TO PRODUCE AND DISTRIBUTE THE GOODS AND SERVICES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE WELL-BEING OF SOCIETY.

• In particular, these goods and services should address the physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual needs of individuals and groups of individuals within the society.

WHERE REQUIRED, TO PRODUCE AND DISTRIBUTE EXCESS GOODS AND SERVICES THAT CAN BE EXCHANGED WITH OTHER COUNTRIES FOR RAW MATERIALS OR FOREIGN GOODS AND SERVICES THAT CANNOT BE PRODUCED EFFECTIVELY LOCALLY.

• Here we must take care not to take advantage of other nations in such exchanges. As a moral nation guided by spirit, we must conduct all of our affairs with honor.

• In general, such trade should be balanced so that no nation is burdened by unwieldy debt.

THE PURPOSE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT "FREE ENTERPRISE"

THE PURPOSE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT MARKETS AND PRICES.

THE PURPOSE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT MAKING PROFITS.

MONEY IS SIMPLY THE MEDIUM WE USE TO EXCHANGE GOODS AND SERVICES.

• It makes it easier than having to barter for everything. Essentially all barter is done against this common representative unit, and then the units can be exchanged at the set rates for goods and services.

• There is nothing that sets the value of goods and services other than demand and the price someone is willing to pay.

• This can cause difficulties with people receiving fair value.

ECONOMIC HISTORY HAS NOT BEEN "FAIR"

• The wealthy have had unfair advantage and used it ruthlessly.

• Several became extremely wealthy via less than honorable means.

• Until this century, there was a great delta between the haves and have-nots. It's only in the past 50 years or so that the middle class has risen so greatly in level of comfort.

• Even with the rise of the middle class, over 80% of the country's wealth is still in the hands of less than 10% of the population.

UNLIKE THE GOVERNMENT, THE ECONOMY IS NOT AND HAS NEVER BEEN CONSIDERED TO BE SOCIETY'S SERVANT.

• In many respects, the Captains of Industry have more power than anyone in the government.

• These men are beholden to no master in our present society.

FOR MANY DECADES, INDUSTRY HAS EFFECTIVELY DECIDED THE COURSE OF LEGISLATION IMPACTING THE ECONOMY.

• This meddling was clearly not in the best interest of the public.

• The tobacco industry is one case in point that has so entangled itself with political careers of key legislators, that it has enabled itself to profit immensely at grave cost to the general welfare.

• Perot's warnings about the incredible influence of the PACs on our representatives in Washington are a testament to how effective these lawyers are at saving money for the companies that hire them.

IT IS TIME TO TAKE THIS POWER BACK.

• The bottom line is that the resources of this country belong to the people, not to any companies. And, if our legislators have taken this away from us, they did so without our approval in the process.

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT MAKES THE CURRENT WAY OF DOING BUSINESS IN THIS ECONOMY SACRED IN ANY WAY.

• We the people can decide to change the rules of the game at any time. This is completely within our rights and our power.

• For instance, if we decide that families should only be able to pass a limited of wealth to their children, we could:
  • Enact a law that allows up to $100,000 per child without any tax penalty and then tax any amount above this by 90% or even 100%.

  • This would make the children "more equal" and would require that each individual earn his/her wealth by his/her own merit.

• As another example, we could limit the amount of profit that any company can make off of any endeavor. Perhaps this should be set to something like a maximum of 15%.
  • The actual percentage might need to be dependent on the nature of the goods and services that the company or individual provides.

ECONOMY AS A SERVANT OF THE PEOPLE

• Employs the skills/talents of people toward labor that results in useful products and services.
  • Presently many jobs do not really use skills/talents hence don't provide sufficient challenge. This is largely due to the nature of the jobs and the availability of a pool of people to do those jobs.

• There is no reason for not having 100% employment.
  • A job is the means by which an individual provides a service to society.

  • There is plenty of work in society for everyone to have something useful to do.

  • Where the private sector stops, the public sector should pick up in defining projects for the society to do and services for individuals to provide.

• The economy should produce and distribute the goods and services required to meet the collective needs of society.
  • When we have people going hungry, this is not happening.

  • When we have homeless people and families, this is not happening.

  • When we have people living below the poverty level, this is not happening.

