Even before creating the catalog, people determined for themselves how much of a product would correspond to another product. For this purpose, they could take either the smallest available product, or come up with a physically non-existent product that would be equal to one, and then they would count how many such units are in other products. If, with the development of technology, something appears that contains only a part of a 1, then a fractional number less than 1 is simply used. Thanks to this, we can easily calculate from the catalog which country has received less production.
Suppose A has 10,000 Not Received Units (NRU) after shipping its product to country B. Please note that since the number means non-received products, no one will try to specifically accumulate as many such units as possible, because this means that the country gave a bunch of real goods to others, but received literally nothing in return.
And now A receives products from C. As before, a record is made in the catalog about how many products C gave and to whom – A, which did not give anything in return. Depending on the quantity of the delivered goods, the following occurs:
1) if the product is 10,000 units, then A now has 0 NRU, and C now has 10,000, since up to this moment it had 0 in this example;
2) if the goods are equal to 6,000 units, then A has 4,000 NRU, and C has 6,000;
3) if the goods are equal to 13,500 units, then A has 0 NRU, and C has 13,500. A does not have -3,500 units, since it has completely closed its shortage in received products – 0 is the minimum value, as we only care if a country has a certain amount of not received products or not. C can then get a lot of things for its 13,500 without the need to give anything in return;
4) if the goods are equal to 6,000 units, and A simultaneously provides C with products equal to 3,000 units, then A has 7,000 Not Received Units (10,000 – 6,000 + 3,000), and С has 3,000 (6,000 – 3,000).
And so, we understand that money is just an entry in the catalog about how much products the society has not received in the process of product exchange with other countries. For this reason, there is no reason for a society to accumulate a large amount of unreceived products in the form of a large sum of money.
As you understand, this money does not have inflation. And the products themselves cannot decrease in price. A chicken will remain a chicken, and a cow will remain a cow in 300 years. Yes, new technologies will vary how much for the delivery of such products (phones, cars, etc.) the country will receive NRU. This is logical, since, for example, we have more equipment in new cars than in models from the 1980s.
The “price” of a product can be determined by the calorie content and usefulness of one kilogram of it. Other parameters also affect the “price”. Moreover, the price will be fixed only when all countries agree with it. Nobody can just say that a product is worth a million units because they like that number. I will leave it to scientists to decide the price of each individual product.
In reality, we will be able to safely use such currencies as dollars and euros with many countries. And if 3 or more countries want to create the aforementioned catalog and trade through it, then why not? This catalog will not in the least prevent countries from trading with others for already existing money… will it?
Modern money works on the same principle, but there is a catch in that it does not belong to the whole society, but to individuals. The process of creating modern money is also different, and few people understand how it works – but at the same time everyone uses money, and many do not bother to wonder about this process. You can often hear about broadening one's horizons, but I wonder if people should also learn to expand their focus – if we take photography for the analogy.
When you are given a salary, you receive absolutely nothing material for your work. But having money on your hands allows you to exchange it for something tangible, be it food, clothing, tools, etc. Accordingly, the more money you have on hand, the poorer you are (usually) – everything is the same as in my example with countries that temporarily become poorer, until another country gives them its products, lowering NRU of the country that got the goods. Your “wealth” is potential, not actual. You will become actually richer only when you buy something with this money; but here, too, there is a capitalistic trick – not everything that is sold under capitalism is of real benefit to you, and other things could harm you, or even kill you. Then there is a possibility that money can simply depreciate – that is why many people try to keep their money in movable and immovable property.
Under capitalism there are a lot of jobs that, to put it mildly, do not improve the life of the whole society, and sometimes even make it worse, trying with various tricks to swindle money out of people so that they buy something that they do not really need. This fact leads us to the following truths:
1) Many people see the obvious – if they got a lot of “easy” money in a small amount of time, they could buy a lot with it. Since, depending on material and spiritual knowledge, people do what they believe will benefit them themselves in the situation in which they find themselves, then under capitalism there are people who do not have much spiritual knowledge, and for this reason they commit crimes in order to get those very “easy” money. Of course, they are making a mistake, for which sooner or later they will pay, but society also suffers for its decision to use money within the country to obtain food and goods. Vital food, things, and simple housing should be free for everyone, without exception. This is the only way crime in the country will decline, which in turn will reduce the number of police officers.
2) This brings us to the next truth. All those people who are now engaged in, essentially, parasitic activities, as well as those who are called upon to eliminate the crime, will no longer have the need to engage in their activities if everything necessary for healthy life becomes free of charge even for the temporarily unemployed and those who generally do not want to do anything. Society will benefit from this, since the chances of being cheated for money will suddenly plummet – and if society knows about everything that I wrote about in my main book, then the chances that people will be cheated for other reasons, such as for sex, will fall even further. Further, society will benefit from the fact that many of those people who now do not participate in the production of useful products, but consume them, will go to work at useful for society jobs, which will reduce the average working day for all people in the country.
It can also be noted that it will not be necessary to have a huge amount of educational websites (foreign languages, history, physics, etc.), since there is only one truth. We will only need one website, which will be completely controlled by the society, and where scientists and researchers with the proper education and experience will write. As for theories, it will be possible to create a separate section, or a forum, for this. Naturally, people will be able to run their websites and blogs – just like they do now. All this should reduce the amount of (informational) noise that is created by the desire of people to find a way to make money. All those people will also be able to go to work and help reduce the total working hours.
It has to do with the saying “work hard”. Many things already have their own monopolist. For example, photo editors, 3D programs, music applications, etc. Work hard or not, it is hard to do something useful and necessary, improve those programs, and at the same time come out ahead – and the first places will be taken only if people stop using the competitor's products and start using yours. Here again we could have one program for the whole planet that would be improved and improved collectively by all people who can offer something new and useful. Of course, such a program could consist of different modules, pieces, so that people do not have to download a bunch of gigabytes of data just to correct the color balance of a photograph, for example.