Week 2: A rational reason to Panic - ‘Post Capitalism’ by Paul Mason

“Technology will make everything free”. Bold. Mason’s claim, whilst seemingly outrageous to the senses, is based in solid precedent of economics, with declines in real world income and massive shortfalls in the planet’s pension pots, as well as existing business models of social media with Facebook and Twitter completely free at the point of consumption.

A post capitalist society then? A society where technology has allowed objects to become economically valueless. However when was the last time you purchased an object based on its worth to you? The fundamental principle of capitalism is that a product’s, or a service’s, value is set by what the market deems it to be worth. For example, is the iPhone sat on the desk to my right worth its monthly dent in my wallet? I know there are other phone’s that can achieve the limited functions I actually use better or quicker, or phone’s that can do slightly less for considerably cheaper or even a phone, such as the Google Pixel which can do everything I want and more for slightly less money. Surely the good capitalist would purchase one of the other options? But great numbers of society do not. Personally, I find pleasure in the sleekness of the glass and metal fabrication, a realness compared to the completely virtual world of the objects function. But if we take this to a post capitalist society, when cost has no baring, why would time be taken to produce something beautiful to use? Form would be irrelevant compared to function, or more so quality has quantitative value. A precarious perch for the Architect. A service built on quality followed by beauty. Is there room in a post capitalist world, for what economist would call vanity projects or what some of us would refer to as art? 

“In a way, they have grasped that if climate change is real, capitalism is finished.” The driver for post capitalism, the climate. The current capitalist market cannot handle what is required to save the world. As profit margins are squeezed leading to a smaller pot of investable money as well as limited opportunity for economic return, what can the model capitalist gain from pouring their hard earned money into these projects?... other than stopping people doing the premature dying thing. Especially when some of the most powerful companies are in the energy industry. Finding more coal and oil to burn is far more profitable almost overnight. When there’s money to be made, the climate can wait. For this reason Mason proposes that intervention from nation states is the only way out. The only elements of society with money to invest without the burdens of financial return. But where do the states get the money from? The people.

The problem with getting money from the people? If we ignore its current unpopularity which in democracies short 5 year cycles can be a very quick way to power, the main problem is there isn’t much money. Something which threatens markets and governments possibly even quicker than the climate is rising levels of debt and credit, and the holes left in their wake. Nowhere in the economy is this problem crystallised more vividly than in the murky mystery of pensions. When the weight of the aging population’s investments outweighs the ability of the markets to grow capital. When we hit the iceberg and the great pension ship Titanic sinks is our fate the same as Leo, reaching a hand out to our ‘elite’ friends only to be dragged down in the bubble of its wake. The life boat, in the view of Mason, exactly as climate change is for government intervention.

Whilst this seems to be a cyclical problem, Mason suggests the introduction of a universal wage. An income paid to all in society of working age which is enough to survive. Whilst at first, especially to people with a more capitalist outlook, a way of damaging the economy dangerously close to communism. However the universal wage still allows for people to work and be taxed accordingly yet allowing a freedom, a lack of pressure. Imagine a world where everyone has the opportunity to create, to test ideas, to pursue knowledge and learning without the pressures of avoiding destitution. Utopian? Yes, a little. But just close enough to be in reach.

Universal Wage does have hurdles, an economist could easily suggest there would be a rising price in commodities. Most commodities can be controlled though, we already have rent controlled house, whilst not sufficient presently, it can be expanded. Travel and public transport has always been a topic of privatisation versus public owned. Food prices may struggle however some changes in life style and a food taxation system based around nutritional value rather than a desire for cake could have an easing effect. And so left is energy. And as discussed earlier the only bodies with the power and possibly desire to change the energy markets are nation states. Rather conveniently once the equipment is purchased, which especially in cases such as solar panel and battery storage is rocketing down in price (as Mason suggests technology will cause everything too), renewable energy doesn’t require costly mining or burning, as it is from the free and continuous energy supplied by the surroundings. Either by the kinetic energy of waves, tides, gravity fed water turbines and wind or the electromagnetic or heat energy from the sun.

So Mr Mason, should we panic? Is it the rational thing to do? Or are we already developing the path for the future?­