COMPANIES ARE DRIVEN BY THE BOTTOM LINE [PROFITS]

• This is not surprising, it's what the game of free enterprise is all about. Providing service or value is at most a secondary factor.

• Further, short term profits presently receive the greatest attention.

• In some cases, this directly puts the public at risk.
  • Cigarettes are a key case in point.

  • Decisions to recall and fix versus risk the potential lawsuits involved with a design flaw in a product have come to light several times in the auto industry.

• It's scary thinking that the cost of human life comes out to be as small as it does in their equations.

• However, it's not surprising that the cost to the animal life or other aspects of the environment are treated with even less respect.

• The question is: Do we truly want to allow such companies to even do business in our society? After all, it is our choice!

THE ISSUE OF "FAIR WAGES" FOR A DAY'S WORK

• What should the range of wages be?
  • Is it truly fair that this should be several orders of magnitude? Especially given that individuals put in similar amounts of their time and energy.

  • Wage effectively determines the amount and types of goods and services one can afford. What factors should impact this? Is it fair that one's natural skills and talents are so important in determining this?

• What should the minimum wage be?
  • This should be governed by the minimum level of goods and services that an individual is entitled to in society.

  • At the very least, this should result in an individual or family living above the poverty level. An open issue is how much above the poverty level.

• One's performance should be judged relative to one's abilities.

• Increase in wages should be based on merit and need.
  • Merit is demonstrated whenever the individual does something that provides greater value to society.

THE ECONOMY IS THE MASTER RATHER THAN THE SERVANT IN SOCIETY TODAY.

• Yes, the economy delivers a sufficient quantity of goods and services to those who can afford them. However, the economy also determines who can afford what in society.
  • Industry essentially determines what most jobs will pay, and the amount that a job pays determines what the individual with that job can afford to buy.

  • Yes, the individual has some choice of which specific goods and services to spend money on, but this is highly influenced by commercials that entice people to buy specific goods and services regardless of their true value.

  • Many goods are basically duplicates of one another, with no real differences between them. Also, many times different models are similar as well.

• The economy operates on a 6-8% unemployment rate.
  • This keeps a ready reserve of people to fill vacancies and has the net effect of keeping wages lower than they would otherwise go.

  • Those who are unemployed either have to go to the government, to private charity, or to family for support -- assuming they aren't pushed out to the streets. It would be much easier on all if everyone worked.

WE ALLOW COMPANIES TO USE UNFAIR TACTICS TO GENERATE A MARKET OR NEED FOR THEIR PRODUCTS.

• Advertising, in particular, uses psychological techniques to get people to consume specific products.

• As an example of how well this works, the only money that the television networks make is through advertising. This money pays all the bills for all the programs that are run on TV, including all the high salaries per episode of the stars on the hottest programs.
  • You can bet that companies would not be paying such high advertising costs if the net result wasn't increased sales, increased market share, and increased profits.

  • Further, on top of the cost to the networks, companies pay extensive amounts to advertising agencies to make sure that the 30 or 60 second spot that they come up with has the greatest effect.

  • In many cases the cost to produce a one minute commercial exceeds the cost of a 60 minute show.

  • The cost for a 60 second spot for the Super Bowl this past year was $1 million.

• Actually, the bottom line is that we the consumers pay ALL of these bills.
  • The companies deduct these expenses from their income. They just use a part of the money they take from us to pay this expense.

  • Also, since in most cases the psychological factor produces the compulsion to buy, the manufacturer can keep the price higher and still sell it because in some way it has been justified as "better" in our minds.

• Clearly, this practice is not in our best interest.
  • It doesn't force manufacturers to compete based on value for price.

  • It doesn't ensure that society gets the best products.

• A whole industry (TV) has been created and is sustained by getting a large part of society to spend a significant amount of time watching shows that primarily provide entertainment but also provide a wrapping for commercials that coerce us to consume products.
  • If the shows have such redeeming social value, let's pay for them directly and get rid of the noose that companies have on us. The bottom line would be lower cost as actor's salaries would be kept more reasonable.

  • At the very least, there should be a review panel to evaluate commercials.

• Of course, this would mean the TV industry would have to then focus on providing us with quality entertainment and educational shows. But, that is the service they should provide anyway.
  • The amount of people tuned in could provide an indicator of how many people were being served at any given time.

  • The amount of resources expended in the production of various shows should be proportionate to the audience watching the shows, and/or to the overall value provided to society by the program.

