld" @Stompix was writing about. So I believe a blockchain could be a solution for that problem.
@hatshepsut93
In this case (retirement points) the "points" or "token" are there. But they are 1. not in the hand of the people who earn it 2. just created by and controled by 2(3) persons, and 3. they are not tradeable - and the plan is not changable.
Topic: Child support - A state affair (Tokenization of child support) (Read 158 times)
Could we tokenize the synthetic asset of "average expected future tax payments" and bring it back in the hands of the people?
No. If anyone tried to do it, it'd just turn into another scam shitcoin. No offense OP, but your idea sounds like it came straight out of 2017/18 when the ICO boom was happening and people thought everything could be 'tokenized' (a silly non-word IMO).In fact, I'll go even further and ask if there's actually been a real-world case of a token or coin with its own blockchain being used for anything productive, because if there is I'm unaware of it. The fact is that crypto isn't, and probably never will, solve any real-world problems. Blockchain tech might come in handy at some point, but even then there are serious privacy issues in addition to all the security concerns, so....yeah, not a great idea here.
Basically we could create "crypto token" for "average expected future tax payment" and give it the children to economize their own child support. Do you have another ideas?
Why would this need to be a crypto token? People just want to make tokens without answering this question first, because crypto tokens are cool and "the future".
But there are no successful cases of tokenization. NFTs created a lot of hype, but their use case is just speculative trading, eventually it will disappear like all other hypes before it. Other tokenization attempts failed before event being able to create any hype at all. Tokenization is fundamentally a failed concept, because there's no way to link something in real world to something in blockchain. It usually involved third parties which is against they very idea of crypto.
taxes are suppose to support the citizens in need. its suppose to support the poor and disabled. not be used to profit the rich
the only reason anyone would be wiling to pay tax is where they think of tax as a insurance/support system(social security) that they can rely on in bad times when peoples circumstances change
to keep children from living below the poverty line, tax is used to help keep a child from suffering from poverty
however these benefits are not some auto credit given to all kids. but instead if the single parent in custody of the child is not earning a fair wage nor getting support from the other parent THEN the state steps in
its not an automatic thing just because a child is born
the only reason anyone would be wiling to pay tax is where they think of tax as a insurance/support system(social security) that they can rely on in bad times when peoples circumstances change
to keep children from living below the poverty line, tax is used to help keep a child from suffering from poverty
however these benefits are not some auto credit given to all kids. but instead if the single parent in custody of the child is not earning a fair wage nor getting support from the other parent THEN the state steps in
its not an automatic thing just because a child is born
if this suggestion ever because as standard for parents who can't support their kids, this suggestion will make more irresponsible fvckers and then just leave the kids to the government.
It is more complex.
For example the topic is also because of your argumentation. But there are also other important problems to solve. F.E, our democratic understanding, what has nothing to do with feudal artefarcts. But also about child poverty.
But one main problem is about LGBT-laws. So in the moment a sperm donor, who is donating on a private basis for a lesbian couple, is responsible for paying child support for this child. This is not fair. And one solution for this problem, is to change the child support system in many western countrys.
its got nothing to do with creditworthiness of the child nor about expected future taxes of the child.. because the child does not pay it back.. the absent parent does..
The money comes from somewhere. And no, mostly the state is nothing get back from that money from the parent who cannot pay.
--
But, more important:
What is the reason parents should pay for a child? From where is it - this tradition? Is it a democratic tradition?
What does it mean for the child? Equality?
Yes, what you searched about "Unterhaltsvorschuss" is nearly right. We can work with that, without a correction.
From what is the money, the state is paying the "Unterhaltsvorschuss"?
(A lot of people saying taxes - from other persons. I say it is from loans through creditworthyness out of expected future tax payments of the child. So not taxes, it is payed from a synthetic value.)
From what is the money, the state is paying the "Unterhaltsvorschuss"?
(A lot of people saying taxes - from other persons. I say it is from loans through creditworthyness out of expected future tax payments of the child. So not taxes, it is payed from a synthetic value.)
its got nothing to do with creditworthiness of the child nor about expected future taxes of the child.. because the child does not pay it back.. the absent parent does..
also its not means tested based on likelyhood of the child being a burger flipper or a CEO to decide how much grant to pay out. its instead standard state benefit limits of child support. again done as a tax payout in a form of a grant to the custody parent and reimbursed later by the absent parent
there is no credit. no expectation of future tax payments. its simply one parent gets a grant, absent parent repays it
it seems what you are learning from is not actual sources.. but sounds similar to some cult i read about years ago that do this "freeman" thing that pretends governments create money out of child births and people are entitled to this free cash if they just fill in some special form.. that cultish nonsense was debunked years ago. and i hope you are not falling into that rabbit hole
if this suggestion ever because as standard for parents who can't support their kids, this suggestion will make more irresponsible fvckers and then just leave the kids to the government.
And the government also will like it after all the more kids on their hands the more funds they get from the government.
Yes, what you searched about "Unterhaltsvorschuss" is nearly right. We can work with that, without a correction.
From what is the money, the state is paying the "Unterhaltsvorschuss"?
(A lot of people saying taxes - from other persons. I say it is from loans through creditworthyness out of expected future tax payments of the child. So not taxes, it is payed from a synthetic value.)
From what is the money, the state is paying the "Unterhaltsvorschuss"?
(A lot of people saying taxes - from other persons. I say it is from loans through creditworthyness out of expected future tax payments of the child. So not taxes, it is payed from a synthetic value.)
i just done a quick google search..
when a single parent(with custody/guardian) is not receiving maintenance/alimony from the other parent for child support. the government can give the custody parent an 'alimony advance' /maintenance advance as a grant.. which is where the parent looking after the child gets the child maintenance and later the state then grabs the cash from the non-paying parent
its called Unterhaltsvorschuss
its seems to be nothing to do with giving credit just because a child is born. its more about using tax money to give the poor parents a grant. where the state then gets reimbursed from the parent who refused to pay for their own kid.
its got nothing to do with a system of every child generates over 800k of free money
when a single parent(with custody/guardian) is not receiving maintenance/alimony from the other parent for child support. the government can give the custody parent an 'alimony advance' /maintenance advance as a grant.. which is where the parent looking after the child gets the child maintenance and later the state then grabs the cash from the non-paying parent
its called Unterhaltsvorschuss
its seems to be nothing to do with giving credit just because a child is born. its more about using tax money to give the poor parents a grant. where the state then gets reimbursed from the parent who refused to pay for their own kid.
its got nothing to do with a system of every child generates over 800k of free money
You said that 600 billion are generated by the children born each year throughout their lifetime.
I said 600 billion are generated each year and yous aid it's not the same, let's test it:
So in my case Your case
2001 600 billion Children born in 2001 600 billion in their lifetime
2002 600 billion Children born in 2002 600 billion in their lifetime
2003 600 billion Children born in 2003 600 billion in their lifetime
2004 600 billion Children born in 2003 600 billion in their lifetime
But this numbers are the real deal of the creditworthyness (in this example Germany).
It is good that there are other payments for children, but this is not what my topic is.
I got it, your topic is about imposing your views, not discussing, then have fun with your monologue!
No, no. The point was "child support" payed from loans from future expected taxes. It is right that there are other governement payments (in the example: Germany) that are payed from taxes directly! But the one who responded to my point projected "to pay from taxes" in the payment of child support. And this is not true. Child support in Germany is not payed out of taxes. (When the parents cannot pay child support.) It is payed out of loans, creditworthy through expected future taxes.
I do like to discuss other social benefits, f.E. payed out of taxes. But to say I meant that child support is payed out of taxes is wrong. I did not write that, and I did not write that it should payed out of taxes!
(...)
ins short yes its technically possible as its similar mechanism to how central banks will make CBDC value with their commercial bank witnesses
however what the OP is not understanding is that this mechanism of crediting births is not how the economy of germany.. or anywhere actually works
though it probably would be better if currency minting was based on births instead of debt
ins short yes its technically possible as its similar mechanism to how central banks will make CBDC value with their commercial bank witnesses
however what the OP is not understanding is that this mechanism of crediting births is not how the economy of germany.. or anywhere actually works
though it probably would be better if currency minting was based on births instead of debt
Thank you, Sir.
Yes, to anticipate is good. It is not that way*, but we could change it.
*(Basically it is, in the case of child support. But not tokenized, and with a huge bureaucracy and centralized mismanagement.)
ignoring all of the OP's silly bits about creating birth credit to pay child support in germany currently(sorry that not how it works)..
lets just play hypothetical about a mechanism to make his premiss come true
very simply much like how some crapcoins do it. they create new coins(minting) by just having a federation that created a transaction including value which is then honoured by the network as new value
so imagine a multisig. where by a central bank(main authoriser) and a maternity ward doctor with parents become the witness of a birth. in a 4-of-4 multsig address creating the value. where the central bank, doctor and parents also have a 3-of-4 multisig to receive the funds
(doctor, bank and parents form the multisig address, but its actually the central bank and parents that can spend)
where by the parents cant unilaterally spend.. they need the banks consent(signature) to complete a spending proof
creation tx
3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 840,000 credits -> 3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 840,000 credits
signed by all parties
spending tx (each month for 18 years)
3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 840,000 credits -> 3M0mM4dF4m1lyTrU5t 3800 credits
3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 836,200 credits
signed by bank and parents
..
ins short yes its technically possible as its similar mechanism to how central banks will make CBDC value with their commercial bank witnesses
however what the OP is not understanding is that this mechanism of crediting births is not how the economy of germany.. or anywhere actually works
though it probably would be better if currency minting was based on births instead of debt
lets just play hypothetical about a mechanism to make his premiss come true
very simply much like how some crapcoins do it. they create new coins(minting) by just having a federation that created a transaction including value which is then honoured by the network as new value
so imagine a multisig. where by a central bank(main authoriser) and a maternity ward doctor with parents become the witness of a birth. in a 4-of-4 multsig address creating the value. where the central bank, doctor and parents also have a 3-of-4 multisig to receive the funds
(doctor, bank and parents form the multisig address, but its actually the central bank and parents that can spend)
where by the parents cant unilaterally spend.. they need the banks consent(signature) to complete a spending proof
creation tx
3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 840,000 credits -> 3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 840,000 credits
signed by all parties
spending tx (each month for 18 years)
3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 840,000 credits -> 3M0mM4dF4m1lyTrU5t 3800 credits
3B4nKD0ct0rM0mD4d 836,200 credits
signed by bank and parents
..
ins short yes its technically possible as its similar mechanism to how central banks will make CBDC value with their commercial bank witnesses
however what the OP is not understanding is that this mechanism of crediting births is not how the economy of germany.. or anywhere actually works
though it probably would be better if currency minting was based on births instead of debt
Let's start with the most important part which shows clearly where you're making the mistakes:
You said that 600 billion are generated by the children born each year throughout their lifetime.
I said 600 billion are generated each year and yous aid it's not the same, let's test it:
So in my case Your case
2001 600 billion Children born in 2001 600 billion in their lifetime
2002 600 billion Children born in 2002 600 billion in their lifetime
2003 600 billion Children born in 2003 600 billion in their lifetime
2004 600 billion Children born in 2003 600 billion in their lifetime
If each generation produces when it's born 600 billion it does matter if you have them upfront 600 from one or you get it by year in which it means 10 billion from each of the 60 generations, which adds up to again 600 billion.
It's math not analyzing plasma radiation in a toroidal field.
If I were to read any doomsday piece of news I would be in a mental hospital by now, but miraculously I've survived 3 economic crises, two getting off the Earth, one loss of ozone lair, three wanna be 3 world wars, the death of the euro and the dollar, the rise of the apes and many more. And!! I do live in Europe and I do have a kid and I know what I'm talking about!
If I were to compare how I was raised and how I raised my own it has been 5 times easier and I afford to give him a ton of stuff that probably only 1% of the kids in my time had, but some do need to see disasters and the end of the world at every step.
No, that's not how it works, what you'e referring to is GDP, GDP is not currency and it does not influence directly the monetary mass.
Your words, not mine!
I got it, your topic is about imposing your views, not discussing, then have fun with your monologue!
Also, 600 billion per year? Lol, yeah! so 1/3 of the budget is made out of future loans.
This is not what I wrote. Read again! (It is the number of expected LIFELONG tax payments for all newborn children born in one year in Germany. - But I guess this is easy to misunderstand, because of the language barrier. But if you want to understand, you can understand.)You said that 600 billion are generated by the children born each year throughout their lifetime.
I said 600 billion are generated each year and yous aid it's not the same, let's test it:
So in my case Your case
2001 600 billion Children born in 2001 600 billion in their lifetime
2002 600 billion Children born in 2002 600 billion in their lifetime
2003 600 billion Children born in 2003 600 billion in their lifetime
2004 600 billion Children born in 2003 600 billion in their lifetime
If each generation produces when it's born 600 billion it does matter if you have them upfront 600 from one or you get it by year in which it means 10 billion from each of the 60 generations, which adds up to again 600 billion.
It's math not analyzing plasma radiation in a toroidal field.
Read the news to this topic!
If I were to read any doomsday piece of news I would be in a mental hospital by now, but miraculously I've survived 3 economic crises, two getting off the Earth, one loss of ozone lair, three wanna be 3 world wars, the death of the euro and the dollar, the rise of the apes and many more. And!! I do live in Europe and I do have a kid and I know what I'm talking about!
If I were to compare how I was raised and how I raised my own it has been 5 times easier and I afford to give him a ton of stuff that probably only 1% of the kids in my time had, but some do need to see disasters and the end of the world at every step.
This is so wrong. Currency is stored work-time, and when you have more people, you have more work-time. But in this simple construct there is no devaluation, the one who is working is eating for one, the two who are working are eating for two, and three for three, and four for four,
No, that's not how it works, what you'e referring to is GDP, GDP is not currency and it does not influence directly the monetary mass.
..... So of course, in this simple construct - and your response is very simple/populist - you can create children out of (nearly) thin air, and so is the work-time increasing, with which will produced more goods and more services consumed and used by this more people.
Your words, not mine!
It is good that there are other payments for children, but this is not what my topic is.
I got it, your topic is about imposing your views, not discussing, then have fun with your monologue!
First, there is no "bank' that suddenly offers loans at zero interest to the (..) government
Here you are right. But what is your problem with that?
second, you're mistaken about the whole creditworthiness, and what's even worse you assume somebody will just lend a country money just because it will have children.
What you understood and mirrored in the second part of of your sentence I did not write. Read it again!
So, why isn't this working in Nigeria or Bangladesh?
Also it will working there.
I can explain, why it would not work in the German Demokratic Republik: Bechause there were no taxes. But in Bangladesh, Nigeria and India it is working. Of course you have another scale there: In Germany the yearly income per head is ~50,000 Euro. In India it is ~2,000 Euro of course. And in this proportions are expected future taxes per person - in the view of the loangiver. And of course, there are other criteria, but:
What you missed was, that I described a problem, why it is not working. And I offered a solution. Read again!
Mismanagement of loans was a problem. Bureaucracy was a problem. Tokenization would change it. Are you able to anticipate? Or are you imprisoned in what is?
