A pay-it-forward scheme works like this. Person A does a good deed for Person B and just asks that, in return, Person B does a good deed for someone. Person B does a good deed for Person C and just asks that, in return, Person C does a good deed for someone. The cycle continues like this, with the goal being to create a flowing river of good deeds.
Pay-it-forward schemes have been a trope for a very, very long time, there was even a bad movie made about it (oh Hollywood, what would we do without you). However, as even the movie acknowledges, they are notorious for eventually fizzling out. If you had the authority or whatever that would allow you to and were to ignite a chain for as long as possible, how would you do it?
If it’s enforced, it’s more of a tax, isn’t it? I thought the whole premise was that people are doing it out of altruism.
Etiquette expects that when you do a nice thing for someone you gain nothing more than a “Thank you” in return.
You can’t do “Pay-it-forward” as that places a burden on the recipient and your ‘gift given freely’ then becomes a task to them. Which is no gift at all!
If it’s enforced it kind of loses it’s charm and appeal, no?
Technically, “enforced pay it forward” is called credit. Your debt would then be “the amount you still have to pay forward”.
Of course, this defeats both the spirit and the purpose of a pay it forward scheme.
