Work-Standard Currency Devaluation/Revaluation (Pt. I of II)

So far, all the examples which I have provided for the Work-Standard in the titular Treatise of the same name requires the economic and financial capabilities of an entire nation-state. If the Work-Standard is practical for the nation-state, it should also be simple, yet feasible enough for smaller ventures. That would be the best opportunity for me to provide more straightforward instructions on how to operate the Work-Standard from the bottom-up and not just from the top-down alone. The examples that come to mind are those which children and young adults are both capable of operating.

I am talking about those all-American examples like the lemonade stand, the Girl Scout cookies, the vending machine, the fast food drive-in. These four are great examples of ways in which the Work-Standard can be applied locally. Any high school student who wishes to contribute Arbeit and thus generate Geld from engaging in those activities must uphold the Marktrecht (Right-to-Market Laws) of their SSE (Socialist Student Economy), the Unified Federalist Student Economy (UFSE). The most obvious regulation involves taking Command Responsibility of maintaining sanitary conditions in the workspace. Nobody deserves contracting Polio from a lemonade stand, H1N1 Influenza from a soda fountain, or Salmonella from eating fast food. Do I need to remind everyone how this Coronavirus Pandemic started and how Overtourism in turn allowed COVID-19 to become a worldwide crisis, not just something restricted to the People’s Republic of China?

Of the cited examples,a lemonade stand is arguably the easiest, fastest way of demonstrating how anyone applies the Work-Standard in actual. Here, it becomes possible to outline a simplified summarization of the Work-Standard and how it interfaces with the everyday affairs of a Socialist Student Economy (SSE). Unlike the Liberal Capitalist OECD-Type Student Economy, the SSE is more than capable of operating something as simple as a lemonade stand in front of somebody’s house without having to spend Kapital on a “Business Permit.” The Marktrecht renders the Business Permit obsolete, allowing anyone from the UFSE to prepare the lemonade, obtain some throwaway cups, and erect their lemonade stand in the summer months as a Productive Property under the parental supervision of the neighborhood Homeowner Cooperative, PDE.

Assume for a moment that the youth operating the lemonade stand is not the only one pursuing this decision in the entire US. In a summer month like June, it is possible for us to envisage a given Suburb to have two platoons of 40 youths operating about 20 lemonade stands. Each lemonade stand has 2 youths operating it. Their Currency is the United States Note (USN) and pegged to the Work-Standard, instead of the “United States Dollar (USD)” and its Hard Peg to the “Post-Bretton Woods Debt-Standard.”  Thus, the Price for 1 Kilogram (2.20 Pounds) of Lemons is $0.24 USN (United States Notes) and the Price for 1 Kilogram of Sugar is $0.33 USN.

I can understand why these Prices would seem ‘cheap’ to everyday Americans and non-Americans alike in the 2020s. But we have to remember is that so much has changed between 1971-1973 and 2021-2023. These USN Prices are historically comparable to those which somebody might encounter at an American grocery store during the Death of Bretton Woods. Of course, there is also that justifiable Intent behind why I had insisted upon the Exchange Rate for converting US Dollars to US Notes to be $75.00 USD for every $1.00 USN.

In any case, to find the youths’ Quality of Arbeit and by extension their Total Economic Potential (TEP), we will only be finding the AP1 portion of the TEP Formula. After all, these 20 lemonade stands are operating under a single Profession, the aforementioned Homeowner Cooperative.

[Work-Productivity (Force Multipliers) – Work-Intensity] * Number of Vocations = AP1
AP1 = Arbeit of 1 Profession

We can start with the obvious: the Work-Intensity (WI) for all 20 stands is $11.40 USN. This is the total cost of spending Geld on lemons and the sugar.  

There is no discernible benefit to be had from relying on the Mechanization Rate (MR), which comes later on in the TEP Formula. Does one really need to automate a lemonade stand? Therefore, I will omit the MR variable from my handiwork.

