Jobs in a Resource-Based Economy

I would like to offer my suggestions for how the concept of employment could be addressed, defined, and/or enacted in a resource-based economy (RBE).  I work in healthcare, and I see a wholly viable paradigm available for emulation in the medical community’s path of what I will refer to as “Rotation-and-Specialization” (RAS).  I will refer to the occupation itself as a service performed by an individual to serve shared needs.  Calling a job in a RBE a service makes much more sense to me, because individuals would need to serve in a role (ostensibly several) in order to maintain necessary services.

There would be two broad categories of service: armed and unarmed.  If the entire population of the world is not adopting a RBE, then an armed service is a necessary reality.  The machinery that would make a RBE thrive however, is the unarmed service.

The best way to illustrate my point is with examples:

1. John Q. Public is a senior in high school.  One of his classes each day is a one or two hour block called “service rotation.”  He spends about 4-6 weeks on each rotation, performing/assisting with a service.  His current rotation is Janitorial service.  He leaves his campus and shadows a person who has specialized in Janitorial Services to see what it is like.  He and his friends all joke about how much they hate “trash duty,” but they would invariably develop a shared experience, and a deep respect for how difficult the service is (and hopefully be less likely to litter as a result).

John finishes his Janitorial Services rotation, and moves on to his Food Services rotation.  He is shadowing citizens specialized in Food Services, and his duties include harvesting food resources from community farms or ‘urban farm skyscrapers,’ transporting and organizing resources for ease of access, handling citizen complaints about food quality, etc.  He used to always wonder how the bananas ‘got on the shelf,’ and now he recognizes why his parents & neighbors don’t take more than they need.  They’ve all had to serve in food services, and they know that it makes an unnecessary amount of work for their fellow citizens.

Six weeks later, John moves on to his Peace Officer rotation.  He rides along with specialized Peace Officers, and learns about what their daily service consists of.  He enjoys this service so much, that he decides that after high school, instead of going to college, he wants to specialize in this service, thus completing the RAS model.

2. Sally, John’s friend, rotated with him on all of the same services.  However, Sally didn’t find Peace Officer service palatable, so at the end of the year, after she’d been through all of the rotations that didn’t require a Bachelor’s degree, she was sure she wanted to go to college.  In college, just like high school, she had a course devoted to experiencing other specialties, which also gave the “specialists” in each of those specialties some much needed help.  She enjoyed her research rotation, where she helped people specialized in certain areas of science to carry out research.  She completed her Legal rotation effortlessly, but didn’t want to be a lawyer.  She really liked her medicine rotation, where she followed around a Family Practice physician who made house calls.  If she wants to specialize in medicine, she’ll have to finish her degree, and then apply to medical school.

Under this RAS model, inherent problems exist that certainly warrant addressing.  For example, what would happen if everyone wanted to specialize in the arts, and just sit around and make music all day?  My first argument to this question would be that this doesn’t happen now, and people’s interests are so diverse and talents are so varied, that it seems highly unlikely that a majority of people would settle on any one service.  However, since it would be possible, it requires addressing.

The solution would (as most do) rely on majority rule.  A simple vote would allow citizens to decide what’s fair.  The nature of an application process tends to suffice at weeding out a majority of unqualified candidates.  Because, even though no one receives monetary compensation, you’d still want the most qualified person serving as a lawyer, or physician.  One suggestion could be requiring persons specialized in the ‘soft’ services (music, literature, etc.) to spend a certain amount of time each year performing services with the lowest census.  In that case, it might make more sense to require all individuals to spend a small portion of time (2-3 weeks per year) rotating through those services with consistently low censuses.  If no one wants to be a janitor, then everyone must equally support the burden.  This allocation of human resources seems most appropriate in an economic model with the same goal of allocating natural resources.

What if someone wants to change specialties?  Have at it.  As long as there is space in the census available for an extra teacher, or an extra lawyer, diversification would be welcomed.

What if someone wants to try multiple specialties?  Certain specialties (and the demands within each subspecialty would come into play) would allow for citizens to have multiple specialties.  A Peace Officer could retain his specialization in that public service whilst also serving as a professional sports player.  The particulars of how “specialist” status would be retained would obviously vary from service to service (tests, performance reviews, etc.)

What if someone gets fired?  Time to pick a new specialty.  Maybe you shouldn’t get to access resources unless you’re serving (in some capacity).

