Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Why does Promise Language make a difference?

It allows other forms of value to be conveyed to facilitate a transaction.  The individual chooses the form of value.  The efficiency allowed through a common protocol decreases the costs of value translation.  The availability of money is not dictated by a single monopoly.  If, for example, a person who wishes to make the transaction does not have dollars available, and the other party wants dollars, another form of value can be introduced that allows the transaction to complete.  The Wealth Translator takes a fee for that translation.  This might sound like an academic discussion, but is not.  It removes the constraint of a single "money supply"'s availability and allows alternatives to the monopoly.


The people promoting existing currencies all want their currency to be used during the transaction.


People want the things they can buy.

They want value or wealth storage.

By holding their wealth in an easily transferable form like Bitcoin or gold, they can hold an appreciating currency while not requiring the people they do business with to accept Bitcoin or gold.

Monday, December 30, 2013

Promise Language eliminates the concept of "money supply"

Edit:  money supply and currency supply are two separate things.  Money is the abstraction of anything of value.  Currency is something issued by a currency provider/central bank.

So how is money supply constraint eliminated by Promise Language?  By making any store of value available to facilitate the transaction.  The simplicity is so pure, every currency on earth would become a store of value.

Currencies have two aspects:
1. store of value (wealth storage)
2. medium of exchange (wealth translation)

Electronic transactions allow near instant exchange (translation) of value.

It is possible for a pure "medium of exchange" currency to be created within this system.  Expands and contracts with the volume of transactions, however, that is outside the scope of current technology.  Promise Language would have to be implemented prior to that kind liquidity to occur.


If the Federal Reserve implemented Promise Language, the Fed would suddenly have so much liquidity with other forms of value that contrary to most economic theories, the good money would chase out the bad.  Of course, existing contracts denominated in dollars would have a real effect, the underlying tide would tend towards wiping out dollars to their intrinsic value.  IE.  dollars would become scarce as other alternative value translations became available.  EG.  Bitcoin or electronic gold or silver.

NOTE:  the above applies to the derivatives world.  Real world contracts/salaries denominated in dollars would become more valuable (increase in purchasing power) by contracting the mess at the "financial" level.

All transactions involve time

Are you taking risk?

There is no such thing as instant delivery.

Value changes.

Transaction fees cover.

Dividing your lines of businesses mitigates the risk of:
1. value change
2. delivery failure

That is why Promise Language is a transactional protocol rather than a protocol of record (eg. a record of the transaction rather than the process of the transaction)

Promise Language clarifies the lines of businesses by clarifying risk.

Sunday, December 29, 2013

Alternative currencies and the same old problems (Bitcoin)

The internet allows efficient "Wealth Translation", but requires a standard language/protocol.

While it is nice to see an alternative currency, Bitcoin suffers from the same flaw as a gold-backed currency. Deflation doesn't exist in the real world because sellers don't like lowering prices. Liquidity/velocity dries up with insufficient transactional currency in the system. Hoarding makes the few wealthy as interest is charged for the use of a transactional currency.  That will be the result of Bitcoin, despite policy and foresight to avoid.


Solution? Efficiency in currency translations. That is most easily done with a common transactional specification/protocol. "Promise Language" does exactly that. All transactions are promises to deliver value. Regardless of form (currency).

Promise Language is free and solves the problem.

[transaction]
   [promise]
      1 stick of gum
   [endpromise]
   [promise]
      0.01 bitcoin
   [endpromise]
[endtransaction]

Sincerely,
Andrew Bransford Brown

Friday, November 15, 2013

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

The Mathematics of Monetary Science

Communication * (Trust + Performance) = Accountability

The above equation led to the creation of a monetary transaction specification with descriptive terminology.

"In God We Trust" is printed on the paper, but are they delivering on their promises?

Sunday, February 10, 2013

A banking protocol.

The financial system is composed of a series of broken promises going back to treaties and trust funds.  Modern central banks were deliberately designed as a financial slavery system about 150 years ago, although it existed in other forms prior to that.  What is the solution?

A banking protocol.  I spent 8 years studying law, finance, banking, monetary science, and history and reverse-engineered the concept of money into its constituent parts.  Then arrived at a solution.

All financial transactions can be described as:
- one promise for another
- did each side deliver?

The above describes the basics of what I call “Promise Language”.   Please see the attached diagram:


While this appears simple (and it is), adoption of this protocol would fix the economy and world financial system within a few months.  Due to unraveling the treaties and trust funds’ broken promises, it would end warfare as well.  The protocol can be started anywhere and due to its simplicity and cutting transaction costs, it would be adopted rapidly.

Here is an abbreviated example.  For a more detailed specification, please contact me.

[transaction]
    [promise]
        [promissor]
            John Doe
        [/promissor]
        [promisee]
            Jane Doe
        [/promisee]
        [description]
            One stick of gum
        [/description]
        [date promised]
            2/8/2013  10:00am
        [/date promised]
    [/promise]
    [promise]
        [promissor]
            Jane Doe
        [/promissor]
        [promisee]
            John Doe
        [/promisee]
        [description]
            USD $1
        [/description]
        [date promised]
            2/8/2013  10:00am
        [/date promised]
    [/promise]
[/transaction]

Sincerely,
Andrew Bransford Brown
+1 917 653 7781
andrewbb@gmail.com


The protocol is currency agnostic.  Currencies can be designed to be backed by tangible value such as gold, silver, land, manufacturing output, rice output, wheat, natural resources, etc.

The protocol eliminates usury (charging a fee for a transactional medium), but allows interest when borrowing capital.

The protocol makes money supply important from the economies of scale of a currency, but unimportant to an individual.

The protocol allows an individual to become their own central bank, but this is unlikely due to the economies of scale of a national currency.

Each currency is a reflection of the culture of the country.

It eases the micro-management required in daily central bank operations.  Design of the currency becomes paramount.  For instance, if the US took the total currency in circulation and pegged it to the value of all real good manufactured exports, including processed food, the currency will gain value in direct relation to the real value of exports.  As exports increase, the value of the currency increases thereby lowering the cost of imports.  This happens automatically without daily intervention and manipulation of money supply or interest rates.