How might a city - or town for that matter - begin the process of reclaiming knowledge and skills wealth in a focused and deliberate manner? On the one hand, a limited number of still prosperous municipalities may think of themselves as holders of such capacity already. But compared to the actual knowledge and skills availability actually present, the jobs which redistribution, taxation and production residuals presently allow tend to underrepresent that capability to a considerable extent. In some instances, such formal economic organization may even appear primarily as an economic skeleton in the larger setting, as governments struggle to deal with the missing gaps. Many who wish to take active part in economic life are either limited in their ability to participate, or may no longer be able to in a realistic sense. Cities need people, and people need cities, but both are presently stymied, as to how both can somehow meet in the middle.
This problem has become so pressing that some now propose redefining money as a form of socially approved infinity, to simply paper over our currently existing obligations in hopes that so doing will somehow rebalance them and revitalize needed services in the process. However, money - in a larger sense - cannot help but reflect the end result of what we structure in the first place: a reality recently exposed as a growing negative infinity set for knowledge skills use. Some people get that money can't just continue to play "catch up" indefinitely, but their ideas as to what to do about it can be harsh indeed. What is not as widely recognized is that existing economic structures can be realigned, so as to bring the "opposing" infinity sets back into balance with one another.
Certainly, the need for such a rebalancing exists primarily in relative terms. A sizable portion of society may be able to continue funding adequate services though the same transmissions which remain relevant for any number of nations and/or previous generational set points. A rebalancing process, however, is needed for numerous cities and individuals, especially to redress problematic issues of true economic access for today's youth. In some instances, the same might also be true for nations experiencing difficulties with knowledge based service structures.
Knowledge based services have grown to such a degree that they no longer have adequate balance with the still positive infinity of goods production, a problem which people tried to overcome through a consumer role in the first decade of the new century. How is it that product creation structures tend towards positive or negative infinities? Physical goods often trend towards positive infinities because of the coordination of assets and capital to knowledge and skill, which also serve to provide considerable monetary compensation above and beyond the individual contribution. However, physical product which is massive, stationary, needful of much human labor and barely utilizing technological gains of the last century also trends towards a negative infinity, in economic terms.
While money can be created to address the negative infinity set, it nonetheless becomes more difficult over time to address what remains a growing imbalance, if the structure stays in that form. What's more, institutions are still faced with cutbacks on individual hours, in spite of the additional monies. When we look the still declining ratio of human to human service in the present, it is easy to see how this is actually plays out in the long run.
There are two methods which can work together, to change the infinity set for knowledge and skills use from negative to positive. Since people have the same time limitations, starting at that same hour measure in relation to one another is paramount, for every extra hour claimed for oneself value wise moves the set once again into a negative direction in an aggregate sense (ouch. I know...please bear with me here). Also, and equally important, the set continues in a positive direction when economic access is ongoing with the actual learning processes. In other words, our incremental time use interspersed with related time investment (which assists long term memory as well) prevents time debt from building in the first place. Instead of waiting for seemingly endless lag periods just to take part in life, our ongoing participation (as skills producers and consumers) keeps the set from moving back into a negative direction. In other words, when we work with what we learn throughout the entire process, less of a negative time ratio ever has a chance to build up in what we need to provide back to society, for what society provides to us.
It is perfectly understandable - and of course desirable in many ways - for society to wish to reward exceptional knowledge strictly on its own merits, especially given our monumental sacrifice of time for skills acquisition. But when we attempt to do so, there is no way to truly acknowledge all the worthy. So, we find ourselves continually forced to pick and choose amongst a plethora of valuable knowledge components, many of which ultimately have to be discarded in the process (at least for the broad suggested purposes such ideas may hold). What's more, those not deemed worthy are often arbitrarily devalued, deservedly or not. Fortunately, that unsettling reality of supposedly "unneeded knowledge" didn't always hold to the degree it does now.
When knowledge was not so widely spread or utilized, the positive infinity set of tradable goods was capable of backing knowledge use to a far greater degree. If someone claimed extra time sets that others needed to somehow compensate, governments and insurance were once able to redistribute for the difference. Over time, incentives become skewed, and thus further limited the inclusion of knowledge that primary processes are able to utilize. Tremendous incentive exists for communities to turn this process around by validating the knowledge potential of their own citizens, not to mention a community's ability to become virtual "universities" and new forms of integrated business organization through the process itself.
