Even if the logical and mathematical approach is enough to reach the result of an Universal Dividend money, it is still possible to develop additional and more practical points of view, which tend to the same fundamental result.
The economic zone associated to a common money is fundamentally a Citizen construction. Any Citizen in its respective State is a co-owner of the Zone (which can be reduced to only one State). In a democracy, we are regularly invited to elect our representatives directly or indirectly. Therefore it is an act of common life, where the money is the economical cement commonly accepted and created to allow exchanges in space but also in time in a balanced way.
Yet any owner of a company whatever it is, receives, proportionally of its capital holding an annual Dividend. The Euro area is economically valuable proportionally to its monetary mass circulating (or even the PDB, but PDB and Monetary Mass are interdependent).
The Universal Dividend corresponds then simply to the recognition of the co-ownership of the economic zone by each Citizen (present and to come, and no generation has any privileged right from this point of view). The citizenship of the economic zone is inseparable to the fundamental right of a comparable share of the common money issuance between every citizen.
The art, the free softwares, the free rights writings, non-mercantile work done by charities or individually etc... What any citizen of the euro area brings, are values, which benefits to the mercantile sector directly or indirectly, immediately or delayed in time. For example the Internet works with a layer of free softwares which were developed and distributed most of the times without any monetary recognition.
These types of productions are hardly traded for money directly, because what makes them value, is the adoption by the majority, even more fast that one does not ask for a mandatory payment to get it. This creates norms fast, information exchange protocols, and usages. Yet, this substrate of value develops mercantile values which give value to their rare products or artificially scarce, by asking for a mandatory payment.
The Universal Dividend is a valuation of this free layer and not directly mercantile to the society, which is a fair compensation of the rights of use of this multi-value layer for mercantile activities.
One can not oppose the free creation of value an intellectual property rights as a mean to be paid. Because the choice to give the freedom of use and of transformation of its creation is a mean to disseminate without obstacles, without brakes, fast, to the benefits of the most. This is generally the case of scientists discoveries. Still, authors of these creations do not say that they should not be paid for what they brought, but they do not want to sell it directly. They do not ask for proportional gains to their contribution, but a minimum monetary recognition.
The Universal Dividend answers to this expectation.
The creator who wish a proportional remuneration to his contribution has to go for a proprietary approach. The two approaches do not oppose, they complement each, and can totally exist not only between different actors, but also for one actor who, as the case may be, can choose to do a free or a proprietary contribution. One would not « classify » a free citizen, master of his own fate, in any « box » where he would be constrained to stay to pretend to benefit any social « window » , which would constitute an obvious economic setback, limiting creativity and individual production to really specific domains, by definition not innovative !
Monetary Issuance by leverage is an asymmetry which emphasized capitalistic gap without any reason. Because X, Y or Z have an capitalistic asset at the beginning, one will let them to overrate this asset by monetary issuance leverage, which devalue existing money to their asset, and let them buy or copy any innovation at any time by creating temporary false money.
The Universal Dividend is a neutral money issuance and symmetrical in space and time, which let the money its original sense : a Mutual Credit between Citizens, given not only once, but progressively, lifelong, and relatively to the measurable wealth (Proportionally to the monetary mass / citizen), without harming any individual present or to come, whatever how old is he.
Universal Dividend then does not only have a neutral role to the investment via the monetary mass growth allocated between every citizen, but also an economic buffer in case of evaporation of the money in any zone pseudo-isolated inside a monetary area. If we imagine that « X », after doing a big monetary gain decide to leave the autonomous area to invest somewhere else (or simply save money), the Universal Dividend makes sure that the monetary exchanges are not totally stuck, and can start again progressively.
Money has not as a goal to be a tool of hostage taking where the one who, having made the choice to monetized his production, could profit of the accumulation of money to block the exchanges of other producers, and impose his views.
This argument resume the fundamental principal stated by Richard Stallman about the usage of any information system : the code must be transparent and editable. To accept a money any citizen should at least accept the running code, and be able to change by democratic choices. Yet it is obvious in 2011 that these two minimum conditions are not filled by « official » moneys with hidden codes, imposed, of which the development of the working code is not submitted to any democratic choice (Bâle I, II et III, are monetary principle not submitted to the approbation of the users).
The « digital horizon », highlighted by Olivier Auber should awake us about the dimension of this choice of monetary code attached to economic freedom following high criterion like the legitimacy, ethic, or neutrality.
Fundamental condition of any measure is the individual. Indeed, outside of the individual no measure of value can exist. This is the minimum and sufficient point for any measure of value.
Human is the observer of the economy, as much as its fundamental actor. His service and his freedom of creation is its primary objective. Thus, he is the only real point of valuation possible for any money who wants to be anywhere and anytime universally usable where the economic trade is possible.
Outside any specific value, there is an economy. But emptied of its individuals, no economy remain, there is obviously nothing left measurable.
By developing the money on a continous micro-investment, all along the life of any citizen, it is the whole economy which invests in each of its fundamental economic component, the “risk” being distributed in the multitude and in the time.
Furthermore, there is no way Humans of a given generation would claim the right to judge in their siblings, from who comes the value future generation will use. Proceeding like this, past generations, blind to reality of uncertainty to what is value or not, have let fall in misery several of their creators of value considered today among the most important.
The existence or lack of Universal Dividend is a measure of humility or arrogance of present men before the men to come.
Internet websites and blogs have used or cited ideas of the RTM and bring other compatible interpretations and really relevant of Universal Dividend :
Furthermore the wikipedia article about « Basic Income » is full of information, including about experiences (all successful) of economic area who adopted a monetary system near the Universal Dividend.