WI: A Currencyless Economy?

CECBC

Banned
What if a major country got rid of traditional currency and instead issued non-transferable vouchers that could be redeemed for food, clothing, entertainment goods, etc? Like if instead of getting paid in dollars you got a little paper with your name on it redeemable for a certain amount of a particular good?

One advantage could be massively reducing theft. Money would be pretty much useless to steal since it'd be non-transferable. It'd also make black market transactions harder since they'd have to barter instead of just paying cash.

A second advantage could be a firmer control of how people spend money. Don't want people wasting too much time on entertainment? Just limit the vouchers for entertainment goods. Drinking an issue? Cut back the alcohol vouchers.

A big disadvantage, I think would be working out how much of each voucher people needed so people could get everything they needed and not have excess vouchers left over. It'd be way less versatile then money and wouldn't give people as much choice over their spending.

Would this system work or would it be a disaster? It wouldn't be as versatile as money but I could see some sort of Communist country implementing a system like that.
 
I personally would be very against it. As for working, yes a Communist Country could do it. As for working well likely not and people would get around this system to get what they want like alcohol and entertainment.

Though it would have to be a country not dependent on trade because without a traditional currency they would likely not be able to conduct business with other nations under such a system as the one you suggested.

Also it sounds like the system used in the book 1984 now that I think of it and it seemed to be a disaster. The biggest issue I see is the idea the vouchers can't be transferred, I think any system with "money" that can't be Transfered would very likely be a disaster as it greatly devalues it and pricing would be set by how many vouchers are issued. Markets with a low number of vouchers/customers will likely see the pricing go down and so would naturally allow people to buy more of those goods while markets with a high number of vouchers/customers would see higher pricing due to naturally higher demand.

Though how would the business's in this voucher based system work, all government owned or would the owners of the business need to get vouchers from the government.

There are a number of things that would need to be explained in more detail such as how this is handled on the Business level and trading. But I would have to say I based on what I have read I don't think it would work.
 

CECBC

Banned
I personally would be very against it. As for working, yes a Communist Country could do it. As for working well likely not and people would get around this system to get what they want like alcohol and entertainment.

Though it would have to be a country not dependent on trade because without a traditional currency they would likely not be able to conduct business with other nations under such a system as the one you suggested.

Also it sounds like the system used in the book 1984 now that I think of it and it seemed to be a disaster. The biggest issue I see is the idea the vouchers can't be transferred, I think any system with "money" that can't be Transfered would very likely be a disaster as it greatly devalues it and pricing would be set by how many vouchers are issued. Markets with a low number of vouchers/customers will likely see the pricing go down and so would naturally allow people to buy more of those goods while markets with a high number of vouchers/customers would see higher pricing due to naturally higher demand.

Though how would the business's in this voucher based system work, all government owned or would the owners of the business need to get vouchers from the government.

There are a number of things that would need to be explained in more detail such as how this is handled on the Business level and trading. But I would have to say I based on what I have read I don't think it would work.
I was thinking of it more in the context of a full command economy with no free trade. I don't see it working in any sort of free market system. In a command economy I see it as being inefficient but not an outright disaster. They could set prices and stuff like that to stop any sort of inflation.
 

BooNZ

Banned
Would this system work or would it be a disaster? It wouldn't be as versatile as money but I could see some sort of Communist country implementing a system like that.

Define "work". What is it trying to achieve? Neither fiat currencies nor rationing systems are 'revolutionary'
 

CECBC

Banned
Define "work". What is it trying to achieve? Neither fiat currencies nor rationing systems are 'revolutionary'
Work as in everybody doesn't starve to death or the country doesn't grind to a halt and collapse as a result of it.
 
Think how UK wartime rationing system worked with coupons-- But, of course, you had to *pay* for the stuff your coupons allowed, and 'through the nose' for anything more.

IIRC, several Marxist / Communist states tried the money-less route, and a parallel economy promptly developed. Barter, scrip, dollars, what-have-you. That rapidly leads to smuggling, SPIVs, outright bribery, widespread corruption and the total undermining of the Great Plan.

Not to mention the failure of 'quality control'...
 
This is simple rationing, nothing new about such, and obviously at some lew level of efficiency it can work.

