Balance and Equal Provision

I feel that the virtue of the person staying at home and looking after the child also having access to all goods and services means there will be a welcomed reduction of about 33% in the work force in a country like Great Britain. 

This would stop the massive acceleration in production of goods going on at the moment and would pave the way for my system of only people approved goods being produced.

The goods put forward for approval would have the cost to the environment and other limiting factors detailed as well as the advantages of the product.

I feel that these effects, i.e. the reduced work force and amount of goods required would then come into balance, with both hopefully gradually being reduced as the system evolves.

When considering worrying possibilities where people might take and use as much as they can and in excess, I would point out that society is inherently much more balanced than it appears.  In a healthier state it has equal proportions of people with differing personality traits and wishes, each serving to balance the whole.

As people would be channelled more into professions that suit them and as people would not be continually led astray and brainwashed into thinking they need certain things and told how they need to be, much more balance would emerge.  I feel that with much more genuine balance being promoted, people would soon de~stress and find more depth, meaning and contentment in their lives.

The circumstance that hitherto a lone parent has severe provision problems would be greatly relieved by the parent having access to the goods and services. It is also an investment in the future of the country and in the world as it indicates properly nurturing the young.

Also in countries where women are bullied into submission as they have no rights their plight would would be alleviated by the individual access by the mother to all the provisions she needs for herself and for her under age child

Another great demographic asset would be that a family in a country that doesn`t enjoy social benefits would not need to provide for its future by having as many children as possible. 

It would also stop the dreadful aborting of baby girls because of provison problems.

More on the Moneyless Theory

The moneyless theory would also suit developing nations, where couples have to have numerous children to ensure their care in old age.

Old and infirm people would be automatically entitled to the goods.  Also several mentally ill people have told me how they could and would work willingly for six hours a day. Another advantage would be that families would no longer need a provider who can dictate and tyranise, or is under enormous presure to maintain their family as the person staying at home looking after the child would have access to the goods for herself/himself and for the child.

I feel generally that with such a system there would be more co-operation, less stress and more love in society- remember, there are more people who want that than want today's survival of the ugliest system.

An Up-date on my Economics Theory

Now with the gaining of more individual autonomy, and yet communal networking, with things like policing and politicians becoming less and less effective in our every day dealings, the thought of my moneyless theory becomes more and more appealing.

Especially the requests for a product aspect.  After what I consider a suitable period of twenty years of informed advertising where people are accurately guided in what they truly need and in what a healthy future for planet and people can sustain and with a 5% reduction in all financial aspects per year,  I am sure people will be able to make accurate and advised choices as to the goods and services they wish to consume.

My idea of putting a proposed product to the people, mainly per internet and if there are 1000 clicks for the product, ten thousand will initially be produced is really a good one.

The bare truth about the product will be told, i.e. experiments on animals, any unhealthy chemicals involved, possible downsides and the cost to the environment, but of course its merits and virtues will be told as well.  The informed population will on an individual and communal basis be able to then decide on their own future, the futurre of their children and the future of the planet.

Small people friendly firms would arise which cater for minimum production.

One, as stated would 'pay' for their product by six hours productive work per day six days a week.  (see blog)

Most people I know, especially younger people are no longer competitive and ambitious. They don't care much about promotion or financial success, but about how their loved ones are fareing.  They are more interested in yoga and fun and bringing up their children properly than war and guilt.

My husband says it won't work as people are by nature greedy.  I don't thing they are.  Admittedly there are naturally greedy people as there are natural criminals. But we don't have to let these people have the dominating attitude in our society. Anyway, I feel if indeed most people appear greedy that they are made that way by the money system we have and many people are very disatisfied with it.

Problems in today's money driven economy

With the advent of global problems, such as dirty water world wide and people induced climate catastrophes we need global solutions.

Global solutions mean we let go of systems which tended to cause the global dilemmas in the first place.

One of these systems is the money system. With money as a medium for the exchange of goods we have an artifically propped up system where we are now finding business for business sake.

Governments are desperately trying to maintain a system which not only threatens our quality of life but also our very existence.

In order to maintain the system we need growth. This involves growth in population and growth in manufacture.

Do we really need more of everything. Do we really need more people on this overstretched planet. To artifically stimulate our needs we need advertising. Advertising at its best arouses discontentment and it is also causing severe confusion and unhappiness.

People are picking up all sorts of messages from the environment about the dire straights we are in and deep inside them they know what is good for them and nature, i.e. using and taking less but we are being constantly bombarded by very vivid and intruding messages about what the system feels we need to be happy, successful and desireable.

No we do not need more soaps, shampoos, deoderants, cars, hoovers, dishwashers. Just one cleverly designed article of each kind is necessary for our happiness and well-being.

Supporting a system which has had it, is causing an inhumane speeding up of existence but it is a hurrying and indifference which leads nowhere - just to increased stress and increased hurrying.

It is no wonder lots of people, including physisists feel that time as a dimension is running out!

Also the fact we equate everything to a factor which has no inherrent value, i.e. money, reduces the true value of things. Things mainly come from the environment - from nature and it is about time we realised the true cost in environmental and human terms instead of equating everything to a factor of nothing.

Money is a medium which is and will be totally unecessary. It is a medium which is tearing us apart.

The moneyless system would be driven by the real needs of people, rather than artificially created demands, and by a loving and sharing attitude and thirdly by respect for the environment.

People would be better educated and informed than they are now and would no longer be misled by advertising and by the illusions and incentives created by money.

Everyone would be entitled to everything they want but what they want would be over time filtered and adjusted through a careful educational process.

Everyone would be taught to understand the limits of the natural resources and what it takes to have a healthy and sustainable environment.

Everyone would be entitled to the same amount of goods and services, providing they worked well for six hours a day for six days a week. They would be entitled to the same goods and services during any illness or other form of hardship which would prevent them from delivering their customary six hours of work.

The availability of goods during a life-time combined with a good education for women would eliminate the need for poorer families to have many children as is the custom today in many developing or poorer nations. This will reduce the population of the planet, over- population now being the main environmental hazard we have.

Two days of each month by each able bodied adult worker would be used for voluntary work consisting of unpleasant tasks. Children could be encouraged to help within reason to foster their community spirit.

Individuality based community spirit would be encouraged.

Six hours work for six days a week with mothering considered a condition which also gives the woman access to the goods for herself and her children means there would be some reduction in the labour available.

To counteract this I feel it would be essential, before the full introduction of the system occurs, to encourage people to understand their real needs and to dispose of artificially created needs.

One could measure this by initially asking people what they really want – what do they feel would make them happy, then after careful advertising and media campaigning, say after ten years one could again ask people what they feel they need to make them happy. Wanting has got to be analysed for what it is – often a compensatory yearning. In some people, however, buying something or flying somewhere may give them genuine happiness and something they reflect gladly upon.

Present levels of demand and then possibly more demand would not be in line with supply in the new system due to the reduced labour force and a new balance has to be found and maintained.

People would be channelled into suitable work according to their talents and intelligence, at least as much as possible and there would be full employment.

Appropriate accommodation would be available to everyone. However, initially patience would have to be exercised, i.e. until the houses desired have been built.

In my system whereby humans live without money, environmentalists would be the rulers, i.e. people who put the well-being of the planet and its inhabitants first and not their egos.

To further my suggestions on developing a society without money; I suggest that the new economics comes into effect over a period of twenty years with a reduction of all financial factors of five percent per year.

Advantages:

- The system focuses manufacturers and consumers on the real economy rather than
a fictitious economy which is created by money

- bankers who are behind the recent economic crises as a result of their greed and
irresponsible ways of managing and acting are no longer needed

- fair distribution of available goods and services

- appropriate care for the old, sick and needy

- appropriate education for all, e.g. male and female according to ability

- no need to have many children, who are at present needed to care for their aging
parents in countries in which there are no appropriate social security systems

- as a result a dramatic drop in number of children and an end to the intolerable
increase in world population, which would otherwise continue and bring
environmental desaster to all

- much less stress for the planet and for its people

Disadvantages:

- implementation in stages

- competitive forces no longer directly at work

- risk of over-beaurocratic decision processes

- assumption that the better performing individuals would still excel at their jobs
although they wouldl not be rewarded with above average access to goods and
services

- assumption that people would co-operate with the system without excessive
performance monitoring

My idea would be to eliminate money altogether, and create a true value system.

We would work about six hours a day and feed all our needs into a centralised computer system and if there were a thousand or more wishes for an item then the need would be transferred to a suitable producer. The thing would be manufactured and delivered to our vicinity.

We would not be paid for our work but we could all have access to the goods. This has been the basic structure in many societies for aeons. So it's not so new.

Just imagine the whole of society working for the good of the environment and people, with advertisers using all of their skill to truly inform people as to what the earth can sustain and what it can't - helping people to find what really makes them happy - a combined constructive effort, instead of the madness going on today.

