Building the Future Now

Tag: capitalism

  • Cooperatives and a New Economy

    In some of my previous blog posts, I mentioned cooperative businesses and a cooperative-based economy as an alternative to Capitalism and conventional-style corporations. But because cooperatives as a business form are not really well-known, I’d like to briefly explain them. 

    To begin, a very basic and broad definition of a cooperative business is where the workers own the business and make decisions about its operation. It is democracy in the workplace, democracy in the economic sphere. This cooperative model directly challenges the ownership model in our current capitalist system.

    In a worker cooperative, the ownership is moved from CEOs and shareholders to the workers themselves. They become the shareholders. The profits of the business go to the workers. But the responsibilities in running it as well fall to them. In most worker-owned cooperatives, each member gets one vote in the decision making process. The worker-owners make decisions through a democratic process, which can vary from company to company. 

    In order to help ensure that the business is profitable and tasks are being completed, the workers can elect a supervisor or even a management team, depending on the size of the cooperative. So it is not completely non-hierarchical, it is just that the decisions about the hierarchy are made democratically among the workers. 

    This bottom-up control has many advantages. One is efficiency. Workers that directly benefit from hard work and figuring out ways to save time and money will usually do just that. Having hands-on experience in the decision making process helps avoid the dumb decisions that we all know comes from the top, wherever we work. 

    Workers cooperatives also help pull wealth down from the upper tier of the economic system – from the wealthy – to the worker-owners who often live in or near the communities in which they work. Worker ownership helps anchor wealth in communities, instead of it being extracted by large corporations such as Walmart. 

    Many worker cooperatives have a specified ratio between the highest paid worker and the lowest paid worker. It can be 9 to 1, 7 to 1, or 5 to 1 depending on what the workers in the company decide. This helps wealth to not be concentrated among the top tiers of the company, while still allowing for some upward mobility and incentives for career growth. 

    Here are a couple examples of worker-owned cooperatives operating in the United States in a range of industries. 

    New Era Windows

    This worker-owned cooperative based in Chicago sells energy-efficient windows throughout the United States. They formed after an abrupt closure of the plant in 2008, eventually purchasing the company in 2012. By 2015 they had 20 employees and were generating around 1 million in revenue per year. They are still going strong today. 

    Namaste Solar

    Namaste is a major solar installation company in Colorado that has been operating for over 20 years. It currently has over 60 worker-owners, and is a top rated solar company. 

    Select Machine, Inc.

    This machining shop was sold by the retiring owner to the workers, becoming a cooperative in 2010. It is located in northeastern Ohio, and it currently has 11 worker-owners. It specializes in metal applications for construction projects.  

    Palante Technology Cooperative

    Palante Tech Cooperative formed in 2010, and provides technological services to non-profit corporations and other similar organizations. There are currently 8 worker-owners at the company. 

    These are all examples of worker cooperatives around the United States. A current estimate of the total number of American cooperatives, though, is only around 612. Compared to the rest of the world, worker cooperatives represent a small slice of the business landscape here in the United States. Increasing that number could result in a ground shift in our economy and society. 

    Mondragon Corporation

    To see an economy composed of cooperative businesses at a larger scale, we can look at the Mondragon Corporation in the Basque Region of Spain. Mondragon is a federation of ninety-five cooperatives that make a wide range of products. Mondragon operates in four economic sectors, Manufacturing, Retail, Finance, and Education, and is the seventh largest corporation in Spain. It employs about 70,000 people, 80% of whom are worker-owners. 

    The impact that this corporation has had on the community around it is enormous. In the town of Mondragon where it was founded, it has been noted that there is not extreme wealth, but there is not any poverty. A majority of the townspeople have shares in the company. This extends to the communities around Mondragon where many of the cooperative businesses are themselves located. This has helped the overall Basque Region, which historically has been a less economically developed area, turn into a more prosperous one.

