MovieChat Forums > In Time (2011) Discussion > Sustainability of the time-currency

Sustainability of the time-currency

posted 11 years ago by B-J-C
13 replies | jump to latest

Consider this. For simplicity's sake, imagine there are ten people in this society, each has just turned 25 and their clocks have just started ticking, giving them each one year. In order for one person to gain 9 years and live to 35, he would have to kill the other 9 people. No matter how much they transfer and exchange their time, they only have 10 years between themselves.

The only way new time enters the system is when someone reaches 25, then one year is added. But that person also needs their own time. So they must either take time from somebody else, or die. Sylvia Weis, for example, was given 10 years to 'celebrate' when her clock started. Then after that time is spent, either by naturally passing or by purchasing goods and services, she'll need more. The entire time, her time is counting down, as well as the rest of the time of whoever gave it to her, as well as everyone else in society. So the larger the population, the more the time is spread out, and the faster the entire world's balance of time depletes.

'The poor' are not an infinite producer of people to steal time from. If the rich continue stealing from the poor, they'll eventually wipe them out. Then the rich will just have themselves to share time between. Every new baby born will only add one year to the economy when they reach 25, but will themselves want to live as long as everyone else. Logically, eventually, time will expire for everybody until there's just one person left, then they'll die when their time runs out.

Imagine that everybody has exactly one bank account, and it loses exactly a dollar a day. The money doesn't go anywhere, it just disappears from the economy. And every time someone turns 25, $365 is automatically reproduced and put into their account. Not accounting for spending it, that money will disappear from circulation completely after one year. Sure, they can get a job and earn more money. But from where? Their employer's balance is depleting at exactly the same rate as theirs.

I'm not an expert on economics, but I fail to understand how such a system could be sustainable.

[–] SamMerlotte 11 years ago

These are great points and i totally agree. But I think the wealthier classes have direct access to the "production of time". They only have poorer classes and ghettos for slave labor, doing the dirty jobs they don't want to bother with. If the rich were ever in danger of having their time depleted they could actually create more time for themselves. I think they avoid keeping an infinity symbol on their clocks to create the illusion of a system of rules that even the rich are subject to.

That's your problem, welcome to Philly.
- Danny Devito

[–] schumithecat 11 years ago

good explanation. I agree that it would only be workable (somewhat) if there were a separate reserve/surplus of time (which the rich could buy and then trade etc.) that was completely independent of peoples' collective alloted time. or you could say a surplus could be created because people who worked before 25 would earn time and (since their own clock hasn't started) transfer it to other people. It doesn't seem like they could "bank" it for themsleves, because otherwise you could start working at 15 and have several extra years by the time you turn 25 (it seemed everyone started with 25 years at that age no matter what).

[–] ianpetchey 11 years ago

Run a force breeding camp. Cull male infants other than a small breeding stock and keep the females pregnant from the point they become fertile. Use them as slave labor to keep the thing running and harvest them when they hit 25.

Wouldn't take many of those to make you a crap load of time and if some bleeds out to the rest of the population via trade and guards then all the better - everyone needs the time so no-one can complain - apart from of course the product in the camp.

[–] subase 11 years ago

Yeah and with selective breeding you have really dumb people with 50 IQ who would actually live quite a happy life until 25.

But the point of the system is population control so they want people to die. But this doesn't make sense either since they don't look crowded at all and the earths resources are limitless even if you only have solar.

[–] wongmark 10 years ago

I don't think having babies is the only way that new time enters the economy. I'm sure the rich get more time the same way our rich get more money.

[–] ixtrm-sol 10 years ago

op is thinking 17th century mercantilism where the economy is finite and zero-sum game assuming time is finite like gold/silver. the movie's time currency is clearly modeled after modern economy, time as currency can grow itself simply by sitting in some vault earning interests, it's literally more money out of thin air. time as currency is fiat currency and faced same inflation problem, the rich people in the movie control the inflation by adjusting how much things cost so the poor will die at a steady pace to offset the inflation. of course to the poor people that live day to day, time currency is zero-sum game.

[–] mrtron81 10 years ago

That's not the way it works. There is more time in circulation than the one year people get when they turn about 25. Remember it's the currency that replaced money. I'm sure when they changed the currency to time everyone traded their money for time at some exchange rate, such as $10,000 for 1 year of time. The supply of time can also be increased the same way our system increases the money supply. The government can "print" more time, but that devalues the time in circulation. It's implied in the movie that the government isn't printing enough new time, causing prices to rise and poor people to die early.

[–] dave1176 10 years ago

I think this question is a central one that the film is trying to raise. The time currency is in a lot of ways a parallel for the even more spurious 'cash capitalism' economic system we live in. How so we get more cash in our system, with a growing population and dwindling resources?

Whatever the currency - it is used as a control medium to ensure inequality and enforce power structures. In our economic system, we do have a lot of crisis, and the system is premised on eternal and perpetual 'economic growth', which some economist theorists see as both unsustainable, flawed and causing a lot of problems to the planet (forcing measures such as deforestation in order to maintain levels of growth).

The other thing that is going on in our current unsustainable system is trading on futures, basically maintaining our system by borrowing from further and further into the future and our predicted economic output then... many feel this will inevitably end in tears.

As to the more immediate particulars in this system, it is unclear where the hours come from when people work. The bankers are very aware of the nature and effects of cash injection, when the dad refuses to inject even a 1000year ransom into the sector. They no doubt do inject time in controlled quantities when needed. Of course for the system to have credibility it has to have strict rules, but it will also have reserves and the possibility of borrowing from futures just as we do with cash.

In short - like our own industrial economics, I agree that this system is a good model to see many of the problems with the world we live in, which to me makes it great sci-fi!

[–] Jnbfwc 10 years ago

Are resources really dwindling? Remember that each no person who is born not only drains resources, but is yet another potential producer of resources.
Considering that a man can live on his own garden with his entire family, it is completely feasible that every family on earth, and each to come, can easily be fed, clothed, and sheltered with our resources since a man can develop in his lifetime more resources than that which he consumes. (Unless you think one man is eating all of those crops of corn)

[–] trevordejava 10 years ago

I think it *might* work like this

The original (non-timer) generation has children.
Then they help raise their grandchildren when their children turn 26.
In theory starting very young (16-18) you might get a pattern like this

Age -> Children
16 - 0
17 - 1
18 - 2
19 - 3
20 - 4
21 - 5
22 - 6
23 - 7
24 - 8
25 - 9
26 - end (oldest child is roughly 8 years old)

Which is unsustainable normally, (A 10 year old isn't 100% self sufficient in a modern technological ghetto).
However, if we assume that the first generation helped until the oldest grandchild was 16+.
There's about a 7 year gap. Which then they start getting pregnant and help raise their younger siblings.

Age oldest -> age youngest

16 -> 7
17 -> 8
18 -> 9
19 -> 10
20 -> 11
21 -> 12
22 -> 13
23 -> 14
25 -> 15
26 -> 16 closing the loop, They now raise their oldest siblings child which is roughly 8.

[–] actionmanrandell 10 years ago

are you too dense to notice that the rich actually create time. all it is is time on a clock thats all its. its data on a clock. and thats all even if everyone on earth died accept the top 1% in this world they would still be able to live for ever because they have the technology to simply switch there clocks on infinite

[–] DanPhx 9 years ago

I didn't read the book on which it was based, however. . .

I nominate the following mechanics....

First of all, inside Weis giant safe, beside the million year time vessel was the book, "Time Matters." The book lays it all out. How it started. How it works. What is means. Everything.

In the chapter titled, "Out of Time," the book explains one of the (many) secrets known only to the holders of the book (and a army of drone-like workers sequestered from the outside world, but oh so well cared for. (think umpah loompah without the skin tone).

When key invention/discover making time currency and biological immortality practical occurred, people's expected lifespan was 100 years. When a person expires (by unnatural causes or time clock expiration) their dead bodies actually hold more time! How much? The difference between 100 years and the amount of calendar time the person actually has been alive. (which means someone who lived past 100 calendar years would hold nothing).

Ever wonder what they did with the dead bodies? Well, a not so small army of "collectors" roamed around picking up dead bodies and taking them to "collection centers." What citizens (even collectors) don't know is that BEFORE cremation, the bodies are drained of what could be a relatively large chunk of "potential time." (That's what the non-umpah loompahs do). Not an unimportant secret, eh?

However, the biggest secret of all?
All one must do to access this "potential time," is properly grab the dead person's foot! Kinetic time transfer, by arm. Potential time transfer, by foot -- but only after the time clock is on zero.

THAT is how the immortals first got and now maintain their control.. a reward they reason that is fair payment for sustaining the system.

Oh, and by the way. There was no mention of time zone 3.
(the following is invented)

That's because many centuries ago the group of immortals (i.e. Weis and his buddies at the top of the time hierarchy) held an experiment in zone 3... They let the secrets of potential time be known. Unfortunately, the benefit of killing someone for their potential time far outweighed the state's ability to dispense justice for breaking the law (or even the populations ability to reproduce). In short, they killed each other off.

The immortals leave zone 3 empty as a clear reminder that despite their best intentions the "ancients" who wrote the book, "Time Matters," found/created the right answers to maintain the species.

:-)