Day 217: Who's Free Riding Who?

In economics you have the 'free-rider' phenomenon, a concept which if often brought forward in favour of capitalism.

The free rider concept refers to instances where someone enjoys the benefits of a product or service, without having paid for that particular good or service.

A classic example that is used in text books is where someone uses a form of public transportation such as a train, without having paid for a ticket, and is thus 'free riding'. The same goes when there is for example a project where there is collective action to reduce emissions as to increase air quality. Some may not want to participate/contribute and keep their emission levels the same while everyone else is lowering theirs, still resulting in better air quality for them, even though they did not contribute.

Now, within the context of economics, capitalism thinks to have the solution for the free rider problem, by trying to capitalize on as much as possible. If everything has a price, then everyone who uses whatever good or service, will pay.

Linked to this is also the whole 'but I worked so hard for this' and 'it's not fair that I have worked for this and that others besides me are benefiting from it, if they want it they should just work for it' mentality. This is the result from believing that our current society and economic system truly provide everyone with 'equal opportunity' -- while this is not the case.

When the Equal Money System is put forward, the 'free rider problem' gets hauled in to show how 'unfair' the system is, because everyone is provided for even though not everyone may be contributing (because they are unable to).

The problem with the free rider concept is that it is only ever brought up in the interest of holding on to one's money where "it's mine! And I worked for it!". Other forms of free riding are never brought up.

If everyone consumed as much as an average American, we would need 5 planet Earths. Put otherwise, it's a situation where 5% of the population consumes 20% of the Earth's resources. Isn't that free riding as well? You are then free riding because other people both now and in the future will bare the consequences of the unsustainable lifestyle someone else enjoys. Free riding doesn't only occur when someone is enjoying the benefits, but when someone is not taking part in resolving the consequences of the actions you are involved in.
People are being deprived of resources which are being directed towards unsustainable lifestyles – and so people are free riding on the lives of others and free riding on borrowed time from generations to come. Dumping waste into the ocean or poor countries with weak environmental regulations is free riding the Earth. The continuous postponement of coming to an actual agreement that is binding for everyone to reduce emissions and use of fossil fuels is free riding. Each time we wait with making crucial decisions which we KNOW will affect future generations is free riding. Just because ‘we won’t be here to face the music’, we don’t care = free riding.

We live in a polarized world of massive inequality – where some have more than they’ll ever need and other barely, and even don’t, get by on a day to day basis. Rich countries positions today are the result of free riding other countries in the past under forms such as colonisation and slavery. Without free riding, capitalism as it exists today would not have been possible.

Instead of moaning about people benefiting from your efforts, it would be better to spend one’s energy towards ensuring that we have a world that is Best for All to make sure that we can all live and live sustainably while ensuring the safety of life for future generations. This is the only form of free riding that is really a problem – as it has actual physical consequences on the life of others, while the free riding problems most people currently care about only hurts one’s self-interest and ego and does not really pose any real problems.

In an Equal Money System, we care about real free riding problems and will act according to the principle of Prevention is the Best Cure to minimize consequence as much as we are able to

Related articles

• Day 363: Basic Human Rights and Crime (Part One)
• 338. What is Equal Money Capitalism?
• Day 336: Democracy and Capitalism are the Redistribution of Wealth - (Part Two)
• 361. Food is a Human Right | Equal Money
• Day 359: Pricing and Labeling in Equal Money Capitalism Profit-Share (Part Two)
• 339. Value in Equal Money

Read More

Day 189: Will your Level of Education Determine your Income in EMC?

This blog post is in relation to a comment placed on one of our previous blog-posts - you can check out the full comment at http://economistjourneytolife.blogspot.com/2013/02/day-188-simple-solutions-in-equal-money.html

~ Since I am the one who made the comment, I will rebuttal your response also.
First you are comparing green apples to red and saying they are worth the same at the register, which I tend to agree with. But, my comment was based more on someone that had 4 yrs of college or previous experience to someone who dropped out of high school.

