Friday
20Mar2009

Toward a New Economy

By Bill Shein
March 20, 2009

In the wake of the A.I.G. bonus scandal (which comes after, and in advance of, so many other corporate absurdities), and with public discontent over the longstanding economic status quo officially boiling over into fury, President Obama said on Wednesday that there will be no return to “business as usual.”

Reason Gone Mad - Bill Shein's award-winning newspaper column from the Berkshire Eagle.Before heading to California for an urgent meeting with America’s most respected policy wonk, Jay Leno, he also said, “The business models that created a lot of paper wealth but not real wealth in the country and have now resulted in crisis can’t be the model for economic growth going forward.”

It was a refreshing comment, given his administration’s muddled statements about reducing consumption (in Obama’s inaugural address) while also increasing consumer demand, as Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner recently told European finance ministers is the key to recovery. What this fog of contradiction ultimately means remains unknown.

For its part, Congress will soon hold long-overdue hearings on creating a new regulatory framework. No doubt the well-heeled lobbyists for the corporate elite are girding for battle, campaign-donation checks in hand, expecting their usual victories. Will they get them?

Let’s hope not. If the president and Congress (and the rest of us) are serious about a new economic model, then it’s time for bold action on ideas that are not, at present, receiving the attention they deserve. Because we have an unprecedented opportunity to reorient our economic life in support of fairness, equity, sustainability, and responsible stewardship of the earth. With a not-too-shabby side effect of actually making us happier and preventing the atmosphere from catching fire. Can’t forget that!

So, yes, let’s save the nation’s banking system, but let’s do it in a way that doesn’t further enrich those who gambled away billions while paying themselves millions. (Oops! Too late for that. Sigh.) And let’s rein in the “financial instruments” that few understand and that do little besides make money on money.

Are we truly tired of Wall Street’s definition of success? Then let’s embrace financial metrics that value companies on more than just a multiple of earnings. That means green economics that attaches real cost to externalities like environmental damage and social impacts. We can also better incentivize (with tax breaks) and reward (with our investment dollars) companies that value employees as human beings and this planet as a miraculous, finite, and fragile resource.

The fact that these investment priorities have long been labeled – derisively, by the so-called pros – as “socially responsible” is, to my mind, quite an indictment of any other kind of investing.

Let’s also accelerate the move to closed-loop production processes, in which energy is conserved and every component of what we manufacture is fully recyclable. Will this mean an end to container ships and long-haul trucks filled with cheap, plastic, overly packaged throwaway items? It sure will. And good riddance.

Most importantly, we must develop an economic model that doesn’t rely for its success on a fire hose of advertising that tells us we’re too fat, too poorly dressed, too ordinary, not having enough sex, not living glamorous-enough lives, not rich enough, not young enough, not driving the right car or using the right cell phone or living in a big house filled to capacity with gadgets and toys and fancy things.

Because if we are honest, we’ll see that modern consumer capitalism has become a cruel, manipulative, soul-destroying system that commits psychic violence on each of us – most notably our children – by nurturing self-doubt and mental confusion and unnecessary anxiety and regret. All in the name of “moving product.”

Indeed, striking evidence presented a decade ago by Yale political scientist Robert Lane demonstrated that even as market democracies identified and met every (alleged) consumer need, nearly all measures of individual happiness, emotional well-being, and satisfaction with life have declined. That’s what “business as usual” has wrought.

If we can emerge from this crisis with a responsible, low-growth, locally based, community-oriented, less stressful, full-employment economy, rather than simply recreate what existed before, we will have done right by future generations. We’ll also vastly improve the lot of the current ones.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Thanks to “business as usual,” Bill Shein earns a massive bonus even if no one reads this.

« Obama's 'Wonderful' World | Please Do Not Reply »

Reader Comments (2)

Yes, yes. Wouldn't it be great to go back to the era of the Native American indian, happily living in little villages; blissfully unaware of modern society and all the evil it has wrought. Our own little "low-growth, locally based, community-oriented, less stressful, full-employment economy." Except for the fact that the average age of mortality back then was about 35 and without growth you wouldn't have full employment. Sorry Bill, you would be an "elder" in the tribe - if you weren't already dead. Life that you describe would be brutish and short because we wouldn't be progressing. Without progress you get stagnation and death. The fact I'm reading this and responding on my computer should be about all the answer this article needs. By the way Bill, you would be one of the first unemployed in your little fantasy world - Where would you even get a keyboard to type on?

April 2, 2009 at 12:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterKB

@KB - It's often amusing that -- for no apparent reason -- the assumption is that any alternative to the current, out-of-control, unsustainable economic system is a return to "the era of the Native American Indian ... blissfully unaware," etc. Or that we'll manufacture our houses and cars and food from hemp. Or that we'll just live in caves. It is, KB, a red herring, and I suspect you know it.

No one who is seriously examining today's global challenges and opportunities is talking about that at all. But such retorts are an effective way to avoid serious discussion of making necessary changes to how we live on this earth. To me, "progress" can be made in countless ways that don't continue to consume the finite resources of the planet (and that don't lead to what you call "stagnation and death.") I'd strongly recommend you read "The Paradox of Choice" by Barry Schwartz, for one, as a good starting point for understanding how modern capitalism doesn't make us as happy as you might think.

We've been sold a story for too long that "progress" means economic growth at any/all costs, and that without it we'd all die a horrible death at an early age, etc. It doesn't, it can't, and I'd welcome your thoughts on the real, substantive proposals that are being discussed around the world. (I mentioned closed-loop manufuacturing as just one of zillions.)

Just to reiterate: No one's talking about ending what you consider "progress" (computers, modern medicine, etc.) Just bringing our economic and other systems in line with the realities of living together on this planet, and perhaps that means a change to putting profit ahead of so many other things.

The "progress" of a food system that force-feeds us with stuff that is not even "food" is not progress to me. The "progress" of using our ingenuity to develop -- literally! -- an army of robots and drones that kill is no progress that's good for our long-term survival. To me, "progress" is not an incredible ability to transmit information and knowledge around the world in an instant via computers and the Web that is used as yet another avenue for distraction, for pumping marketing messages into people's heads, etc.

To me, progress is harnessing the ingenuity and human capital that exists right now to build something better.

I have a feeling we might be able to find some common ground, KB. Especially since you seem to have dramatically misread or misinterpreted what I've written.

Thanks for posting!

Cheers,
Bill

P.S. Regarding a "keyboard to type on," you'll definitely enjoy this:
Apple Introduces Revolutionary New Laptop With No Keyboard

April 2, 2009 at 5:56 PM | Registered CommenterBill Shein

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>