I think that saving money for both unexpected problems and future investments is an important part of social responsibility, and I would not adopt a currency that was deliberately designed to make saving difficult unless it was forced on me. Even then, I'd probably try to turn it into some kind of commodity that I could sell again later in order to dodge the losses.

There are a few assertions on the main page that I find interesting, in particular the one about money value vs goods value being "the underlying cause of the boom/bust cycle." I don't have time to read the linked book about it, is there a quick version of the explanation?

I never doubt your goal, just the ability of your currency to achieve what you are trying to get.

Might interest you: http://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/

I have no reason to doubt the story as told there(other than my theoretical complaint), but I am not a historian or economist.

Taken to an extreme, it's move back to hunter-gather societies when you had to work every day - no stored capital.