Hypothetical:

If you could do anything & didn’t have to worry about the property trade & currency based economic concerns of investment cost, profit or loss … and instead, you could simply focus on your project goals, research, development, implementation etc.; while making efforts to ensure your project activities abide by the best possible & feasible practices, which minimise ecological & social harm, and maximise ecological & social benefits …

WHAT WOULD THAT PROJECT BE ?

So have a think about that, while I take a step back & re-explain what you just read.

PLEASE NOTE: the following description may sound a bit technical, but you (the user of the system) don’t need to understand all that complexity in order to use it; much like you don’t need to understand the international banking investment & finance concepts like derivatives, futures etc., just to use currency.

This system has (an equivalent) simple user interface, so in the same way: currency is the simple user interface for economics (encapsulating all that complexity so anyone can use it), or; as your keyboard mouse or touchscreen is the simple user interface to the underlying hardware & software of your electronic devices.

Encapsulation of complexity inside simplicity is the key!

Present Economic Paradigm vs. Open Empire:

What I’m talking about is this:

• You have an idea;
• You may or may not know exactly what that idea is, it could just be a vague notion of some creative concept;
• You may or may not know how to technically logistically or strategically bring that idea about;
• You may or may not personally have all the resources required to bring it about, or even necessarily access via friends & family;

… but you’re passionate about it nonetheless, so …

• You agree to some terms and conditions (see pages & posts relating to the Open Empire Trust);
• In a nutshell, you’re still the creator of your idea, but you’ve exchanged “ownership” for “beneficiary of” the project outcomes;
• Your idea then enters a process, evaluating it as follows:
  • Does this project increase or reduce ecological &/or social harm &/or benefits that already occur? (quantify)
  • Does this project cause or prevent ecological &/or social harm &/or benefits that are not yet already occurring? (quantify)
  • How do these quantifiable ecological & social gains & losses compare to other projects and options for resource allocation?
• But it may take some time going through the process before these questions are answerable.

THIS EVENTUALLY ANSWERS OUR FIRST (AND MOST IMPORTANT) QUESTION:

Is this project NEEDED by the world?

… AND IF the answer to these question is YES, THEN (arguably) it is something we should do. All other questions are secondary to this.

Compare this to the status quo, where these are the very last questions asked, if they’re ever asked at all; instead they’re replaced by the questions as follows:

• How can we exclusively (if possible) & maximally, hoard then exploit this resource, such as to create the greatest economic profit, from the least economic responsibility for any ecological or social consequences resulting from our exploitation of the resource?
• How can we artificially (if necessary) manufacture demand & scarcity to raise the price as high as possible?
• What is the threshold (or sweet spot) between supply, demand and price, where our profit is maximised?

This is how decisions are made. The fundamental basis of our present day currency based economics, is the most wasteful and insane system imaginable

OUR SECOND SET OF QUESTIONS IS THEN:

1. How urgently is it needed versus other uses of the same resources?
2. How is it best technically, logistically & strategically achieved?
3. Do we have the resources in hand to pursue this project further, according to its priority on the project slate (schedule)?

BECAUSE these are the questions that need to be answered in order to prioritise its development on a project slate, where it requires additional resources (beyond what the project collaborators can come up with themselves). This information helps advise the system (& other people) where their resources will achieve the most good, and thus enable the greatest growth in total ecological & social good.

As stated in other articles:

• IF a resource is not scarce, THEN so long as our methods of harvest, storage, processing, use and disposal are ecologically & socially friendly & sustainable, there’s no reason anyone should go without, nor have to pay for or trade anything for access to such resources … SO LONG AS we have a mechanism for motivating and rewarding people for supply of said resources.
• ELSE IF a resource is scarce, THEN we need to determine which allocation of that resource has the greatest merit, and such calculation is determined by things like the following:
  • Which use of a scarce resource is least likely to increase scarcity?
  • Which use of a scarce resource is most likely to decrease scarcity?
  • Which person or project has most merit (from assessment of the ecological & social consequences of their resource production, consumption & utilisation), for access to scarce resources they’ve applied for?

Thus everyone is motivated to contribute to society and to ensure they do the least ecological & social harm, while creating the most ecological & social benefits. This arrangement also prevents the gaining of social power via the hoarding of resources.

Back to our Hypothetical:

Ok … So in this hypothetical scenario:

• You’re not poor
• Your day isn’t wasted doing a job you hate
• No one else is either
• The environment is stable
• So long as you contribute to society &/or environment you’ll likely get access to at least some of the scarce resources you apply for
• Scarcity generally decreases rather than increases
• The planet ceases to be over populated relative to our resource consumption (as we’re no longer wasting so much via a consumption & growth based economic model)
• Religious & other forms of brainwashing has reduced, since there’s no longer a tax-free-status prop up for religions, and having to survive on pure merit they evolve back into something more akin to philosophical discussion groups
• … and to keep yourself entertained, you can pursue anything you want in life, you simply have to justify any resources you use & how you use them (from both perspectives of ecological & social consequences), if some of the resources you need to access just happen to be scarce …

SO WHAT WOULD YOU DO IN THAT WORLD?