Are there commonalities which could encourage individuals to coordinate economic activities as a cohesive group, when they might otherwise lack incentive to do so? For instance, how might marginalization affect such incentives? Perhaps it depends on whether marginalization is due to social identity (which may in fact discourage economic solidarity), or commonly held physical and related mobility challenges which inhibit workplace commitments, at least to some degree.
In particular, time arbitrage and the defined environments of this organizational approach, could be a game changer for the latter group, in terms of economic solidarity. Not only would mobility-specific environments lessen transportation woes for the marginalized (many who don't drive), the mutual employment of time arbitrage might also encourage individuals to remain economically and socially connected to others. Only recall how such individuals often have difficulty being hired because they face multiple challenges which can impact their workplace performance.
I found myself reflecting on these issues after a Marginal Revolution discussion a couple of weeks earlier, titled "The Microfoundations of Intersectionality". Tyler Cowen also included the Wikipedia reference for this term. However: After reading some of the responses to his post, I began to wonder whether intersectionality is actually a useful term, since it appears to be highly charged in terms of gender and race - neither of which I find especially useful in promoting a more inclusive economy. How can the sometimes intense focus on specific groups of marginalized, help the aggregate? That said, there are precious few responses to this problem thus far, which aren't essentially zero sum in nature. Plus, if intersectionality discussions are mostly about access to top positions in society, that's not my focus either. To Cowen's credit, he highlighted the fact wheelchair bound individuals also suffer a lack of economic access.
A helpful institutional focus would create settings which address mobility issues for a wide range of marginalized employee potential. As a result, the access problems these various groups face would be minimized by a simple template for thinking about infrastructure and logistics for living and working. Even though it's difficult for firms and other institutions to assist would be employees in more than any single capacity of disability, walkable communities would greatly improve mobility for all concerned. Hence defined equilibrium settings would mean not having to overcome additional costs for the same disability struggles time and again, to bring each marginalized individual to our collective workplaces.
Those with disability commonalities - including everything from getting old to lack of "appropriate" credentials" (two which I face) - have more incentives to respond to well planned logistics for work environments than is normally recognized. One way to think about the framing involved, is via the concept of time as commodity. Time use in these settings becomes a standardized economic unit for mutual time priorities. Like an apple harvest, a primary goal of this approach, would be to make good on as much of the "harvest" of time potential, as is humanly possible. When it comes to time based services, the emphasis on quality product has meant a consequent loss of far more harvest potential than is actually necessary.
There's other logistical advantages to templates that reflect commonality. Recall that the equilibrium corporation non tradable sector activity would not be intended to compensate time or skill as institution specific. Rather, it would support the coordinated settings of similarly minded individuals who are willing to assist one another via multiple levels of skill. It would be a no brainer for the equilibrium corporation to back such settings, given the fact it would also manufacture a full range of modular and flexible infrastructure and building components. Since the compensation and resource utilization processes involved are internally driven, a sustainable continuum for many who were previously marginalized, becomes a distinct possibility.
Essentially, the time as wealth approach makes it possible for individuals to work with others whose combined disabilities become far less of a burden, in a common service generation context. Hence the reasonable chance that commonality in what otherwise often appears as "multiple shortcomings", might actually prove effective, as a strong social security network.
No comments:
Post a Comment