Home

Crowdfunding Countercurrents

CC Archive

Submission Policy

Join News Letter

Defend Indian Constitution

#SaveVizhinjam

CounterSolutions

CounterImages

CounterVideos

CC Youtube Channel

India Burning

Mumbai Terror

Iraq

Peak Oil

Globalisation

Localism

Climate Change

US Imperialism

Palestine

Communalism

Dalit

Humanrights

Economy

India-pakistan

Kashmir

Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

Kandhamal Violence

Arts/Culture

Archives

About Us

Popularise CC

Disclaimer

Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name


E-mail:



Search Our Archive



Our Site

Web

 

 

 

 

Value Our Children, Instead Of Money

By Lionel Anet

15 April, 2016
Countercurrents.org

The present is the future in its formative stage. That process is universal and is always adhered to as that’s nature. Life only thrives from the present activities, which are evaluated in the future, and that future tends to be imagined from the past. But today’s evaluation of the future is highly fragmented as a result of the reductionist method used by scientist and society. Study to do with life’s future, to be useful, must be holistic. The most important thing we need to ponder, and be as accurate as we can is the future we are creating today, so we are back to the beginning. What sort of future are we making?

We are constrained by an economy that has economic growth as its criterion of success, as it must be in a competitive capitalist world. That growth had escalated in two surges, the first by using coal as an extra energy to top up sunlight and wind, then a century later, the internal combustion engine burning oil, which took over as the primary source of energy in the middle of last century. Oil is the most practical, convenient and energy efficient fuel ever used, that is, the energy from burning that fuel is many time greater than the energy used to get and process it, and little waste to dispose. Last century economic growth surged because of cheap oil, but this century as the cost, (the energy used), of producing oil rises, that high yield margin is going to a deficit. Nevertheless economist expectation remains somewhat confident that the economy will regain its strength as they can see it in their economic system.

That economic growth is due to the concentrated energy in the fossil fuels. Not that economic growth in the last four decades has given us any tangible benefits; on the other hand, there has been a gradual environmental and social degradation. Early during that time the neocons claimed that the economy needed to keep growing to be able to manage all the environmental problems. But it’s the economic growth that has been the culprit by using the energy that gives the greatest return for the energy used to get that energy. And that is fossil fuels, particularly oil. Without oil, coal mining would be minuscule.

There are many things that we did with that cheap abundant energy that’s impossible with renewable energy, considering that we already have an over populated world, let alone the extra 2 billion people expected within 4 decades. The items we won’t be able to afford on a sustainable and compatible basis with other life are military expenditure, city car travel, jet air travel, and transport of goods over long distances, most international shipping of goods, megacities and high rise building. They are a few of the many items we must abandon just to survive, but we will be able and need to do far more than just survive. We must change from an exploitative to a collaborative economy, as that can satisfy the needs of all people in a peaceful way with the least damage to the ecosystem. Our first step can be less use of money and a lessening of its importance.

Economic growth is synonymous to capitalism and money is its life blood that forces its people to consume increasing amount of fossil fuels to maintain the energy needed to grow the economy. Fiat money is the only money that has ever existed, as gold, silver and anything of value are only part of a barter system, they suits static civilisations. On the other hand, capitalism is a dynamic system and therefore needs money, as a catalyst; it facilitates economic activities and measures it in unit, which can be stored digitally. Money is only a number; therefore we can never runout of it, hence, sovereign government can create the money that is needed to enables its people to look after themselves, if resources are available.

Money, as an abstract concept, is ideal as a facilitator to exchange private property, an essential element in capitalist economies that can stimulate economic growth. Nevertheless, its nature’s ability to provide, which’s the present obstacle to growth, and it will soon lead to a decline in economic activities. So far growth is only stunted, except for the financial sector. Unfortunately, it’s that sector that has accumulated the most money and is using it for their advantage, which is to societies’ disadvantage. It has led society further into uncontrollable state where we know we are destroying our life supporting planet in multiple ways, but money keeps us on that course because it’s at present all powerful, particularly as it’s largely used covertly.

Money gained dominance due to its etherealness, it exist because we believe it exist, thus it can disappear from view to avoid been taxed, but its practical function, in capitalist economy, is to catalyse interactions. Money must be used by everyone to be able to live and function in capitalist society. This form of control is far more efficient than any others at robbing societies and its people. For our survival, we need to know what’s going on and to do that we must remove the power that money has to rules us. That will make life much easier for nearly everyone and as well; people will gradually become more important and have more power than money. But how do we reduce the importance and power of money?

That could be achieved by supplying as many services free of charge in a gradual way, but quickly. Services such as health care, education, city transport, and information services are vital, so they should be free of any charges. Also a basic income for everyone working or not would remove a need for workers compensation and unemployment benefits etc. This would drastically reduce the cost of living and administration, which in turn would mean that wages can be very much lower but with a better and more secure life.

With a lower cost of employees, we would have more and better services by people instead of machine burning fossil fuels. Because the employer would only need to pay workers for their effort, as the community would be increasingly responsible for our wellbeing. The cost of providing services would be affordable as that labour intensive work is provided with the cheaper labour. The labour to service ourselves is only time so, the more intimately our relationships are, the less money we would need. There would be many benefits from the cheaper labour and that basic income. Cost of entertainment would be very low, as people in that industry would also have lower expenditure, therefore need less remuneration and they’ll have no worries in maintaining their families and themselves.

This would reduce the power of money it would equalise somewhat social status and would reduce crime and give opportunities to live worthwhile lives. It would decrease government’s expenditures on hospital, public transport, and education, and in any areas were people are so important. The cost of human interrelationship is nil, but it’s essential, it’s the way we live; we must interact with one another in the community and communities with others around the world, or we’re likely to be depressed. Social groups, if they are set up to give the best life for its people run at their best where people participate according to their ability and they get the satisfaction by participating in maintaining the viability of the group. Furthermore there’s no reason to be better than other groups but to exchange methods and ideas. That’s not idealistic wishful thinking it’s what happens in many voluntary organization.

Transport is a wasteful activity and therefore should be kept to a minimum to be efficient; although, it does increase the GDP. The total cost of transporting items is never fully factored in to the product’s cost. The carbon emission is considerable, especially when its air freighted, as emission at 10 thousand metres are 5 times more effective in warming the planet than at sea level. While ships have stowaways on their hull and in bilge tanks, harbouring many unwanted organism that damages the ecosystems. All those cost aren’t factored in the sale price, if they were, local produce would be more viable and our planet would have a better chance of supporting today’s children when they take over. Governments are uncaring and dishonest in the way they collectively force societies, business, and its individuals to disregard the biological state of the planet and its future just to maintain that exploitation and boost the GDP, regardless of the fret to our life.

Reduced labour cost with an increasing fuel price and a good public transport that is used by every traveller, combine with town planning to minimise travel will reduce accidents, pollution, wasted time and space. Roads would only be used by emergency vehicles, taxis, and the essential transport of goods. The benefit from that would be multifaceted with cleaner air, better health, fewer accidents, more social interactions, and a relaxed life. All of that could be acceptable within a capitalist system as the main changes are a lower labour cost and an escalating cost of non-renewable, that’s if our population was a mere 2 billion. Therefore we’ll need to do far more to survive with an expected 9 billion, but it would be a good start.

Lionel Anet is a member of Sydney U3A University of the Third Age, of 20 years standing and now a life member

 



 



 

Share on Tumblr

 

 


Comments are moderated