the use value of land.

I think the majority of people have no idea what 'use value' is. And unless you're planning to throw open the big estates and country parks in the UK and allow people to grow food or put up holiday cottages on them, 'use value' is meaningless anyway.

I'll try to explain this really simply - most people do not understand financial abstraction.

They understand that they can buy stuff, or not buy stuff, and do stuff, or not do stuff.

They particularly understand whether or not they can do more buying and doing of stuff than their neighbours can, because this kind of competition is encouraged and praised as a fruitful activity.

A few understand gold is shiny, and people seem to want it, so gold is good.

Everything else will forever remain a mystery to at least 95% of the population. (Including most politicians and not a few bankers.)

The majority of fiat currency is in fact indirectly based upon capitalised land rental value.

No, the majority of fiat currency is based on faith in the future, and violence - or threat of same - in the present.

Land ownership happens to be one of the claims on resources this system encourages. There's nothing primary about it at all.

I suggest you read the introduction to Polanyi ARGeezer mentioned in today's Newsroom, because it explains all of this much more succinctly than I can.

But the basic problem with all your suggestions continues to be that you're still essentially a marketista.

I'm not. Changing units of accounts does nothing to destroy market ideologies such as the Holy Rite of Competitive Acquisition.

And it's the ideologies that are the problem, not which metaphorical fingers people use to count with.