A BUXBE MANIFESTO —

CHANGING CURRENCY FRAMEWORKS
TO INCENTIVISE CREATING EMPOWERMENT SUSTAINABLY

22/02/22

1
MANIFESTO FRAMEWORK

This paper will discuss BUXBE, why it exists, its objective, its fundamental differences to other cryptos and currencies in general. Further, it will establish the maligned framework and consequences of current usury/commodity currencies and why solving the world’s problems will never be possible when using such currencies and the wealth framework they measure due to the biased, compromise framework they are designed around.

I can understand that some of the proposed arguments could be argued ad infinitum, and many authors have made careers in selling such ideas. What is important is to pull back to first principles and build what humanity is looking for from there. The dilemma is not many authors/philosophers do this, leading to further questions of fundamentals instead of solidifying them to build from. It will become clearer later on my saying that, with our current usury/commodity currency mindset, there is no profit in fundamental solutions.

Please note: I define usury in its original meaning: any cost/interest on currency. The modern definition of exorbitant interest can be misdefined that some interest is OK. So, should it be called ‘OK currency’? Of course, that makes no sense. It actually dupes people into thinking that a cost on commodity currency is normal. It doesn’t have to be, nor need be. This will be made clear on further reading.

2
WHY BUXBE

Going back to first principles, the key to any respectable currency is how does it incentivise people to create experiences to empower the most people in the most sustainable way possible, to redundancy. BUXBE focuses on valuing the quality of people creating while cultivating Earth, not seeking profit while destroying it. Even with an increased focus on sustainable industry, the fight to implement it is huge, as, FUNDAMENTALLY, profit is made by being unsustainable, not because of it. Listen to any Shark Tank episode and see how startups are questioned about how they can’t make something so well selling it becomes redundant. Business is built on obsolescence, not redundancy.

BUXBE is a free to use, non-commodity currency based on the work of people choosing to use it. As a consequence, the people exchanging with it own the bank. The bank also is not an entity requiring profit to exit as the people using it allow it to exist. There is also no need for tax or costs to build infrastructure or run the bank. Further, the bank pays for all education, both teachers and students, in equal amounts. This affords people to find out what interests them the most, and find the best teachers to do it. This develops a true free market of discovery and creativity, competing to collaborate, to be known to be the best, and be able to share it, to let it go and learn, create, and experience more. That is what life is all about. There is no conflict here. Creation is built on peace, not from the weak disconnected mindset of ethics, but the strong connected mindset of excellence.

Many can do this is a bubble, as the motto ‘if you want to change the world, change yourself’, but there is too much collateral damage, created in the past, that is not addressed, that we ignore. So many of use are lucky to be supported by resource access, but many can’t afford it, and many cultures have been destroyed through war for the covert reason of resource ownership, to sustain first-world economies that waste them. We can point to developing countries becoming more wealthy do to tech advances, etc, but I point out to you that if we were really economic models that empowered people, this would have happened much faster, that they would not have been compromised in the first place if we had an empowering economic model (we don’t), and there would be a lot less conflict, if any, in corporations and banks OWNING that journey. Only an economic model that focused on resource efficiency directly based on people, not an imaginary commodity, owned by banks, that is then distributed to a few who then own, and speculate, on that journey. All this quantitative wealth perpetuates to speculation, gambling, and corruption. This is SOLELY because currency has a cost.

The world is pretty fucked up. It has been for a long time. It is in devolution mindsets that all wealth is quantified, owned by banks, and the only thing that gives money value is speculating on a commodity of it rather than on the base framework that does give it value: people’s creativity.

There is this total misconception that money is created by an authority, to then get a piece of. To be clear, crypto doesn’t change this much, if at all. People think a crypto created privately, outside govt financial systems, is different, decentralised among miners to create and have redundancy for security; that there are so many thefts in crypto should demonstrate this doesn’t work. What people are missing is cryptos are still usury/commodity currencies created a different way. They change nothing and empower no one.

