[P2P-F] Fwd: New moneyless economic system described

[Michel Bauwens]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tomi Astikainen <tomi.astikainen at mindyourelephant.org>
Date: Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:53 PM
Subject: New economic system
To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>


Hi Michel,

Long time no talk. Hope everything is fine and dandy with you and your
endeavors of openness?
Maybe you have noticed that I launched a new book: www.tomiastikainen.com

Today I was writing more extensive stuff for the FAQ about moneyless living
and when writing about new (moneyless) economic system I thought of you.


Text:

  *How would you re-design a more sustainable economic system?*


 Short answer: I would design it with others,
*sharing*<http://p2pfoundation.net/Sharing>resources and perspectives
in
*open collaboration* <http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Open#Introduction>,
and leaving room for constant evolution of the system. In fact, the very
fact that you are on this site proves that the re-design process has started
among the people of the Earth, in a very unique fashion: from the ground up
instead of top-down.


 Professor *Tim
Jackson*<http://www.earthscan.co.uk/ProsperityWithoutGrowth/tabid/102098/Default.aspx>says
“Sustainability is the art of living well within ecological limits”
where “living well” implies both ethical behavior and comfort. Thus, a more
just and sustainable system is found in the crossroads of efficiency,
environment, equity and ethics.


 The basic requirements of a sustainable economic system are that it is able
to:

   1.

   meet basic human needs of the whole global population,
   2.

   take the carrying capacity of the Earth into account,
   3.

   allow the diversity of life to flourish now and in the future, and
   4.

   ensure both human and societal development


 The basic components of an economic system are:

   1.

   Need clarification,
   2.

   Resource extraction,
   3.

   Production,
   4.

   Distribution,
   5.

   Use of the produce, and
   6.

   Re-use of resources


 *Needs*

Market equilibrium, i.e. balance between supply and demand, has not been
reached in top-down approaches. Capitalism is producer-driven guesswork
vulnerable to formation of monopolies and distorted by profit-motive driven
creation of artificial needs. On the other hand, the central-planning of
socialism and communism cannot answer to rapid changes of people’s real
needs and preferences.


 In a moneyless society the basic needs for survival are quite easy to
fulfill because we all need nutritious food, warm clothes, comfortable
shelter, clean water, functioning sanitation and all that. The human needs
that guide the basic production are somewhat unchanged and predictable.


 However, there are more advanced needs that derive from individual
preferences, interpersonal relationships and from ideas for societal
development. An individual might want to create a piece of art that requires
equipment, two people in different geographic locations might want to meet
each other out of a whim and a research team might realize that a bridge
needs to be built to link two cities together.


 In order to enable all this, people need to have an easy means to express
their changing needs so that required products and services can be
delivered. We do this already: we order stuff from Amazon, we book trips
over internet and we create wikis and documents together with our peers and
professional colleagues to plan larger projects. All we need to do is to
link the information systems we already have, open them up to public
scrutiny and make these massive amounts of data accessible in a common
database that can guide production decisions.


 If it seems that we cannot possibly fulfill everyone’s needs without
exceeding the carrying capacity of the Earth (not enough resources to make
everything happen at once), we can then assign numerical values for
resources, e.g. time and amount needed for a final product. And then we can
utilize various mobile and internet technologies to design tools that allow
people to “vote” on a daily basis to inform production of their needs, i.e.
use direct democracy to guide the production decisions.


 *Material and energy extraction*

The sporadic, short-sighted and predatory resource extraction of today
cannot continue much longer. The same goes for fossil-fuel based and highly
centralized energy production and distribution.


 In a moneyless society all energy comes directly or indirectly from the sun
(including geothermal, wave, tidal, and wind energy). *Jeremy
Rifkin*<http://p2pfoundation.net/InterGrid>talks about the
“Inter-grid” – the internet of energy – where all of us are
both consumers and producers of energy. It is possible to set up with
current day technology, today, if we want it to happen.


