Wait a minute...are you telling me that the first issue of importance when thinking about living sustainably is really the most efficient use of the labor force? Yep, I guess so.
Don't get me wrong, I do think there are a lot of important topics that need to be discussed; such as income disparity, sustainable fuel source(s), proper nutrition, public transportation and many others. However, I wonder if solving the labor economics dilemma could lend itself to helping solve some of these other very important issues.
The dilemma?
We have a labor economics dilemma? Good question…in my opinion, the answer is, “Yes!” We, the westernized world, have developed a global economy that focuses on profit as the driving force behind all decisions. I believe the main reason for the focus on profit is that we correlate extra monetary resources with security. The logical thought process has been more money = more security as we are able to purchase health insurance, houses, cars, etc. The problem is we don’t need many of these aforementioned purchases. What we need is security.
Many people work a job so that they can generate an adequate income. Now adequate is a relative term, but nevertheless, the modus operandi is that we are to strive to climb the corporate ladder, buy a nice house and drive a good, reliable, if not fancy, car. We strive to get the next promotion, earn the next bonus and do a little better, personal profit being the driving factor. But what does our world look like when we all aim for this? We end up with suburbia.
We end up with people moving a little further from their place of employment so that they can build the “perfect” home with an adequate yard to enjoy. A little piece of “paradise” that we can own for ourselves. In order to live here, however, we become reliant on this nice car to get us to and from work, where many people spend their lives earning money. Health insurance is also necessary to ensure the hospital and doctor bills can be paid. Some employers offer this, but only to the higher end positions. If you have to pay for insurance yourself, then you most likely work even harder to make enough money to afford it.
Okay, so there are a few ramifications, but for those that can find a job in a certain region, things work out and their needs are met, right? Nope. In addition to utilizing the benefits of a global economy, we have magnified specialization. Everyone has their special role with a fancy title and very few people manufacture actual merchandise in the western world. What this means is that we have become almost incapable of adaption. We used to be “jack of all trades” and now we are full of one trick ponies. What happens when that “trick” is no longer profitable?
Take Detroit, and much of Michigan, as a perfect example. Detroit was just another community in the Midwest until the advent of the automobile. The city doubled their population from 1910 (465,766) to 1920 (993,078) as they boomed onto the global scene. Many immigrants to the country sought out Detroit and Southern Michigan as they had plenty of manufacturing jobs. With plenty of profit in the auto industry, other players entered the automobile market. The race for profit ensued and there have been many changes in the way a car is made. The automobile boom, along with all the supporting manufacturers, has long since declining in the region and Detroit has become a story of a city that exists without a real industry.
Many people have been dealing with real decisions as a repercussion of this “city without an industry.” Not the least of which is what to do with their house, car and reliance on a job that no longer exists. The global economy idea has created communities that rely on purchasing power to support their security and existence. People find themselves stuck with mortgages on houses they can’t afford, payments on cars they don’t need to drive to a job that no longer exists. The perfect bubble of prosperity has busted.
The solution?
Well, how about “a” solution. How many times have you heard somebody say something along the lines of, “If I can just stick it out at work, then things will be okay.”? A lot of people put up with their jobs because they think the income is their security. What if, instead, there was an option to have those basic needs taken care of without the stress of finding a place to live, finding an adequate job, or finding a way to get to the job? What if we created a society where the basic worries of life are eliminated?
I think a big key to this solution is to redefine our understanding of the word “security.” When profit means security, then we understandably focus on profit and can forget what security really means. I think what we all really strive for is the basics. We need a sufficient and safe place to call home. We also need good food to feed our bodies and quality health care. I think a legit argument exists for the need to participate in recreation as well. We need pastimes and opportunities to explore our environment and enjoy the planet we call home. We need these opportunities for security and profit is not the answer. The answer is flexibility.
Imagine a society that offered several jobs in several industries. By becoming less specialized in one industry, we generate a need for many types of workers. With many types of jobs, there are many options for workers to find a niche that is satisfying to them. If we changed the common motto from “bigger is better” (economies of scale) to “better is better”, then we realize the value of a satisfied workforce as well as a satisfied community. By finding the happy middle ground between complete specialization and “master of none” then we can build a society that has workers capable of adapting to the different work environments. If one sector of industry becomes less favorable, for whatever reason, workers have other industries with a low learning curve where they can find work.
Proper Prior Planning
So far, I’ve been making the argument for less globalization and an increased sense of a regional community. This, I believe, is a key to sustainability, but in addition, I think we can do better for the people of our societies. I think we can help them feel safe and secure, not be afraid of losing something, but by proper motivation to be a part of something positive.
How about, as part of their payment, workers would receive an appropriate form of housing, food and health care. Yes I’m talking about a planned community that provides employment, housing, food and health care. I’m talking about being purposeful in the way our societies meet the needs of the people who live in them. What a novel idea. When we have a society that is focused on security for the people instead of profit margin, then we have a society that focuses on all of these basics of life, not just a currency that can be used to buy them (but may not).
Imagine this…
A society where there are multiple industries to choose from as a contributing worker. In return, we as a society will guarantee you an opportunity to live in provided housing throughout the community. Food rations, or some other approved method, will be distributed to each worker to trade in for quality local food that is grown by local farmers. Universal health care will be available for all members of the society. Since everything is localized, there is less need for individual automobiles and people are able to access all parts of the society via a light rail and public bus system. Among the necessities would be public parks, libraries, groceries, etc. All of the essentials of a happy and healthy life need to be accessed via some form of public transportation.
The clear advantages are a stress free life. There is no need to worry about your industry going belly up and being without a job. There is no need to worry about fixing the car when you don’t need one; no need to worry about financing a car when you don’t need one. There is also no need for home maintenance and repairs when you don’t have to own one, let alone find a mortgage. No worries about being declined health insurance or being able to pay the astronomical premiums.
What you have gained is time and flexibility. You have freed your mind of all the daily worries that plague the average person and have allowed it to think about the things you want to think about. Whatever floats your boat is what you can spend your conscious hours on. Maybe you want to read a book…or even write one. Maybe you want to pick up mountain biking but never have with the lawn to mow, gutters to clean and oil that needs to be changed on the car. You have time on a daily basis that is now freed up to focus on whatever makes you happy.
You also have the flexibility to change your mind. Instead of being stuck in a dead end job, but can’t leave for fear of living without an income, you can pick up and move at the drop of a hat. Whether you want to stop making push brooms and start making solar panels on the other side of town or even if you want to move from Chicago to Vancouver, you can do this in a flexible, regional country. Imagine if all regions were set up with light rail and public bus systems as well as the infrastructure laid out above. You can have all the basic necessities of life and live in the region of your choosing. You have flexibility of time and location. You have true mobility in life that can never be had by our system of mortgage owing, car owning, job dependent families of today’s global economy. And societies have gained a flexible workforce. If one region needs more workers, we have a flexible society to meet that need.
Ramifications worth mentioning
A few minor things do need to be accounted for in this “ideal” society. There still needs to be a relative hierarchy of income levels. No one wants their doctor to be a hobbyist. We need good education for positions that require it and we need to be willing as a society to pay these people more. If they’re willing to gain more education and expertise to learn how to treat me when I’m ill, then they deserve extra compensation. I don’t think they need several magnitudes more in income, but they do need noticeably more.
There needs to be some sort of balance of how much someone works and how much they are compensated. Perhaps citizens earn their different services (housing, food, etc.) based upon sufficient contribution to the workforce. Citizens qualify for these services as long as they work a minimum throughout the year. Maybe it’s something along the lines of 9 months of work equates 3 months of vacation. They can also qualify for a sufficient form of Social Security if they work enough years in their lifetime. Maybe 30 years in a lifetime is sufficient but these are things that would be hashed out over time and consideration.
These could be baselines, but there can be incentives for people who would rather more money than time. Those willing to give up vacation time for work should be allowed to make more money. Those people could then afford nicer things, like the big TV or the nicer apartment. Different people are motivated by different things and they should be allowed to pursue them, within reason.
What does that mean?
Well, it’s really just an idea. I personally think it’s a great idea that needs tweaking, but it’s a great conversation starter. Will it happen in our lifetime? I don’t see it, but I hope I’m wrong. Will it ever happen? Maybe, but only if enough people talk about the things that really matter in life.
If it does, however, it would mean that people would be ensured of a quality job, a quality lifestyle and a society that focuses not on profit, but on meeting the basic needs of us, the people. We would have less excess waste, less motivation to buy and consume as much as we can as we generate more and more profit. With less consumption, we can come much closer to living not just a personally sustainable life, but a societal sustainably life.
So yeah, a great place to start when talking about living sustainably as a society is to address proper labor economics.