Were it not for the personal interaction of time with production and environment, little else about capital would matter - at least as far as humans are concerned. Yet somehow, this fact gets missed. How can anyone argue that time use - in human capital terms - is mostly an ill begotten burden involving labor? The paradox of such reasoning is that automation continues to free time use from difficult and repetitious labor - even as populations fear the implications of that freedom. Technology gives us the same time "upgrade" options that it has provided all along. Why is it so difficult to envision time use as wealth capacity in a direct sense?
Time is the experiential component - the vital spark that gives life to economic reality. Mind and resource capacity have become so embedded in technology and capital formation, that some would just as soon not consider time use as valid. However this rationale is a mistake - particularly as governments struggle with unnecessary austerity and monetary cutbacks. A marketplace specifically for time use, would alleviate many problems for both services and knowledge use.
When time value does not have its own internal markers; healthcare, education, and other vital services struggle to provide time value through inadequate means which detract from other wealth formation. Even though resource abundance still makes it possible to coordinate services at broad levels, some populations would benefit from time value through more conscious and decentralized means. Otherwise, a lack of time use markers as contrast with other resources, will reduce economic growth further than has already been the case.
Presently, governments remain dependent on taxation of income, property and capital, for the services and knowledge use they provide. However, it has become more and more difficult for governments to preserve vital knowledge use formation, as multiple aspects of life are now caught in ongoing redistribution patterns.
Further, it is impossible to ascertain not only how incomes impact resource use, but also how much production is even needed to generate services without undue burden. Why not compensate time use, as a central point from which to begin anew? Even though it would not be desirable to do this in large scale settings, numerous small scale decentralization experiments would provide pointers, as to long range plans for services needs.
Those who are gainfully employed, do not realize the degree to which the unemployed see themselves as a burden on society, yet this need not be the case. Knowledge use systems would not only provide greater economic access, but the means of doing so would also mean new wealth creation at the outset. Carefully considered time use would finally become obvious as the gift it actually represents. After all, time use capacity - in the right organizational circumstance - can also exist as a final, i.e. not just intermediate, good. Time aggregates could not only provide local support systems, but also a diverse range of experiential product. Each community has the chance to build from a blank slate, to create a unique growth trajectory.
As time use becomes central for economic activity, other resource potential takes on greater clarity. People start to ask, how do I want to relate to others? How do they want to relate to me? How best to use local resources so they are not problematic for the ways I want to spend my time? How can automation and technology in this regard also free time, and what might that mean for new production options where I live?
Granted, some are concerned what answers to these questions might consist of, and understandably so. But the answers are important, because too much of present day environments are not adequately structured for the resources actually at hand. The human mind has every ability to move beyond the limitations that populations are coming up against. Some individuals simply need a marketplace for time, the rights to their skills capacity, and a bit of understanding that life need not be the constant struggle it seems.