In context…
— Hello! I want to earn money without working and without paying taxes.
— I am going to earn money by performing tasks online. But I'm not going to do them myself. They will be done by artificial intelligence.
— But you said that only companies and individuals pay taxes.
— But those decentralised organisations or DAOs will want to know who you are and will identify you when they make the payment. And you will have to pay taxes.
Pretty convincing, isn't it?
As you can see, this is a dialogue I had on a portal with Artificial Intelligence, the image has also been generated, Dall-E, DALLE-E, which my colleagues have recently started to use at the Trebas Institute. I do not second the motion if the intention is to take the IA response for granted; it could be used as a research tool, but not as an end product.
2022 was a year of great technological revolutions. Some of them are truly significant when we look back on them in a few centuries' time with perspective.
Space Exploration and Technology: Launch of the James Web Telescope, Deflection of the Asteroid's trajectory, Didymos/Dimorphs, numerous launches by SpaceX and Nasa...
Didymos/Dimorphs, numerous SpaceX and Nasa launches...Science and Health: Synthesis of embryos without sperm and eggs, Malaria Vaccine, predicting the shapes of any protein with artificial intelligence, reviving organs in deceased pigs...
In 2023 there will be several fields that will continue to accelerate their evolution:
Generative Artificial Intelligence of texts, images, videos.... And much more.
ExoCortex and Brain Computer Interfaces.
Fibre optics envelopes the planet.
Decentralisation of the economy.
I am going to venture to talk about a new trend that I believe will develop in 2023 and that will be possible thanks to the convergence of the previous 3: “The Pseudonymous Economy”.
This being so (and Kuhn's arguments in this respect are not easily refutable, based on the case of the natural physical sciences, which are certainly much more “exact” than economics), one must suspect that the repetitive repertoire of the fashionable economists:
It is neither neutral nor purely objective, since no knowledge is so, least of all on the level of social facts. That is to say, that the pretended “objectivity” of this position is not compatible with its effective location within a given spectrum of positions on the question of the social.
That the point of view assumed in the theory corresponds to the dominant forms of appreciation in the social field. That is to say, that such a “non-neutral” position is not representative of whatever positions exist in society, but of the one which, by virtue of power issues, has become hegemonic. In this way, in the name of a supposed neutrality and universality, a point of view is being proposed that is necessarily partial.
And the third conclusion is definitely not Kuhnian, but the offspring of what has been taught in the social sciences: the point of view that predominates in global society is that of the sectors with the greatest economic and symbolic capital power. It follows that the supposedly scientific premises of these economists, cloned in their concepts, actually represent the point of view of the economically powerful, of those who benefit from capitalist globalisation.
This is what allows us to realise that in many cases those supposed scientists of the economy who appeal to us through the mass media are nothing more than paid employees of the big businessmen, who in a curious idea of “pre-established harmony” find a singular affinity between what they ascribe to the principles of economic science and the particular interests of the social sectors that hoard the majority part of the global income.
FREEPIK
Pseudonymous Economics
Basically, the Pseudonymous Economy is that interaction between individuals and organisations that allows the exchange of products and services without identifying the identity of the persons performing them.
The pseudonymous economy is a type of economy in which anonymity or privacy is valued and protected.
In a pseudonymous economy, participants do not necessarily reveal their true identity or personal information when executing transactions or interactions. Instead, they use a pseudonym or a nickname to hide their identity.
This form of economy is not new, and with decentralisation and the development of Blockchains such as Ethereum, it has become increasingly common.
In the world of cryptocurrencies, users can send and receive coins anonymously, as transactions are made through digital wallet addresses that are not necessarily linked to a real identity. Of course, more advanced blockchains allow for much more sophisticated functions.
The pseudonymous economy is useful to work on services that can be done remotely: software development, data analysis, reporting, digital marketing services...
Through online platforms, I can connect with an avatar and a pseudonym and provide my services. Verifiable and reputable.
Don't think about drug trafficking or criminal activities. In the pseudonymous economy, everything is transparent and verifiable. The activities for which money is paid and earned are validated before and after by the organisations and auditable by anyone. And they are not criminal. They have more to do with software development, ideas, art, technology,
finance, science.
Conduct activities under a pseudonym.
Maybe I don't want to be censored by a government. Or discriminated against because of my age, race, nationality, gender or any other personal aspect and only be valued for my contribution and results.
Maybe I want to protect my identity and avoid
bias…
Work in the Pseudonymous economy
There are numerous Web3 platforms where thousands of jobs are available. Payers and recruiters are only interested in talent and results. They pay for it and don't care about your identity.
For example, you can find job offers on Noxx, Remote.co or CryptoJobList; although Hive.blog is a great platform to start with.
Types of jobs are available
Many of the jobs available are in marketing, content writing, tasks in the decentralised Web3 world.
And of course, you can use artificial intelligence to program, write documents, make images or videos. You don't have to work. In other words. It's not a requirement. But I don't want to say with this, that I support AI doing the work for me, that's on the world stage, and of course, here in HIVE it's sanctioned, even though there is a double standard; you know what I mean.
| Pseudonym | Paradoxical |
|---|---|
| Tax events require identification. Decentralisation allows economic activity to take place outside a country or jurisdiction. | Everything is traceable, auditable, public, verifiable... |
With the economy, pseudonymous... Are you or an artificial intelligence working? Are you working in any country? From any country? For an organisation in any country? Working for a decentralised organisation whose statutes are programmed through Smart Contracts on the Ethereum network, which is basically in the cloud accessible from anywhere in the world, does not locate you, nor identify you. But you can get paid in cryptocurrencies.
Talent is offshored and pseudonymised. Talent will work in the cloud. Online. It will perform tasks attracted by the technological and scientific technological and scientific advances of DAOs. Will be paid with cryptocurrencies in their wallet or pseudonymous wallets.
Talent may want to pay taxes. Voluntarily. To countries that interest him, because they offer him interesting conditions, or because they feel identified with their values. How will countries finance themselves in the future? How will countries be able to compete to attract talent and still maintain their budgets? With the game of the 3 levers? Will DAOs and decentralised organisations attract talent and create new “nationalities”? Create new “nationalities”?
XLSEMANAL
In conclusion
Fortunately, there is much more to economics than this nonsense, which will last as long as the boom of big capital that sustains and promotes it lasts. There is in economic theory the presence of complex thinking, alternative and dissimilar notions, ideas about the articulation between the social, the political and the economic —see, for example, the works of Klaus Offe, or those of Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen—. Certainly, economics is a science to the extent that it is able to articulate with these social, cultural and political determinants within which it takes its place and its meaning. As such a scientific discipline, it is inhabited by various theories, by partial empirical findings, and by open questions. And it is sustained despite the fact that many economists –or some of those who call themselves economists– do not deserve the name of scientist, nor do they live up to the demands that this implies.
What will become of tomorrow, I do not find in The Prophecies of Nostradamus any answer to this uncertainty, perhaps we can all reach a consensus and hit the nail on the head, it will be future generations who will read our writings and determine the veracity of our predictions.
Credits
- Title art CoolText
In the interim, I think there would be a solution where some core taxes (say 50%) are set for certain levels of service like now, but the other 50% is self-applied to what is interesting to the person. For example, if a country government wants to go to war, they can only do so if the funding comes out of that 59% self applied tax, which means that they would have to convince enough people to spend their tax money on war, instead of building parks in their neighborhood, or increasing nursing staff.
The percentages are relative and the reality is different. For example, in the case of Ukraine, foreign investment has been far greater than that invested in World War II, and after more than a year of war, the policies adopted have not yielded results. All of this is questionable, and the variables to be dealt with are impossible to control, which is the basis of the "Chaos Theory".
But, if people had to donate to Ukraine out of their pocket, would they? And then, if Russians had to donate for the government to attack Ukraine, would they? very unlikely.