Often I've struggled to clarify, how a marketplace for time value could function. One reason this market potential isn't immediately obvious, is that the time arbitrage involved, would function as a unique equilibrium. Time value would be utilized in relation to itself, thereby allowing individual and group expression of economic values that exist in relation to local resource capacity.
The groups which take part in this endeavour, would generate new means for time based services in defined local settings, across a broad spectrum of coordinated skills capacity. Expressed time priorities (time arbitrage) in these communities would function differently, from how labour (particularly specific skills) is compensated in the "normal circumstance" of general equilibrium. Further, ownership responsibility and benefits would be linked to all participants, in mobile systems of building components, land use groupings, and flexible physical infrastructure.
Another problem I sometimes encounter, is discussion re what could be in an economic context, when it isn't quite clear what already is, by contrast. Even though today's services based economy represents close to 80% of U.S. economic activity, the theoretical structure of this activity is far from concise, as contrast with the much easier to measure "goods" economy, that prevailed till the latter part of the 20th century.
While production gains can still be discerned in tradable sector activity, the murky relationships of today's dominant services capacity, are far less tangible. For that matter, the theoretical nature of services organizational capacity, has yet to be differentiated from the still relevant neoclassical framing, of global tradable sector activity.
Consequently, I've argued for production clarification (tangible definition) in services which might also prove useful for economic modeling. Even though simpler methods of knowledge use would hardly be "perfect" "substitutes for skills specialization, such methods could still provide more reliable progress indicators over time, than what today's arbitrarily limited services capacity can provide. Even better, an organizational knowledge use structure which - via time units - generates new wealth at the outset, could finally relieve the long term budgetary burdens now faced in the U.S.
In all of my attempts to describe my framework, I realize my own economic "shorthand" phrasing and theoretical suggestions, fall short of what is actually needed. Hence I will continue my efforts to conceptualize from as many angles as possible, for the sake of greater clarity. After all, many observers frame economic concepts somewhat differently, depending on their own roles for economic participation.
This discussion of defined equilibrium considerations wouldn't be complete, without mentioning some normative aspects of economic freedom. When economic freedom is mostly envisioned as freedom from the actions of others, the actions of the strong over the weak mostly give free markets a bad name. Worse, a "do nothing" approach, has encouraged regulations which ultimately undermine remaining economic freedoms for all concerned.
Given the extent of economic freedoms we have already lost, might intentional economic design make it possible to begin reversing those losses? While some remain certain that "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions", I would respond that good intentions are often necessary to preserve the most economic freedom, for the greatest number possible. Fortunately, time as an economic unit, could provide apt means to preserve personal leverage for the supply and demand of services which individuals mutually prefer in the same settings.
Again, it has been difficult to express the idea of personal economic time value, due in part to a lack of clarification in the time value that people find most important in general equilibrium conditions - let alone the defined equilibrium conditions which I have described. Since too much of our potential time value ends up excluded in today's services dominant economy, our time commitments are no longer well aligned, with the environments we have built via the relationships between money and other forms of resource capacity. What's more, our personal skills race with technology continues, because we still lack the means by which to provide economic value for what we experience with others, through the shared mechanism of actual time and place.
Should we gain the ability to pursue the freedom of mutual employment, it would also allow us to relax our grip up on a skills race with technology that can't be realistically won. Yet no one need fear displacement by automation, if they are willing to explore a completely new marketplace which makes it possible to think differently about services supply and demand. A marketplace for time value, could help to restore faith in the value of economic freedom, and it would give individuals the chance to pursue mutual challenges and aspirations on more personal terms.