Women who have become mothers would hav e life-long access to the goods, leaving it up to the woman whether she went to work or not, and there would be much more provision for working from home.

This would be an ideal solution for the growing automation and computerisation as the more machines took over people would then simply work fewer hours.

Caring and social services and also very unpleasant work would be completed by everyone (except mothers) doing two to three days voluntary work each month.

Education would be available to everyone at any age, and I am sure people would be chanelled into suitable occupations much more than they are today, as profit would not be a consideration.

We would have thriving small industry and small firms, with people taking pride in the things they would produce. We would re-introduce quality and patience and care and respect for humanitry and the earth goods.

There would be a rapid decentralisation without lack of communication and isolation. The loss of centres in society is very dangerous with any collapse causing massive chain reactions and a complete breakdown of infrastructure.

I would suggest competition could be perpetuated in sport and with musical events.

There would be an emphasis on personal responsibility permeating the whole of society.

Supply would be created by demand with people making educated requests. And the incentive to work would be created by people's basic needs having to be satisfied and also the possibility to live in relative luxury if one works conscienciously for six hours for six days a week.

Families would have time and energy for each other and there would be plenty of time for innovative hobbies.

Organization an decision taking

The decisions would be taken by knowledgeable people, who have the best interests of the community as a priority and who are organized in different groups. The groups would be as decentralized as possible in order for them to understand the real needs and wishes of the people.

More on My economics Theory (see blog)Sectors to be looked at

Construction Industry


Everyone actively involved in the work process or who is entitled to the benefits of the system for other reasons has the right to live in appropriate accommodation.

Appropriate accommodation would be based on the size of the family and certain choices available to the future occupants of the house or flat.

The size of the house or flat would be standardised but with certain variations to accommodate for the different tastes of people. Some of the choices would be whether people want to live in the town or countryside or whether they want a flat or a house, but people would have to live fairly close to their work place for environmental reasons. People could also elect to have a holiday home if they would agree to have a smaller main residence.

All houses would become energy efficient over time and all new houses would fit reasonable environmental needs. One could visualise open plan park like areas with houses randomly placed upon it. The houses would not border upon each other but would have small areas around them for growing vegetables is so desired.

In a transition period people could stay in their houses or flats if they choose to do so. People could leave their properties to their children to make sure that occupants look after their dwelling appropriately.

The construction industry would be set up to build and maintain the houses and flats which the people are entitled to. The companies doing the construction and maintenance would be organised for resource efficiency and effectiveness.

Resources would be better utilised than now and the transparency of the market would take the slack out of the present construction industry.

Car Industry:

If money is taken out of the system pricing and brand image would no longer play a role in competition. Consumers would only be interested in cars which cater for their needs and preferences, which are safe and environmentally friendly.

Manufacturers would look for resource efficiency and environmental friendliness. As a result the offer of car types on the market would be dramatically reduced to the following four as mentioned in section one above:

- compact car

- compact SUV

- saloon car

- sports car


The different makes would be merged into one, the number of plants would be reduced to capture available economies of scale and the number of suppliers and distributors and service points would be cut back. As a starting point we would suggest two suppliers for each part and component of an automobile and the distribution points would be set up to achieve both customer proximity and economies of scale.

More on My economics Theory (see blog)Money based system as benchmark

Money is used to quantify demand and offer which is brought into balance by the invisible hand of the market. Profit opportunities arise when demand is higher than offer, prices will go up, profits will increase, which will in turn attract additional investments.

Money is also used to quantify and optimize

- sourcing decisions

- make or buy decisions

- decisions on the optimal size of production and service

- location for production

- methodology of production

Money is instrumental in expressing the value of exports and imports and in bringing them into an equilibrium over time.

Money is a major incentive for rewarding workers and suppliers and also customers.

All of these functions have to be replaced by something other than money in the proposed new system. Initial ideas to that end are

- carefully designed planning systems, which are as close to the consumer as feasible and which fully incorporate environmental considerations

- equal remuneration and sufficient provision for the needy, which will create a feeling . of happiness and satisfaction for most and will incentivize workers to do their best
at work.

In the longer term planning of production levels, offer can be based on last year’s demand and macro- and micro economic changes envisaged. Adjustments based on the better education of consumers can be made.

In the shorter term planning, inventory levels will be observed and production will be increased or reduced accordingly, on a monthly or quarterly basis as appropriate.

Productivity measurements between different production locations either existing or planned will be used to optimize production effectiveness and efficiency and to make or buy, location and optimal size decisions.