TOO MANY SIMILAR SERVICES COMPETING

• Individual consumers should not have to waste the time to determine which among similar competing services is best.
  • There should be an impartial group that does this once, ar at least lays out the information in a way that makes it easy for the individual to decide.

• Where services are truly "equal", let's quit all this waste of energy and find a fair way to split the market share, thereafter expecting the competing parties to cooperate to improve service and reduce cost wherever practical. Fighting over market share is WIN/LOSE for SOCIETY.

TOO MUCH COMPETITION, NOT ENOUGH COOPERATION

• Competition is supposed to keep prices down, thereby providing goods and services at the best price to consumers.
  • However, when we get to the war of brand name against brand name, we're not really competing between apples and apples anymore, but in many cases between apples and oranges.

  • Even if we are competing between apples, it's between different varieties that have little in common other than being apples.

  • For instance, Coke vs Pepsi vs RC Cola vs Shasta Cola vs Generic Store Brand Cola. These are all Colas. Yes, they taste different. Yet, why are the first two roughly twice the price of the rest?

• In many cases, competition wastes effort because resources are being redundantly applied across two or more companies.
  • At times it is useful to employ competition to motivate and foster multiple teams to work harder and to get added innovation on something.

  • However, too much competition can burn people out.

• Cooperation that allows multiple groups to take advantage of the best that both have to offer, allowing better solutions faster.

JOBS ARE NOT TAILORED AROUND INDIVIDUAL SKILLS / TALENTS

• Society wins when each individual is operating at their peak and applying their abilities in a manner that is of the most service to society.

• The individual also wins in this situation since this form of expression typically is one that supports pursuit of happiness.

• Most jobs in society are not set up in this way. Manufacturers or companies have particular jobs that they are willing to pay to have done that require various types and levels of education and skill.
  • In many cases these jobs are repetitious and boring. In fact, the only reason many haven't been automated is that the cost of labor is still cheap compared to the cost of automating.

  • In some cases Unions have stepped in to standardize the working conditions and to fight for fair pay. However, this has been a long and hard struggle.

• Within society, for each job that needs to be done there are one or more people who are right for doing that job.
  • It is extremely important to society to fit the right people to the right jobs!

UNFAIR "OWNERSHIP" OF PROPERTY

• This is one of the toughest economic problems to deal with.

• How much ownership of property can be allowed insociety without incurring the problem of the "haves and have-nots"?

• "Right to Use" is probably a better term than "Own", and such right should probably not extend past one's own existence.
  • Some things should be considered as personal property -- clothes, furniture, jewelry, books, and other personal effects.

  • But, land, this is another matter entirely. Here, the law of the Indian's seems more relevant. How can one own mother earth, or father sky?

• And, what about ownership of one's house?
  • Again, right to use seems enough. The landlord should be the society.

  • This would make everyone tenant/owners in a sense.

CONVENE A NATIONAL ECONOMIC CONVENTION

• Define the service that the economy must provide to society.

• Define present shortfalls in providing that service.

• Identify key infrastructure changes needed to address shortfalls.

• Explore changes that need to be made in "ownership of property".

• Determine whether Captains of Industry will cooperate in good faith.
  • They will probably not take kindly to relinquishing the power they now have.

  • However, the people will not be denied. The economy must serve us.

  • Allow industry to come up with a plan to modify the economy so that it serves our needs for full employment and for better goods and services.

FREE TV FROM IT'S RELIANCE ON COMMERCIALS

• Companies will need other means of advertising their products.

DEVELOP A PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTING INFRASTRUCTURE CHANGES

• Some education of society may be required to explain what is being done and why. Many presently have no awareness of this.

• These are major infrastructure changes that impact both the way companies do business and the way individuals work. Cooperation between companies is rarely practiced in the current environment.

• Rather than trying to push consumption of fixed goods and services, industry should be projecting actual need, producing sufficient goods and services to meet the need, and using any remaining resources to work on generating new goods and services.
  • Yes, this smacks of master planning that got the Soviets in trouble.

  • However, we already know how to produce more than enough and have the appropriate capacity in our factories and service industries. The Soviets never had this.

  • Further, to some degree manufacturers are already doing this based on knowledge of market share. Otherwise their production would exceed sales, increasing inventory.

