I explain we give people incentive to participate by cutting their grocery bill.
I've read your document - and my understanding is that you're effectively expecting people(or at least merchants - initially) to ignore (or remain unaware of) the existing exchange rates of BTC to local currency , and price their goods independently of this as if their local market were some isolated little trading ecosystem.
I don't have time to fully respond - but I simply don't see why this step will take place. If the phone apps are in place that allow easy BTC trading (in whatever units) - then surely these same apps will allow easy lookup of exchange rates and people will not trade at the heavily discounted rate you seem to expect.
I think it's completely unrealistic to expect merchants to discount their offerings in this way.
@julz - this shows a deeper understanding of what I propose. Excellent question. I thank you.
You've also hit on what I feel is the most challenging part of the plan. However, I believe it is workable. To illustrate strip Bitcoin away for a moment and say participants traded food directly. If you have orange trees and therefore plenty of oranges would you be willing to trade them? Same with having chickens and plenty of eggs, etc. I think it has been shown people would indeed trade. Adding a currency to facilitate trade simply makes trading easier.
From what I propose participants would start at BC2 which is currently worth about $.10. If I could bake bread or give apples, etc. for eggs I needed I certainly would do it. Have you seen egg prices lately? The currency exchange rate wouldn't be of concern because the
value I could get from the market would be commensurate.
What you're suggesting is that people wouldn't want to accept/acquire BC2, but I say demand for it would grow. You mention an "isolated little trading ecosystem". Yes, but keep in mind I expect these things to start popping up everywhere, and because it's the same currency you could buy goods (and increasingly services) from anywhere. Last, I expect the low exchange rate to be temporary, not stagnant. My only concern is for people relying on dollars in any way for their business, as they might temporarily lose in dollar terms until things grew.
On the flip side, people on the buying side would of course love buying such goods at a low exchange rate. Again, I expect this to be temporary and movement toward dollar parity. This is when the decimal would be shifted as the increasing unit value could make deflation a threat (people holding not spending). After the shift existing participants would be 10 times wealthier, making prior investments well worth it. As the new level again increased they would be richer in dollar terms too.
A more general criticism of your writing style is that it's somewhat incoherent and verbose. I may try to provide a more constructive criticism on that point in a day or so.
All I can say on that is it is what it is. I'm using the writing skill I have against my time constraints. Please see my acknowledgement of my writing shortcomings to kjj above. However, I would say in my defense that I do seem to be communicating at least somewhat effectively as the dialogue is advancing and not stalled. I might add I once had an English professor say my writing was very clear and coherent. Go figure.
BTW, have to say I love your name. Pulp Fiction is one of my favorite movies.