    All in all, cooperative businesses provide more wealth and stability for the workers and communities where they are located. During the economic downturn in 2008, Mondragon as a federation of cooperatives spanning multiple industries, was able to avoid mass layoffs by shifting workers from impacted industries to ones that were affected less. This took sacrifice on the part of all the workers in the company, and it was a very different decision than the executives and shareholders in capitalist corporations made.

    Cooperative businesses still operate under the same forces of competition and the need for innovation just like any other business. So a cooperative economy still has those same forces just like our current capitalist system.

    The primary difference is who owns the company, who makes the decisions, and who profits from it. It makes so much more sense that the workers in the business should be the ones in charge. What do most shareholders really know about the day to day operations of a specific company? Almost nothing. 

    I want to make it clear that I am not selling a utopian dream. Cooperatives are difficult, they take time and effort. It entails making business decisions with your coworkers. Not all cooperatives are successful, just like any business. And working in a cooperative is not for everyone. That’s okay.

    But for those of who want something different, who want to make an impact with our work, cooperatives are the way to go. They are the ultimate team ball, we’re just playing a different game than Capitalism.  

    Additional Reading:

    What is a Worker Cooperative?

    Spanish Town Without Poverty

    How Mondragon Became the World’s Largest Co-Op

  • Is Capitalism Really Responsible for our Modern World, Part 2

    Part 2: The Role of the Public Sector in Innovation 

    One of the primary justifications for Capitalism is that it is the cause behind our modern world, creating the comforts and health benefits we all enjoy. This is the second part of an essay that critically examines that claim. In this part, I will be focusing on the impact of research and innovation that has come from the public sector. 

    The term “public sector” means any sort of research funded by public money, whether through federal, state, or local governance. This means the military, public universities, and governmental agencies such as NASA and the National Institute of Health. 

    Starting with the US military, there have been a multitude of innovations that have come from the Defense Department. Maybe one of the most profound innovations is that of the internet. The prototype for this was developed by DARPA, a highly innovative research arm of the US military. In addition, most of the developments in computer technology and science in the early years of computing were from publicly funded universities.

    So much of our modern world is based upon this foundational development of computing and the internet. Over one trillion dollars of US retail commerce happens online each year. Social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter exist because of the US military’s invention of the internet in the late 1960s.

    Add to the internet the following list of items that the US military either invented or substantially helped in the development of; the microwave, GPS, jet engines, canned food for mass production, synthetic rubber and fabrics, superglue, jeeps, EpiPens, WD-40, and many other items. The list is pretty exhaustive. And that is just for the US military, not to mention other militaries around the world.

    Another major source of public sector innovation is NASA. Maybe even more than the military, NASA has contributed greatly to our modern way of life. Public funding put a human on the moon and developed most of the technology to put satellites in orbit. Satellites are a critical component of our interconnected world, allowing almost instantaneous communication from almost anywhere on the globe. 

    Beyond satellite and rocket technology, NASA has created or been a major part in the development of the following items: scratch-resistant lenses, memory foam, cochlear implants, freeze-drying, digital cameras, ear thermometers, wireless headphones, advancements in baby formula, cordless power tools, artificial limbs, housing insulation, and solar cells…to name just a few. 

    In the field of medicine, the federal government has played a massive role through agencies such as the NIH, public universities, and research institutions. One of the most notable achievements of publicly funded research is that of the human genome project. Achieved in only 13 years versus the 15 years it was projected to take, this cracking of the human genome has transformed medical research. 

    Beyond this, public funds have funded much of the basic research for medical advancements that is not viable in the capitalist market. A good example is the Nobel Prize winning research of Julian Axelrod at the NIH on neurotransmitters in the brain. This research has led to the development of a wide range of drugs to treat depression. 

    Another major discovery that altered the modern world is that of penicillin. It was discovered by Alexander Fleming, a researcher working on a publicly funded project at a publicly funded hospital in the UK. This discovery is arguably the most significant medical breakthrough in modern history. It allowed for the creation of antibiotics that have saved millions upon millions of lives. The infant mortality rate has seriously decreased because of penicillin, as well as post-surgery deaths from bacterial infections. All in all, the discovery of penicillin has extended the average life expectancy by 23 years. 