A true decentralised currency is directly created, therefore owned, but the people using it. This takes out the need to think that we need different currencies for different purposes. This mindset focuses on the money as the central wealth measure. It is not. PEOPLE ARE. Using different countries for different purposes separates people and, again, wastes energy on transfer costs, however small they are. Currencies are again reduced to commodities. Using one currency worldwide is not dominion over people if the currency is free and has no commodity value. Only a non-commodity currency, created by the creative capacity of people, is truly decentralised, as each person is a node of the bank itself. Without people, the currency does not exist. I did not create BUXBE. People did. When people say usury/commodity currency is just a symbol of energy exchanged between others, they forget there is a bank that takes a cut of that, or a stock exchange, or a hedge fund. These are derivatives of a monetary leak, focusing on the energy of creating commodity money, which is meaningless. Think about all the people who CAN’T create because they can’t access this illusory money developed countries make, betting on market swings at the expense of developing countries lack of empowerment. There is an immense amount of money in existence, but its distribution framework empowers so few. Think about all the people who want to create, to show who they are to empower others, but can’t because they have to show they are worth the money, instead of being worth the resources to create, based on their sustainable capacities. It is ironic that Mohammad Yunus of Grameen Bank won the Nobel Peace Prize for creating a bank to lend small loans to such people, at higher interest rates than people think. Money does empower exchange, but thinking it has to be a commodity one is mindless. Humanity will have to let go of this in the same way species evolve. We will be stuck in devolutionary loops, as history has demonstrated, while we waste the IMMENSE resources we do on commodity currency. That we continue in this direction is similar to throw-away fashion.

The ultimate sinkhole is connecting usury/commodity currency to religion and that money is abundant. The largest travesties are evangelists and those objectifying the law of attraction. The religious connection is the ultimate example of how money disempowers, not just for coercing people to give money for salvation, but that people are left so distraught with trying to make ends meet that they are reduced to believing money is the new Jesus. This alone shows how the mechanics of money, the usury model, disempowers so many people, reduced to submission, mental illness, no education. From here we get to conflicts, thefts, gang violence, scams. It goes on. People can say it is human nature, but it is simply humanity living in frameworks that perpetuate scarcity. Making a game of how to succeed out of squalor is not showing human empowerment. Give empowerment to all, and see what happens then. Only then, the true heroes show themselves.

In comparison, for the law of attraction, it is undeniable this can lead to some positive vibes, to love, and reaping from the positive energy of others in return. It’s fabulous. However, so many devolve this to manifesting money, saying it is abundant. The oxymoronic misconception of abundant money is it only has value if it is scarce. So it is ‘abundant’ by taking away from someone else. resources are scarce, but creativity is abundant. So, money actually squeezes creativity, not make it flourish. People will say restrictions offer new opportunities. There will always be restrictions, limited by Earth. No need to make artificial ones. Money is not wealth. People are. The law of attraction is becoming a rort. So many successful books really say the simplest things in a long way, and they sell millions of these. Again, this is consequence of disempowerment. It is amazing how recent authors seem to ignore that it doesn’t work for most people, and that people do bad things with money. It is just so stupid! The true value of laws of attraction are the positive qualities it extends to others, and invites them to be safe to return the same. Quantities are irrelevant [although a double espresso would be a wonderful gift! :)]. When we ignore qualities, connected to empowering Earth, too, we lose everything. There will be people who will say, and fear, that the rules of BUXBE will change in the future because human nature wants to control. However, as an example in Bitcoin, the rules are fundamentally set. BUXBE is not possible to own, even by me, as the people using it own that part of the bank. They are all part of the bank, not me. My profit is using an account in BUXBE first teaching others how to use it, and when that is not longer required by leveraging others teaching their communities to use it, I can do other things. This is leveraging empowerment, peacefully, based on excellence, cultivating Earth.

3
THE EVOLUTION AND DERIVATIVES OF USURY/COMMODITY CURRENCIES

In modern history, even in all history, there was always been compromise in power and empowerment. We are used to thinking that freedom is realised through dominion and control. This is irrespective of any political framework. Power is the key, manifest through war. The framework of this is resources are scarce and survival is dependent on controlling them. As tribes with little advancement in technology, this would make sense, but as human communities grew from cultural identities to political civilisations, this fundamental never changed. It could be speculated on that political control used spiritual belief to expand that. Either way, spiritual beliefs ran alongside the political control pyramid, in whatever way it manifest. The differences do not matter.