The other problem is that the government can't make money out of thin air if it gets those loans without devaluation (...)
This is so wrong. Currency is stored work-time, and when you have more people, you have more work-time. But in this simple construct there is no devaluation, the one who is working is eating for one, the two who are working are eating for two, and three for three, and four for four, ..... So of course, in this simple construct - and your response is very simple/populist - you can create children out of (nearly) thin air, and so is the work-time increasing, with which will produced more goods and more services consumed and used by this more people.
But most important you've forgotten about secondary benefits,
1. Kinderfreibetrag
2. Kinderzuschlag
3. Unterhaltsvorschuss (child support)
These are not like credit granted by some unknown entity and in one case are actually tax deductions, completely invalidating your theory.
1. Kinderfreibetrag
2. Kinderzuschlag
3. Unterhaltsvorschuss (child support)
These are not like credit granted by some unknown entity and in one case are actually tax deductions, completely invalidating your theory.
I changed your response a little. I wrote JUST about point 3. Child support, and in Germany, when it is payed by the governement, it is called "Unterhaltsvorschuss". I just described this ONE point, which is not tax payed. It is loan-for-expected-tax-payed. I described it. It is good that there are other payments for children, but this is not what my topic is. (But this is what you are talking about, tax based benefits. So you criticized it on your own. It is not my problem.)
Also, 600 billion per year? Lol, yeah! so 1/3 of the budget is made out of future loans.
This is not what I wrote. Read again! (It is the number of expected LIFELONG tax payments for all newborn children born in one year in Germany. - But I guess this is easy to misunderstand, because of the language barrier. But if you want to understand, you can understand.)
How about not trying to fix what is not broken?
This is ignorant. When you live in one of the western countrys (f.E. USA, England, Germany, France, Canada) you know that for a lot of children the system is broken. Child poverty is a thing in those countrys. Often for the growing "lower class" there is no lunch money for children, there is no propper education, etc.! Read the news to this topic! --- And yes, this is just "first world"-poverty.
So will you repeat is, that the child support-system in (my example) Germany is not broken? If yes, this would be evil!
Child support from the state is not payed out of taxes of other people!
Example - Germany:
That means an average expected future tax payment of ~600,000,000,000 Euro per year. For that credit-worthiness the german state is getting a lot of credit (money) from the banks! Through these credits the (german) state CAN generate a lot of profits. And from these profits child support from the state is payed for children, which parents cannot pay child support.
Example - Germany:
That means an average expected future tax payment of ~600,000,000,000 Euro per year. For that credit-worthiness the german state is getting a lot of credit (money) from the banks! Through these credits the (german) state CAN generate a lot of profits. And from these profits child support from the state is payed for children, which parents cannot pay child support.
Completely flawed view.
First, there is no "bank' that suddenly offers loans at zero interest to the German government, second, you're mistaken about the whole creditworthiness, and what's even worse you assume somebody will just lend a country money just because it will have children.
So, why isn't this working in Nigeria or Bangladesh?
They could have trillions.The other problem is that the government can't make money out of thin air if it gets those loans without devaluation, it can only get those back from taxes paid by the citizen, even if it were to invest in highways or schools or industry, the revenue will still be in taxes, still paid by the average Joe well before the kid will get his first job.
But most important you've forgotten about secondary benefits, Kinderfreibetrag and Kinderzuschlag and Unterhaltsvorschuss. These are not like credit granted by some unknown entity and in one case are actually tax deductions, completely invalidating your theory.
Also, 600 billion per year? Lol, yeah! so 1/3 of the budget is made out of future loans. Common!
Could we tokenize the synthetic asset of "average expected future tax payments" and bring it back in the hands of the people? Basically we could create "crypto token" for "average expected future tax payment" and give it the children to economize their own child support.
How about not?!
Let's stop tokenizing and creating shitcoins for every single thing just because it sounds trendy or cool or promises flying unicorns farting honey?
You're basically proposing money printing, at birth for each child to get 700-800k euros because yeah, printing money out of thin air solves everything!
Why even stop there, let's give them 1000 trillion, let's create a school token worth 50 trillion or their education, let's create some other 4 billion food tokens and some 100000 quadrillion toy tokens cause it's to ease, just give people money and everything will be fine!
Do you have another ideas?
How about not trying to fix what is not broken?
In most of western societies (like in the EU and the USA) child support is - by law - a thing of the parents. One reason for that is the tradition of a feudal system. Parents are (economically) bonded to "their" children, and vice versa. But this concept is not good in relation to the conecpt of euqality. Every child should have the same economically possibilities. Should they?
Who is paying child support, when parents cannot pay child support?
- or -
Why the state is not paying child support for all children f.E. from age 0 to age 14/18/21?
I will not answer the second question. This is on you? But I can explain how western societies paying child support, when parents cannot pay child support!
Child support from the state is not payed out of taxes of other people!
Most of the people are thinking, that, when parents cannot pay child support, the child support for the child is payed of the taxes of other people through the state. This is wrong! Not a single dime of child support was payed out of the taxes of other people!
Example - Germany:
When a child is born the credit-worthiness for the german state is increasing by ~814,000 Euro (~850,000 USD). This is based of the average expected future tax payments of this person. It is the same, when you go to the bank and asking for a credit. The bank is asking you how much money you will make in the future. On that data you get your credit. But the (german) state will not have the future taxes of one child, in one year it has the credit-worthiness of ~750,000 born childs. That means an average expected future tax payment of ~600,000,000,000 Euro per year. For that credit-worthiness the german state is getting a lot of credit (money) from the banks! Through these credits the (german) state CAN generate a lot of profits. And from these profits child support from the state is payed for children, which parents cannot pay child support.
But what is the reason for posting this on a crypto board?
The (german) state is not paying the child support for all the children, from which they are profiting of. In Germany and in other western countrys there is a big mismanagement of synthetic money. (Money that is additional generated through the (future) payments of their children.
So my reason is a question:
Could we tokenize the synthetic asset of "average expected future tax payments" and bring it back in the hands of the people? Basically we could create "crypto token" for "average expected future tax payment" and give it the children to economize their own child support. Do you have another ideas?
Who is paying child support, when parents cannot pay child support?
- or -
Why the state is not paying child support for all children f.E. from age 0 to age 14/18/21?
I will not answer the second question. This is on you? But I can explain how western societies paying child support, when parents cannot pay child support!
Child support from the state is not payed out of taxes of other people!
Most of the people are thinking, that, when parents cannot pay child support, the child support for the child is payed of the taxes of other people through the state. This is wrong! Not a single dime of child support was payed out of the taxes of other people!
Example - Germany:
When a child is born the credit-worthiness for the german state is increasing by ~814,000 Euro (~850,000 USD). This is based of the average expected future tax payments of this person. It is the same, when you go to the bank and asking for a credit. The bank is asking you how much money you will make in the future. On that data you get your credit. But the (german) state will not have the future taxes of one child, in one year it has the credit-worthiness of ~750,000 born childs. That means an average expected future tax payment of ~600,000,000,000 Euro per year. For that credit-worthiness the german state is getting a lot of credit (money) from the banks! Through these credits the (german) state CAN generate a lot of profits. And from these profits child support from the state is payed for children, which parents cannot pay child support.
But what is the reason for posting this on a crypto board?
The (german) state is not paying the child support for all the children, from which they are profiting of. In Germany and in other western countrys there is a big mismanagement of synthetic money. (Money that is additional generated through the (future) payments of their children.
So my reason is a question:
Could we tokenize the synthetic asset of "average expected future tax payments" and bring it back in the hands of the people? Basically we could create "crypto token" for "average expected future tax payment" and give it the children to economize their own child support. Do you have another ideas?
Jump to: