What is money, really?

"Money" is whatever people decide to use when they exchange something that belongs to them.
The idea is that this "money" should endure over time, be transportable across space (even virtually), be widely accepted, and be a "commodity" with intrinsic (use) value, measurable in quantity, and exchangeable for something else.
When someone is employed, they sell their time—a finite and non-renewable resource—to the employer, along with the skills and competencies they provide during that time. Unfortunately, today they receive in return paper or digits in a computer, which can be easily multiplied at almost no cost and distributed arbitrarily within the economy by their "producers," instead of receiving another finite and non-renewable resource in exchange, such as gold. In that case, for the 10,000 minutes worked in a month, the seller would receive, for example, 10 grams of gold, and the value of each minute worked would implicitly be 0.001 grams of gold. This doesn't even consider that the seller had prior "production" costs to reach that value of their time, costs that can also be expressed in "time offered to others"—borne by them, their parents, or society, and currently overlooked.
This reasoning also applies to entrepreneurs who sell products that include time consumption, or to retirees who sold their time in the past; all are disadvantaged. Therefore, "currency" can be "gold," "silver," or any other commodity, with "time" being one of them, as it meets all the necessary characteristics to be "money." It’s one thing to use time for yourself, doing what you want; it’s another to make it available to others, who gain economic benefits from it. Time is a finite and non-renewable resource for each individual.
A person's true wealth is their time, unused property, and freedom, with money being just a means of preserving "economic energy" until it is decided to be used in transactions.

Can the "Convertible Minute" (MIN) be called a "penny"?

We are discussing a monetary system based on a so-called "time standard."
The name "Convertible Minute" reflects the possibility of converting users' past time into actual resources, generated through the use of that past time.
MIN could potentially be classified as a "complementary community/local/regional currency," in the spirit of paragraph 11 of EU Directive No. 2018/843, as it will serve distinct local communities based on users' residences, but in similar ways to ensure a unified approach, consistency, and broader applicability. Used as a private auxiliary currency (issued by users), MIN encourages the mutual rewarding of voluntary work and the exchange of resources that people already possess—resources that are the result of past efforts. MIN is formed neither as a "credit" nor as a "reward," but "naturally" and "democratically."
MIN can also be categorized as "representative money," with MIN representing "units of time," and time being the standard/coverage on which MIN is based. The MIN exchange tool is fairly distributed, not "sold" for fiat money in exchange for something.
So, jokingly or not, the answer is "it depends (on who is asking)." It can neither be confirmed nor denied; everyone interprets it as they see fit. Both the "Convertible Minute" and the "Minute Bank" are whatever users want them to be. Both concepts are tools made available to users without any "cost" or "price" in lei, euros, USD, or any other (pseudo)currency. Perhaps it could be said that the project helps people take on the functions of the currently misarchitected monetary-banking system, to use a euphemism.
The project doesn't "sell" anything, nor will it use your assets to give out loans, not even within the limits of your funds. Only account holders can grant loans if they wish, assuming the risks; they can do whatever they want with their money.

What is the difference between MIN (Convertible Minute) and BTC (Bitcoin) or other cryptocurrencies?

Firstly, MIN is not a cryptocurrency and does not rely on blockchain technology. MIN could potentially be categorized as a "complementary currency," being somewhat similar to other such currencies—assuming users (community members) and even local, regional, and central communities (states), who already have their incomes practically reserved, attribute such utility to the representation of past time. It also bears some resemblance to a so-called "utility token."
Secondly, although we believe that BTC is superior to fiat money due to its limited supply, its creation and initial distribution methods, as well as the subsequent distribution, are not the most suitable. They are quite difficult, restrictive, and somewhat centralized (few have the real ability to generate BTC), and "top-down," favoring polarization. The fact that, after more than 15 years of existence, around 1 million holders possess over 90% of the supply, and currently around 40% of the BTC monetary mass is concentrated in the hands of only about 2,000 users (with the founder alone holding over 5% of the BTC monetary mass), is not coincidental or beneficial. The fact that over 15% of BTC is considered "lost," and that BTC (finite) can be purchased with "fiat" money (infinite, with their flawed architecture from the start)—all highlight a certain incapacity of BTC to optimally address today's societal issues, problems generated by the monetary architecture, which it only partially addresses, to be polite. There is a need for real decentralization and democratization of the medium of exchange.
Regarding the tens of thousands of other cryptocurrency projects, the vast majority are inflationary and oriented towards the economic profit of their owners, complex, with fluid philosophies and a very weak or non-existent connection to economic fundamentals and monetary theory—most have proven or will prove to be completely worthless to their buyers, who are unfortunately (also not coincidentally) lacking economic culture.
They carry risks, but their great merit remains the fact that they have sparked a discussion and put a real issue "on the table."
In contrast to such projects, the Minute Bank and Convertible Minute are based on a completely different philosophy. They constitute a social project, and the website contains ample elements of economic and monetary theory that form the foundation of this project, which aims to return power to the hands of all people, promote equal opportunities and equity, at least from a monetary perspective.

What is the difference between MIN (Convertible Minute) and RON (leu) or other fiat currencies?

MIN has not yet been designated by any state as a "means of payment." If some people use it as such—that is their choice.
The essential difference lies in the creation and primary distribution of new money generated in the economy.
Fiat currencies are practically generated without limit by central and commercial banks in the form of credit granted to only some, under various conditions. This aspect creates significant distortions and multiple negative effects, but it is not the place to delve into details here; there is already ample information on this topic on this site.
In contrast, MIN is generated in a decentralized manner by everyone who creates an account and has equitable access (the same amount of currency at the same age level and at the same time) to the monetary supply, which is exclusively formed this way and is inherently limited. Subsequent redistribution of MIN in the economy is based on supply and demand, reflecting the relationship between the level of resource consumption and the value of those resources.
So, we are talking about a decentralized, gradual, equitable, and limited "production," available to its producers, representing the existing resources and their past time. Implicitly, we believe that MIN fulfills the essential functions of money, unlike fiat currencies, which do not retain value and whose

What are banks, exactly?

Although we use money and banks daily, unfortunately, most people do not understand the realities of how money is formed and how banks operate.
People believe that when they deposit money in a bank, they are "depositing." This is incorrect; they are manipulated into thinking this way. According to the law, these so-called depositors "loan" money to the bank, and they only have a claim against the bank.
When someone "takes a loan," they are actually issuing a guaranteed payment promise, which the bank buys at a lower price and then puts (not transfers) money (generated from nothing, invented) into the borrower's account. The borrower will repay with their labor and limited time the amount they benefit from (due to a flawed system) plus interest.
Over 90% of what people "deposit" on demand in banks can be "loaned" to someone else for 30 years, yet very few wonder from which of their "deposits" they will fully withdraw or spend their money the next day or a year later.
In fact, the money we are forced to keep in banks does not belong to us, and we can only use it as long as banks do not face problems. When they do, their inherent issues will be resolved at our expense (monetary inflation, etc.). In short.
The systemic problems of central and commercial banks are numerous, starting with the creation of money without coverage, continuing with the distribution of money in the economy, fractional reserves, the allocation of credits, and so on. The intention is not to conduct a banking system course here, although the subject is thoroughly covered on the site, and those interested in further research can find ample information online, including from Romanian economist, academician Anghel Rugina.
What we wish to emphasize here is that the Minute Bank has a completely different architecture from that of a central or commercial bank currently in existence—a correct, balanced architecture.
Likewise, Convertible Minutes have a completely different architecture from fiat money—one that is correct. And these architectures are so different that we can speak of a choice between "slavery" and "freedom."

What is the objective of the "Minute Bank" project?

The goal of the project is to provide people with a complementary and/or alternative community-based system for measuring value, which would also enable a complete re-architecting of the entire monetary, financial, fiscal, and institutional ecosystem on a sound economic basis, with presumed beneficial effects on individuals' lives.
We aim to offer people an exchange tool that guarantees their freedom, ownership, and control over their resources, as well as facilitates ethical and efficient allocation of all resources at the community level. Given that the current banking system is inherently unstable, this will become evident to everyone, and we must be prepared.
By providing a currency with such an architecture (MIN), people can practically exchange their natural right to freely use a proportional part of raw natural resources and the resources (in a broad sense) they have (saved), at fairly formed prices while preserving purchasing power. We offer a democratization of money.
Declaratively, the "Minute Bank" can only be "a tool for keeping track of the passage of time and measuring and highlighting the mutual utilities between people, as appreciated in a free market."
However, the project also aims to show a possible "path" or lay the groundwork for a potential "ecosystem," with any possible reward for investors only achievable within the success of that ecosystem.
People can also assign a monetary representation to this tool if they wish. We aim to "throw down the gauntlet," demonstrating that things can be done differently and that there is a need for progress (and possible solutions), including in the monetary sphere.
In conclusion regarding the objectives, we recall the unequivocal words of Prof. Jorg Guido Hülsmann from his excellent book, "The Ethics of Money Production":
"The future promised by an economy based on paper money ('fiat,' without coverage) means central planning or hyperinflation (possibly a mix of both). The third alternative is the complete abolition of paper money and a return to a monetary order."
The Minute Bank is a social project, entrepreneurially generated, aimed at addressing social issues arising from potential blockages and monetary inflation—reducing the purchasing power of everyone’s savings and the exaggerated polarization also generated monetarily.
It is a tool for which significant resources have been and are being allocated by the founder, assessable even in "fiat" money. However, the Minute Bank does not "sell" anything in "fiat" money; it is a tool provided to people for free use. Only if users wish to support the project's development can they donate "fiat" money, with donors potentially being involved later, proportionally to their contribution.

"Minutes bank" is a "central bank" or a "commercial bank"?

The Minutes Bank does not operate within the current flawed institutional and monetary system. It can be a simple online site or platform that keeps track of the passage of time for those who choose to use it—a "counter," a "stopwatch" that allows users to "play," including transferring "points/numbers" to each other according to their preferences. These "digital points," representing their past time, are called "MIN." Officially, transactions will be made free of charge, and if users wish to quantify something through transfers, they may do so, as per their discretion.
Therefore, it is not a "company," nor is it a "person"; no one "sells" or "buys" anything with money as recognized today. It is a social project, and its purpose will be determined by its users.
It can also be considered a pilot project, a theoretical model for operating a bank and a "balanced" currency, with sufficient and expandable practical applicability. Like gold, it may serve as a "valve" for a present and future that might be considered somewhat unpleasant from the perspective of monetary relationships between individuals, small groups of individuals, states, banks, and dominant large corporations. Last but not least, it can serve as a meditation topic, unfortunately highly relevant in the current context of an inherently unstable and inequitable monetary and banking system.

Who produces the representation of time - the currency "Convertible Minute" (MIN)?

The "currency" is not produced by the Minute Bank; rather, it is "produced" (evidenced and potentially circulated) by each individual at the moment they create an account with the Minute Bank—through their very existence, as time passes.
So, it is not "electronic money," nor is it "issued" or bearer of any "claim right against the issuer," etc.
In fact, the "Minute Bank" merely records the passage of time and the voluntary and automatic transfers of "representations of time" between users. If they find it suitable to use it for monetary purposes, they are free to do so.
The individual account will initially show the time elapsed from birth up to the present, as well as exchanges of "mutual utilities." At the time of death, the individual will no longer produce "currency," and any remaining "amounts" (balances) can be allocated according to the expressed wishes of the owner.
Time (and MIN as its monetary representation) is the only good produced in a decentralized, democratic, and gradual manner, and distributed equitably, unlike "fiat" currencies, which are produced centrally and distributed in society top-down, through credit. This leads to the impoverishment of savers, dependency, debt, waste, as well as the adverse "Cantillon effect" (where early holders of newly issued money benefit from competitive advantages in acquiring resources) and resulting polarization.

How is the "MIN" currency formed, distributed and redistributed in the economy?

Starting from the individual who generates it at the moment of account creation, MIN currency spreads in the economy either through automatic, gradual allocation in the same amount (by marking the passage of time), effectively representing a so-called "universal basic income," or subsequently through voluntary redistribution/allocation to other individuals or communities, regardless of their nature, purpose, or reason.
Institutions, businesses, associations, etc., are nothing more than—generally speaking—communities of individuals who come together for various purposes. Implicitly, they do not have (how could they have) an automatic starting capital. Their resources could only be formed through allocation from individuals, within the limits of their savings.
The philosophical premise is that "money should represent (monetarily) the total natural and capital resources existing on Earth," resources available to all individuals inhabiting the Earth at any given time. Throughout their lives, people exchange time and mutual utilities. MIN represents a "liquidation of existing resources" and a right to use others' resources, within the limits of already available or obtainable liquidity by offering one's own resources to others. The "MIN" currency intermediates barter, not generated as credit.
In practice, we provide a medium of exchange for what people have accumulated throughout their lives (capacities, skills, knowledge, competencies, tangible assets), evaluated by the market. The value is determined by how it is appreciated, which implicitly sets the manner of monetary redistribution among people. The monetary supply (balance) will be accumulated by those who are useful and consume little, while those with reduced utility and high consumption of others' resources will see their balance decrease. This signifies a correct creation, distribution, and redistribution of the medium of exchange, of money, in the economy.

What is the "coverage" of the convertible minutes (MIN) generated?

In short, the coverage of everyone's monetary availability is in what they own (tangible or intangible).
When someone creates an account, a specific balance appears. The said amount of currency covers all the physical, intellectual capacities, skills and competencies of the respective individual, as well as all his net assets (everything he owns from the past), all accumulated through inheritance, manufacturing or acquisition, in his past.
Similar for all people who open an account - their balance is covered by what they own, tangible or not, which can be offered in exchange. The balance is the monetary (liquid) representation of man, as a resource and as an owner.
As an example - if only one man remained on Earth, aged 10, his age would be equivalent to the value of everything that existed on Earth at that time, and if in a year there would be an extra hut produced on Earth, the new (larger) money supply would be equivalent to what exists at the new time on Earth. Of course, the relevance of this value can only exist in the presence of the exchange, implicitly a second person will be needed, who may be 20 years old and also owns a part of the Earth's existing resources. We thus have two people who (having liquidity and resources) can get involved in exchanges, even in the absence of barter or present work. And if we are talking about tens, hundreds or thousands of people, the existence of the currency (with a predictable evolution of appearance, distribution and volume) becomes imperatively necessary for the intermediation of exchanges. Because what changes are exclusively people's resources, money only mediates.
Therefore, people exchange among themselves what they own, mutual utilities, and the MIN represents only an evaluation and exchange tool, implicitly it is normal that it be equitably created and initially distributed. The subsequent redistribution between individuals will be the result of the interactions between the demand and supply of utilities.
The fact that, as time passes, it accumulates in the account of each quantity of newly created and distributed exchange instrument, represents a normality, and the individual balance will be related to the daily evolution of individual holdings.
If all residents have accounts, the total money supply covers all resources (abilities, skills, competences, natural resources, all kinds of assets - real estate and not only -, consumer goods already produced, monetary reserves, etc. .) existing on Earth and owned by them.
The coverage, the representation, can also be constituted by the raw natural resources of the Earth - the representation of a fair distribution, the redistribution within economic interactions reallocating both resources, capital (resources transformed through labor and capital), as well as their liquidity. There are about 300 MIN for each m2 of the Earth's surface.

How is equity and ethics facilitated in such a monetary-banking system?

The current monetary-banking system is not an ethical one, it steals time from the many and allocates it prioritized to the few, implicitly people must have alternatives available. The quasi-monopoly of money production and distribution is deeply unfair, arbitrary, generating a decrease in purchasing power and an unjustified level of social polarization.
But time cannot be manipulated. Through the uniform and simultaneous distribution of "digital/monetary representations of time", in correlation with age, the system becomes a balanced and ethical one. More than that, in general, access to resources is made through the currency, and if over time some have excessively accumulated resources (real and perhaps also virtual) with the help of "fiat" currencies, including because they had the first access to them, their exploitation and maintenance could no longer be done without using other people's time, resources and capital (of time and not only), implicitly favoring a natural redistribution.
The total monetary mass distributed / recognized to all, gradually, proportionally and throughout life represents the equal right to use throughout life the resources of others, in whose component also entered (part of) the gross natural resource to which any individual has the right If someone wants more liquidity, he will sell his assets or time, and if he wants other people's assets or time, he will sell his MIN. What is important is the fair initial distribution, to everyone and throughout life, of an instrument of exchange (resources) that preserves its value.
Those who save will keep or increase their purchasing power over time, the net consumers of resources will have to, at some point, after exhausting (including through the wear and tear of) their own capital, contribute with effort and with individual utility. This is beyond the necessary taxation / reallocation of the excessive consumption of the natural (and perhaps virtual) resource, through fiscal policy. The fact that the entire monetary mass of MIN is formed exclusively in the described way, does not allow monetary expansion, but the full and permanent coverage of money in resources.
The "money supply" highlighted by the "Minute Bank" is expressed in "units of time" and has "coverage" in "everything that exists as a resource on Earth", available to people, equally, at a certain moment. This assertion is valid both at the individual level and at the family, community, local, regional, national or global level.
The extent to which each person can access during his life the respective stock of resources, at each moment, depends - in the end - on the ratio between the value of his individual utility and his assets for others and the value of the utility of others and assets them for him.
In order for this utility to increase and not to be forced to work for subsistence until the end of life, man and - by extension - the community, must wisely use his entire resource of "time" available from God / Nature and weight its consumption of "natural resources" also available from the Creator / Nature. In addition, it is also necessary to wisely manage his "capital" resources, which he either achieved (alone or together with others) using his time and the undivided share of natural resources, or obtained from to others, in exchange for his own resources, which cannot be separated from his entire life span.

How can a certain degree of price stability be favored in such a system?

First of all, the philosophy behind the project must be well understood.
Imagine that the Earth has only one inhabitant, only one man. The earth is at his disposal, so that, during his lifetime, the respective person can consume and transform its resources, with his time, as the Creator ordered. The length of time it does this - let's say 95 years, that is, about 50,000,000 minutes - represents the price gradually paid by the individual to use the Earth. So we can say that the value of the Earth, as it will show at the end of the person's life, with the rest of the remaining natural and capital resources, is equal to 50,000,000 minutes. This total accumulated monetary mass represents, at any moment, the value of the entire Earth, because, being only one man, the entire Earth belongs to him, with a natural right of use. The monetary representation of the past time will be found in the account.
If we have two people, the Earth belongs to both, the capital resources created belong to each of them, and the money supply (which represents the value of the resources) is the age of the first plus the age of the second. The balance of the first is the representation of its resources, the balance of the second is the monetary representation of the resources of the second, but also the total price of the resources of the first. How do they make exchanges between the resources that belong to them? In order not to resort to barter, they can evaluate their own available resources at any time and in "past minutes", but they will only be able to obtain from those resources a maximum of the monetary mass of the other. Here, the monetary mass of the other person also represents the maximum value of one's own resources. The same reasoning applies to several participants.
The money supply is the monetary representation of all types of resources that their owners can make available at any time to other people who agree to be part of the community that agrees to enter into exchanges based on such a currency. And if there are about 8,000,000,000 people on Earth, the total money supply could be about 150,000,000,000,000,000 minutes. The instrument of exchange, the unit of measurement and storage of value - the "minute (convertible)" - is thus equitably created and distributed, both initially and later, in the economy. It will accumulate (but only up to a maximum limit of 9,999,999,999 MIN) in the account of the one who has something to offer to others and does not request their resources, leaving the other's account. And vice versa, in a fluid movement throughout people's lives. And limited monetary inflation will highlight the value of the evolution over time of the volume and utility of resources.
Strictly related to stability, the previously explained architecture generates the conditions. The first condition of stability is that there is no monetary expansion without implicit expansion (correlation) with the existing resources, the correlation not being subjectively established by the banks. We follow financial stability, in general.
Price stability is not an end in itself, any price can vary depending on demand and supply between the different goods that change, time being among them. By default, the time value differs.
To the extent that the available money supply will be very large in relation to the volume of exchanged resources, prices will be high, that is, the purchasing power of money, of convertible minutes, will be low. And vice versa. As more and more people prefer to trade in MIN, prices will become stable and generally likely to fall.
For safety and to promote a certain stability of the entire monetary and organizational architecture, as well as to avoid abuses, certain transaction amount limits were set, depending on several criteria (maximum value per transaction of 500,000 MIN, daily value of 1 million MIN, monthly value of 2 million MIN, annual value of 5 million MIN, maximum annual value difference between the same recipients of 3 million MIN). In addition, structurally, there is also an inherent "neutrality" in time.
Moreover, on average, the annual natural increase of the average monetary mass of MIN belonging to the community would normally be about 2.75%. If in the meantime the amount of resources (generically and broadly speaking) from the economy of the participants in the system increases more, global prices will decrease. If this quantity will not increase proportionally or will decrease, including the wear/destruction/consumption of existing goods and natural resources, it will have its effect, and the general level of prices will increase. But the evolution of the production volume will depend on the market, on the people, the growth (implicitly the consumption of resources) cannot be an obsession in itself.

How can I set or evaluate my prices as correctly as possible, if I don't have a reference?

In short, the duration of your life is worth as much as you have and can use for the benefit of others. Because, if you don't do anything and if you don't own anything, in order to live you will have to buy from others, and the representation of time is only equal to the representation of your share of raw natural resources. Which others have accumulated, by force or with fiat money.
People give themselves a value for what they have accumulated over their time, which is approached as "commodity" (that's why MIN is not "fiat"). Their assets (the only ones that - in fact - have value, being human-controlled resources, made in the past and with which benefits can be obtained in the future) will be all the more valuable, the more they relate to a reference identical to the others' .
How can prices be set? Simple enough. An option would be to start from the idea that you theoretically get 1,440 MIN in your account every day (representing the record of your past time, a day having 1,440 minutes) and to compare it with your daily cost in "fiat" currency (lei, euro) , usd etc) or in gold or silver.
Another would be to multiply by what you consider the actual time allocated to the employer or in the effective production of goods or services. Or to compare stocks of different "goods".
There is no fixed price / exchange rate for goods (MIN, lei, pens - they are all goods), everyone can buy and sell as much as he wants what he owns, the only condition being that of having a counterparty in the transaction, and the Bank de Minute cannot be a counterpart, but only a facilitating tool. However, on the site you will also find some references / indicative courses - a report on gold, silver and lei, all dynamic and with a logic behind. As a result, the value will probably increase, but gradually.
Don't forget, you are the only person able to set the price of your coins, goods, time, skills and knowledge accumulated in the past and made available to others / sold in the present and in the future, as well as the price of other resources (natural and ) of capital that you own and are willing to make available to others - through sale, rent, donation, loan, contribution, etc.
A price can be collected even in several currencies (combined). Of course, on the free market, the supply will meet the demand and thus the final price will result and the other terms at which the exchanges will be made.
Your job is to make what you can do and what you own have as much value as possible for others and not to consume more than you can afford through your own utility (production) and saving. And you will be fine.

What is the exchange rate of the MIN currency with the already existing "real" or "fiat" currencies?

On the site you will find "indicative quotations" in "fiat currency" (lei) of gold, silver and convertible minutes (MIN).
In the case of parity with lei, as a convention, it started from a conservative reference of 2.14 lei / 1,000 MIN, which took into account the money supply of lei at the end of 2023, communicated by the BNR, the update then being done monthly, in correlation with the excessive official monetary inflation. Also as a comparison term, a reference to the global monetary mass would have generated a starting value not very different, of approx. 3.9 lei / 1,000 MIN, if we refer to the euro, the same methodology would have given an estimated result of approx. 14.4 lei / 1,000 MIN, and in USD - about 18 lei / 1,000 MIN. If we refer to global net assets, we could talk about an equivalent of 25-30 lei / 1,000 MIN. It is certain that all quotations have an upward trend.
The value is less important, the trend is more important, but probably any indicative valuation range between 1 and 30 lei / 1,000 MIN is realistic enough, at the national, European and world level, at the level of 2023.
Here, the MIN is also revealed as a tool for preserving value, a function of money with decisive importance.
These quotations are not mandatory and are dynamic, taking into account the official exchange rate (in real time) of the two metals, as well as the volume of the monetary mass of lei, its evolution, adding a "premium" intended to stimulate the use by the payers of the respective goods, considered by us to fulfill the conditions of correct instruments of exchange, of "real currencies" (gold, silver, time). Anyway, this "premium" only anticipates an inevitable evolution of the courses in the current, inherently inflationary context. Prices in MIN for all types of "resources" (time, skills, competences, nature, goods and services) will be dictated exclusively by the law of supply and demand, but in a stable context and monetary equilibrium.
It is also important to specify the fact that, we do not think that in the case of MIN we can talk about a "virtual currency" / "cryptocurrency" / "digital representation of value". And we are not a "provider involved in exchange services between virtual and fiduciary currencies", but - possibly, rather we could talk in the case of MIN about a possible "complementary", "alternative" currency, better said about a "voucher " / "point" / "token" / "monetary representation of the passage of time" / "electronic record of the passage of time" / "counter" / "stopwatch", which measures the minutes passed in the life of each member of the community, regardless of the time entering the community, as well as records of transfers.
It can also represent an alternative means of measuring value and exchange, people can transfer their account numbers to each other, if users choose to use it this way, but it is not related to "blockchain" technology.
The existing "fiat" currencies do not have an intrinsic value, therefore there is not really such an engaging exchange rate with them, although - to provide guidelines - we have also made such a tool available on the site, there are arguments behind the values. Individuals and communities can do whatever they want, because even the fiat money they own is part of their assets, they have it because they previously sold resources / time to others, so they can sell it in exchange for what they want, implicitly MIN, what course is he considering? MIN has full coverage in resources, with "time" as a benchmark, and the exchange rate fluctuates freely. The estimate is that, due to the circumstances, it will evolve relatively gradually increasing.
But nothing is sold or bought with Minutes Bank as an active participant, at Minutes Bank there is no commission, income or profit in any "fiat" currency from the possible "transactions" of community members. The monetary system based on the standard "time" and "convertible minutes" (MIN) proposes not to interact with the system considered, argued, as "disputable" (not to say "fraudulent") of "fiat" money, issued and allocated discretionary and without coverage. They only work within the community thus created.
We emphasize, the objective of the project is not speculation, we do not generate and sell MIN, requesting that we buy something with "fiat" money or with precious metals. It is a social project, generating possible complementary regional currencies.
We consider the only valuable resources to be people's time, skills and competences, natural resources and physical capital, what actually exists on Earth. In principle, only these can be engaged in exchange processes.
Indicatively, perhaps a report could be made to BTC, to gold, silver or even to "fiat" currencies, if we take into account official rates or monetary masses, quantities, to provide benchmarks and stimulate acceptability, cashing in "real" currency (gold, silver, MIN), we did it.

How is the financing of the common expenses of the communities in the monetary system based on the MIN?

