I'm not sure if this is the proper forum for this post... but I thought it was. So I put it here.
I'm writing a science fiction novel in which a libertarian society strewn across the continent of Antarctica is pitted against a global state. The details of the plot are not important for this particular topic, but I'll gladly share them if anyone is interested. Anyhow - the Antarctic society consists of multiple, competing systems of civil order. Amongst them are cities based in towers and dome structures, some of which structures are owned corporately by the residents (although the ownership is not limited to the residents).
The residents generally own the space in which they live fee simple, but also own shares of the structure itself. These shares serve as a major currency in the Antarctic society. They are not true fiat currencies, as they are backed by the physical structures of the buildings, and the issuance of new shares is prohibited (although shares are divisible by their holders: one may have, for example, a certificate for one hundred fifty and three-tenths of a share of Aurora Towers, a corporation owning six city-towers, represented by five hundred million shares each).
My question is, in general, what do you think of the idea?
In particular, do you believe this would be unlikely to occur, given that specie would be available for use as money? Or for some other reason? My reason for believing such a system could exist is that the future industrial value of precious metals may eventually make the opportunity cost of their use as money prohibitive, as is beginning to happen in my story. With structures that make living in a hostile environment being a scarce resource, they could back a non-inflationary paper currency.
Obviously, this system would only work in an environment such as the one in which my story takes place - a fact which will generate interesting plot issues for the story to address. I hope to gather some other interesting issues from you all. I am not a "hard" sci-fi writer - I deal more with philosophical and economic concepts than with scientific ones, though the science is there. The more thoroughly I can imagine an economic problem, the better I can work it into my story. I hope you can help me develop this one more fully.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!
MacFall:With structures that make living in a hostile environment being a scarce resource, they could back a non-inflationary paper currency.
I think that commodities that are eligible for backing paper currency should have very few other uses. For example, gold isn't used that much apart from its use as a backing commodity for paper currency. Also, they should be easily fragmented (like melting gold). I just don't see why those structures would be chosen as a backing commodity.
ivanfoofoo: MacFall:With structures that make living in a hostile environment being a scarce resource, they could back a non-inflationary paper currency. I think that commodities that are eligible for backing paper currency should have very few other uses. For example, gold isn't used that much apart from its use as a backing commodity for paper currency. Also, they should be easily fragmented (like melting gold). I just don't see why those structures would be chosen as a backing commodity.
Prior to the time in which the story is set, several of the cities had municipal governments, installed by a previously-existing central government. When the central government was dissolved, the municipalities were made to issue shares of ownership of their assets to their former taxpayers, proportional to what had been paid in taxes. People started trading their shares; new towers and domes were built which adopted that system as it had become popular by that time.
Just to nitpick, it wouldn't really be a fiat currency would it? Since fiat currency if defined at a currency backed by coercion. By the way the idea of Antarctica sounds interesting since there's a number of states competing for it but I believe are prohibited from doing so until a certain time by some treaty. I don't know the specifics though.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
A fiat currency is something irredeemable. It is not legally bakced by anything.
scineram: A fiat currency is something irredeemable. It is not legally bakced by anything.
What I was going to say.
But I like the idea - I would be interested in reading it someday maybe. If there is no libertarian paradise on Earth, at least I can escape into one :).
The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.
Does owning shares means you have a proportional say in what rules (speed limit?) apply on/in these assets? And are they managed for profit (rented out...)?