One of the first things students learn in economics is the concept of scarcity. Finite resources, unlimited human wants. William Dugger and James Peach offer a different foundation - the concept of abundance.
"Abundance does not mean that everyone is satiated. It means that everyone has enough within the limits of knowledge of society...Abundance means that everyone has adequate healthcare, nutrition, education, transportation, recreation, housing, self-expression, and personal security" (Dugger and Peach, Economic Abundance).
They propose the goal of universal employment via raising the minimum wage, cutting taxes progressively, raising government spending, and loosening monetary policy.
While I deeply agree with the authors, I see two crucial obstacles in not only their vision, but the vision of others before and after.
1. What does "adequate" mean?
They say abundance is determined contextually, by the potential of our society and technology but that's not helpful for policy making.
2. How can power dynamics change when the people in power don't want them to (or when we don't care enough to change them)?
Political
Money's ability to influence the political process, and thus economic possibilities has been well documented and for a long time. Several authors with visions of the future have included political change alongside economic ones. Dugger and Peach are no exception. However, it is a puzzle to me how power dynamics can change will still existing. I fear the only "shock" that will change the dynamics will be something ugly.
Economic
"It is the fear of unemployment which makes the workers put up with the authority of their employers" (Joan Robinson, The Problem of Full Employment)
Robinson, Marx, Kalecki, Dugger, Peach, and countless others have identified unemployment as the tool to keep workers in line. The fear of losing your job, your income, your life(?), wills you to accept exploitation and oppression. You don't quit your job that pays you 1/100th of what your boss gets paid and 1/100th of your value because well, what if you don't find another one?
Relieving the fear of unemployment through job guarantees or government issued income payments would seem to provide space for workers to resist unfair practices and could usher a more equitable society. But again, what would alter the dynamics that exist now? Why hasn't this change already occurred?
The thought of telling businesses to remunerate more fairly or to not fire people during recessions is outrageous, I assume to not just business people. Interfering in business management is interfering in the market system and we all know the market works fine without any help. Sarcasm aside, it might be detrimental to start poking around in business, but hasn't it been detrimental to the unemployed and the poorly paid thus far? Hasn't income inequality been detrimental for ALL? How did business win the coin toss to see if the economy works best when we appease business versus workers?
I think there may be other reasons for a lack of change in income inequality and infiltration of money into politics, one of them is complacency, "In Marx's view, educated men were usually members of the upper class, and thus they owed their position, prosperity, and superior knowledge and education to the privilege inherent in the capitalist system. Therefore, they would generally do everything within their power to preserve that system" (E.K. Hunt, Property and Prophets). Most people probably aren't members of the upper class and want to save capitalism, but I do think there's an inverse relationship between income and the desire to demand change. Empathy can produce strong incentives to demand change, but once one is not immersed in deprivation daily, a sense of urgency is lost. Those that are still in deprivation might not have the time or energy to be demanding things.
Will we reach the great ideas that have been put forth from Robinson to Dugger to the visionaries to come with the existing dynamics and apathetic and/or unheard citizens?
*The title of this post was stolen from the new X-Men movie, but I thought it was just too fitting to not.
No comments:
Post a Comment