Donation Based Universal Basic Income - Good or Bad?

[FractalMatt]

I'm working on a coin that has built in very accuracy decentralized IDs.  One thing I'd like to do is add in a donation based Universal Basic Income, people can choose to switch it on and we'll take 2.75% of their spendings and earnings and put it into a pot of money.  Then every month or so, we'll split this money amongst everyone who has an ID and has agreed to pay into the system. We will give users a little badge on their profile that people will see when they earn money from or send money to people choosing to participate.

Why 2.75%? If the same percentage of users who tip when using Square also choose to participate, this will provide about $700 per year. $700 per year has been established as the cutoff for extreme poverty worldwide.

Do you see it as a feature that would interest you in the coin (I think it should be good for marketing ourselves)? Or something that would scare you away for any reason?  My biggest worry would be inflation but studies are seeming to indicate that as long as this amount of money is small and is money that was already in the system, that this should not occur.

Thank you!

[1714797699]

1714797699

[1714797699]

1714797699

[EXtremeAEX]

Why would people join though? This sounds like communism and EU to me, the 'richer' has no incentives or any reasons to stay, and they even pay others for nothing much in return, which is a flaw in this system. 

I would say this would not work, unless the 'richer' are given coins/stakes that may have value or other rewards, but it would still be hard to attract people. Would you want to participate if others participate just to get a share of the pot money?

[FractalMatt]

Why would people join though? This sounds like communism and EU to me, the 'richer' has no incentives or any reasons to stay, and they even pay others for nothing much in return, which is a flaw in this system. 

I would say this would not work, unless the 'richer' are given coins/stakes that may have value or other rewards, but it would still be hard to attract people. Would you want to participate if others participate just to get a share of the pot money?

Not happy to see that reaction

Donation based is the key.

Nobody has to pay into it.. people who are good hearted can choose to do so, and then essentially they are paying the users of the currency to use it.  So if investors want to buy currency, they should see it as a positive, because even if they don't contribute.. users are being incentivized to use the currency.

[EXtremeAEX]

Not happy to see that reaction

Donation based is the key.

Nobody has to pay into it.. people who are good hearted can choose to do so, and then essentially they are paying the users of the currency to use it.  So if investors want to buy currency, they should see it as a positive, because even if they don't contribute.. users are being incentivized to use the currency.

Sorry, didn't meant to put you down like that. I get what you mean now, that the investors that choose to participate can promote this coin which benefits them. Don't mind me back then, I was trying to be realistic and think from their perspective. In this case, maybe you can try to make it such that users less then (a threshold) in their earnings cannot participate, as they might be 'freeloaders'. 

I think more information regarding how this works would be useful, for instance what does 2.75% of their spendings and earnings mean? Do they take from their profits based on their trades with the coins, or the value of the coins?

With a little bit of improvisation, this may work out, but I still have some doubts to this profit sharing community though.

[iluvpie60]

I'm working on a coin that has built in very accuracy decentralized IDs.  One thing I'd like to do is add in a donation based Universal Basic Income, people can choose to switch it on and we'll take 2.75% of their spendings and earnings and put it into a pot of money.  Then every month or so, we'll split this money amongst everyone who has an ID and has agreed to pay into the system. We will give users a little badge on their profile that people will see when they earn money from or send money to people choosing to participate.

Why 2.75%? If the same percentage of users who tip when using Square also choose to participate, this will provide about $700 per year. $700 per year has been established as the cutoff for extreme poverty worldwide.

Do you see it as a feature that would interest you in the coin (I think it should be good for marketing ourselves)? Or something that would scare you away for any reason?  My biggest worry would be inflation but studies are seeming to indicate that as long as this amount of money is small and is money that was already in the system, that this should not occur.

Thank you!

You need to understand there are already thousands of altcoins and a lot of those altcoins already air drop in coins to people(the people sell them right away for profit). People will just up and sell these coins they get immediately and take their profit and buy something else.

Your time is probably better spent on developing technology that somehow would bring people out of poverty while at the same time they need to work for it. + this also sounds about something like a scheme in some way and you are on a brand new account.

You will need to hire a campaign manager for a hefty price around here if you want any credibility.

[mrcash02]

I agree with EXtremeAEX, it's like Communism, doesn't work.

There isn't problem with 'donations', but if people want to do this they will do with Bitcoin, Litecoin, Ethereum, Dollar, etc... What makes a currency's price increases are the big investors, usually people with more money to push up the price and if they discover their money is going to be taken to be distributed among other people they will surely try to find another AltCoin to invest.

And if this feature isn't a must it doesn't have a reason to exist as people can do charity anytime with any currency by themselves...

[pinkflower]

I am all for helping our less fortunate neighbors but we have also learned that the tax money held become large enough, the person or the group who controls it will always be vulnerable to corruption.

Why not use an escrow type smart contract for the funds that can be unlocked by a voting mechanism?

[FractalMatt]

Yeah, it's a new account because my old Legendary one was hacked.  They changed the email address, password, and signature.. meaning I can't reclaim it.   I've actually spent years in the cryptocurrency community.

People are allowed to use our coin without contributing to this fund.

Anyway, if anyone is interested, here is our home page:  http://34.201.246.155/

This is a very temporary URL, and only the front page works for now.. we're having a random bug we're trying to debug.  Will probably take this back down again within 24 hours, but I'd love to get more general feedback.

The idea is that users do indeed need to work to earn the coin in the first place.  They need to find and link to each other/refer new users.  And they do need to link to at least about 30 users, requiring them to do some work. And yes, excellent idea about requiring a minimum income as well. No one gets in without putting in some work/buying in.

My big push is trying to get general user adoption by paying them to refer each other to create new accounts.. and I figure investors will follow.  And you are saying that people will simply sell air drop coins for instant profit.. remember that if someone is selling them, someone else is buying them. And I figure what do average people want and what is likely to boost adoption and generate buzz? And that is actually exactly what I want, I want a bunch of users to buy and dump, so that others can get in cheap to get others invested.. though if we ICO that'll take care of that too.

Thanks pinkflower, yes I intend to build this functionally directly into the coin so that nobody can touch this money for other purposes.

-Matt

[Beerwizzard]

people can choose to switch it on and we'll take 2.75% of their spendings and earnings and put it into a pot of money

On this logic it seems like the highest tippers will never  get at least the same amount of coins that they've donated to the other users so I don't think that this idea can be successfull. Anyway the implementation of any kind of donation system might be a good stuff if you are making a specific altcoin but it is definetely shouldn't be the basic thing for your cryptocurrency.

[FractalMatt]

people can choose to switch it on and we'll take 2.75% of their spendings and earnings and put it into a pot of money

On this logic it seems like the highest tippers will never  get at least the same amount of coins that they've donated to the other users so I don't think that this idea can be successfull. Anyway the implementation of any kind of donation system might be a good stuff if you are making a specific altcoin but it is definetely shouldn't be the basic thing for your cryptocurrency.

It's a small piece of the currency, but these kinds of responses are exactly why I'm hesitating to emphasize it. Though given the amount of interest in UBI, I do think we can get users.  But yes, it's a donation, meaning that yes those who donate money lose some money in the process.

Perhaps I should emphasize a little bit that work is needed?