You know what, I’ll tell the internet about a project I want to be working on: a revolving pot of money people can borrow from for things like buying in bulk and avoiding “insufficient funds” charges.
A very simple ledger. No humiliating means testing or grovelling. The “loan” could be paid back when/if the “borrower” starts to see a benefit from the project.
This seems like something people who aren’t paying the poverty tax1 could fund for people who are. A nice community project that might actually do some good, unlike however much time we’re spending talking about fair taxes for people who have summer cottages to sell.
I think the closest “competitor” for the idea would be short-term lenders, but this “loan” wouldn’t be for profit so it shouldn’t be subject to the same laws. The only real consequence if nobody pays their loans back is the project ends.
But maybe people would borrow in good faith, and then not having to pay the poverty tax would help them, and then they would put money back in, and then more people who need it could access it.
I’ve read circulating money this way is good for the economy, if you are a person who needs that kind of rationale in addition to, you know, potentially keeping your neighbours alive.
Thoughtful comments, as always, are welcome.
- I had a question on this. The wikipedia article on “cost of poverty” includes a few other names for the same concept, as well as some really good examples of it. ↩︎
This is a little like a micro-micro version of micro-loans for businesses – there are NGOs working in the latter space.
I’m aware of Kiva, but that requires people looking for money to pitch themselves to an audience, which can be humiliating.