The alternative is bartering. The goods produced by one individual may not be desirable by another, especially if the person produces an non-physical or specialty goods Bartering for high value items becomes difficult (e.g. I'll trade 3000 bread for your car is unlikely to work)
By example : Everyone describe their preferences for works, consumption, and right to use. Then we calculate the optimal distributions of works, consumption, and right to use from these preferences and a well defined ethic.
No, roughly speaking, each worker will get more of the consumption that they like, and work more where they prefer to work. Usually if a worker don’t like to work, he will work less and get less. But this is only consequences of the system, the general principle is …
sources:
… that we calculate the better distribution (of work and consumption), given the preferences of each individual.
Jobs that might be more or less desirable don't necessarily have a relationship to how imporant that job is. Your proposal is vulnerable to poor distribution of labor and not adequately meeting societal needs
The desirability to do the job is not the only thing took into account, there is also the desirability of consumption, services, etc… (see a example in the sources)
sources:
Imagine nobody like to collect the garbage.
There is a great chance that everybody desire to have their road clean.
So the optimal distribution would be something like it :
The people that dislike the least to collect the garbage, and that do it effectively, collect the garbage, but for their desires to still be fulfilled near of the desire of others, they get more of what they want otherwise. (the calculus will decide what is the optimal distribution, not someone thinking like i did)
The existing examples of currencies not managed by governments, such as BitCoin, have far more price volatility and organized crime than government currencies do.
Money is an extrinsic motivator. The introduction of an extrinsic motivation causes a reduction in intrinsic motivation such as a desire to improve the quality of society
There is no evidence that intrinsic motivation is wholly absent. Admittedly, the larger part of society do not experience intrinsic motivation, because it is hard to find. Extrinsic motivation, through the use of money, has merely become to path of least resistance in terms of finding motivation.
If the claim is that we need to move to an intrinsic system over an extrinsic one, you need to show that an intrinsic system can support society. There is no evidence that it can, that I'm aware of.
The will to survive is not enough to drive progress. Money provides motivation to improve society, not merely maintain it. In order to improve society, an intrinsic motivator needs to be established e.g. As society improves, people will have to work less overall and everyone has more free time.
Currency is a motivational tool for people to get rewards for their hard work. If someone doesn't get any reward for their work, why should they do it? Human brains work on a reward system, and money becomes a learned motivator so it therefore becomes motivation if money is a reward for a task.
That conception of rewards and punishments is simplistic. Rewards can be much more nuisanced, such as the satisfaction of improving the quality of society or developing one's self. These intrinsic motivators are much more effective and contribute more to one's overall wellbeing.
spaghetti_tree
