will restore the Ukrainian economy and infrastructure, residential areas, and entire cities? This is a colossal task for the whole world and the entire civilized and democratic world will be able to take on this task and help turn Ukraine into an incredible technological and updated country. There is no doubt about this for anyone who watched the course of this war and that unimaginable unity of the whole world around this proud and courageous country and its citizens immeasurably in love with their country.
However, the next question that will inevitably arise when Ukraine's economy and infrastructure are restored is who will pay for the costs of its restoration. At this point, I want to make a small digression and describe the opinion of the author of this article. I fully support the capitalist world and any attempt to take away from those who were able to earn to share the income among those who did not want to work makes me angry and irritated. But as with any rule, there are always exceptions, such as the income of temporarily disabled persons who cannot earn at the moment and undoubtedly should be discussed separately from the above statement.To continue
our thought about who should pay for the restoration of Ukraine, we need to give a simple example. In an antique shop, a man picks up a vase. The second person pushes the man with the vase and the vase breaks. Who should pay for the cost of the vase? Should the person who held the vase pay for the vase? From a moral point of view, the question is open; from a legal point of view, the unequivocal answer is Yes. But should the person who pushed the man also pay for the vase? From a legal point of view, the question is open, it will be necessary to prove that he pushed, for example, by providing data from the video surveillance system, from a moral point of view, the unequivocal answer is Yes.
So, using the above example, we can explain the situation to those who have to pay for the destroyed economy and infrastructure of Ukraine. Should the one who destroyed it pay for the restoration? Undoubtedly yes. Should the one who pushed him pay for the restoration? As in the previous example, the answer is yes, but it needs to be proven. The thoughtful reader of this article will exclaim indignantly that he does not understand what it is about, who pushed the destroyer in this case? And we will now find out this answer.As we already
discussed in the previous article 'Crypto. Past. The present. Future.'
many companies have decided to move into the unregulated field of crypto finance to hide income. Is receiving crypto funding a punishable act? Of course not. Is hiding company income a punishable act? Of course yes. But considering that legally, until the moment of exchanging cryptocurrencies for fiat money, this investment is considered an investment and is not subject to taxation, it is most likely that a reasonable investor will be able to pay taxes after he decides to exchange cryptocurrencies for fiat currency. In general, this issue is not in our competence, there are several institutions involved in taxation, and they know exactly what to do in this case.
We want to discuss the other side of the issue, the moral one. Can an investment in life-destroying devices and technologies trigger an escalation of hostilities? Most likely not, at least as long as these investments are subject to calculation and public control. But what if these funds go into the shadows and cease to be subject to public and state control? In this case, from a moral point of view, the answer is: yes, this is a punishable act. From a legal point of view, this must be proven. For example, by providing blockchain transaction data that cannot be destroyed. But is it worth asking this question and worrying about the past? If there is no other way out, the unequivocal answer is Yes. If there are other options, then let the question remain open.At this point,
we want to tell what the AeCash digital currency mentioned at the beginning of the article is. In addition to the fact that it is a single digital currency of the global advertising market, an attentive reader could also note that we propose to use this digital currency for the construction 5Y DeHome Community. What does this mean in practice and what are the benefits of implementing this technology? The construction market always requires stable financing. Nothing harms a construction project more and nothing increases the cost of construction more than the instability of financing.
After all, each delay in payment entails a whole chain of failures in the overall system of the building plan. And the larger and larger the construction, the greater the damage caused by the delay in financing. That is why we propose the use of the single digital currency AeCash not only as an advertising market currency but also as a source of stable financing for construction projects. We have described the implementation of our digital currency as an example of how long such projects take to implement. It took three long years from the creation of our currency to the first sprouts of the beginning of its financing.That is why
it is necessary to start planning the restoration of Ukraine's economy and infrastructure right now. Right now it is necessary to make responsible and balanced decisions aimed at the post-war period of the life of this proud country.
After all, the people of Ukraine, who suffered from the horrors of war, daily heavy news, and mass exodus from their homes, deserve to see the restoration and flourishing of their beloved Motherland during their lifetime. We are ready to provide Ukraine with all the necessary information regarding our proposed project and help in creating similar solutions based on our experience.Aething Inc.