Why has it become so important for nations to develop more reliable means than debt in order to get things done? Perhaps the idea of building more with less debt, would be a good New Year's resolution for nations in general. Fortunately, it would not be necessary to focus solely on tradable sector activity (mercantilism) to make it happen. No matter the amount of economic dynamism a nation may experience, civilizations can eventually unravel, if and when they excessively rely on debt and its associated redistribution, to take care of the most vital functions of society.
By way of example, one of the bigger dangers to economic sustainability takes place, when debt is structured around the expectation of future income streams which have little - if anything - to do with what an actual debt decision is expected to accomplish. Indeed, revenue gambles such as this can be equally dangerous whether they involve external gambles on human capital at the micro level (future claims on someone's income generation potential), or at the macro level, in the form of claims on a nation's revenue stream which stem from tradable sector activity.
The rationale for debt creation patterns and their subsequent resolution, also helps to explain why economics as a discipline is so closely interwoven with historical outcomes. No nation can really afford to assume that increasing debt load levels don't warrant serious a serious response that takes long term structural stability into consideration. Should a nation eventually stumble in its debt gambles, the failure would also affect long term societal expectations on the part of its citizens, not to mention how they might consequently view the economic possibilities of their future.
Even though cultural attributes may appear more important than economic considerations in certain respects, continued prosperity nonetheless depends on how nations respond to budgetary obligations over time. However, the need to maintain reasonable debt levels should not be confused with a supposed need for austerity. Plus, who exactly is making that call? We have already observed how no sane political party desires to implement austerity during their watch! Hence austerity in many instances is mostly a default point of no return (overall failure), once governments become unable to postpone their growing budgetary burdens any longer.
A major mistake for all concerned, is when nations refuse to seek additional means of economic dynamism in terms of knowledge use and application, without debt. Yet this is increasingly the fragile position in which developed nations are beginning to find themselves. Many a knowledge based NIMBY impulse has been backed by extensive debt and taxation. Every nation needs to create broader societal support and inclusion for knowledge based endeavour, which doesn't require debt or redistribution as its point of origin.
How might we reconsider long term economic sustainability in the near future? For one, we need to carefully evaluate debt's overall role and importance in building and maintenance cycles. How can we structurally sidestep that role? It is becoming increasingly clear that we need new sources of wealth which can be utilized to reduce debt levels throughout economic systems.
Time arbitrage could be one of the best candidates to strengthen a 21st century knowledge based economy for the long run. Symmetrically aligned time value would serve as a reliable building block to get things done, with no additional budgetary burden. Even though our skills aren't symmetrically aligned, all too often when we compensate for skills differences, not only do we exacerbate existing differences in aptitude, further debt is required for the process. Debt has often been the only way to augment our time value, when it falls too short of the time value of others! Plus, when we harden skills differences, people start thinking about debt jubilees all over again. Should time value be used as a building block in accordance with the time we actually posses, the process could ultimately reduce our need as a society, to constantly redistribute revenue in order to further our building and maintenance activities.
Time as wealth would be a partial, but still important shift away from the burden of extensive debt obligations. In contrast with what is normally built in any society, maintenance roles require far more time hours to accomplish successfully. Since symmetric time units can function as a point of wealth origin (time units as resource building hours), building hours could gradually increase in aggregate, in relation to maintenance hours which otherwise require redistribution. Symmetric time functions as immediately canceled debt, and each of us can claim ownership of the result. By allowing time value to function as a valid economic unit - one which positively contributes to GDP - we could make it possible for an incredible amount of maintenance functions to function in a wealth building capacity, and reduce debt obligations as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment