Home » Money » The Economy of People

The Economy of People

The economic teachings of Pope Francis are a hot topic. People feel a need to weigh in on what he said whether they understand it or not. But it’s the simple fact that so many don’t understand where this comes from that is probably the most important point in the public debate.

To sum it up: Money should work for people, and not the other way around. That shouldn’t be controversial, but having forgotten this way of looking at things is may be at the heart of economic and social cycles. The simple answer is that it’s time we remembered. More to the point, that philosophy is at the heart of American tradition going back to our earliest days.

What it takes

What it takes

An Economy of People is not a radical teaching at all. Barataria has written on the topic in many different ways, especially outlining the difference between Capitalism, which we don’t really practice in its purest form, and Marketism. The latter is a belief in free markets and the power of people coming together freely to exchange for their own benefit. Capitalism, by contrast, is the belief that money will lead the way. The difference is not academic at all.

A free market is something of an ideal. Markets, by themselves, are almost never truly free. Anyone looking for an edge is going to take advantage of their unique position – or even build one to the best of their ability. There are many known “market failures” that cause markets to be less than free.

For example, let’s say you know something that no one else does. Perhaps you have developed a new way of building something or created a new invention that has not figured out yet. That’s an “Asymmetry of Information” that gives you an edge. It also means that your competition is at a disadvantage. Push this hard enough and you might even be able to develop a monopoly based on your ability to do or say something of value that no one else can.

Branding, as a marketing concept, is also about building a monopoly of sorts. If you can get into popular culture the idea that your purse, soft drink, or any other thing is the one true definition of coolness, then anyone who wants to be cool has to come to you to buy your product. You want “the real thing”? Buy it from the only place that has it.

Naturally, people learn from each other and knock off brands all the time. Given time and enough resources, markets will sort themselves out without a concerted effort to create a true monopoly through methods like buying out a resource in its entirety. But on the other end, not everyone necessarily has access to the same markets meaning that there is never true equality of opportunity.

That’s where the traditions of the United States come in, expressed through laws and programs throughout our history. Universal education became a standard in the 1820s in large part to give everyone the most basic access to markets. Slavery was outlawed for similar reasons, above and beyond the moral ones. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 made explicit monopolies illegal. The New Deal re-organized many things, especially banking, to make sure that everyone had access to credit.

Hard money was hard to come by in the Panic of 1819

Hard money was hard to come by in the Panic of 1819

These examples from our history were chosen carefully. Each came at the end of a cycle of Depression. The first time that word was used was by President Monroe to describe the downturn of 1819. A serious downturn came in 1857 and had a lot to do with the Civil War. The Long Depression of the 1880s culminated with a renewed attention to the fair operation of business. The Great Depression of 1929 needed nearly everything to be sorted out before we could move forward.

It’s been noted here in the past that business cycles are getting longer, a fact neatly missed by Nikolai Kondratieff when he first proposed them. It seems as though as our life span increases everything is stretched out. That’s because they are more than business cycles – they are social and cultural turning points. The downturns occur when we conveniently forget what our Grandparents taught us, which were the lessons from the last Depression.

Here, in the fifth such Depression in US history, what we have forgotten is that money has to work for people. We let go of the ideal of a free market created not by natural forces but as a deliberate act of policy expressing our most basic values. Indeed, value and values are the same word – or at least they must be.

This Depression started because we forgot that money should be the slave of the Economy of People, not its master. The first step towards ending this cycle is simple to remember.

30 thoughts on “The Economy of People

    • I will take that challenge. 🙂 This is a summary of a lot of things we’ve talked about over the last 6+ years, and as usual the purpose is to move it up to a new level. Some kind of real political platform is called for, yes. I think this is the kind of issue that Democrats could win with.

  1. You have a great way of making the obvious complicated. 🙂 Seriously its a good topic, but it is going to be lost on a lot of people unless you can boil it down a lot more.

  2. Pingback: Pragmatism | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  3. Pingback: Lines and Language | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  4. “Given time and enough resources, markets will sort themselves out without a concerted effort to create a true monopoly through methods like buying out a resource in its entirety.”

    I like the overall thrust of this post, but am confused by the above sentence. I’m not sure whether it’s endorsing or denying the view that markets, if left alone, will always eventually reach equilibrium, i.e. that monopolies can’t last indefinitely and eventually everyone in the market will arrive at some kind of symbiosis with everyone else. I just wanted to chime in with the suggestion that that view is by no means self-evident. It’s entirely possible that unregulated markets are sometimes or always self-effacing, e.g. if a single firm managed to monopolize the entire economy.

    I’m also skeptical of your characterization of capitalism vs. marketism. When I try to conceptualize capitalism, it seems like the word denotes a capital-driven economy, i.e. a society in which self-expanding private property is the primary mechanism for organizing production and distribution of resources. In this definition of capitalism, marketism naturally *becomes* capitalism as private property/capital becomes less evenly distributed between market actors; and since capital is self-expanding (e.g. it takes money to make money), small inequalities tend to get large over time. (I unpack this a lot more here: http://centralcircuit.com/2014/05/26/does-capitalism-create-inequality/)

    So, yes: markets are in some instances great tools for organizing resources, and the economy should work for human beings, not the other way around. But I’m not sure you’re being critical enough of the underlying dynamics of markets and their connection to our current woes.

  5. Pingback: Bizarro World Finance | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  6. Pingback: Forward! 2015 & Beyond | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  7. Pingback: Why Economics? | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  8. Pingback: The Expectations Game | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  9. Pingback: Money is Just a Tool | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  10. Pingback: Coopertition | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  11. Pingback: Catching Up on Old Stories | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  12. Pingback: Tax Profits, Not Labor! | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  13. Pingback: Fear Doesn’t Glitter | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  14. Pingback: Post-Capitalist, Pre-(Something?) | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  15. Pingback: People, not a Machine | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  16. Pingback: Labor Day | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  17. Pingback: Pope Francis, Teacher | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  18. Pingback: Too Much Credit? | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  19. Pingback: Big Ideas Fall Apart | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  20. Pingback: Post-Capitalist, Pre-Whatever? | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  21. Pingback: No Credit / Bad Credit | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  22. Pingback: Keeping Score | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  23. Pingback: The Case for Pragmatism | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

  24. Pingback: Unlimited Credit | Barataria - The work of Erik Hare

Like this Post? Hate it? Tell us!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s