Where do we go in the future?

Seeing the TED talk it was clear that the old growth model set a single goal or growth but without limits. The single goal somehow aligned everyone to move towards a single comparable goal. If we succeed to make a harmonial world and and continue to thrive… what should we thrive at?
For example, we start to re-invent ourselves with technology and AI could soon replace our functions in every way. What is then our future role in evolution?

My take on your profoundly deep question which if understand correctly could even be interpreted as a search for the meaning of life - what should be thrive at ? what are we here for ? what is our purpose ?

Obviously I can’t answer any of those questions that because I’m probably not at the right pay grade.
However since this question " what should we thrive at " is so profound that it does merit an attempt .

Here’s my take on our the state of our current existence and potential future :

All of us are enormous potential and we can still not comprehend fully what our mind is capable of doing let alone what we can do with AI - both in good or bad ( mind) .
With all this potential if we satisfy our most common needs for us and the planet then the we still can not comprehend yet what we might be capable of doing or being with us or the planet because if we try to think about it it will probably blow most " normally " configured belief systems or mindsets .
So who knows what we can do alone and my take on the situation is that is we work together then
our individual capacity is usually exponentially increased working in a collaborative voluntary team if conditions for each member are just and right.

Any team of persons thought is probably still more creative than any AI algo ( for now ) maybe in 2040 or so and leading up to that then yes we almost certainly will be creating a lot of things and realities with machines and code.

That does not answer your question either though so let me get back to that - what should we thrive at ?
and what is our role in evolution ?

The way I see it is that our primary goal of evolution is to be perfect or as close to it as possible - this might take a while but it could actually be out ultimate goal of evolution - it might sound pretty out there but I’ve thought about this for about 30 years and still have not come up with a better explanation of what our goal might be .

Then the other thing is what to thrive at ?

My take on this question is so much more simple than the big evolution question :

We should thrive at " happiness " - this is at the core of our senses and the ultimate reward for
something well done for our selves or for others or for the planet.

Personally I find most happiness when I can see that something I have done makes someone else or
another group happy - but the answer for everyone else is always different - your happiness is unique and only you can find it at the most deepest level.

Does that help or have I given you more questions than answers again ?

Many thanks for your answers and yes, made me realise the depth of my questions…

The question of ‘What we should thrive at?’ was aimed to point out that the cyclic nature of the economical doughnut could replace the single goal of increased growth with a less defined objective. Simple objectives are easier to align a larger group of people to in my experience/observation.

Regarding our future role, yes we do have the tools to be happy and fulfil ourselves forever more. Let’s assume we create a society to do that so that everybody can realise their potential and feel completely at one with themselves and in society. Well… I think that our nature dictates that it is not enough, we will have to strive for something and that brings me back to my original question… What?
We could pursue perfection… but that is not for everybody. We could also pursue discovery… and that neither is the means to an end that everybody wants.
I may not have thought this all through but I’m surprised to get into any dialogue so quickly.

We need to better understand about what we hope to deal with. Today our ways of viewing and understanding our social system of macroeconomics are so complicated and confused that even using the doughnut philosophy we will still not have a clear understanding of what our system comprises and how it works. So how on earth do we expect to have an inkling about how to improve the society where we live? Our attitude is one of chutzpah, if our egos are so inflated that we already know many of the answers. In fact we don’t!

But we are not complete fools and we do have some grasp of who we are in our society, so what I have been proposing is the way to improve on this knowledge by the use of cold logic and serious analytic thought based on a model, that unlike the doughnut, is simple, logical and engineered so as to be possible to grasp, without having to compromise on the many other schools of thought. My explanation for it is provided below in the following essay. Write to me for a copy of my research e-book here. chesterdh@hotmail.com

Making Macroeconomics a More Exact Science

Today macroeconomics is treated as an inexact topic within the humanities, because at a first look it appears to be a very complex and easily confused matter. But this attitude does not give it fair justice–we should be trying to find a better way to approach and examine the subject, in a good way that avoids these problems of complexity and confusion. Suppose we ask ourselves the question: “how many different KINDS of financial transactions occur within our society?” Then the simple answer is that only a limited number of them are possible.