Who would decide who gets to do research?  That’s a tricky question.  Under the RBE model, it may not be fruitful to perform any available research study that we can imagine (but this sounds like fodder for a completely separate article).  However, a problem-based research approach keeps in line perfectly with a needs-based model, such as RBE.  For example, [x] amount of people die in a year from disease [y], therefore individuals specialized in pertinent areas request that someone perform the research service to discover a cure.  This isn’t dissimilar from how things work today, and more than likely an imaginative individual would recognize the need for research before the problem gets to be a large problem in the first place.  But under a RBE, studying the varying colors of bat droppings doesn’t provide a useful service (unless perhaps there’s such a surplus of staffed specialties that the endeavor doesn’t detract from maintaining economic utilities).

Requiring individuals to rotate through all available services would create a shared experience that fostered empathy among citizens.  The added benefit is that all services would receive support staffing, and the needs of the collective are maintained.

25 thoughts on “Jobs in a Resource-Based Economy

  1. Think this is being over complicated a bit. Rather than completely revamping the educational and employment system, we simply need to remove money as the commodity and replace it with service hours earned toward retirement. Moving between areas of employment would be easier as well as better addressing the issue of matching ability and personality to different professions. issue of trade with other nations still using a monetary system would require maintaining said system for international trade. JUST THINK OF ALL THE WASTED TIME SPENT MANAGING MONEY. It’s crazy

  2. I’m not sure you fully understand RBE. As others commented mudane jobs would be obsolete. It is also important to understand that this system has no government and the organization of a military is unlikely, not to mention the whole world will have to be involved for a RBE to work. It is not wise or necessary to make people provide “service”. In a RBE work such as providing health care (jobs that still need human work) are the only type of charitable work in this society; people will do it with out force in order to occupy their time and feel fullfilled.

  3. I have enjoyed the article and ideas presented in the comments greatly. I have used many of your ideas to design a comprehensive plan which I will post. Id appreciate any additional input.


    Ideally, as laid out by the vision of The Venus Project, technology will erase the need for mundain jobs in a RBE (Resource Based Economy); such as Janitorial, Sanitation, Transportation, Construction and Maintencence. Allowing more freedom for the individual to pursure personal intrests
    and self-growth. While this is a plausable vision, it lacks a path of progression. We have to look at
    current human nature[A] and develop a plan to reach the ideallistic vision of The Venus Project[D].
    To skip [B] and [C] would cause rejection of the idea of a RBE and prahaps invite calamity.

    Now, currently our cililazation is brainwashed as to how a socity must act in order to prosper.
    We live in a reward/punishment socity where we are trained that one must work a task in order to gain
    both necessities for life and ability to enjoy lesure activities. It has been this way since humans
    left their close-knit tribes of hunter/gatherers and moved to citys. To completely eradicate and replace said socity would not work, at least not until we’ve acclimated future generations to the concept[B] and have global support from all nations[C]. So, the question remains as to how we accomplish [B] and [C].

    Throughout my research into RBE’s, i’ve came across many fourms with other individuals that
    share the vision of a RBE and their ideas on how to bring the Venus Project to fruition. I will outline
    the most well thought-out and, potentially, most effective means of doing so here.


    Let us assume that the first Venus city is in full swing. Located in a place where all needed resources could be procured for the sustainability and prosparity of the city. It is already populated by like-minded individuals who strive for the betterment of mankind and already contains multipule generations from childeren to elders. This city will still have need for a human infrastructure as
    we are not at the technological level to have an automated one. Which means we’ll still have need for
    Janitorial, Sanitation, Transportation, Construction and Maintencence staff along with Peace officers and other Public Service professionals. There will also be a need for Farmers and Fishermen. Let’s classify these as Type 1 professions, requiring on-the-job training without much more educational advancement. In the current system, these professions are filled by necessity for survival and availibility of openings. There is little respect for the people holding these jobs because the majority
    of the public has not ‘walked a mile in their shoes’, so to speak. Through a redesign of the educational system, this can be fixed giving all a ‘respect factor’ to these professions. Let us say that once a person reaches highschool, included in the cirruculem is a two hour block of “service rotation” throughout the highschool years where the individual will spend 4-8 weeks working as an understudy in each of the Type 1 professions. This will not only give the individual a new-found respect for the position but they may find that their aptitude lies in these professions creating a replinishment of staff after the highschool years if they decide furthering their education holds no intrest to them.
    For instance, a person who spends 4-8 weeks in Janitorial and/or Sanitation services will likely not litter or cause unnecessery mess because they know how difficult it is to keep surroundings clean. A person spending 4-8 weeks doing Maintence and/or Construction services will likey have more respect for
    the community environment because they know how difficult it is to build and maintain the communities structures and public areas. A person who goes through the Farming and/or Fishing services will likey not take more than is necessary because they know how difficult it is to feed the population. This ‘service rotation’ will continue into College with Type 2 Professions which are jobs that require higher education and training including Doctors/Nurses, Lawyers, IT, City Planning, Teachers, Resource Management and other professions. Requiring individuals to rotate through all available services would create a shared experience that fostered empathy among citizens. The added benefit is that all services would receive support staffing, and the needs of the collective are maintained. This will be a part of acclimating the population.