Since we are also talking about a seasonal affair involving a Marktrecht, the Force Multipliers (FM) is set at the default value of 1.00.

This leaves the Work-Productivity (WP) to be the only factor for the youths to be concerned about on the Arbeit side. Every lemonade stand has the official rate for the Price of 1 cup to be set at $0.10 USN. If each lemonade stand sells 6 cups, their Work-Productivity (WP) is $12.00 USN. Given the 40 youths involved, the FQW and TEP is $24.00 USN.

[$12.00 (1.00) – $11.40] * 40.00 = $24.00

On the Quality of Geld side, the 40 youths had generated $0.60 USN in Federal-State Revenue (FSR), which was the Actual Geld that they have after spending $11.43 on lemons and sugar.  

I am not expecting the lemonade stands to be creating surplus Actual Arbeit for the aforementioned Homeowner Cooperative. Let’s suppose that the 40 youths achieved their FQW of $24.00 over the timespan of 60 minutes for the sake of demonstration purposes.

FQW + (ES+ … + ESx) * SR1 = MP
(MP + FSR) * SR2 = FQM
SR1 = Scale / Duration of Production
SR= Density / Scope of Production

The Final Quality of Geld (FQM) and Total Financial Potential (TFP) are also the same value. Like the TEP Formula, only the first portion of the TFP Formula is needed. 120 people bought 1 lemonade beverages at all 20 stands for 60 minutes. The Federal-State Revenue (FSR) gained from this endeavor was $0.00 because the Homeowner Cooperative was allowed to keep $0.60 USN as per the Marktrecht. Next, how would we write the Solidarity Rate for Scale of Production (SR1) and Scope of Production (SR2)?    

$24.00 + 0.00 * 2.00 = 48.00
($48.00 + 0.00) * 1.00 = 48.00
SR1 = 120.00 / 60.00 = 2.00
SR= 1.00 / 1.00 = 1.00

For the Real Total Economic Potential (RTEP) and the Real Total Financial Potential (RTFP).

Attrition/Inaction Rate = TEP / TFP
RTEP = TEP / Attrition Rate
RTFP = TEP + TFP / Attrition Rate
TPP = RTEP + RTFP

$24.00 / $48.00 = 0.50%
$24 / 0.50 = $48.00
$24.00 + $48.00 / 0.50 = $144.00
$48.00 + $144.00 = $192.00

This leaves us with the Total Productive Potential (TPP) of $192.00 USN for the Life-Energy Reserve. If we are just talking about the Homeowner Cooperative and not the rest of the US, the TPP value is the maximum amount of Actual Geld which can be printed into circulation. We should be grateful that the Attrition Rate for this endeavor is not as high as the example I gave in Part IV of “Strategic Accounting and Allocation of the Federal Budget” from The Work-Standard.

Let’s imagine for a moment that somebody is convinced that this endeavor on its own to be a little “overvalued.” I can see why somebody would arrive at such a conclusion. These 40 youths, if we consider their own contributions of Arbeit and generations of Geld to the Life-Energy Reserve, we are looking at $4.80 USN each. Fortunately, as I had stated in Part I of “Devaluation and Revaluation,” there is a way for the Central Bank – the Federal Life-Energy Reserve – to either devalue or revalue the Life-Energy Reserve. The real challenge, as I found out while articulating the specifications of the Work-Standard, was determining which variables should be altered. From the way I see things, it is either RTEP, RTFP, or else the TPP value itself. We will find out for ourselves in Part II of this entry.  

-Under a fixed exchange rate system, devaluation and revaluation are official changes in the value of a country’s currency relative to other currencies. Under a floating exchange rate system, market forces generate changes in the value of the currency, known as currency depreciation or appreciation.

-In a fixed exchange rate system, both devaluation and revaluation can be conducted by policymakers, usually motivated by market pressures.

-The Charter of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) directs policymakers to avoid “manipulating exchange rates…to gain an unfair competitive advantage over other members.”



Categories: Compendium, Financial Warfare

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: