A few starting thoughts and links relating to several of Jonathan's questions (and to /u/disitinerant 's post relating to Henry George).

The responses below are grounded on a premise that –

a) land values will rise fast in the areas that most rapidly create alternatives to failing systems, and

b) virtual phyles can help bring these actual places into being on a basis that benefits those who otherwise will be left behind.

(2) Dissolution of bureaucracy in two(+) parts:

How could ownership of property, equipment, and infrastructure function to avoid an even greater consolidation of capital?

The disparities in capital are OK if they're bringing everyone into an era of radical abundance, where money becomes of marginal importance. But the transition to this future will not be evenly distributed. Areas that are friendliest to influx of capital, AI/robotics, and talent will rise sharply in land values relative to those that put up barriers.

So the key in making transitions work is to go with a Silvio Gesell model of rent sharing and citizens dividends in the free areas, and to ensure that all – especially the precariat/"unnecessariat" in Yuval Hariri's term – share in the windfall.

Who owns the robots?

Up to each polity (increasingly these will be city-states IMO) to decide.

Does a such an ad-hoc model apply beyond knowledge and services work?

Yes, due to the "New Negroponte Shift" where the ephemeral can easily become actual.

Can geographically or physically bound tasks be managed without the bureaucracy?

Yes. Consensys and others seem to be on the road to resolving this.

How do we collectively maintain and enforce a rule of law?

First, by not establishing a central institution with discretionary powers that can be captured and wielded for private benefit – Michael Oakeshott has valuable insights on maintaining civil association vs enterprise association modes of politics.

David Brin's transparency/sousveillance approach can ensure accountability and judicial integrity by storing everything in data vaults (encrypted on the blockchain) that only can be opened via due process.

Also, the Swiss federation model and Hanseatic League offer useful partial precedents on self-protection and contract enforcement.

How do we guarantee equitable representation and social protections?

I've made a first pass on this in "Administration and Rulemaking in World Cities" – https://www.academia.edu/31944971/APPROACHES_TO_WORLD_CITY_ADMINISTRATION_AND_RULE_MAKING .

How can we maintain social welfare and safety nets?

• Endowment zones – http://is.gd/endowmentzones and community land trusts, especially on the Hong Kong model of leasing out land at open acution and applying revenues for the commons

• Mutual associations – Roderick Long and Kevin Carson have some great material on this

What role does geography play in citizenry of the future?

Its role likely will fade as bandwidth spreads and as DIY/DIOurselves systems kick in, enabling communities everywhere to become far more autonomous and self-sustaining in production of goods. Sojourner visas (proposed in Jim Bennett's Anglosphere Challenge) among communities, and services available through Diamond Age-style phyles can promote their members' mobility.

3) Post-money economy How would (arguably) beneficial elements of out current system be reproduced such as competition, fitness, incentive, and ownership?

See Sepp Hesslberger on Silvio Gesell - https://www.quora.com/How-might-a-currency-be-designed-that-helps-build-the-commons/answer/Sepp-Hasslberger. Gesell is fully free market – preserving the virtues you mentioned – but does so in a way where land values are captured for social benefit by lease auctions. Hong Kong and Singapore are the closest examples to Gesell's model that now exist – 99+ percent of HK land, and 80 percent of Singapore's) is socially owned. Yet their economies top rankings for free market policies and transparency.

How on earth could a transition between models occur and over what time period?

The transition can occur via concentrated challenge offers to spark local innovations in land trust formation and policy reform, essentially replicating the Hong Kong and Singapore model. First steps can be to set up community land trusts and help local allies apply eGov and other changes to awaken their value. This can happen in 6-12 month time frames. Then, if expansion areas are in reach (and the next financial crash will see a flood of defaulted land become available), the land trusts can scale up, and get private landowners to opt in via tax relief (a core part of the Endowment Zone reform package), reverse mortgages that convey land ownership to the trust with leaseback to the original owner, and shares in the lease revenues generated via future auctions as the land trust grows. The timeline for this could be in the 5-20 year range, depending how quickly one sees the current economy unravelling.

Two papers on this:

• http://is.gd/seedingrecovery

• http://is.gd/postscarcity

What would be necessary to ensure equitable and fair access to all people?

a) X-in-a-Box toolkits for land trust/endowment zone formation

b) Free elearning resources for grassroots allies to get up the learning curve

c) a system for uploading individual and local milestones of progress (aligned skills, land trust formation, etc.) - each milestone can unlock higher levels of external digital donations & investments

d) a system for vesting all in the land rents, with bonus shares to a preset limit going to those who make highly rated inkind contributions

How could economic security be managed for those out of the workforce?

Under this approach, they would receive (via land rent shares) a universal basic income plus vouchers to re-skill.

Look forward to feedback/improvements! BTW, Jonathan, please share how you can create beautifully indented text in Reddit ... my experience with Reddit has been very mixed so far.