    Cancer research is another area where public funding has driven a large share of the innovation. Add to this the fact that insulin was discovered at a public university in Toronto, Canada. Beyond this, I could list a whole host of drugs and medicines discovered from publicly-funded research that benefit people everyday.

    All this shows something very impressive. That we, as a people, have come together and through our elected officials have hired some of the most talented researchers in the world. Researchers who often toil in obscurity, and without the compensation researchers in the corporate world receive, to make all of our lives better. It’s an amazing thing, and it has nothing to do with Capitalism. 

    This doesn’t mean that Capitalism has not come up with innovations and inventions. It has, the automobile is a primary example. But it’s hard to argue that Capitalism is the cause behind innovation when so much of our modern lives was developed through publicly-funded research. 

    In conclusion to this two part series, Capitalism is an economic system where innovation does happen. But it is not the cause of it, and it is not the sole reason that we in the modern world live in comfort and relative prosperity. Humankind has been inventive since we first entered the scene 200,000 years ago. Technology builds upon itself, upon the accumulated skills, experience, and knowledge of millions of unnamed people in the past. 

    That drive for bettering ourselves and our situation is not going to change if we build a new economic system. In fact, a cooperative economy still fosters innovation, and still involves competitive forces. The difference is that the profit from that innovation is not concentrated among the executives and shareholders at the top. 

    All this goes to show that we do not have anything to lose if we give up Capitalism. We can go about our modern lives with the same amount of comfort. But with a lot less poverty around us and a whole lot healthier and wealthier communities. A better future is possible, we just have to build it.  

  • Is Capitalism Really Responsible for our Modern World?

    Part 1: The Acceleration of Technology and Capitalism

    When Capitalism is discussed, one of the main justifications given for it is that due to its focus on innovation and competitive forces, it has driven the technological developments that have created the modern world. All the luxuries, comforts, and extended lifespans that we enjoy are due to Capitalism. 

    It can be hard to argue against this. We look around and we do have a lot more comfort, health, and wealth than what people did before Capitalism. And right around the time Capitalism emerged, there was an acceleration of technological progress. So it has to be true, capitalism is the cause of our modern prosperity as it is. Right?

    Well, that may not actually be correct.  I’m going to argue that the relationship between capitalism and technological progress is not one of causation, but rather correlation. I’ll do this by looking at the long-term trends in technological development, and then in part two of this essay I’ll examine the role of the public sector in modern technological development. 

    To examine the role of Capitalism in the development of technology, we’re going to travel way into the past when modern humans, Homo sapiens, first emerged around 200,000 years ago. One of the earliest technologies associated with hominids, which include species before humans, was that of stone tool technologies. And it is a technology that we have ample evidence of in the archaeological record. 

    Before even modern humans emerged, there were stone tool technologies. The first is known as the Olduwan Industry, and it was a basic form of tool making that involved chipping away flakes from a core cutter or chopper. This lasted from around 2.9 to 1.5 million years before present, or for a span of about 1.4 million years. 

    The next development in stone tool technology was the Acheulean Industry, which lasted from about 1.5 million years before present to about 200,000 years ago. For both of these industries, it took around a million and a half years for each of them to develop to the next stage. 

    But once Homo sapiens were on the scene, with the same brain capacity and physical features as we have today, the development of stone tool technologies accelerated. The stone tool industry that modern humans stepped into was that of the Mousterian Industry, which was already being used by Neanderthals. This Mousterian Industry lasted from around 200,000 years ago until the next stone tool industry came about around 50,000 years ago. This is only a scant 150,000 years for a major technological change to occur, compared to the 1.5 million years in previous industries. 

    And this acceleration did not stop until stone tools were replaced with other technologies such as metal working. Looking at the chart below, the exponential rise in stone tool technologies can be clearly seen. 

    Figure 1: Showing the development of stone tool technologies by archaeological phase. 

    One critique of the above chart that could be made is that the phases of stone tool development are ones that archaeologists came up with and may not represent a quantifiable change in technology. So here is another chart looking at the development of cutting edge efficiency, which is a more quantifiable variable.

    Figure 2: Showing development of cutting edge efficiency in stone tool technologies. 

    Inventiveness has always been a part of humanity, and this has been the driver of technological change. As humanity has developed technologies, our base of knowledge has increased and our skills have increased. Each of these factors and more are behind this exponential growth in technological change. Here is a chart showing the development of technology from stone tools until today.

    Figure 3: Showing the exponential growth of all human technology over time.

    When viewed over the long span, we have been on an upward exponential curve really since the Neolithic Era. The invention of Capitalism occurred along with the Industrial Revolution, already far along on the exponential curve. The acceleration was already happening.

    We can see this same exponential growth if we divide technology into certain industries. Here are some charts below showing different technologies and their development.

    Figure 4: Showing the development of transportation technology. 

    Figure 5: Showing the development of communication technology.

    Figure 6: Showing growth of medical technology over time.

    Figure 7: Showing development of manufacturing technology over time. 

    Figure 8: Showing the development of energy technology over time.

    All these charts show the rough progression of technology over time. In the aim of transparency, all these charts were generated by ChatGPT. So they may not be perfect. But they do represent the general trend of technological acceleration. 

    I’m not deterministic, I do not think the acceleration of technology is an immutable law. There are no immutable laws when it comes to humans. But the drive for innovation has always been with us, long before Capitalism. And the acceleration of technological change was there long before Capitalism. 

    Those proponents of Capitalism who state that it is the cause for the acceleration of technology are making a basic mistake. They saw two corresponding trends occurring within a limited time frame, and – without any real evidence – they assumed one caused the other.  

    My argument is that this technological acceleration was already happening, and it was going to happen in some form or the other. What Capitalism did was to take control of this process, and ensure that the real benefits and wealth went to those at the top. 

    It is important to remember, you couldn’t make a Tesla unless some unknown and forgotten person (or maybe a group of people) invented the wheel about 6000 years ago. Or if a long line of people hadn’t figured out how to control fire and concentrate it in blast furnaces to work metal. All that occurred well before Capitalism. 

    The real driver behind this technological acceleration is humanity, with our inventiveness and our compulsion to make things better. We need to unshackle this drive from the control of Capitalists, and use it to build a better future for all. 

    In the second part of this essay, I’ll look at the role of the public sector in the development of modern technologies and innovation. Coming soon!

  • Loneliness and Its Impact on Politics

    I was watching a video the other day discussing comedian Bill Burr’s comments on Elon Musk that got him banned from Twitter/X.The video, linked below, started as something humorous but turned into a serious discussion on a topic that deeply impacts many of us.

    You can check out the video here.

    This issue is loneliness in our society. In the video it is discussed as a male loneliness epidemic. The commenter in the video brought up the many different studies that show a link between right-wing ideology and loneliness in all ages and genders, not just in young men. And there are a great deal of these studies that show this link such as this one.

    So in reality, loneliness is an issue for everyone in our society. It’s not just men. A recent Surgeon General’s report titled Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation discusses how our communities are fraying and social connections are becoming weaker.

    This isn’t just due to modern society. Loneliness is a specific feature of our current economic system. A long-standing critique of capitalism is that it is alienating and causes the “atomization of the individual”. In short, this critique describes exactly what the Surgeon General’s report says is happening right now in the US.

    And as the multiple studies referenced above show, this loneliness manifests in our politics as far right ideology. We can’t fight loneliness. We can’t out argue it. We can’t protest it. The only way to counter it is through compassion. By building a new system where loneliness is not a key feature of it.

    The world around us is uncaring and selfish. So we need to be empathetic and selfless. The only way to counter all this is to be the counter argument ourselves. That is the only way that we win the game.

    Here is a good read on the atomization of the individual:

    All the Lonely People: The Atomized Generation