This story is unavailable.

The disconnect is too big for mine

I mean, you understand shares of things, it is a very common concept

The fiat money thing can be difficult, but it is commonly understood

The problems associated with fiat have to do with the fact that it has no limits, for those who may access it, and that not all may access it

All this rule does is limit the total amount of fiat credit available to $1,000,000 times the number of people claiming Shares, and allow each to claim one

So each owns a Share, so each gets an equal share of the interest paid on all the fiat money loaned into existence

Since the Shares are deposited in trust with local banks, that assures each community has a surplus of sustainably priced credit, so why move somewhere else? There are plenty of reasons, of course, but not economic ones. (so each country will be incentivized to provide attractive social contracts, to attract the best talent, or maybe just to attract people with trust funds to deposit in local banks)

Maybe it’s the scale, but that drops away when you view it as a per capita function

My best guess is just thinking too hard, as the complex concerns about the economy create similar complex structures in our minds, so it’s difficult to disregard the many concerns that become irrelevant when each is enfranchised