Although our society comprises of many millions of participants, to answer this question properly we should be ready to consider the aggregates of all the various kinds of activities (no matter who performs them), and then idealize these activities so that they fall into a acceptable number of more general terms, for the expression of a relatively small number of different but specific social functions. Here, each activity is found to apply between a particular pair of entities—with each entity being expressed by its having individual properties. Then to cover the whole social system of a country (excluding foreign trade), the author finds that it takes only 19 mutual flows of money for the purchase and payment of goods, services, access rights, taxes, credit, investments, valuable legal documents, etc. Also these flows are between only 6 different representative entities. .

The analysis that led to this unexpected result was performed by the author and it may be found in his working paper (on the internet) as SSRN 2865571 “Einstein’s Criterion Applied to Logical Macroeconomics Modeling”. In this model these 19 double flows of money verses goods, etc., are shown. They are found to pass between only 6 kinds of role-playing entities. Of course, there are a number of different configurations that are possible for this type of simplification, but if one tries to eliminate all the unnecessary complications and sticks to the basic activities, then these particular quantities provide the most concise result, and yet it is a fully comprehensive and satisfactory analysis.

Surprisingly, past representation of our social system by this kind of an interpretation model has not been previously properly examined nor presented before. Other partial versions have been previously modeled (using 4 entities, by Professor Hudson), but they are inexact due to either their being over-simplified, or in the case of econometrics, much too complicated.

These are the two reasons for the earlier non-scientific confusion by many economists and their failure to obtain a good understanding about the way the whole system works. The model being described here is unique, in being the first to include, along with some additional aspects, all 3 factors of production, of Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” book of 1776. The three factors of production are Land, Labor and Capital and along with their returns of Ground-Rent, Wages and Interest/Dividends, respectively, which are all included in this presentation diagram.

The diagram of this model is in my paper (noted above). It may need enlargement to see all of the aspects included in the one view. A mention of the related teaching process is also provided in my short working SSRN 2600103 “A Mechanical Model for Teaching Macroeconomics”. With this model in its different forms, the various parts and activities of the Big Picture of our social system can be properly identified and defined. Subsequently by analysis, the way our social system works can then be properly calculated and illustrated.

It is done by the mathematics and logic that was devised by Nobel Laureate Wassiley W. Leontief, when he invented and introduced the important “Input-Output” matrix methodology (that he applied it to the production sector only). This short-hand method of modeling the whole system replaces the above-mentioned block-and-flow diagram. It enables one to really get to grips with what is going-on within our social system. Subsequently it will be found that it is the topology of the matrix which actually provides the key to this. The math is not hard and is suitable for high-school students who have been shown the basic properties of square matrices.

By this technique it is comparatively easy to introduce a change to a pre-set social system that is theoretical in equilibrium (even though we know that this ideal is never actually attained)–it being a convenient way to begin the study. This change will then create an imbalance and we must then introduce a process for regaining equilibrium again. The introduction of sudden changes or policy decisions my thus be simulated and the effects determined, which will point the way to what policy is best. In my book about it (see below), 3 changes associated with taxation are investigated in hand-worked numerical examples and the logical and irrefutable results are a surprise even to this author!.

Developments of these ideas about making our subject more truly scientific (thereby avoiding the past pseudo-science being taught at universities), may be found in my recent book: “Consequential Macroeconomics—Rationalizing About How Our Social System Works”. Please write to me at chesterdh@hotmail.com for a free e-copy of this 310 page book and for additional information.

I agree that the question of 'what should be thrive at" is deep on many levels, that I confuse myself with ideas around this on a daily basis. I did want to respond to Perpetuo however regarding the response that we should thrive at happiness. I disagree with that as I don’t think most people, especially in this digital social media age, know what makes them happy. I think digital social influence, and the relentless marketing of the companies that disregard all the things that the doughnut brings to light have confused us humans as to what is important, and what makes us happy. To make sense of it I try to approach this question more along the lines of doing what feels right, versus trying to do what we ‘think’ will make us happy. For example, when I read the works of great thinkers like Naomi Kline and Kate Raworth, I don’t choose to pursue ideas around their teachings because I think it will make me happy. I do so because it just feels right. The challenge is to keep their messages front and center every day, because the everyone is in competition for your attention. And those that feed the growth machine are pretty good at finding ways to win attention.