    Another part of the acclimation process would be to keep the reward/punishment system and slowly
    phase it out as technologies advance and the mindset of our socity alligns itself toward the common intrests of all people. It goes without saying that all peoples will have access to necessities of life such as nutrition and clean water, basic clothing and basic shelter. However, to enjoy lesure activities or to gain access to more stylish clothing or shelter we should start with a Work Credit program. Let me elaberate; if an individual is pursuing education, be it K-12 or College level, they have access to lesure activities to spend their free-time. During the High-School and College years, students will gain access to more fashionable clothing and jewelery because they are involved in ‘Service Rotation’, contributing to socity. They also gain access to lodgings outside of their birth home. For instance, post high-school if they go directly into the workforce than they recieve the ability to get an apartment. In collage they will have an apartment with a roommate who is also in college, simillar to a dorm. When out of college, they can get their own apartment. When they marry, they can get a house. However, once an individual leaves the educational system they must contribute to socity in some fashion in order to have access to lesure activities, privite lodgings and more fashionable clothing/jewelery. This can be electronically tracked daily or weekly and connected to some form of identifacation that must be used in order to obtain anything, with the exception of basic necessities. This will give people the drive to work, allowing our socity to prosper.


    Until the world is in precicipation, there will be a need to trade with current nations. Requiring a surplus of goods to trade for whatever resources that are needed to maintain our initial socity. Not only that but, as we know with greed, if people see something they want they will try to take it. While this won’t be a problem inside the confines of our city, it may be outside. We’ll need a standing army to maintain defenses of our civilization against those that would want to take/destroy it.

    The best way I can see to get support is to spread state to state, country to country, nation to nation and finally contenent to contenent. We’ll start in the United States. While the prototype city is in Venus, Florida, i’d reccommend Arkansas, Colorado or North Texas to be the true growth area. With the Abundance of Rivers, Flat Farm Land and lower population densities it would be ideal. Once we get a foothold in the state and win over that states population, a majority vote of the population and approval of the state legeslater and congress will allow a succesion of said state to form its own country. Which will then spread border to border to neighboring states until the entirity of the United States is on board, at which point the international community will take notice and so on and so forth.

  4. The way careers are established now, the average person spends 40, 50, or 60 + hours doing the same job whether a doctor, a car mechanic, therapist, or a teacher. Personally, I don’t believe this a recipe for happiness. I think people would be happier if they were productively engaged some of their time with growing their own communal crops, humanely raising their own communal farm animals, beekeeping, learning to can and store vegetables and fruits, sewing our own clothes, spending time with children coaching etc. In a resource-based economy, I envision a career as part-time service to your community, and volunteering to help out in the community in other areas which would require oversight. But, we are so removed from nature at this point of human civilization, that just this fact alone contributes much to the stress of our lives, in addition to myopically doing the same job, day in and out for hours on end each day. If we were more personally involved in growing our own food, tending our own farm animals, collecting our own rain water, etc., I believe that life would be vastly improved for humans and the natural world around us.

  5. It’s time to organize and make this happen. I know about the Venus Project but, just talking about it doesn’t get it done though. Is there grants to be obtained, it there funding from folks like Buffet and Gates. If you can make a real business case you might see them saying yes to helping this become real. Live the dream.

  6. All of these ideas are great however I agree that we don’t need lawyers and that skills training by counsellors/psychotherapists is imperative. When attempting to make these huge changes one of the most common problems are the lack of:

    Conflict resolution skills: The ability to resolve conflict healthily.

    Problem solving skills: The ability to understand ‘systems theory’ and how everything is connected by systems and sub-systems working closely together for one another’s benefit.

    Communication skills: Learning the ability to connect up with one another by using appropriate language, body language; eye contact, and voice tone.

    Assertion skills; The ability to ask for what one wants without the fear of ridicule or guilt.

    The ability to be Being Mindful.:The ability to calm the mind through learning to take control of our thoughts so they don’t take control of us by learning breathing meditation skills.

