The super economy: a perspective

Social Darwinism is a concept that not only defines our socio-political norms and institutions, but anaxiom when it comes to worldly purpose. Naturally, our economic system is a manifestation of thisaxiom, as substantiated by the concept of market forces in the field of Economics. Quite interestingly, this concept of market forces, and the directly, or perhaps, indirectly associated instinctive precedent of Social Darwinism, is in conflict with another major economic concept. That concept is “ allocation of resources”.

Any economic system that regards a resource as a mere resource would arguably not reach a state ofoptimal productivity and prosperity. The resource has to be clearly divided into the human and physicalresource in such a way that the human resource is treated as not only a form of “ capital”, but a form ofinvestment, that is close to the nature of an average technology based resource, so to say. When weregard technology as superior to the human resource, we are introducing a sort of hypocritical vision.

The hypocrisy in this vision stems from the fact that technology is treated as the end goal, whereas, thehuman resource, that was initially harnessed to get to that end goal, is currently being treated as astepping stone. In other words, the irony is that we are “ playing the player, and rewarding the game”.

Our misaligned and rather misconstrued perspective stems from blind faith in technology, and fallingfaith in human capital. Misallocation of resources is merely a bi-product of our misaligned perspective.

The Cornucopian view, in this regard, has not only reached a saturation point in its own lifecycle, but isalso adversely effecting the economic system through extreme rightward shifts in consumerism, andextreme leftward shifts in human satisfaction levels. Availability has improved, productive capacity hasgone up; also, capital, on average, has reached a mean level of sustainability, but the key drivers of theeconomy are suffering. Human beings are more prone to depression, anxiety and existential crises, thanever.

Technology is not the reason as to why we are heading this way. The underlying reason is the decreasingfaith in human beings, as a result of the technological revolution. Humans are adaptive beings, and thiscrisis would eventually balance itself out, but that would not solve our economic problems; the onesthat, hypothetically, could be solved in their entirety, given a reevaluation of the economic allocationsystem, as a whole. What’s the solution to his allocation problem, one might ask… My humble conjecture is that the problem is hidden in the notion “ that the solution is slowly feeding on itself”. Onemust first understand this. The solution and the problem, both, are lost in plain sight. It’s like an auto-immune virus in the economy. The virus makes sure that the body attacks itself, internally. The virus is not that potent yet, however.

Technology has solved most of our problems, but the problems that remain, require human interventionat a macro economic level. The education system ought to be redesigned in such a way that specialized fields like Law, Engineering and Medicine require formal education and training, and other fields merely require field experience and self paced research. This would tend to optimize human potential through “ aptitude triggers”. The human resource would focus its entire attention toward a purpose that is in linewith their true calling and natural talent.

Human beings are living in the tech-renaissance era where sinister robots do not necessarily have totake over the world by deeming us incompetent. We live in an era where self exploration is barely givenattention. If that changed, then the tech-renaissance era could reach a sustainable state where Artificial Intelligence and computer intelligence would merely be tools. It’s about looking beyond the black andwhite. It’s our callous attitude, and not our incompetence, that is not allowing the 21 st century economicsystem to become the “ Super-economy”.