In the black market either - like it was common in the OTL Eastern Block (especially when currency value was unstable) - US dollars or some other foregin money would be obviously used.
 
IIRC, several Marxist / Communist states tried the money-less route, and a parallel economy promptly developed. Barter, scrip, dollars, what-have-you. That rapidly leads to smuggling, SPIVs, outright bribery, widespread corruption and the total undermining of the Great Plan.
No Communist nation had a moneyless economy. Lenin and the Bolsheviks basically realised that, while it was necessary for them to trade with foreign capitalist powers, not having money to facilitate that trade would be a mistake.

@CECBC If you're looking for a communist who advocated labour-vouchers then Amadeo Bordiga who was one of the founders of the PCI advocated that it would be necessary to immediately transfer the economy to such a system in order to avoid any rollback to capitalism however the concept of labour-vouchers are not the same as what you described.
 
That's the model in the "Expanse" book series. Everybody has access to basics: clothes, shelter... to survive.

Of course if you want more than survival you gotta pay for it.

Money evolved independently throughout human history, you cannot have civilization without it
 
Well, hunter gather societies manage it.

Seriously, any modern society NEEDS money to function, even if you call it something else.

Also, how are these 'vouchers' going to remain 'non-transferable'?

Theoretically, the government hands out these vouchers. OK. What happens when your toilet stops working? You have to apply to the local government office for a plumber? ... Wow, this will make the Soviet economy look functional.

What about buying flowers, or fresh fruit or ....

Any government that tried it would have an economic collapse, and either there'd be a revolution or an invasion by a neighbouring country that would be welcomed with open arms.
 
Walras tried it to modelated... is a titanic effort as value itself is pretty intrisecal and have ways to be used and needed plus being easy to manage, heck the economy invented currency as needed it.
 
This sounds like a full-on Communist country, and it could never be sustainable. The USSR had a currency. North Korea has a currency. Even Panem had a currency of some kind in The Hunger Games. It would take a completely isolated (way beyond NK) nation that is utterly totalitarian in nature to do anything like this.
 
What if a major country got rid of traditional currency and instead issued non-transferable vouchers that could be redeemed for food, clothing, entertainment goods, etc? Like if instead of getting paid in dollars you got a little paper with your name on it redeemable for a certain amount of a particular good?

One advantage could be massively reducing theft. Money would be pretty much useless to steal since it'd be non-transferable. It'd also make black market transactions harder since they'd have to barter instead of just paying cash.

A second advantage could be a firmer control of how people spend money. Don't want people wasting too much time on entertainment? Just limit the vouchers for entertainment goods. Drinking an issue? Cut back the alcohol vouchers.

A big disadvantage, I think would be working out how much of each voucher people needed so people could get everything they needed and not have excess vouchers left over. It'd be way less versatile then money and wouldn't give people as much choice over their spending.

Would this system work or would it be a disaster? It wouldn't be as versatile as money but I could see some sort of Communist country implementing a system like that.

This system has existed in the past - workers in many US Mines in the 19th C would be paid in Company Scrip instead of greenbacks and these could only be spent in the company store (which of course was able to charge more) effectively 'trapping' the workers.

It gets a big no from me.

A modern version might be to get rid of 'paper and metal money' and have everything paid for by cards and apps etc.

There is the possibility to 'control spend' or more accurately what type of Merchants a card can be used with

I was at the Payment Knowledge Forum in London Last year and some chaps from Sweden were talking about a cashless society by 2030 - where everything is paid for by Card or phone app etc - and that in the cities much of the infrastructure is already cashless

In such an environment with modern technology it might be possible to enforce what people can spend money on!
 
There was a proposal a few years ago in Ireland to reduce the social welfare payment for the unemployed by about a third and replace that portion with a voucher system for food products.

It would be a first step towards this kind of system.
 
A couple of things seem to be moving in this direction in Australia. The welfare card is being trialled that limits purchases of alcohol, cigarettes and the like for welfare recipients and there is talk of removing the $100 note from circulation due to its use in the 'black/cash economy'. I could see this sort of thing becoming more common and marginalising cash rather than fully replacing it.
 
This might work in conjunction with a rationing system.

Otherwise, no.

Cashless economy, perhaps. But there needs to be some kind of universal exchange mechanism, otherwise you may as well have a bartering system.
 
Top