The consequence of this has been glorifying war as power, to possess commodities for wealth: gold, scarce objects, art, land, etc. So humanity has this predilection to possession as the symbol of wealth, at the expense of resource use efficiency. This leads to class for the same. Class/race differences are symbols of scarcity, real or imagined. This leverages fear. And so the cycle continues. As we say in present societies, thinking of things manifests the same. War builds on war. Look at all the resources wasted in the last 120 years on war. So much wasted resources. So many lost people, based on fears stemming from the lust of power. If politics was actually useful, we would not be fighting for change every time a new leader arrives. And yet, we go through the same cycle, building careers on dichotomies: those that are corrupt, and those fighting against it. The result is we all lose. Why so much inevitable corruption? Behind power is money. What is money valued on? Scarcity. We have evolved our social structures and experiences in many ways with new innovations, which is terrific, but these have happened in spite of money, not because of it. Money is more of an obstacle to getting empowered things done. Such innovators are recognised as such more than the money they make. Many failed because of debts. Note that this is debt to a financial entity, not of people. Thank about how a business would run proclaiming how their new ideas would empower people in a sustainable way, and the investment is in the people participating to make that happen, without a bank. The innovator would be, in such a case obliged to perform based on the people involved, and who will buy the product/service. This is not taking out exchange, or some govt saying everyone has to work for the same amount of money for political status. In such an exchange system, everything is focused on the people, and the wealth they create. It is all about quality. A bank owning the currency to then offer for exchange, at a cost, is irrelevant. This is why banks are inherently, and really have always been, meaningless. If a bank is just an exchange ledger, and it runs for free or at minimal cost for whatever reason that balances, that’s fine. It is the interest that kills not the bank, but almost everyone else, making careers of economists that are really peddling snake oil.
People have made careers in trying to change this. If they really wanted to solve these issues, there wouldn’t be amy money in it. Yet, this is how the economy works. Authentically or not, they are owned by the economic system to sustain themselves. Perhaps being on welfare, but really driving change making ideas home, might not be a good look. But then, they can write books, be idolised, travel the word as leading edge changemakers, and then do it all over again. This is not to say some of their ideas may have merit, but being true ideas for sustainable progress is fundamentally flawed, because the framework of their solutions are incorrect. How many people are lauded for their systems change capacity, but totally ignore economics, even currency. How can that be possible? Many are proud to say it is irrelevant! There are also many people idolised for the fundamental global problems they discuss, idolised for their insight, but do not have any solutions, or talk of possibilities that have no possibility to implement or don’t exercise doing so; they just want to talk about it. Many people love talking about it, but do nothing to affect that. Then there are others who really look at economic flaws, build circular economy frameworks, economic milestones to achieve, and then target policy change, to politicians. Even when rare policy changemakers do really want to implement these positive ideas, they are left to navigate incredibly convoluted paths, fundamentally because they need the money to pull it off. Despite the community advantages, the sustainable ROI, such projects are reduced to grants and the like. If profit was based on sustainable frameworks, this would be easy.

It brings to light the philanthropic cycle. There is a huge impetus for VCs and billionaires to give money. As alluded to earlier, this only demonstrates the flaw in our economic models. It leaves a few ‘pioneers’ to offer philanthropy to causes that matter, but impossible to do to all that need help. Why do they need help? Because our economic model compromised them in the first place. And they are left scrambling for some … money. [The more I am writing this, the more unbelievable that humanity can avoid knowing it is destroying itself, for money, it a total mindfuck]. Andrew Carnegie, of railway fame, among other industrial advancements, made a point of giving away his fortune before he died. While certainly not an unblemished entrepreneur, such resolve is admirable. But it doesn’t solve the problem, and it is unlikely this would be standard practice, nor could it be. The problem is the framework of how wealth is measured: quantity vs quality. There have been some economic models that look at relieving the pressure valve of this dilemma, such as Steiner economics wanting philanthropy to be systemic, or jubilee years where all debts are erased, however, this only shows how wrong quantity-based wealth is. It promotes greed, power, dominion. People want to blame it is human nature, but it isn’t: it’s a consequence of adapting to the models presented to succeed. What else is humanity to do under the circumstances?

And this brings us full circle, from the concept of saving humanity from it’s vice of existence by religion, to where we are now. 4
HUMAN NATURE AND THE HUMAN CONDITION
For as long as we want to conceive the perception of humanity, it has come from a foundation of weakness, that sells humanity is inherently pathetic, that it cannot trust itself. That includes you. Therein lies the dichotomy.

People can define what human nature and conditions are, but what matters are the framework this comes from. Most are negative, and this has driven decision making, and game theory, to where we are now.

Lets get these fundamentals defined about human nature:
We adapts to its surroundings to succeed; the foundation of cultures.
We choose the path of least resistance to succeed. This includes following status quo.
We want to connect and empower to the best of our ability as environments allow. This is evidenced by the nature of children.

