A New Global Social Economy

As a starting point, let us establish a few requirements.

  1. Everybody will need to be provided with the necessities for a decent life: food, shelter, basic services, education, recreation and entertainment (those who literally cannot get jobs through no fault of their own should still be able to lead comfortable and fulfilled lives).
  2. Those who do achieve – through their knowledge, skills and talent – should be rewarded (also as incentive) for their contribution to the new society.

We are probably talking about scientists, engineers, programmers, teachers, etc.

  1. Those who do not provide what one might call “necessary” or “productive” services should still be able to contribute to society and have their contributions acknowledged in some way (“better” accommodations, travel, etc.)

I am thinking about artists of all types, entertainers, authors, etc.

  1. In order to fairly comply with points 1 – 3, the world’s wealth must be managed and fairly distributed.

A World Bank report of 2013 estimates the Gross World Product (GWP) at 75.59 trillion USD in nominal terms.

The CIA Factbook (2015) estimates GWP at 107 trillion USD in PPP (Purchasing Power Parity). This would yield a per capita value of 16,100 current USD.

These figures give only an annual figures for production meant to satisfy current market demands. They do not represent the wealth of the world and the potential for production targeted at satisfying the needs of the new global social economy.

I, however, cannot find any estimate of real world wealth and annual production potential.

  1. The organization or direction of this society must be chosen – and able to be changed – so as avoid tyranny.

Much of this might remind one of communism, except that the world’s wealth –if wisely managed and equitably distributed, should be sufficient to avoid the poor economy that characterized the Soviet Union, and…

As for the Soviet Union’s authoritarian leadership, see point 5 above.

  1. The form of the new society: Meritocracy?

Meritocracy – due to its application in the past – has often had negative connotation. The problem has always been: who gets to determine the criteria for merit and what the criteria are?