We can not dismiss the expense of a higher education, or the value of years of previous experience, by paying say a gas station attendant of fast food server the same as the doctor or technician you spoke of. Indeed a doctor or technician, and even a plumber, electrician, or carpenter are needed just as much in today’s society.

Understand that within Equal Money Capitalism – education will no longer be a point of ‘investment’ from which you are expecting ‘returns’. This is one’s approach currently as the result of our environment which promotes competition and profit for the sake of self-interest where it’s ‘each one on his own’ – and is in essence an approach based within survivalism. There’s not enough jobs for everyone to go around with, and so people chose an education and career according to the prospect of money linked to that education/career. This is not a real decision/choice made within the consideration of one’s passions and interest – but based on a fear of not making it within this world and ending up with nothing. People who’ve currently  gone through a process of education and spent a lot of money and work getting there experience a sense of entitlement towards ‘getting a good pay’ – but only because they have experienced the process they went through as being an unpleasant one. If it wasn’t for the reward as ‘a good pay’ – these people wouldn’t have made the same education and career choices. Studying and working for an extended period of time to do a job you love and care about will be the reward itself. Within that, you are not going to be comparing yourself with what other people are doing and what process they went through – because what you are doing and the decisions you have made are merely the common sense outflows/results of your passion and what it is you like to do within Life. So, you’re not going to receive extra compensation for your perceived suffering, because you will not be going through a process of suffering. One’s approach towards education and careers will thus change completely.

In terms of financial investment, education is a basic human right, and thus will be provided by the government through tax-monies. In other words – you won’t have to pay for it specifically, because it is part of the ‘package’ you receive as part of your basic rights within developing yourself to your utmost potential. So – here, again, you will not be spending more money on an education for a doctor or any other type of education – so, here, again – there will not be a sense of ‘deserving’ a higher pay because one spent more money on study fees or study loans.

But there again we can very well pay someone who just started in the trade and has little knowledge or skills, the same as someone who as invested several years into learning and refining their trade. There are different values to ones experience within their chosen specialty, A company cannot afford to pay the unskilled as much because they aren’t capable of doing the job themselves.

Within Equal Money Capitalism the only value worth valuing is Life. It’s not about who can do what job or who went through what process of Education – it’s merely a point of you are here, you are alive and thus you will be supported to remain Life. The idea that a company cannot afford to pay the unskilled is merely the outflow of having polarized wages. Where those who are considered having a ‘special position’ receive way larger sums of income than those who are considered to be within an ‘average’ work position. Once this polarization is out of the way – there will be enough money to go around to reach everyone. Realise also that within the context of an Equal Money Capitalistic System – there will be no such thing as ‘an unskilled worker’.  Once one has completed one’s primary education,  a person will be multi-skilled and capable of a multitude of tasks due to the broad spectrum of education that will be in place.

If you start demanding that all employees and people are paid the same, then what happens is the less experienced workers begin to loose there jobs and their job opportunities as employers begin to limit their hiring to only skilled and experienced candidates. This creating a less people with experience because they can’t get any, and higher demands on the fortunate few who are working. Not to mention higher costs and shorter supplies of said products.

This will not be the case because in terms of equalizing wages – you will still end up with the same amount of costs in terms of paying out wages (if not less) – and as such there should be no reason why one would hire someone whose “overqualified” so to speak to do a job that someone who is less skilled can do at the same level of effectiveness. In addition, the labour market will not operate according to supply and demand. Providing employment forms part of a company’s social corporate responsibility. And decision-making such as you’ve outlined above would be considered unethical. Whenever a person no longer requires to perform a particular job within a company, the company is responsible to provide it with a different task. For companies to just take away a person’s income, which is a person’s lifeline is unacceptable. With such principles in place, it will be in the company’s best interest to ensure that each worker is trained to the best of their ability and to make appropriate matches between a person’s skill-set and their role in the company.

Read More