April 14th, 2008 by Maja

Do we change from within or from outside factors? Is change possible from within the system or is a new system needed? If we choose to work from within the system, do we work from the roots or from the top? Or perhaps; from all these angles at the same time?

All these big questions sometimes make me feel like a change is impossible, but then meeting ordinary people living this economic crisis, it is clear that the existing system is not sustainable. Witnessing the fine line between prosperity and poverty, and seeing what multi-national companies are doing to the third world, people at home, and the environment, keeps reminding me of the necessity to change this system quickly, and not spend all energy debating over whether it’s possible or not.

It is a man-made economic system after all, and trading methods have changed before to suit the times, so surely they can change again to suit our present situation. Perhaps it is the free market ideology that is a failed utopia?

 We all know we are in a globally fragile state, and historically this is when extremist forces have got to power. Trying to conserve a no longer suitable system will be detrimental to everyone and heighten existing conflicts.

There is a real need to educate and supply ideas to the public, which give hope for a better future, and inspire solutions. It is up to all of us to decide if we want it.

mb

April 1st, 2008 by admin

Finding a way to marry our current economic system with humanistic and environmental concerns seems to be the challenge of our time, but is this perhaps an inherent contradiction?

In human history “the survival of the fittest” has been a matter of competing over available resources. In modern times this competition has been structured into a regulated global economic system, an attempt to create a more “civilized” world. Today our economy still reflects this competition.

With modern technology we have the ability to produce in abundance. According to both Amnesty International and the UN we are already producing more food than is needed to feed the world. We also have the scientific knowledge to maintain this level of production using new methods and materials that wouldn’t damage the eco-system or rely on depleting resources. Still, millions of people are starving and we keep over-exploiting un-renewables such as oil, gas and coal at a much faster rate than the planet can sustain. Somehow, this unequal distribution of goods and unsustainable management of scarce resources, constitutes a “thriving economy”.

Our system is dependent on constant growth, which has led to over-production and dwindling resources. At the same time we need to waste the surplus in order to sustain value, to balance supply and demand in order to keep our economy – not our environment – “healthy”.

People are beginning to ask the question whether our basic model of “competition” and perpetual growth is still valid and necessary. What was once “modern” suddenly doesn’t seem so “civilized” anymore.

Through the intelligent application of new technologies we have a possibility to re-structure our economic system more equitably, in alignment with what the planet can actually supply. It has become a matter of choice; collaboration or competition. We could choose to feed everyone. It could be a seismic cultural shift.

But instead it is argued that our culture and our technological advancements are motivated by the economic competition. There is a big fear that we would not have the incentive to work and invent if we didn’t have the need to earn money. But the competition for profit also creates the incentive for crime and corruption and there are many people already working for no profit, usually people who passionately love their jobs or can afford to do what they want. Have we become dependent on someone else motivating us to get out of bed?

What would happen to a culture where everyone actually had a free choice over how to live their lives?

March 21st, 2008 by admin

I sometimes hear I belong to a ‘lost generation’, which no longer cares about anything but themselves. But how can we trust our political system when we feel disenfranchised and unable to make a difference; what’s the point in caring for something that no longer belongs to us?

Even though economists recognize the influence of money lobbyists on the political system, and are aware that “the market” cannot in itself take action against global warming and pollution, there is no prevalent search for alternatives or debate about the fundamental workings of our monetary-based economy. The public debate is between the left and right of the same model; how much a government should intervene into “free trade”, a debate that many of my generation have stopped participating in, rejecting it as false democracy.

With the possibilities of modern technology at hand and the wisdom from civilizations that have risen and fallen before our own, is this really the best we can do? Why is there no real debate about alternative ways of managing our resources, where are the ideas for a new economic system?

I think it is time to focus on what solutions we have available since we are already despondently aware of the problems – and that is what Future for Sale is all about, and what I hope we will be discussing in this blog.

mb

March 20th, 2008 by admin

We need to think globally about global matters, and both the economic and environmental crises are global concerns at this point.

Who are we to say an economic transformation will never happen in our lifetime? Many things now commonplace were just as inconceivable 50 or 100 years ago. What ordinary person then could have conceived of “software” or the Internet? And who would have thought green issues would become mainstream one day?

In times of crisis there is both the threat of destruction and the possibility for rapid change, it is ultimately up to us what way it will go.

mb/sh