A tremendous amount of the confusion in taxation is a direct result of variations in valuation assigned to numerous kinds of skills sets. While some of this again is certainly understandable, it nonetheless created a quagmire from which no simple taxation system seems to suggest escape. The simplistic beauty of starting from the same base also means being able to provide voluntary services from that same dynamic, which would serve to erase most of the tax system presently needed for services in the U.S. It is also the single starting base which allows arbitrage to represent what people actually choose to select from one another in coordinated services activities. Otherwise, skills arbitration processes would quickly break down under variances in time value, much as tax systems broke down in the present due to variations in time value. That lost balance finally became a runaway train which no amount of redistribution can tend to.
How, then, might a community "build out" from that starting point of sameness in time constraints? What it would seek to do is diversify its knowledge and skills base on a continual basis (the infinity aspect): a goal which also means that greater inclusivity can readily work as a positive incentive. In some areas, "just in time" knowledge can be applied to an already acquired base, especially for those who have less time invested in specific areas of education or related work. Such an application actually reflects interchangeable components of tradable goods production patterns, and would maximize time potential while still encouraging individual decision making in the process. In other words the equal time valuation aspect allows each coordination effort to work seamlessly with others under constantly changing economic conditions and resets. Plus, the smaller the community, the more resets one might expect in production terms.
While some capacity can be utilized in group settings (especially with combined investments), much of this capacity would actually take place though individual arbitrage which is structured both in ongoing group timed settings, (such as semesters or quarters) as well as more spontaneous or immediate settings, interspersed with the calendar plans for ongoing economic activities. The goal is to bring all kinds of economic activity under the coordination of an overarching umbrella, which also makes individual representative (interest) groups unnecessary and allows greater economic sustainability.
Building out in a larger sense means considering lifetime options which allow individuals to retain a degree of economic and social autonomy through the course of their lives. Skills and knowledge use development would be incremental - i.e. ongoing and not so dependent on certain levels of achievement before being able to economically interact with others. Also, integration of various skill sets, responsibilities and obligations would mean that one treats their own time much as anyone who works in an entrepreneurial or managerial capacity. That makes it possible for internal management mechanisms, so that outside supervision is not necessary and all time therefore readily matched in other ongoing activity, with others.
True, no one would quite know how to utilize such structures in the beginning. It's a safe bet that matching skills and knowledge use could also be tried through any number of challenging games, or focused forms of activity to bring people back together who otherwise might not find reason to do so. Ultimately however, winning strategies would be replicated across different areas, as communities seek to continue the expansion of knowledge and progress which was so recently interrupted. Those winning strategies, once they reach a certain magnitude of actual productivity and wealth creation, could readily be incorporated into monetary policy. One of the greatest advantages of skills arbitrage from the starting point of equal time constraints is that it allows for optimal participation, just in time knowledge use sets and learning choice decisions on the part of all who desire to contribute, no matter what the knowledge problems to be solved actually consist of. Odd to think that lining up our overall capacity, in such a way, might make it possible to get some of our "better" human nature back in the process.
Yes, this overly long post is essentially an (unreasonable?) plea, for allowing ourselves to start the race of life from the same point. I know it's a lot to ask. Of all the proposals I've suggested, this is probably the most controversial, and so I wanted to address it as delicately as possible. But I don't know how knowledge use could be structured more effectively, that would actually work better in service based supply side terms and still be capable of creating the constant momentum knowledge use needs. I still believe that people can readily create whatever wealth they want, completely independent of the way they utilize their actual time in relation to others. What's more, such a method would give everyone a chance to form a basis for survival in terms of what is possible with the use of one's own time - something which is really quite missing in the present. It would also give all of us a chance to breathe easier and spend time together doing more of what we want, without living in constant fear of being undone by doing so. When we equalize the time element, we allow our own desire to succeed to become the primary incentive for infinity growth.
Just the same, whatever moral intent lies behind this post tends to get drowned out by the visualization I was actually able to use for the infinity sets themselves. I wish I'd had the temerity at a young age to challenge the counselor in high school who did not schedule the math I needed for college prep, because I consequently lost the nerve to catch up afterwards - remedial math was not as widely available in the 70s as it is now. So today I remain in awe of people with a good understanding of math, and the positive purposes they can apply it to, "when so inclined" (arghh, nevermind). Therefore, I will remain forever grateful to the remedial math teachers who helped to reacquaint me with some of the basics, several years ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment