How to account for energy and automation since the Industrial Revolution is not covered but that’s not so much a criticism as a question I have.
As in: if our perceived debts in the interpersonal space are based on labour, what happens when that labour is more and more done with a combination of energy and automation?
Hey Dave, glad you like it. In terms of energy and automation, those essentially scale up labour power, but a monetary system is always about *relative* balances between people, so as the general level of labour productivity goes up in the network (aka. as the power of your labour gets amplified by energy and tech), the relative positions of each person might remain the same or change, but a money system is always about that relative position. This is why we can have people in incredible levels of poverty, despite the fact that our absolute labour power has been massively amplified over time
Another way to conceptualise this is to reimagine the collective output of the eight people as the 'living standard', but individual members of the network that fail to get an equal claim on that are below the average - in a capitalist system this is huge problem, because to compete you often need to be staying above the living standard so that you don't get 'left behind'
Just to add to that: One of the big stories of capitalism has been the control of the 'means of production' by small groups of people - aka. control of the means of *labour amplification* - which means some people contribute the labour, while others own the means of amplifying that, which means those others get to take an outsized cut of the absolute increase in labour power in the overall network due to energy and tech. The alternative would be for every single person to collectively and equally own the means of labour amplification, which - theoretically at least - would mean the relative positions of the people in the proverbial 8-person system would remain the same rather than deviating in extreme inequality
Got it. Thanks for such a considered answer. Actually Varoufarkis had a good stab at explaining how that last scenario (anarcho-syndicalism I expect) might work in practice in Another Now. It was complicated to say the least! And one thing you seem to appreciate is if it’s complicated to explain and ‘get’ then it’s almost impossible to get traction for change with.
Trying to wrap my head around the backwards logic of State debt and what is really happening with the current circumstances of state debt increasing, inflation, and diminishing productivity. From your framework, I understand it as the following:
States have issued "too many" tokens into the system, which initially served as catalysts for igniting labor power. However, the resulting outputs of the labor power (profits) were scooped up by powerful players and wealthy individuals and are being stored away (in assets and the stock market), instead of circulating back in the system.
The working population is left with the inflated prices, but a disproportionate flow of tokens back to them in exchange for their labor. This results in a depression of productivity.
In theory, the working population would have to work more to get more tokens, but that doesn't seem to be happening? One of our systemic limits, I guess.
It seems like automation is allowing for the top of the system to separate from the bottom by simply pushing it out of the system. The bottom is left to fend for itself (and/or is being violently controlled), while the top keeps extracting from the earth and the remaining "middle" is pushed to the new "bottom".
It's strange seeing this all play out in slow motion. Looking at your visual representations, it's as though pieces of the bottom and sides are crumbling off slowly, but most of the system is bound tightly together by these rigid webs and scaffoldings of interdependence. Right now, enough components are still working that the whole thing can lop around like a gross Frankenstein. I think it's highly unlikely that a large enough piece in the middle should cave in. Instead, it will likely mutate and undulate maintaining the interconnected mesh with new peaks of power rising up and changing shape.
I would love to imagine a visual representation of what a stable state system could look like.
Probably the best distillation of the international monetary system I have ever seen. Great job, Brett!
Thanks so much Michael - glad you find it useful
This is impressive.
How to account for energy and automation since the Industrial Revolution is not covered but that’s not so much a criticism as a question I have.
As in: if our perceived debts in the interpersonal space are based on labour, what happens when that labour is more and more done with a combination of energy and automation?
Hey Dave, glad you like it. In terms of energy and automation, those essentially scale up labour power, but a monetary system is always about *relative* balances between people, so as the general level of labour productivity goes up in the network (aka. as the power of your labour gets amplified by energy and tech), the relative positions of each person might remain the same or change, but a money system is always about that relative position. This is why we can have people in incredible levels of poverty, despite the fact that our absolute labour power has been massively amplified over time
Another way to conceptualise this is to reimagine the collective output of the eight people as the 'living standard', but individual members of the network that fail to get an equal claim on that are below the average - in a capitalist system this is huge problem, because to compete you often need to be staying above the living standard so that you don't get 'left behind'
Just to add to that: One of the big stories of capitalism has been the control of the 'means of production' by small groups of people - aka. control of the means of *labour amplification* - which means some people contribute the labour, while others own the means of amplifying that, which means those others get to take an outsized cut of the absolute increase in labour power in the overall network due to energy and tech. The alternative would be for every single person to collectively and equally own the means of labour amplification, which - theoretically at least - would mean the relative positions of the people in the proverbial 8-person system would remain the same rather than deviating in extreme inequality
Got it. Thanks for such a considered answer. Actually Varoufarkis had a good stab at explaining how that last scenario (anarcho-syndicalism I expect) might work in practice in Another Now. It was complicated to say the least! And one thing you seem to appreciate is if it’s complicated to explain and ‘get’ then it’s almost impossible to get traction for change with.
Wow! That piece gave me a bigger kick than my morning coffee. Thank you Brett!
Ha ha, pleased that you like it
Brett, brilliant and thank you - you continuously help me understand more & better.
Alongside energy balance (there’s a planet earth involved somewhere), there’s an uneasy balance with “violence” (or maybe we call it a “jubilee”).
I am waiting for the rest of the world to call on (or enforce) the 1 year of “labour” from all 300m+ US citizens, they are “owed”.
Wow I love this. Amazing work.
Trying to wrap my head around the backwards logic of State debt and what is really happening with the current circumstances of state debt increasing, inflation, and diminishing productivity. From your framework, I understand it as the following:
States have issued "too many" tokens into the system, which initially served as catalysts for igniting labor power. However, the resulting outputs of the labor power (profits) were scooped up by powerful players and wealthy individuals and are being stored away (in assets and the stock market), instead of circulating back in the system.
The working population is left with the inflated prices, but a disproportionate flow of tokens back to them in exchange for their labor. This results in a depression of productivity.
In theory, the working population would have to work more to get more tokens, but that doesn't seem to be happening? One of our systemic limits, I guess.
It seems like automation is allowing for the top of the system to separate from the bottom by simply pushing it out of the system. The bottom is left to fend for itself (and/or is being violently controlled), while the top keeps extracting from the earth and the remaining "middle" is pushed to the new "bottom".
It's strange seeing this all play out in slow motion. Looking at your visual representations, it's as though pieces of the bottom and sides are crumbling off slowly, but most of the system is bound tightly together by these rigid webs and scaffoldings of interdependence. Right now, enough components are still working that the whole thing can lop around like a gross Frankenstein. I think it's highly unlikely that a large enough piece in the middle should cave in. Instead, it will likely mutate and undulate maintaining the interconnected mesh with new peaks of power rising up and changing shape.
I would love to imagine a visual representation of what a stable state system could look like.