    I believe this would be an imperative aspect of bringing about A Resource Based Sharing Economy.

  7. Respect for one another would be key to the system functioning efficiently on a whole.
    So everyone at one point throughout their “service” will a least have to participate/experience (in some function) of all the tasks at hand for any society to work as a “well oiled machine”.
    That way all the people will have an appreciation/empathy for the so called dirty tasks, that need to carried out.
    One can’t be an true expert on anything with just theory alone, one also has to experience the knowledge one has gained, so as to have a complete understanding.
    And perhaps crime will be eliminated due to the “respect factor”.

    1. “There would be no need for lawyers in an RBE society…”
      I agree. Instead of many lawyers, you could have a few Counselors that help mediate conflicts and provide assistance to connect people in need with the various services and methods/information. I presume the various services and information should be extremely easy to access online (with streamlined user-friendly interface with help/FAQ and potential video-chat assistance) but some people might prefer to have the insights/help of a person to get help with a personal or interpersonal problem, and other people might need the extra help like people with learning difficulties or people new to a community(that might not know the local lifestyle code of conduct) or to RBE in general.

  8. Some of the following ideas could be worth considering (sorry if long)

    imo we could determine activities *needed* by the community, and list them in a transparent accesible display, that highlights required activities with less volunteers, and makes available the infromation and education/training material. And that we also arrage for distribution of basic tasks that require basic training and can be done as a Do-it-yourself or with a number of potential volunteers from students to non specialists (no need to be a Gas Pump Specialist and have this as a job, when most people can do it themselves [not that there would be gas, since Tesla model S and Monorails etc but just as task example])
    Note that people could do a number of things for themselves leisure and so on that are not really needed directly, its just that its good to know what happens to be needed to make an informed choice

    1- LIST

    Red: No volunteer at the moment
    Orange: Insuficiant volunteers, some scheduled periods are currently empty
    Yellow: Barely sufficient, all shceduled periods have volunteers but there is; insuficiant backup/redundancy or insufuciant training for projected needs.
    Blue: Sufficient volunteers with adequate backup/redundancy and adequate levels of education/training to ensure future

    (the status also helps give indications as to what focus should be on, from reorganizing/distributing/do-it-yourself-ergonomics, to R&D to automate or prevent the activity from being needed.)

    Functional : Failure jeopardizes Life support (hydroponics), operations/production, Logistics,
    Services : Failure affects quality of life and comfort

    Emergency : Unforseen incident requiring immediate action (Fire, Accident Injuries)
    Essential Services : Power, Life support, Medical, Transport, Hydroponics, Communications (Failure causes immediate interference in other activities)
    Operational Activities : Main activity, failure jeopardizes or interferes with production and has a short-medium term impact operations
    Maintenance Activities : Occasional and instanced, long-medium term impact on operations short term impact on quality of life.
    Improvement : Education, training matrial, R&D long term impact on operations (if no one knows how to do X/repair Y/treat medical condition Z you have problems, since it may take time to have sufficient specialization it has to be taken into account ahead of time)
    Qualitative Services: Enhances quality of life (ex:SPA, Swimming pool) but abscence of which does not prevent/interfere with Essential Services or Operational activities.
    Arts & Leisure :

    IMPROVEMENT INDICATOR: a general number indicating the votes for improvement needed by members of the community (more quantitatively, different/qualitative improvments, greater variety/customization, etc). The number itself does not say what needs to be improved but is just to attract attention.

    Such a Protocol could be one of many community protocols available online, with a given community voting to choose which common agreement/community protocol they prefer, and on which aspects or parameters they want to change/delete/adapt/tweak to better suit their preferences/values and environment/situation/climate.

    2- There could also be DISTRIBUTED RESPONSIBILITY (with greater participation by students and citizens)

    Some people could be on call for minor actions (only limited training required) after anyone signals it.

    For example, In a School, you could have ;
    – Janitor Coordinator who is responsible in case there are no volunteers, who trains Volunteers and oversees tutorial and networking applications, and serves as Support for difficult sutiations.
    – On Duty Janitor Volunteer that has allocated a period, a
    – On Call Janitor backup (in case the On Duty is sick or abscent etc).
    – Anyone with Maintenance Basics which could be students in the school that are on call for minor actions for which they have been trained know how to proceed.

    A toilet has a roll of toilet paper missing, any student signals it with a communication device (tablet, smart phone). Any student tought Mantenance Basics can signal “ive got it” (which the janitor on duty sees on his tablet/smart phone) go to the storage take a roll and place it, if no student can or wants to, a Student responsible for Maintenance Basics goes when he has the time(between classes), otherwise the On Duty or On Call Janitor has it on his to do list and goes to replace the roll.

