Statements like this decrease rather than increase this readers confidence in the objectivity and academic rigor of your analysis. I think you should state your conclusions in more modest and more supported ways.
I am still trying to decide if there is anything of novel value here, beyond a mechanism for a UBI-like payments (I know GMI). I simply cannot tell yet.
It would be better if you can cleave the different ideas apart so they could be analyzed in isolation. (then put together as your master plan).
I am most interested to try to understand if there is any novel benefit associated with this 'return cash to central authority' idea. Two challenges come to my mind for consideration:
(1) It seems folks would skirt this return to central authority mechanism by "buying" tokens at a local bank. That bank would in-turn use that money to buy assets. Later you could redeem your tokens for cash. Using this mechanism it seems possible to subvert your return cash to the central authority mechanism. Is that right? If it is right, then what value does that mechanism have?
(2) You wisely limit the DDI and Gov spending to per-capital GDP. Things would likely go wrong, if we could just upgrade this arbitrarily.
Still this is a helpful exercise. In understanding what costs this system is hiding from us, it is helpful to image how this system responds when those numbers are driven very high. What ever those costs are, I suspect your system as it is conceived still has a fraction of those costs now borne by society.
My problem is, I dont clearly see what those costs are, nor how large they are. Thus I don't have trust (or even understanding) of the costs this system places upon society.
Perhaps you can use an analysis of the costs as DDI goes to infinity as a basis for understanding those costs as the levels you propose. I dont know. I just know that at present I know I don't know the costs of your system... but I know they are there.
Final small note: You claim that once cash is created via a bank loan it never leaves the system. I believe this is false. I can present that argument if such is important to resolve.
Cheers!
--Dan
p.s. I am blunt in my challenges, but I would not take my time to read and write this if I did not hold some hope there might be a gem of an idea hidden in all of this...
