[dktekno]

Technocracy aims at abolishing money altogether and replacing it with energy credits.

Energy credits' purpose is to ensure that we do not use more energy (read: raw materials) than allocated for each citizen.

But energy credits will not solve the problems money solve for us: Controlling human behavior!

Money used as promoting healthy life-style

Candy is unhealthy and so are soft drinks.
They don't use much energy from our raw materials. In fact, there is plenty of sugar.

Scandinavian countries try to control sugar-consumption by placing heavy taxes on soft-drinks and candy. In some countries, like Denmark, more than 60 % of the price of a coke is tax in one way or another.

While I personally is against government-intervention in how I live my life, there are many who might see such taxes as neccessary. How would you respond to this?

Money used as a means of moderate punishment for less serious crimes

Fining is a very common thing in western europe. Speed tickets and other means of imposing moderate punishment for less serious crimes that are not serious enough to put you in jail.

Without money, the technocratic society will need to find other ways of imposing moderate punishment, such as corporal punishment when imprisonment is too much for less serious offences, but this will be very unpopular in the western world.

Money as a reward

The classical one you all dismiss by refering to a theory that says humans will work even if they are not rewarded economically.

But there are some jobs or tasks that people would not participate in, unless they are rewarded with extra material goods. Social acceptance and social prestige isn't enough here. I'm talking scientifical experiments on humans.

We can't avoid running scientific or medical experiments on humans. The only solution in a technocratic society to get enough human objects for experiments is a "science draft" much like conscription, where the government draw lots on all youngsters aging 18 to 25 for medical experiments. This will be very unpopular.

[JackSprat]

I agree with Kolzene here on pretty much everything, but with dktekno I would like to point out two issues:

1) Money has not always existed, and before that you cannot tell me humans were incapable of doing anything because they did not have a money system.

2) If money is supposed to "control human behavior", then why all this crime and violence? It seems like the more money is in control, the more crime and violence go up.

[JimmiBaez]

I seen no need for currency. Money is only an object, but it symbolizes power. The power to put value, this I deem immoral.

[yrkoon]

Register on a continuous 24-hour-per day basis the total net conversion of energy, which would determine (a) the availability of energy for Continental plant construction and maintenance, (b) the amount of physical wealth available in the form of consumable goods and services for consumption by the total population during the balance-load period.
By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption.
Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced, and where used.
Provide a specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.
Allow the citizen the widest latitude of choice in consuming his individual share of Continental physical wealth.
Distribute goods and services abundantly to every member of the population.

How would these energy credits be allocated to citizens in practise? Would each person accumulate them somehow, or would there be some centralized issuing system? (Assuming technocracy would be implemented without abundance, such as a worldwide not just North American version.)

[MB.]

Precisely. A means of accounting for production / distribution for the purpose of assembling the information necessary for improving production efficiency.

Would each person accumulate them somehow, or would there be some centralized issuing system?

According to the technocracy Q/A individuals would be issued a limit every month or something. Also when traveling outside of the technate credits could be converted to currencies for the purpose of tradeing.

[yrkoon]

How about the effect of outside influences such as oil cartels on this accounting system? (I am assuming the abundance scenario was determined before the 70s.)

[MB.]

I believe the north american technate would be self sustaining with regard to resources, so outside factors would have no influence.

[MB.]

5.3.4 How would I purchase things? (dr)

Via Energy Accounting thusly, the cost of goods will be stated in terms of energy units and costs would never rise. The available net energy units allocated to people would be deposited automatically into their own accounts as energy credits for them to 'spend.' There would be no tokens (cash) rather like a using a `debit card' that always worked. Once 'spent' by the individual these energy credits which represent amounts equal to the energy used to produce the item would then be used for replacement of the item just purchased by the spender.
Note the effect of this; people will thereby direct the Technate's administration as to what to make and do next. In a Technate the collective will of its citizens direct the country.

http://www.technocracy.ca/simp/Technocracy_FAQ_1.x.htm