    So minor actions are distributed to a wider number of people with basic qualifications as self-service or minor interventions, so that a person with basics is on call for minor occasional actions that are not a job (no one considers himself a gas pump attendant because you self serve your gas fill of your car, and a brief occasional action frees up a person), and frees the person on duty from some of the work currently associated with the job.

    If theres a water leak, the student shows a photo to the janitor, who in turn can advise without authority (You can put a bucket I’ll be there in a few minutes).

    You could have an app with a floor plan of the school, where a student presses the location and takes a picture, the janitor gets a message, sees the floor plan with a red pin, touched the red pin and sees the photo.

    1. This should be ignored (I Cant go back to erase it)
      Functional : Failure jeopardizes Life support (hydroponics), operations/production, Logistics,
      Services : Failure affects quality of life and comfort”
      If someone can edit posts I would like to remove it its an error

  9. I think one of the keys to a healthy functioning RBE and society is people having the opportunity to be all they can be, to follow their heart and their passions… and contribute to the greatest extent they possibly can doing what they love and are naturally inclined and talented to do. Yes, a lot of naivity there, but I’m talking “ideal”.

    I feel they must have the ability to choose what they try and how they contribute – and this would also necessitate an understanding of who they naturally are, what makes them tick, their natural talents, and why they’re here. This is where education is truly valuable – self knowledge – and that would help to guide people to where they contribute and feel most fulfilled.

    1. In an RBE, resources are your control instead of money. It means that you must use resources to everyone’s gain/loss. It doesn’t mean that people go to the streets or get punished unusually, it just means reward and punishment is still there. But we must still have individual choice, and individual drives and motivators. Otherwise, people will be unhappy and move back to societies that better reward them when they do something good – like degrading back to a capitalism or socialism. And that defeats the purpose of doing an RBE.

      So I think this system of cycling people through every job is incorrect – nobody has the time or capacity to train for every field, or work every field at any given time. People should not cycle out of jobs, but rather into them.

      For example, say everyone has to start out working part-time after high-school. They don’t have to work at all until then. As they work part-time, they have to attend classes. If no part-time work is available, they have to attend full-time and do volunteer work or something. But basically, they are like everyone else – they have to log a 40 hr week of something. If they want to do this for life – fine. If not, they have incentive through better access to higher-grade resources – like being able to go to more bars, or more sports venues, or more leisure time, or more vacation, etc. etc., that could come with attaining and maintaining a higher level type of employment – a higher level of skill, a more dangerous job, or a higher level of accomplishment means the RBE rewards you with access to things you otherwise wouldn’t get the chance to have access to, generally.

      That means that we must reward people with more access to resources when they work higher-grade types of employment. Many times it could just mean time off. But everyone must log 40 hrs/wk, basically. Say I’m a programmer – I can log 40 hrs/wk by doing my normal job, and since most work is project work, in-between projects I can pursue further training or do my own work. As long as I’m doing something productive 40 hrs/wk, who cares what I do? And I still get access to go do stuff, and have vacation time – regardless of whether or not I’m still employed by someone.

      Now let’s think healthcare. We mandate with every higher-grade job, that everyone keep up to date with and also have the ability to advance the latest research, as well as adhere to standard practice and be able to challenge standards. That keeps with individual accomplishment and achievement, advances society through expertise, and maintains that people adhere to the highest quality of their work, instead of being lazy or committing malpractice. That alone maintains your viability to stay in that job – not your social stigma or social acceptance in the workplace, but the work you do alone.

      So you see – if resources are your control, not everyone will be a rockstar or athlete. First, you have to be able to fill the role. That means being good enough to tour if you are a rockstar, or play if you’re an athlete. Then it means you must maintain that role. But there is also no incentive for being a rockstar or athlete save some fame or getting to do something fun for a while. But you still have to log 40 hrs/wk of work, and if you don’t make it as an athlete or rockstar, you’ll have a hard time logging that 40 hrs…

      If someone commits a crime – that means loss of resources and possible detainment. Say, for example someone drives intoxicated – not so different from now, they lose access to driving for a while, or they must blow a 0 to start their engine. If someone does malpractice, and its found to have been intentional or discriminatory, that could mean detainment – and that means loss of pleasure and other things in life. Or it may mean loss of certain resources – like leisure or entertainment. Whatever the society decides is just for the crime and also just for the accomplishment… penalty = loss of resources, reward = greater access to resources or other rewards.

      If someone does something particularly wonderful – perhaps it means more leisure time. That alone could be big. Say you get one full year of leisure to do whatever you want. For example, if someone starts up a business that did a lot of good, or did some research that did a lot of good, or saved lives, or worked a dangerous job, or did a good service to the community, or did a lot of volunteer work – we could reward this type of thing with more leisure time – and that means an incentive to excel. We could set up incentives to excel in any field, that could mean time off work that others don’t normally get. Or we could mandate that they get to go to more places, and be able to do more things. Or take trips somewhere. Basically, it means being able to utilize more leisure resources more than what would otherwise be available – and that is incentive to excel.

      People must have freedom of choice and freedom to pursue happiness and accomplishment. That should be the driving force behind the work. If someone is comfortable working service-oriented jobs all the time, so be it. But most people would probably want to circulate into the higher-ranking jobs in order to have access to higher-grade resources. That could mean a lot of things in an RBE, but basically it means more leisure and access to more entertainment, etc.

      So you see, the answer to jobs in an RBE is simply this – greater access to have or do what you otherwise wouldn’t have or be able to do, and loss of access to these things should you do something criminal. There would still have to be choice to be able to pursue your own best interests, or group interests. There would still have to be choice in types of work you do, as well as types of study you do.

      Nobody has the time or capacity to train in all fields, nor can they work in all fields. But they have the choice to do what they want, and as long as they can validate that they spent the time doing something productive and for a certain amount of time – that’s all our RBE cares about.

      As long as the wheels of society keep on turning, and as long as the requirements of the society are met (job openings and research and development, maintenance, etc) then we have met our objective. Jobs will naturally open to people if there is the need. People can work under multiple disciplines if they choose. Or people can specialize in one discipline, and work either one full time job or many project-based jobs. They just have to be able to justify the time they log.

      What this makes is a mandate that people justify their work and log time doing work or training – and that alone keeps our RBE productive. But if nobody gets the chance to do research, do their own things, or promote their own ideas, we don’t evolve as society. That would be a problem, and indicates we must still allow for personal and community choice and freedom of work. It’s just a well thought out, simple law that dictates how an RBE would function properly..

      Then you might ask – how do we trade with non-RBE nations? It’s not hard, either. You just sell things to other countries in exchange for currency, then turn around and use that currency to purchase things from other nations. It would be a different kind of trade, but something you could still do…

      So you see, with simple work/training mandates as well as using resource allocation to reward or punish behavior, an RBE easily satisfies the psychological aspects of an economy, while rewarding good behavior through policy and making impossible or negating bad behavior. That would vouch for the viability of an RBE over any other type of society, meaning that society would never turn back.

      Hashing out the details of an RBE is much simpler than trying to perfect a socialist or capitalist society. You just have to think outside the realm of money and start thinking how would one function? How would we allow for choice and freedom? How do we allocate resources fairly? How do we determine these things? How would people pursue fields of work?

      The answer to these questions is simple – setting up laws that require these questions to be answered in an appropriate way. That is a societal problem, meaning the society will decide on how best to do it. But the basic formula must hold – or else we will easily wind up going back down the path of capitalism, should an RBE society fail like so many communisms..

      That means that once we find one way an RBE will work, others will find other ways – and we’re off to the races.

      1. Since I can’t edit this post, I should say the formula for jobs is simple: it comes down to the society mandating and evolving laws.

        One law for work might be – after highschool the person must log 40 hrs/wk. That means whatever work they can get plus training. If you cannot log 40 hours doing work, the rest must be spent attending classes or other types of training.

        Same law with full time work. You must log 40 hrs. It is mandatory that in any job, the person must adhere to the latest research and standards of practice. However, they can also advance research and challenge and evolve standards of practice.

        We set up a reward system for excellence. That means extra time off, more leisure activity access, more things that a person might want to be able to do. Let’s face it – we can’t all go skiing on the same day. We’re going to have to ration our resources – because yes, they are somewhat limited.

        So let’s turn to credits for leisure. A credit can allow you to trade that in for any leisure activity. Whatever that credit earns you, it equates to a full day of leisure. Credits are obtained by performing works, or doing new works. That is your reward.

        You don’t get punished for not working – you just don’t earn credits. That would make life insanely boring, and defeat the purpose of being lazy.