Thanks for your thoughts Solitude218 - obviously I agree with all of what you said regarding those that feed the growth - or maybe we should call it the money machine and their formidable arsenal focused on gaining our attention and even manipulating our views so your point cannot be stressed enough and actually as time goes on I see that technology that will be unleashed in the coming decades related to media social media and " getting inside our heads" will heat up until possibly by 2028 -2029 some pundits online none and some at one of the largest search engine in the world ( not yahoo) have predicted that they will in fact plant a microchip in the back of your brain to " enhance " the brains capacity by 8-10 times. So there is nothing absolutely nothing that the money machine might stop at to get inside our thought process and potentially massively "guide " events. The competition for our attention is not about distracting us it’s about making us dependent on their information so that we come back for more. Needless to say I deregistered from Facebook last year as have many others on the back of the way that this platform has leveraged their position to " confuse " us humans into making us think what is important to us . The feedback loop esentially is all about coming back - getting more likes and friends and creating some form of synthetic feel good factor about sharing something and getting positive feedback but this is like a drug and they know it’s additive which is how it is exploited for marketing and advertising based on the traffic and hits that they generate - nasty stuff considering that they are playing on the human generosity that brings us to sites like doughnut economics where we " feel right " to contribute as I am doing now but only because I feel that and really hope that any time that I spend there pondering and sharing ideas might actually help the common good and the common wealthfare of all of us . My contribution here is selfless because it has nothing to do with my image or my likes but rather the satisfaction of the pure exchange of ideas opinions and common problem solving for the future well being of the citizens of this planet. Actually I don’t like the word human kind any longer - human has the word Man in it which is in my opinion Gender centrist- as is "brotherhood " my preference now is for citizens of Gaia or world citizen or " citizen’s of the world " common good of the world .

Let’s now get back to face your valid question head on Solitude218 - you don’t think that people know what makes them happy and more importantly you think that its not about being happy but doing it " just because it feels right" .

   Here is my view on your take of the " state of happieness " or "state of feelings" : 
  • First of all the DIGITAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE is probably the single most powerful force in the digital age and will only become more powerful ( especially with the advent of Virtual Reality ) . Also I see a future of more an more automation of everything so our conscious attention to " things " especially online or digital will probably increase ( because of our spare time increasing) .
    Also the commerical value of this DIGITAL SOCIAL INFLUENCE will increase because of online sales
    which seem to be 26 % here in the UK but as automation and driverless cars / trucks vans etc robots will going the distribution chain then I see this penetration going to 60-80 % . This will have a profound effect on the way we consume. Given that we live in a consumer economy and although we have the chance to transform and create a hybrid model so the organisation of economic resources ( doughnut model ) as it stands today the CONSUMER holds the key to the gates of prosperity and effectively decides what sells and what doesn’t . Yes the banks and governments hold a lot of other main keys to a monetary based system that we have now but the consumer still is key to a capitalist and even to some extent a socialist society .
    There is one way however to plug straight into this online consumer which is through targeted advertising and as you know already this is how Amazon and Facebook have built one of the biggest advertising and wholesale online shop that we have even seen and they are the best positioned to become the dominant force at manipulating consumers on behalf of the stakeholders that they are willing to partner with to obtain our trust and belief in what they are selling be it tangible or non-tangilble .
    So in a few word the those who can influence the influencers might actually rule the world because they can indirectly gain our attention and distract it - distract it from what we inherently know or from what we inherently deeply know if we are quiet in ourselves and listen to our inner voice we know that it probably JUST FEELS RIGHT - to do or act in a different way and not in the way that the influencers might lead us to believe by selling false truths and one minute satisfaction pills - this is not a lasting peace or satisfaction or not even remotely what " just feels right " to us but something that is based on something superficial and about as deep as a tiny tiny puddle on a street on sunny English summers day . If you step on it then it will splash a bit and evaporate away in 30-45 minutes - this is much like the comfort that we get confused by from almost all of our DIGITAL SOCIAL / digital news that we get fed with every day encouraging us to dive down rabbit holes that will steer us away from what our real goal is on this planet .

After survival and a few other basic needs we have so much more to offer here to our fellow citizens of this world and with the right focus and support and team work I still think we everything here to do it - its just about a change in perspective and a redirection of focus . Kate Raworth is in my opinion one wonderful example of that solution and how much progress we can make by just representing an old age problem and looking actively for more creative and innovative solutions but with a different goal in mind .
This is very powerful - we are capable of solving very complex problems if we have the goal and the motivation - that goal will become crystallized to if we can clearly FEEL that it’s right in our inner voice in our inner essence as you said so perfectly . As more and more of us feel and see this alternative then a rapid shift can underlye radical change in a very short period .
Remember one thing - if all of us are consumers and if we all agreed tomorrow what our future was and what it might look like and how it might be organized then we still hold the balance of power because we can decide what we buy on a daily basis - if we demand alternatives then the alternatives will get seed capital and the capital will create a viable alternative - politics is not this quick - its slower!! So we actually already potentially already hold one of the keys to making a substantial difference in our lifetime .

Solitude218 I totally wholeheartedly agree that social influence is distracting us - yes this is part of the game the balance of power is at stake her our attention is the balance of power and there is nothing that some groups might stop at to hold it and manipulate it to their gain - this is the state of play today on this front .
Then secondly your comment on it " just feeling right" is equally true and somewhat more powerful too because this is an emotional response and touches on our intuition which is in my opinion hard wired to our body - our heart and our lungs and yes our stomach but not something that our mind is always attuned to - I see that the mind can manifest things but sometimes those things do not come from our immediate experience or from books or school they come from somewhere else but the fact that we believe in them is impossible to pin down - scientifically right now we cannot verify this information source but we trust it because we inherently are connected to something - something bigger than us and something that is outside of us and inside of us - everyone will have their own perspective on this and uniquely probably on this topic EVERYONE is RIGHT all the time because what " just feels right " for you will not be the same for the next person but that doe not mean that yours is more right or less right its all appropriate for you at that time - which is why I am writing this right now because also I feel that this might help - there is no other motivation for me but to help others and to enjoy a healthy discussion :slight_smile: .

NOW - lastly but not least I will like to leave you with one final thought and idea .

IF we as consumers hold a key and we as consumers are influenced by digital influencers
who can manipulate they key factor in the economic cycle.

  • Then how powerful would we all become to direct toward our desired destinies if we were able to create our own commonly owned or COMMON GOOD / thrive platform for social media ?

I have been thinking about this for the past two years and you reminded me how important this might be.
IF we aligned the interests of what we all believe is good for all of us and realligned all of the economic resources and purchasing power and business ventures TOWARD that same common goal of universal laws and the protection of our planet and its citizens then I think we can become the influencers of the influencers - because also I believe that given the airplay most people will quickly align with this common value then the impact could be substantial - yes others maybe have tried to do this in the past but in scattered ways not with a broad enough and engulfing mandate. It’s not about social media its common hub that links every facet of human endevours and the creation / exchange of ideas and value and stories and teachings - giving and much more - it would be non-profit and not alligned with any religion face colour or sexual gender but it would be a universal conduit potentially worth paying our attention to !!!

This might seem that I am an idealist - but this is a viable and tangible response to what the future
is providing us - one of the biggest opportunity that the citizens of this world have ever had to thrive -to end poverty - to look up to the skies and have some sense of a bigger identity and that it feels just right to be on this planet right now at this time of potential transformation - for good.
That this historic opportunity gives us a chance to connect with each other for common goals and our common dignity like never before -digital technology can unlock the cheaper energy - endless clean water - food - transport almost everything that will eventually make the unit cost fall toward zero - yes in our life time many of these things might almost be free - if we structure it right and apply the right technology for the common good and we also have a unique platform for us to organise that common good and to communicate with one an other like never before - to build projects and complete them together on other parts of the world ! So let’s not get distracted and FOCUS on what just feels right and hopefully one by one we really will build a better world !! Are you ready to take the first small step ?