Capitalism and Socialism are in a climatic feud. Why? Because they are dying...
Capitalism creates competitors owned by the same parent company to capture brand and product aversion.
Socialism hates this and just wants the goods.
We call this a false narrative, it is meant to distract you from the actual story.
The evolution of ideas, or memes (not the photo kind), has a known process. Some idea is held as a thesis, and it is challenged by an opposite, an antithesis. The tension between these two ideas creates stress, which when broken, produces the synthesis, or the resolution and combination of the ideas.
The raging tension between capitalism and socialism is indication that we are at a breaking point. So what will be the synthesis of these two systems?
Hunter gatherers’ wealth was in their catch.
The patriarch with the largest herd was revered as the wealthiest man.
If animals were wealth, and they fed upon the land, then land must be a more abundant source of wealth than animals.
A single manufacturing plant squeezed into a few small acres of land could produce products, which would spread from hand to hand across the land.
But what do manufacturing plants feed upon? What powers the industrial revolution? A simple concept: the mold, a blueprint for a product. When built once by an expert, it could be used to endlessly copy an idea into reality at the low cost of the raw materials. But all a blueprint is, is some information.
The internet triggered the information age... Information became free.
Our modern day currency is stuck in a legacy system that assumes economic goods, products, etc. are made up of physical materials that require capital intensive labor to create or replicate.
To predict the cathartic future of economic wealth, all we have to do is consider what ideas feed upon. Like animals feed upon the land, ideas feed upon people.
Because the right narrow network of people can produce an idea that is the mold for information arbitrage, that when set in place, can manufacture digital or physical goods at a scale that outpaces the economy itself.
Your dollar doesn’t get traded for a pencil, instead you got stock in the company equal to the cost of the pencil plus the profit from that purchase. Then, the cost portion automatically gets redeemed for the pencil, and you keep the penny stock portion on the profit. Over time, if the company’s stock goes up, your remaining portion also appreciates. However, if at any point there is a loss of trust in the company from the public, they could all sell, tanking the company, and potentially eliminating years worth of profit.
Freeism as the production and distribution of goods incentivized by algorithms. Specifically, to impart my bias, with the goal of free peoples, free products, for a flourishing planet.
In the case of Google or Amazon or Facebook, there are a lot of people on their network.
Compare this to Uber or AirBnB or even Bitcoin or AT&T, there are a lot of people in their network, but that they can’t control.
This subtle difference is in how resources are accessed.
Because when you are on a network, value gets sucked up. When you are in a network, opportunity gets pushed down to you.
Allocated based on need because its a more optimal system.
Distribution is awarded over transaction.
The theory of economics is that both people walk away with more value than when they started.
But the problem is that no economic system outright accounts for this increase in value except for incremental baseline adjustments relative to inflation. The closest thing that approximates added value is the stock market or credit card rewards program.
A network algorithm can track this though, and many already do. The math behind giving is easier than tracking both addition & subtraction.
But first, we need to understand some of the base variables that any economic system might have. Of our current research, there are three main ones to consider — whether the currency is 0-sum or not, whether the currency uses ratios or units, and whether the currency operates on a good or a connection. There are plenty of bad configurations. But the one we will explore is an additive-only, ratio-based currency, modeling connections in a network.
Coffee is effectively a post-scarce resource, but sports cars and fashion are not. These are what we will call luxury goods. Luxury goods are given away at the discretion of the host.
Because if you are seen as providing valuable services to someone who objectively provides the most value to the rest of humanity, then you take share in that ratio of wealth. But remember, they set the “price”, and somebody of that status has the pickings of quality service. People have to seriously consider the worth of their time.
Richer means giving more, and if you give more than others, then maybe you can redeem the penthouse suite at the hotel tonight.
Network effects based on ratings.
Need a simulator
More Stuff I Do