        You get criminalized just the same, only this means loss of resources and up to detainment in jail or a prison – just like today. No death penalty is required, and let me remind you that the US is one of the only developed nations to think it justice to still have the death penalty…

        Next is trade with non-RBE nations – you sell things, then you buy things. With currency you never had. It’s simple and also means you will never have a trade deficit. The more RBE nations there are, the better the amount of sharing and related activity across societies. It would mean it would be a benefit to the world to move to RBEs.

        So you see, it just means some simple laws to mandate some things. Resources are now your control – not money. But hashing out an RBE in detail is much easier at the stopping points than the cliff we dive off when trying to hash out the details of how to use money to implement better fairness, equality, and sustainability.

        That’s why I’m on here talking about RBEs. I can see how to implement them for sustainability. I can’t see how to implement socialism or communism by using new monetary flows to accomplish these same objectives of equality, fairness, resource allocation, resource reuse, and psychological benefit and societal progress. It just doesn’t come naturally with any other type of system…

        That’s why I’m saying – we are at crises points. It’s time to hash out the details of an RBE instead of saying it can’t be done – because it can be done if you just put your thinking caps on…

    2. I made a mistake below and re-introduced ‘tokens or credits’ as a form of control to limited resources…

      The basis behind my issue is we can’t just allow people to go skiing all the time, or playing around all the time. Therefore, there must be some form of law stating that you have to somehow justify that you are doing something productive.

      But we need a way to ensure that without using trade or barter, or we would regress back to other systems, like socialism or capitalism or barter. I guess the idea is to eliminate trade altogether and allow for free use of resources.

      In that, we have to identify that resources are not infinite. We live on a finite planet. There are also jobs that people do not generally want to do, some people would rather not work at all, and so we have problems.

      How do we limit access to limited resources? How do we ensure people are contributing to society?

      That’s why I said we would have to have some kind of means to say – ‘this is the amount of your contribution to society, so these are the things you can choose from to go and do’. Leisure time and activity would be a big resource to allow people to go and do. But we have to give choice.

      Perhaps we would have to abandon the notion of ‘free everything’ towards ‘contributory based resource allocation’. In that, it would mean that things like shelter, food, eating out, cars, transportation, drinks, education, helathcare, our every-day stuff – these would all be free. But things like sporting venues, skiing, fishing trips, vacation trips, concerts – these things would have to be based on a person’s contribution. And that can be as simple as setting up some form of ‘your contribution grants you a voucher for whatever you want to use it for.’ And that could be days off, months off, vacation trips of your choice, leisure activities of your choice, etc.

      In that sense, we would have to re-introduce some form of trade to account for contributions to society. Otherwise, these other people are right – nobody would work. We would all be doing things at our leisure. And while that does promote a happy society – it means we don’t get anything done – and when nothing gets done, it means where do we get our resources from?

      So I would say – if the system can’t work without some mandate or voucher or credit, then re-introduce credits for certain types of resource access (like leisure time and services), so that people have the drive to do something productive. If there is no incentive to do something with yourself, and you get nothing out of it – why do it?

      That’s why I say you need some law that says people must log activity. Their total contribution in = access to higher-grade resources. That not only makes it work but it allows you to transition. There is no way to do this without making leisure resources restricted according to societal contribution…

  10. Defining what is ‘service’ would be critical – I think the task would be enabling everyone to find meaningful and/or productive activity i.e. ‘specialist scrabble player’ or ‘specialist robot mechanic’. I guess the ‘robot’ component of the society’s production would be the counter balance.

    ” What if someone gets fired? Time to pick a new speciality. Maybe you shouldn’t get to access resources unless you’re serving (in some capacity).”

    Here’s an important edge. Controlling access to resources pertaining to service.

    The ‘crap’ work would have to be shared and I think continually by everyone throughout life – including retirement/age slow-eth-dom or dis-ability. If robots ‘bin’ all the ‘bad’ jobs, hussar! but I’m guessing there will be some ‘crap work’ to be done. In my experience a little crap work in your life is fine, even necessary for aesthetic balance, it’s only when the crap work is thrust upon you AND prolonged that the envy, anger, frustration sets in. Likewise ‘armed’ service in the protection of the enclave (assuming it wouldn’t have galactic hegemony!). Otherwise we would be back to a market and/or class privilege tout suite. It was with, and through, the division of labour and exclusive specialisation that these paradigms came to be.

    I like painting pictures. I’d like to paint them on the walls of people’s houses but often my ‘clients’ just want their walls white and not whatever I want to paint upon them – but if painting their walls white regardless one day a week keeps them happy… OK… and I can find such a small selfless(?) allocation of my time significant – but in a good way – in fact self improving.

    robot rights anyone?

