What money does the economy need (new money for settlements)

    The money that exists now (that is rubles, that dollars, that any other currencies of the modern economy) is scarce due to its very nature. With one relative exception - during periods of active economic growth, based on the outstripping growth in the mass of credit money in relation to the growth in the volume of real commodity circulation and real labor productivity, their scarcity softens and becomes less visible. But even in these periods, it (scarcity) remains an inherent property of money associated with a number of objective factors (the presence of loan interest, financial bubbles, diversion of funds to savings, etc.).

    When the economy is in recession, then money for calculations, i.e. to fulfill the basic function of money, is already lacking in the most obvious way.


    In this regard, we consider a simplified model task for constructing new units of account (new money in addition to existing ones) intended for use exclusively in calculations. From taking into account all kinds of life difficulties such as positions and worldviews of national elites, the need to adjust legislation, etc. for now refrain. First you need to solve a simpler problem - the construction of this new entity.

    As is customary in the exact sciences, for example, in mathematics, we take some initial data as an axiom or for given initial and boundary conditions. I will reassure those who immediately seek to object - this is just a standard way of constructing any model.

    In order not to get confused in terms, we immediately introduce a definition for a new type of money for settlements - for example, let it beSpecial Means of Settlements (abbreviated SSR).

    So, the initial conditions and assumptions for the introduction of the SSR:
    1. The SSR (at least at the first stage) is intended for use by the state in order to finance (and stimulate) the most important (for the state) infrastructure projects, such as road construction.

    2. Conditions must be provided for the use of the SSR exclusively in calculations in the real economy.

    The following restrictions or requirements for the issuance and turnover of the SSR follow from these two initial conditions as a way to implement them:
    1. The issuer is the state represented by the Government or a special body under the Government, but not the Central Bank (this requirement should be considered only in conjunction with all the rest).

    2. By the SSRs, the state finances its share of participation in public-private associations created for the implementation of specific infrastructure projects (however, this is just not necessary - other ways of introducing SRR into circulation can also be implemented).

    3. It is allowed to pay taxes using the SSR (but this is one of the key conditions for the model under consideration). At least federal taxes.

    4. SSR exist exclusively in non-cash form.

    5. SSR - this is money with demurrage (payment for "storage"). Solely for example, I’ll name a specific demurrage amount now acceptable for our economy - 0.5 percent per month. Demurrage is another key condition. Since this is a condition tested in practice, it really hinders the withdrawal of these funds from circulation to accumulation and in speculation and accelerates circulation. By the way, a curious consequence of the introduction of demurrage will be the desire of business entities not only to pay all taxes, but also to pay them in advance (there were such examples in history).

    6. The non-cash nature of the SSR and the presence of demurrage will make it relatively easy to introduce and monitor the implementation of the following restrictions:
    - SSRs cannot be settled in the organized foreign exchange and financial markets (that is, they cannot be used to buy currency or securities in the organized market).

    7. Issues of SSRs are not by the central bank, their accounting is not in bank accounts, but in a certain “depository” and not the banking system of their transfers (transactions) - here you can not do without modern IT technologies in the form of, say, block chain technologies - in turn will be a real basis for the following limitations useful for this model:
    - SSRs cannot be given and borrowed at interest.
    - SSR cannot be used to repay loans and pay interest (and any other payments) to banks.

    We will certainly be realistic and acknowledge that it will not be possible to fully comply with all the above restrictions. There are always workarounds. But the scale of the withdrawal of the Soviet Socialist Republic from circulation and their overflow to the currency and financial sectors and putting aside in a small capsule will be an order of magnitude smaller than when using ordinary money for the same purpose.

    The main obstacle to circumventing restrictions is of course demurrage. Demurrage money cannot be saved and used in savings.

    The non-cash nature and modern IT technologies (in particular, it is easy to give each monetary unit of the SSR an individual number) will make it possible to track and make publicly available all transactions with this money. And this is a real and serious obstacle to everyone who wants to break some prohibitions on the circulation of the Soviet Socialist Republic.

    I mentioned earlier in passing, and now I will once again note that it can be assumed (this is just an assumption) that wherever the SSR is used in the calculations, the possibilities for corruption will be significantly narrowed. Since you won’t turn it into a currency, you won’t take it abroad, you won’t transfer it in an envelope, and in general the transaction database is publicly available (of course, the latter remains to be done).

    Extensive world and historical experience in introducing local additional currencies allows us to confidently assert that this system is operational and it accelerates turnover and also reduces unemployment along the way. There can be extremely useful long-term social consequences in changing the very nature of public attitudes toward life values. But we will not go away from the economy here.

    How to determine how much SSR the economy needs and how many of them can be pumped into the economy without the risk of negative consequences such as a significant increase in inflation?
    1. If CPPs are allowed to pay taxes, then the volume of SSR emissions should certainly not be greater than the amount of taxes that they can pay. For example, in the budget of the Russian Federation for 2015 (we are talking about the unconsolidated budget of the Russian Federation), the share of VAT and income tax accounts for about 40% (5.5 trillion rubles). And in the structure of budget expenditures, it is planned to spend 2.2 trillion rubles on the national economy. From these figures, taking into account the fact that the turnover of each issue of СРР (with a demurrage of 0.5% per month) is unlikely to take more than 3 years, it is possible to deduce a reasonable restriction on a single issue of the SSR subject to the adoption of the SSR in the payment of only federal taxes. This begs the figure of not more than 1.8 trillion rubles (I emphasize that we are talking so far of a single issue of the SSR - we will carry out verification, so to speak, with practice).

    2. For reference - the volume of the national welfare fund (figures vary by year) is about 5 trillion rubles. 10% of this amount (0.5 trillion rubles) is often offered to be spent on infrastructure projects. Assuring that this will in no way affect inflation.

    3. So is it better to send 0.5 trillion from the NWF to the economy (and some of this money will certainly go to the foreign exchange market and financial assets) or the same (or even a slightly larger amount) put into circulation as the above-described SSRs? The risk level of adverse consequences (if no additional research is carried out) is approximately the same, and the positive effect in the case of SSR will be much greater (since due to the acceleration of turnover for the same time, each “ruble” introduced into the economy with demurrage will give more new goods and services than the usual ruble). And the increase in the number of goods and services is, by the way, a real anti-inflationary measure.

    Well, what about those enterprises and organizations that received CPP as payment, paid all taxes, paid off suppliers, and some of the SSRs remained with them?

    In this case, I believe, a temporary storage system or a system for buying out excessive SSR should be provided. The state can be the person redeeming (with a certain discount naturally) the extra CPP. And you can introduce a special type of mutual investment funds intended for temporary storage (without demurrage) of unused SSRs and their reintroduction into the economy. But these are essential, but details.

    A natural extension of the use of the SSR to finance large infrastructure projects may be their use in the system of financing public procurement. So, by getting the CPP back to the budget, the state can then send them to finance public procurement.

    Another thought on the topic of whom to finance through the SSR.
    Of course, you can use the existing system for assessing the financial viability of borrowers, their credit histories, etc. But here, as an important additional (and possibly the main) criterion for the selection of recipients of SSR, there can be a share and the amount of taxes paid and tax discipline of enterprises and organizations. And when evaluating projects - recipients of the SSR - naturally, first of all, it is possible to take into account the planned tax payments.

    Also popular now: