top of page
Search

What if everything in the world was free?

  • Dec 9, 2022
  • 4 min read

Updated: Dec 12, 2022


I came across this Ted Talk by Colin R Turner and my first reaction was one of dismissive disbelief. How would it be possible to make everything free? Then I saw that 33,000 people had watched the video and that piqued my curiosity. The objective of this blog is to give you my interpretation of what Colin R Turner proposed in this talk, and you will see that it is not nearly as preposterous as it sounds. The reason the title sounds so outrageous is that it challenges a core belief system of value and trade. Goods and services that have value should be traded. Before money, we used the barter system. When money came into play, it was no longer necessary for a sheep farmer to find a watchmaker who wanted wool in order to get his watch repaired. Trade is so much part of our paradigm that we think trade always existed. However, if you go back in history, you will see that trade is relatively new - it has only existed for 10% of human existence. Our caveman/hunter-gatherer ancestors had no need to trade wool for a watch repair service because they had no watches and had no need for wool at the time. There was an inherent understanding that everyone in the tribe looked after each other, and this is how we operated for a large portion of our early history. Economists do a good job in selling us on the benefits of trade, especially cross-border trade. If the French are specialists in producing wine and Belgians in producing chocolate, it makes sense for France to sell wine to Belgium and buy chocolate from them. If each country focuses on its strengths and not its weaknesses, opportunities for trade emerge and everyone is better off. So let's have a look at how trade is working out for us. Half the world's population lives on less than $5.50 per day. Ten percent of the world lives on less than $1 per day. Trade doesn't seem to be working out that well. The majority of global trade is driven by debt. Total global debt is more than $300 trillion. The global population is 7.8 billion, which means that each human being owes $38,000, yet half the world's population earns less than $5.50 per day. How long would it take these people to pay off this “debt”? The answer is at least 19 years, but they need to eat and survive. Let's say they can only allocate $1 to repay this debt - it would take them more than 100 years to pay back, and that ignores the fact the debt grows on account of interest. Trade is completely out of equilibrium and cannot be sustained.


Then there is the irresponsible side of trade - and that is the destruction it leaves in its wake. Almost a quarter of the Amazon rainforest has been destroyed. We frack the countryside for oil, we destroy villages to build dams, and we pollute rivers with chemicals in the name of capitalism and making money. Is this really the best we can do? What would happen if everything was free? This is where things get a little complicated. If you suddenly announced that everything would be free on Jan 1, there would be pandemonium in the shops as people loaded up on free television and microwaves. But what would happen after a couple of months when everyone had a nice television and microwave? That frenzy and excitement would die down and we could get back to the task of living normal lives. So where would all these free televisions come from? Let's assume you asked everyone to volunteer one day per year to work in the TV factory to make free TVs for your community and town. I think most people would agree. Televisions are a stupid example, but would it not be possible to provide all of life's necessities for free? Not to mention the advancements that have been made with technology, robotics, and artificial intelligence. We managed to put a man on the moon fifty years ago - would it not be possible to provide necessities like food, clean drinking water, and other necessities for free?


This is known as an open-access economy. An open access (or free access) economy is a proposed alternative method of organizing resources and services in human society. This is where everyone contributes their time and skills to benefit the community as opposed to themselves and their families. It goes back to the communal living of our ancestors and promotes a mutual understanding that everyone in that society is fully supported with (at least) their basic living requirements unconditionally. At the core of this is volunteering. The Red Cross has over 100 million volunteers around the world which means that volunteering is not a foreign concept to human beings. It is estimated that more than 1 billion people in the world volunteer in one way or another which is 12 percent of the population. This excludes the billions of caregivers in the world (mostly mothers) who spend their lives caring for the needs of others. You quickly come to the realization that volunteering and serving the needs of others are more the rule than the exception - it is already taking place within a large slice of the global population which makes a pivot to an open-access economy less radical. What is also interesting is that all this volunteering is taking place within a system that discourages you from doing so. The consumerist society in which we live focuses on the acquisition of things. When you volunteer for a day, you are making the decision not to earn money on that day and instead serve the needs of others for free. Maybe we all are born with this inherent need to contribute, be helpful, and serve the needs of others. You could even argue that being self-centered (apart from the strong natural instinct of self-preservation) is unnatural. There are people that are lazy, selfish, and void of the need to contribute to others. They are always looking to exploit and make a quick buck at the expense of others - but these people may be the exception rather than the rule.


 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page