Terms used on this page (glossary)
Dual-currency layer. Participants get monthly Basic Units (BU), spent on essentials at essential-service providers (ESPs), community-owned or private; expired BU are converted to primary currency (dollars) at merit-scaled rates through the Creative Collectives.
The community currency issued by CCO. Pegged 1:1 to primary currency, accepted for essentials by essential-service providers (ESPs), community-owned (PTF) or private, and expires monthly.
A business that sells essentials (groceries, utilities, health care, meals) and accepts BU. Community-owned ESPs are PTFs; privately owned ESPs pass what conversion adds to their BU customers as lower prices.
Networks of artists, makers and other contributors, part of CCO, that review members' work and manage the conversion of expired BU into primary currency at elevated rates.
Community-owned, not-for-profit businesses that accept BU. Modeled as a cost-reduction mechanism (12–16% lower costs), not a wealth-addition channel.
Community-owned housing; monthly payments build Acre Equity instead of paying market rent or mortgage interest.
Community equity built by PTH residents, appreciating ~4%/yr, accessible at exit subject to a tenure-based liquidity haircut.
Spatial governance layer organizing where PTF/PTH deploy; gates cooperative synergy effects behind a zone-participation threshold.
Digital platform administering CCO currency operations and democratic voting for PTH/PTF decisions.
Primary welfare metric: how many days of basic living an agent's accessible resources cover (cash + income + benefit buffers). Two readings are shown: the BLEI paper's own, and the same-rules reading (earlier called design-neutral): the same rules for everyone: 12% of a month's wage and the ordinary daily cost of living, plus one month of whatever regular support a design pays; it leaves out the two extras the BLEI paper gives participants (20% of wage, and a lower daily cost in community housing).
Share of income captured by contracts that build zero household wealth (rent, interest, fees). PTH payments have EDC = 0. The earlier engine's EDC figures are a design target proxy: a formula set to the BLEI paper's target bands, not measured from the model's flows (since v5.3 the model also measures it from rent and interest paid).
Monthly residual resources above the basic-living threshold; gates an agent's probability of advancing an octave level.
Layer 1 · The answer
The answer in numbers #
Below 30 days of basic living
11.7%
with Compassionism, against 26.5% with no program
Change: −14.8 points
In a typical year, the share of adults whose savings, pay and support would cover fewer than 30 days of basic living (the BLEI paper’s measure; in a household, its savings, pay and costs).
Below the cost of living
19.5%
with Compassionism, against 49.3% with no program
Change: −29.7 points
In a typical year, the share of adults whose household’s income falls short of the household’s cost of a basic living (the MIT living-wage basket for its adults and children).
Too little wealth
44.4%
with Compassionism, against 32.7% with no program
Worse: +11.7 points
At the end of the run, the share of adults with less than $25,000 of net wealth (what someone owns minus what they owe; in a couple, half of what the two own) in today’s money.
Children below the cost of living
32.2%
with Compassionism, against 76.4% with no program
Change: −44.2 points
In a typical year, the share of children whose household’s income falls short of the household’s cost of a basic living (the MIT living-wage basket for its adults and children).
Reference environment, 20 years; averages over 500 paired runs of 500 simulated adults and their children, in households (release v5.6 data); both runs include today’s safety net.
Reading the measures
How to read this measure. “Too little wealth” counts adults whose net wealth is below six months of their own cost of living: a reserve against a lost job or an emergency. Today that reserve is what stands between a setback and hardship, so people are right to build it. The framework expects people to need it less. When next month’s basics are guaranteed, and work becomes more a choice than a condition of security as AI and robotics take on more of it, many would stop saving a large reserve and spend more of their time and money on what they value: family, craft, learning, community, travel. In that world, smaller savings would not mean less security, and the gain would be measured in surveys of how people live and how they feel, more than in dollars (Duke Johnson’s framing; the Research Hub’s glossary, “Post-Scarcity Economics”). Economists see a version of this today: a guaranteed minimum reduces how much lower-income households save for emergencies (Hubbard, Skinner and Zeldes, Journal of Political Economy, 1995). What the model does not do: its adults spend the same share of income above their costs with and without the program (the share that matches today’s US saving rate), so no one here saves less because they feel secure, and the model measures no well-being by survey. The gap above comes from the model’s mechanics (prices rising while savings earn nothing, and lower pay after a job loss), not from that change of mindset; the framing explains how the measure should be read in a guaranteed-minimum world, and does not turn the result into a gain.
Layer 2 · A guided read of each result
The guided reads load with the release data.
Layer 3 · Every table, with downloads
All tables of this release #
Every table behind the charts, for all environments and both horizons. Each table opens on demand and downloads as CSV or JSON. The JSON gives every number with its path in the release file. The whole release is one file: data/releases/v5.4.json.