 |
December 15, 2014, 07:05:23 AM |
|
This is just a thought, and people dont have experience of it working, so they would of course hesitate to try it, but consider this...
What would happen if someone donated to a new charity fund whose purpose is to collect donations for 2 specific charities except only 1 of those charities gets the donations at the kickstarter-like deadline, and donations held for the other charity are instead refunded. If this caught on, then wouldnt it create a competition where people who want one charity to receive the funds already "in kickstarter" (as an analogy) for one charity more than the other charity would be motivated to not let one fall below the other like it was a race. You may think 1 dollar wont change much, but when if the 2 charities each have about 100k dollars held in this fund and are different by very little? Do you want one to take the lead and then probably people would give up on the one you prefer winning "the race"?
The next proposed economic instrument:
The motivation for others to pay into this kind of transaction is the same as in kickstarter in cases of crowdfunding or normal motivation in any payment from multiple accounts to one source by an equation of maximum time for each higher money amount, else refunded. Like kickstarter, and already existing in all bank transactions but as a simple step function (all or nothing, transaction happens at a certain time and money is moved all at once), I think all transactions should be generalized to have an equation that says when it will be aborted and refunded or when it goes to the target account it was sent to, and a transaction is extended to include multiple senders and one receiver. The default function is moneyAmount*sigmoid(time)=1/(1+e^-time), where time is scaled to the desired duration of the payment from potentially many sources. This is compatible with all existing transactions as their equation is: if(time < whenMoneyIsToBeMoved) then 0 else moneyAmount. I think a continuous equation is better in cases of crowdfunding, and I'd like all the banks to offer crowdfunding transaction types to any account (with no obligation, just a sending of money like usual), which each bank or money system might charge a fee for such transactions, but competition of cryptocurrencies may drive that fee down very low.
|