People can argue that not all of humanity is like this due to some being inherently disempowering, and so build frameworks to protect others from them. The problem is we are trying to do this within frameworks that empower them, therefore reinforcing their existence. Concentrate on something, good or bad, and it becomes real; qualitative law of attraction. We have been so subsumed by the negativity of being human, we strive to absolve it though ethics. We would be far more empowered if we applied models that empowered the positive aspects of human nature. The argument presented in this paper is this will not happen until we shift our exchange model that measures our positive attributes, what makes us excellent.

The core of human nature is the human condition. This is defined usually by the aspects of our existence, physical and metaphysical; making sense of our existence. I’d like to present this a different way: we do not know how to love ourselves as we want to love others; we do not know how to give ourselves as much love as we give it to others.

Like the paradox of believing money is abundant but only has value when it is scarce, we also have the paradox of self-belief vs belief in humanity. You know you want to connect, give, trust, but fear others will not do the same, so you tread with fear looking for a community to trust, inside a framework that reinforces trust is hard to find. Now look at every person you come across in a day, even a week. What they are thinking is the same as you. As this awareness sets in, you will see how humanity self-sabotages itself towards the one we all wish we could be. The trust humanity WANTS to connect with is clear in realising how money became so prevalent: you trusted the person selling it to you, selling its virtues, at a cost. Money has no value without you, but its creator owned you once it has a cost on it. You work hard, but they do nothing. They are taking a commission from your life, and you are letting them. Fear is an easy sell. Look at industry today and see how much money is made from corporations selling you protection from disempowerment.

We have devolved our frameworks of this separate from Earth in trying to QUANTIFY what that is. From the outset, this is impossible, unachievable, yet we keep trying to. We look at levels of consciousness as means through evolving out of the limitations being human, like this is a deadweight. We compete with performing rituals to self-awareness/realisation/actualisaton, AGAINST the reality we sink in on Earth, forgetting we created the sink to evolve out of in the first place. Human condition: we do not know how to act loving ourselves as we want to with others.

Let go. 5
SHIFTING TO USING BUXBE

Why is this worth doing?
Because it will ‘reset’ our disconnection from Earth and build new frameworks to create sustainably with it, with no other limitations than our creativity. It will also reconnect us with trust, collaborating together to regenerate and rejuvenate with Earth, applying tech to not just correct existing problems, but also apply innovations that make problems redundant.

Why would BUXBE work when other ideas promising the same thing have not worked or only worked partially in communities?
Fundamentally, because other ideas have been focusing on spiritual paradigms for support. This is attractive for most people trying to balance in an overwhelmingly disempowering world, reinforced though civilisations of human existence. I could say, and do believe, that BUXBE allows your spiritual journey to be your own, without indoctrination, supported by everyone, as this is inevitable when no one owns another’s life. However, I’d like to present his one step further. Our spiritual journeys are the ones staring you in the face in every moment of your existence. It’s in front of you, in you, in your every action, and being supported in every moment to experience that. It’s not in me, in an imaginary friend, or something outside of you. It isn’t even just in you. It’s your action that makes your Being real, without compromise or fear.

What would the full consequences be?
1. BUXBE is used by choice. It is not bought into existence. It is created by the exchange between relevant parties to use it. If no one uses BUXBE, it doesn’t exist.
2. The basis for why people would to choose to exchange with another in BUXBE is by the quality of what they create based on resource use for the greatest empowerment/experience. Status in communities using BUXBE is based in this quality, not market hype to possess for a short moment and throw away.
3. Participants using BUXBE own the part of the bank by the amount in their account. The total amount of all participants accounts put together is the amount of BUXBE that exists. This means the amount of currency that exists is also the amount available for communities to use.
4. There is no need to borrow BUXBE for a business. Ideas are presented to the communities the project is targeted for. People will decide if it is useful as presented on how it empowers the most people in the most sustainable way possible. On the project going ahead, people interested in helping the creator, and fit the creator’s needs, will be paid by the creator’s account. On selling inventory, the profit you make is yours. One adaptation can be that all participants involved can be one entity and all profits are shared equally. There is no need for a creator to get more than others in return because all industry is a team effort. The structure and price mechanism of BUXBE makes recognition by monetary profit redundant. The creators reputation is the best in maximising empowerment/resource use is the real profit.
5. If a project going ahead is for community use, such as roads, transport, hospitals, whatever it may be that warrants pricing it for returns, BUXBE [the bank] will pay all parties concerned by ‘printing’ the money and paying the relevant parties.
6. BUXBE is not a corporate entity seeking rewards for creating currency for distribution. it is simply a ledger of exchanges in and between people and communities using it. As such, the negative amount in the bank reflects the positive amount of currency in the community.
7. Because there is no cost in using BUXBE, and projects normally covered by taxes are directly paid for by BUXBE, there is no need for users to be taxed. There is no commodity capacity in BUXBE, which makes thinking the bank or government has to be paid back for such projects redundant. BUXBE doesn’t care.
8. BUXBE held in the bank accrue no interest. Again, as there is no commodity value in BUXBE, and wealth and status is based on qualitative creation [empowerment/resources] and accessing experiences, the need to gain wealth through more BUXBE is redundant.
9. Further, that the previous point is the case, there is a market incentive to reduce prices for greater quality, not the other way around as usury/commodity markets do.
10. As the price mechanism in BUXBE inverts, and participants are the owners of the bank, there is no market pressure for inflation to follow increased BUXBE currency volume. Unlike usury/commodity markets, where increased currency volume dilutes purchasing power, BUXBE volume and pricing are independent of each other. There is no quantitative/pressure leak to imbalance BUXBE velocity or pricing. This is a true free market, flowing in the direction of BUXBE participants collaborating by choice in creating as sustainably as possible.
11. BUXBE cannot be bought into existence, nor is listed on any indexes to be speculated on. BUXBE’s commodity value is completely separate, and irrelevant, from its value as a medium of exchange. BUXBE has no commodity value whatsoever. There may be an option that people could exchange their usury savings with BUXBE, but this is only in opening an account in BUXBE to begin exchanging with people only using BUXBE. However, there is ample opportunity to earn BUXBE by participating in BUXBE education opportunities, or selling resources owned held in usury markets to interested parties in BUXBE markets, to then increase their exposure in, using, and participating in BUXBE markets.
12. If agreed upon, land/property can be sold between BUXBE and usury markets. If a project involves creating on usury-owned land, or is in a potion of high demand, there is no absolute requirement that such land be given to the BUXBE community. BUXBE is not a political entity. There is no interest for BUXBE to own anything. BUXBE is simply an alternate exchange with no cost to empower people out of usury markets to BUXBE ones. BUXBE does not care if people want to own resources to maximise accessing experiences. There are some practical, logical reason this makes sustainable, but even if this is more to do with emotional safety, it makes sense as people feel safe to leverage trust with others knowing there is no fear or loss in doing so. Any decision-making is based on empowering the most people in the most sustainable way possible.
13. Expanding from the previous point, wealth in BUXBE is based on accessing worthwhile experiences, not needing to own them at the expense of others. In this way, and in creating experiences aligned with regenerating and cultivating Earth, humanity aspires to true qualitative abundance where such concepts are real, not imagined with possible quantitative ones.
14. In any decision-making process, ideally through consensus but not negating consent, the ultimate decision is always based on this one premise: WHAT WILL I/WE CHOOSE TO CREATE TODAY THAT BEST EMPOWERS THE MOST PEOPLE IN THE MOST SUSTAINABLE WAY POSSIBLE, HOPEFULLY TO REDUNDANCY?

6
POSSIBLE OBSTACLES TO BUXBE

Like many people starting with new ideas, there will always governance or other usury/commodity dependent entities will not allow BUXBE to scale, if be used at all, without umbrella regulations that would really not apply to BUXBE considering its framework and application. fear based paradigms have nothing to grasp on to with BUXBE to fit into their fear-based frameworks. New things always take time for people to understand, to not feel threatening or attacking. There is ample incentive for current governments to use BUXBE, to being using it for things they can’t do. Volunteers can be paid with it. The UN could us it instead of waiting for monetary support. Acceptance from such entities would really help not just scale it, but leverage supporting people that will not get it from usury markets.

There will always be fears, but humanity is dealing with the perpetual disempowerment of usury for a long time. We just have to take it easy and, like any traumatised child, let the potential sink in.

Of course, there are those who are fully connected to the maligned status of usury. Given the full-blown potential of BUXBE, this would make clear who is not the people’s side, and who isn’t. If such a disagreement is threatened with war, it makes no sense to press it further, but behind a war are people. A leader may disagree, but the actors in that play may not. Everyone has their fear journey to overcome, and that is OK. We do the best we can as transition scales.

Perhaps the largest obstacle is organised crime, easily the most notably being in drugs, arms, and gambling; again, a consequence of usury economics. Change has to be led with as much empowerment as possible, with the right people where trust is shared. Realisation, and awareness, takes time.

As hard as these may be, it is not a reason to not do it.