I think you’ve read a lot more into what I have written than is there. I am simply pointing out troubling parallels in history rather than making an argument for crypto.
I read your proposal. First, and I am being entirely serious and genuine about this, thank you for putting your name on the ballot. I have run for CA 52 twice now, and did not do as well as I would have liked. But anyone can sit at a keyboard and rant about what is wrong. I really hope more ordinary people will decide they would rather show us their ideas by running for office rather than just complaining about things on social media.
Having said that, your proposal has a fatal flaw. Money is a utility which arises organically when people are taking raw materials and making them useful. Value is found in that usefulness, and then people need something they can use to exchange that value, store that value, and measure that value.
Every form of value has an antecedent in someone taking raw materials and making something from them. The easiest analogy is the coffee shop. The barista delivers value, but only because a farmer grew the coffee and a potter made the coffee mug. The farmer and the potter created wealth by taking raw materials and making something useful or desirable from them.
The value in the coffee shop isn’t just the economic value of a cup of coffee. Coffee shops have become a place to socialize, hold small meetings, etc. And young people find opportunities to help pay their way through school and otherwise gain experience.
A demand for money is created by the exchange of value, which is the result of the creation of wealth. Your proposal assumes some for of administrative agency creates money. That divorces money from the underlying creation of wealth… which is why it will never work and should not be tried.