 For the material extraction to be sustainable we need to understand where,
how much and what kind of resources we have. This applies both to untapped
sources and products that can be re-used.


 *Manufacturing process*

In our current system there is a whole lot of overlap in production:
competing organizations create similar products and services with lowest
possible cost – often leading to poor quality products – and they all try to
sell their stuff to the consumers with whatever the means, creating a lot of
artificial needs and desires in the process of doing so.


 In a sane sustainable system we would produce exactly what is needed, as
locally as possible, to as many as possible, with as little waste as
possible.


 The shifting needs “from bombs to food” would take us little by little
towards abundance. Automation would no longer be viewed as the evil machines
that take people’s jobs but as a means to set people free from the drudgery
of manual labor, bearing in mind that nothing would stop you from growing
your own carrots or knitting your woolen socks.


 *Distribution*

Nowadays we ship stuff all over the world without much thinking of the
consequences. Raw materials are shipped to where it’s cheapest to produce
something out of them. Then this produce is shipped to be processed where
it’s cheapest to do. The cargo then moves through various assembly points to
the wholesaler, to the retail store and finally consumers pick it up and
ship it to their homes. They use it, trash it and the junk is shipped to the
other side of the world. Rational? No. Cheap? Hell yeah!


 Distribution in a moneyless society should minimize the distance (i.e.
energy use) and maximize the ease and access of use. Most of the food would
probably be wisest to deliver to large restaurants or community kitchens in
large quantities. Consumer goods such as toiletries could have filling
stations where anyone could fill up their soap bottle near where they live.
Durable goods, such as furniture, could be ordered directly to your home
from the manufacturer. The latest consumer electronics, appliances and tools
could be borrowed from a local “library”.


 If it would seem that transferring some of the products to another side of
the world is not sustainable then distribution would also guide production
decisions, and alternatives would be found. We might come into conclusions
such as using *the common
sea-buckthorn*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippophae_rhamnoides>for
pepping up people in the Northern hemisphere and leaving the luxury of
sipping coffee for those living in areas where it’s viable to produce
locally. Please note that hard-core coffee addicts would always be welcome
to relocate to South America if that is what they value in life.


 We would supplement, and over-time probably replace, the current marine,
air, train and road cargo services with new more efficient technologies such
as *Evacuated Tube Transport* <http://et3.com/ett.asp>.



 *Use*

Currently many people buy stuff to feel happy. People want to own a sleek
car to show off their prosperity. This ego-driven material happiness doesn’t
last long, however. Little by little people are waking up to feel the void
within. To fill that void they need love and better relationships,
education, culture and arts, time for reflection and experiences in nature.
And yes, most people on this planet need to eat.


 More important than ownership is access to goods and services that fulfill
our real needs. In a moneyless society people would use the products and
services that they need to live a good life. You’d be surprised how this
might actually be much less – not more – than what an average person owns
nowadays. And through sharing durable goods many more people could have
access to what they need. The same goes for services: it’s much wiser to use
highly effective and comfortable *public
transportation*<http://www.zeitnews.org/transportation/>that always
takes you to your destination, rather than worry about fixing
and maintaining your car that sits on the parking lot for 95% of the time.
Hoarding junk just doesn’t make sense, especially if everything is *freely
available* <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_good>.


 *Re-use*

Today we live in *the culture of
disposability*<http://www.kerismith.com/blog/the-culture-of-disposability-part-2/>and
most of the stuff we use ends up in landfills. Even fast moving
consumer
goods such as oil and jelly is packed in plastic or glass containers that
are not going to decompose any time soon. As for the durable goods, just by
sharing efficiently what we already have we could for instance have free
clothes for the next 10 years.


 Re-use has to be designed into the whole process so that each product has
gone through a proper *cradle-to-crave
assessment*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_cycle_assessment>.
If we take this seriously we can soon imitate nature where everything that
is disposed of becomes quickly used again in another part of the process we
call life.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110301/9573f028/attachment.htm