DEFINE A NEEDS HIERARCHY AND ENTITLEMENTS

• The purpose of the economy is to produce and distribute the goods and services required to meet the needs of society.

• Needs must be defined for each individual and for various family structures. In addition, the entitlements (i.e. what the economy as an arm of society will provide to meet these needs) must be specified as well for each of these conditions.

• The structure should provide incentives that encourage individual growth and greater contribution to society.
  • These could be it terms of higher wage so that one could buy more goods and services. This could even include a better house or job.

  • Another alternative would be in terms of funding some project that the individual was interested in pursuing.

  • The bottom line is that there should be a range of incentives that would appeal to the range of individuals in the society.

• Some level of equality or "fairness" must be achieved in this area.

EXAMINE THE PRESENT DIVISION OF WEALTH AND COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT DISTRIBUTES IT MORE "FAIRLY".

• It is time for the injustices of the past to be righted. Exactly what they were matters not anymore.

• Decide to what degree past generations (family) can financially assist future ones.

• Decide to what degree a person can accumulate wealth in their lifetime. Do we really need people with personal wealth in the billions, or even the millions for that matter?
  • In a free country, there should be no limit. Yet, because things are so interdependent, without society as an audience or market, these same individuals would not have been able to be so successful.

• Money is a somewhat arbitrary commodity. What something is worth is dependent on what someone will pay for it, not on anything related to cost. Somehow we need a means to assess value.

DEVELOP AN ECONOMIC VISION FOR A WORLD OF TOMORROW.

• Where and how will people live?

• What goods and services will they consume?

• Where and how will they work to provide these goods and services.

THEN DEVELOP A PLAN TO MAKE THE VISION A REALITY.

• What infrastructure changes are required?

• What job training and job restructuring is needed? Perhaps even the restructuring of entire industries.

• What steps are required to achieve the plan?

• What prototypes are needed to demonstrate concepts and/or explore alternatives?

REINVENTING THE ECONOMY.

• Get rid of the waste, but in a manner that assures people of continued employment at their present wage level.
  • The bottom line is that society pays all salaries be they public via our taxes or private via the prices we pay for goods and services.

  • There is no place else for the money to come from.

  • If we're going to pay the salaries, we might as well get our money's worth. However, we need to assist any displaced people in finding something more productive to do.

• Get rid of, or at the very least, moderate the profits.
  • The bottom line is that society pays all profits as well, and profits provide no useful service in return -- other than possibly keeping investment money available in the economy.

• Empower people to constantly improve all part of the systems used to produce and distribute goods and services, and the quality of those goods and services. Also, encourage creativity to come up with new goods and services to meet society's expanding needs.

IT IS TIME TO TRANSFORM THE ECONOMY TO SERVE SOCIETY.

• This is a revolutionary idea in economic thought, one not likely to be embraced by those with economic power today.

THE ECONOMY EXISTS TO PRODUCE AND DISTRIBUTE THE GOODS AND SERVICES REQUIRED TO MEET THE PHYSICAL, EMOTIONAL, MENTAL, AND SPIRITUAL NEEDS OF SOCIETY.

• Distribution of goods is a decision for society to make and for the economic system to implement.

• This requires determining who is entitled to what. People are not used to thinking in terms of being collectively responsible for meeting the needs of individuals in society.

THIS WILL ONLY HAPPEN IF A VISION IS GENERATED ALONG WITH A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTING THAT VISION.

CONVENE A NATIONAL ECONOMIC CONVENTION

• Define the service that the economy must provide to society.

• Define present shortfalls in providing that service.

• Identify key infrastructure changes needed to address any shortfalls.

• Explore changes that need to be made in "ownership of property".

• Define a VISION for an economic system of the future (circa 2002).

TAKE STEPS TO IDENTIFY AND ELIMINATE LEGISLATION THAT UNDERMINES THE ABILITY OF THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM TO SERVE SOCIETY EFFECTIVELY.

GET THE PACs OUT OF WASHINGTON DC. ANY LEGISLATOR CAUGHT DEALING WITH A PAC SHOULD BE FIRED, PERIOD!

Copyright © 1995, Wayne Hartman, Revised -- (18 Sep 95)

DISSEMINATION FOR EDUCATIONAL OR NON-PROFIT USE IS BOTH PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED.