Porter Stansberry called this, “How do we invest in people?” He termed it MeBay. The student offers a percentage of their future earnings for X years in exchange for money now. The primary challenge is that’s totally illegal in many jurisdictions. Therefore people come up with convoluted (and less direct) ways of basically doing the same thing. Another challenge is colleges are the very happy recipients of the US gov willing to indebt anyone with a pulse thousands of dollars to pay schools. (I know a person who has over $300,000 in loans.)
So the design challenge is to accomplish MeBay be offing something so compelling govs and universities have to go along with it either because it’s so cool they can’t resist, and or it would look terrible if they did not.
Why reinvent the wheel? Why not use Nature’s currency, Joules?
- If a currency is electronic, it seems arbitrary to localize it. - “Money" should not deprecate over time. That forces people to use it or lose it. People hate being forced. Good money reduces uncertainty. I know you are trying introduce friction, but that appears to be in response that the system is naturally inflationary which means there is a deeper design flaw. That the money goes back to the community is really just a forced charity tax. - There are way too many 3rd parties, way too many arbitrary variables. These will all have to be managed which makes for lots of overhead and claims of unfairness. - "Equally rewarding people for time spent” does not work at all. If I can dig a ditch in twice as fast as my buddy but get paid the same, why would I unless I can use the extra time for something else? If I can do brain surgery, and those types of surgeons are in short supply, why would anyone want me digging ditches?
What has worked best in the past is gold and silver. Really, the burden of proof is why this idea is better than Au, & Ag. And how are things different than e-gold.com and goldmoney.com ??
Porter Stansberry talked about this a few years ago - he termed it "MeBay". I am also working on something similar as part of a more integrated system. Basically anyone, can offer shares in themselves, or any event. Investors can sell the shares at any time, and or someday hopefully be paid dividends. I would not use debt at all since that automatically puts people in a hole. I agree with insurance -- the ratio of insurance to funding is likely a very good indicator of the chance of success.
You might find some of this design useful. http://wp.me/p4neeB-4Y I just copied how evolution works.