Each individual receives 1,440 MIN daily in their accounts at the same time. The past tense is represented / highlighted.
Of these, a maximum number of 720 MIN can be allocated automatically, according to the principle of subsidiarity (implicitly most resources will remain at the local level), to local, regional and central communities that will naturally form later depending on the users, established preferably with the involvement of users. And possibly to other people - by force of nature - less able to get involved in processes of voluntary cooperation and exchange of utility (children, elderly), the destination being "the administration of common spaces (generally speaking) in society", representing - practically - current taxes, fees and contributions. Pilot projects can also be initiated, which help the local financing of the local needs of the current small towns.
From these can be allocated - for example - 50 MIN each exclusively for maintenance, repairs and infrastructure investments.
The rest - of at least 720 MIN (as an example) for each past day of life - is necessary to remain at the discretion of each individual person, who will allocate it in time as he deems appropriate, in the processes of voluntary exchange and which it remains to be seen if it will be justified to make it the subject of any more taxation, because in a market where each resource / factor of production has a fair price of use, set by the owners / the market, theoretically you do not need generic taxation. The same principle of proportionality will also be maintained regarding the allocation of the monetary representation of the minutes that have already passed in the life of each user. The principle is comparable to "capitation". But other formulas can be approached, such as a contribution proportional to the natural resources owned. Or a combination of formulas, it being important that they have as fair a logical foundation as possible, including from a moral perspective.
Time belongs to people, and if money represents time, money belongs to people. Without the right of "property" - of possession, use and disposal - regarding one's own resources, we cannot implicitly talk about "freedom" either - property and freedom representing the basic pillars of the philosophy of the "Minutes Bank" project.

How will people, communities, companies be financed, if money is no longer generated and allocated by banks?

The current systems remain standing, they can do whatever they want, "Minute Bank" offering only a complementary alternative, which people and their representatives can use (to a greater or lesser extent) or not. The financing of all individuals and communities (thus also of companies) will be done through cooperation / voluntary association and through individual prioritization. The user acting as an entrepreneur will be able to make available (through taxation, donation, capital contribution or loan) his resources formed through saving, and if he or the community institution needs additional resources, they will either obtain them through donation or lend them from other people, or they will involve them in the shareholding. The capital formation of an association of individuals can only come from the savings of individuals.
Or natural persons will adapt, assuming individually the receipts and payments and possibly distributing them internally (before or after) to partners and collaborators. However, it is important to start accepting payments (also) in MIN.
So it's like now, but with "small" changes, in which citizens assume (but in an ethical way) part of the current role of banks (creation and distribution of money). But they do it in a stable environment, without the problems of the current banking system, which cannot ethically and efficiently allocate resources, which produces monetary inflation through lending without coverage in previous savings, the decrease in the purchasing power of the currency, economic and personal crises, as well as an excessive and unnatural polarization at the level of natural and legal persons (plus the continuous expansion of the state).
There is already a "retention at source" from the money supply, allocated to expenses intended to cover the costs of "common spaces" in society, based on the principle of subsidiarity, and local communities, as they will be formed, after the creation of individual accounts, within The Minute Banks will have access to these resources, they are reserved by the project architecture.

Can MIN facilitate economic and non-economic cooperation between members of a community, mutual help?

Projects that require voluntary involvement suffer from a lack of involvement, as involvement requires the allocation of resources, and these are quantified in money. In order for the "volunteer" to maximize its available resources, it is necessary, on the one hand, to quantify the allocated resources and - to the same extent - to allocate them without prejudicing the remaining resources available for their own needs, which can only be obtained from sources outside the community.
Economic collaboration between the members of a community is stimulated to the extent that it is also mediated through an own instrument of exchange, obtained free of charge, preserving the instrument of exchange usable even in transactions with people who are not part of the community.
In order for the instrument of exchange usable in the community to have acceptability, it is necessary to exist in a predictable quantity, to keep its purchasing power and to be equitably distributed initially to everyone, throughout their life. Then resource prices will be formed freely, based on demand and supply.
Members of the community interested in trading their resources (time, skills, competences, goods, services) accepting (and) the complementary currency in exchange thus increase their chances of liquidating their held resources, liquidity with which they can later obtain other resources they need from the other members of the community, who in turn accept to evaluate their own resources, partially or totally, including in the complementary currency.
Those members of the community interested in obtaining resources, but who do not have or prefer not to use the currency with which they can obtain resources from outside the community, will also be able to achieve their goals, together with those members of the community who have resources surplus to their own needs and which they want to liquidate, in order to acquire other resources in the future, which can also be obtained from within the community.
When there are volunteer projects, it is no longer the case that the resources are made available for free, there is a system of prices, measurement and evaluation for any form of involvement / contribution, implicitly of rewards / consideration, including the one helped by being able to offer something in exchange - MIN.
In this way, the possible frustrations that can accumulate over time between community members - to the extent that some perceive that they are allocating more resources to others for free than others - will disappear, as there is a system of measuring costs, of rewards, such as and objective limits, given by individual balance limits.
In conclusion, opening up the possibility for community members to use a complementary currency in their relationships will increase both the opportunities for mutually beneficial collaboration between members, keeping the value within the community, as well as the degree of involvement of members in community activities. So the answer is "yes".

Can my account balance disappear, during my life or after my death, can various errors appear?

Almost certainly not, in principle. There are sufficiently safe systems for now and anyway there is backup, so 99.99% no.
But of course nothing is 100% certain, apart from the fact that currently the state (and all central and commercial banks) permanently reduce the value of your "fiat" money, which we are all legally obliged to accept in exchange for time and of our resources and that the state and the banks can also limit your access to your own money, which - legally - is their property when it is in deposits, the account holders having only a "claim right". But time is yours and in the Minute Bank this is what accumulates - the representation of past time. However, cheating will result in removal.
Therefore, it is certainly only what could be qualified as "legalized theft practiced by the oppressors", who still hold the monopoly of drafting laws, issuing money and using force on the surface unit. They don't like competition, alternatives and lack of control, while we consider that man is not just a resource, but an end in itself.
This project in this "market" is involved and can represent a theoretical and practical expression of exactly what people need - an alternative with a correct, real means of exchange, which keeps its purchasing power, in the property their. The local communities could also have something to gain, generating their own funding, independently of the "centre".
And users can bequeath their own balance to which user and in what proportion they want.

How can I access Convertible Minutes (MIN) in the form of cash?

In the online version, users can use their balance by paying, without any other costs, the equivalent of what other users agree to make available at a price expressed in MIN. Gradually, as the number of users increases, so does the amount of resources that will be able to be exchanged using MIN as a means of exchange, also without any other associated costs.
Related to the possibility of holding the MIN in physical form, as "cash", it may theoretically be possible to transform the digital MIN into cash, to the extent that the wisher pays the production cost and the cash would replace the digital equivalent. And vice versa.
It is possible and maybe even desirable, but for now there is no problem of printing or batteries of currency, for "cash" it is currently advisable to use precious metals (for example), which are still resources with intrinsic utility, finite and non-renewable they are, as is individual time.
Indicative quotations are available on the site, with logical, dynamic, stimulating arguments and for payers.
Possibly at the moment you can sell MIN to other users of the Minute Bank and get (at the bilaterally agreed exchange rate) "fiat" cash money - this is also part of the individual holdings, money that it is probably good to exchange as soon as possible in resources, in useful goods and services, so as not to lose value, purchasing power.
Banca de Minute does not have "fiat" money nor does it "manufacture" MIN, only people generating "MIN". "BM" only reflects human actions.
It is important to make this distinction - the fiat money held is part (liquid, but blockable/confiscatable and depreciable arbitrarily) of the individual wealth, while the MIN held are a representation of the share of the raw natural resources of the Earth. possibly of everything available on Earth, being also a tool of exchange with everything that other people own, as a result of the duration of their existence on Earth. The fiat money is included (as an asset) in the MIN money (which is the representation of all resources in itself), not the other way around.

Why should I open an account in the Minute Bank, what can I do with the account units (Convertible Minutes), with the money?

Do what you want, they are free and belong to you. You highlighted your past time and it belongs to you, as well as the rest of the resources.
If you have carefully gone through the presented theory, the answer is obvious. We also recommend watching the clip below, in which we summarize exactly what can be done by everyone. Accept them (at least gradually and partially) as a means of payment!
In short - because it won't cost anything and because you can use your money, whose value will very likely increase continuously, as it has until now, but gradually, without extremes. You can keep them, you can use them in transactions. An ideal store of value, an ideal medium of exchange, an ideal balanced, secure bank - this is what we have created.
The value will increase and the utility in transactions will also increase as the number of Minute Bank users will increase (and with your help) and the courage to offer resources to others in exchange for MIN (at least partially) will also increase, among people and different types of communities. The development of markets where demand meets supply will also help. The "policy" (inflationist) of central, commercial banks and governments and parliaments will also help, but involuntarily. Our hope is that maybe one day he will help voluntarily, accepting MIN, BM and the related philosophy as a partner in monetary policy, fiscal policy and administration, who knows.
This project, through which the concept of Unconditional Universal Income (UBI) is correctly implemented, seems to be ahead of its time, which, however, will come and we believe that the political leaders representing the states will try again to deceive the people, it has already started this process. So our effort is done right on time, and now the ball is in your court.
Our approach also has an educational role, throwing down a gauntlet. But, for everything, we know that there is no substitute for time.
Success!