  11. Thanks for your comments Sequoia. I’m not completely certain if you mean to agree/disagree with my ideas, but I find that our ideas are not in disaccord.

    Humbly, I’d offer a modified premise behind RBE. To me, the foundation of RBE is not “automation & maximal use of technology,” it’s organizing shared access to (currently abundant) resources. Technology and automation are great, but they’re just the current ‘best’ suggestion, a means to an end. If (for some strange reason) the tech fails, we still need mechanisms for accessing those resources. Thus, by removing technology from the equation, you find that the end (everyone getting fair access to needed resources) is the premise, not what we use to accomplish that task.

    I agree with your assessment that jobs (as we think of them today) will eventually be obsolesced. However, I think they won’t ever completely go away, because the need for some jobs won’t ever completely go away (because humans won’t go away). I used the model of “specialization” because (like a scout’s merit badge) I’d imagine that someday you would need to specialize in multiple skill sets, even if you’re not performing one ‘service’ all day long. And I move to change the term “job” to “service” precisely to emphasize that even if you’re ‘servicing’ a robot that’s performing a duty, the emphasis is on the fact that your individual efforts serve the greater good, and not your own personal monetary gain.

    Again, I’ll illustrate my point with an example: John Q. Public is now all grown up, and he’s ‘servicing’ some kind of malfunctioning robot that does the ‘job’ he used to do when he was a young man. He finishes his repairs and walks home. He hears sounds of struggle, and finds a woman being raped by a man in an alley, and there aren’t any ‘police robots’ around at the time. Because John specialized as Peace Officer, he has the authority to arrest the man.

    I agree that there are OPTIONS available for educational experiences similar to those I’m describing (especially since I’m taking the model from my own educational experience in medical school). However, I think that it would behoove a RBE to build this type of “it takes a village to raise a child” mentality into every facet of the mechanisms that give us the means to the end (shared access to resources).

    I get REALLY excited about this RBE stuff, I really hope we can see this stuff take more shape in our lifetime.

    1. Yes, Jason I see your points and they are well taken. The idea of going back to living in primative ways does not appeal to me, I have considered them carefully. “The One Community” is a good example. While this does appeal at a basic level, I prefer more technology, and creature comforts. TVP, and RBE advocate a modern society which serves all and focuses on effeciency and abundance, so this is what I desire. Having worked in the Medical community for most of my life, I totally understand where you are coming from. For the most part I agree. The only difference is I see a more peaceful society because I know what you focus on grows. The very thought of violent crime sickens me. Enough said. Thanks for a well thought out blog!

      1. I’m absolutely with you. I think tech is THE way to go (and it’s only going to get better). I’m not advocating less tech at all, the more tech that gets us all fed the better. If I have to scan my eye, or thumb to check out a bicycle, or grab a snack, or ride a magnetic rail transit system, that’s fine.

        Yes crime sucks but, that’s why it’s criminal (hey-Oh!). I’m thinking about writing an article about this very problem, but one of the biggest problems in a RBE is going to be dealing with people with mental illnesses, unless our medical tech just gets ridiculously better (which it very well may). I think peace will be inherent to the economic model, because there’s just so little fabricated disparity to fight about.

        Apparently I have even MORE reading to do, because I’ve never heard of “The One Community.” What is that?

  12. Excellent!
    Innovation creative problem solving, alternative ideas are exactly what RBE, TZM and Thrive need to promote and support. Approaches like this will bring these Movements to fruition and move from focusing on problems to collectively creating solutions.
    “Don’t fight a system to change it, create a new one to take it’s place” Bucky Fuller.

    Bravo Waveform!!

  13. As in all transitions change occurs in stages or steps. Nature or Natural Order determines these stages/steps through necessity. i.e. necessity is the mother of all invention. With this said, we can approach the challenge of meeting the human service needs of society. The premise behind RBE is automation and maximal use of technology to fullfill these needs. Jobs such as Peace Officer and Janitor may be necessary at first, but eventually the idea is to eliminate the need for such “jobs”. The educational approach offered is already in use and works well for the most part. I had a selection of vocational jobs I could optionally rotate through if I choose and if I needed to experience/exposure to an occupation I would attend a one day event with my parent or other volunteer who had that position.

    The process of change is one of trail and error coupled with necessity and curiosity. Apathy is the biggest enemy of progress. When people have something to look forward to and feel they are supported in the process and not used or taken advantage of nature will take care of filling the needs of society. Our task as pioneers of RBE is to remove the obstacles of progress while staying focused on the end results desired.

Comments are closed.