Hi Charles,
At 19:47 23/01/01 +1100, you wrote:
>Keith Hudson postulated that all work is done for selfish reasons - and
>went from there to bemoan the lack of variety in the modern world for
>compensating for much work which we (selfishly) feel the need to do.
>
>I tend to divide work into two types - that done in the context of an
>exchange based relationship and that done without an exchange context.
I have obviously not yet persuaded you that all work has an exchange
context. This work may be anywhere on a continuum from individual,
conscious, material and immediate exchange (e.g. money or tangibilities)
through to communal, unconscious, non-material and postponed reward (e.g.
helpful services).
Although the work may be unconditional at the extreme end of the continuum
in the sense that no specific reward is sought in the short term, as in
"News from Nowhere", the individual concerned has a reasonable expectation
of being served in turn when it's needed.
One of the important points I was trying to make is that the latter needs a
community structure that is permanent enough to last at least a number of
years that is likely to produce a benefit to the actor initially concerned.
Do you not understand my point, Charles? There really is no difference in
principle between economic (paid) work and voluntary (unpaid) work.
Equivalence of transactions is either stated or inferred, either immediate
or delayed. All the individuals in "News from Nowhere" (one of the
favourite books of my youth) had a high expectation that their own
voluntary work would be repayed at some time.
And (giving me the chance of a little sideswipe at a recent message from
Arthur Cordell -- whom I know won't take this amiss), "Equivalence of
Transactions" is one of the basic laws of economics.
Keith Hudson
P.S. When Sally recruited me to join Futurework in its early days it was
because I had started the "Job Society" in England in order to study the
subject of work because I felt badly about the high unemployment that then
existed. Twenty years previously I had founded "Jobs for Coventry
Foundation" which grew to a teaching staff of 20 or 30 and taught basic
skills to several hundred young unemployed people in my home town over a
period of several years. But I don't think either of these activities of
mine actually made the slightest difference in producing permanent new
work. However, since joining Futurework and then publicly offering to one
of our then frequent FW subscribers (of the more sociological variety) to
go to his neck of the woods in Canada and brainstorm ideas for real jobs
among their unemployed for travel expenses only (the offer was declined), I
then decided to stop all the pseudo discussion that was going on then and
brainstorm real jobs of my own -- that is, real businesses supplying real
needs. Since then, I've produced two businesses and about a dozen jobs --
that is, real jobs with good earnings that are likely to be permanent. They
will also give me two more pensions to add to those I had already (and much
better ones, actually). Incidentally, the "equivalence of transactions"
that applied in my case was not the unintended by-product of additional
pensions -- money really doesn't interest me very much -- but the sheer
challenge and fun of creating two businesses of a sort which had never
existed before but have every prospect of continuing indefinitely. It
really can be done, and there's really no end to it (incidentally, Arthur,
another "law" of economics). But I was 60 then, I'm 65 now, and I've had
enough of working a 12-hour day.
>
>I know that some people hanker for societies which are totally based on
>non-conditional exchanges (such as typified by William Morris "News from
>Nowhere and other utopias).
>
>I on the other hand am very incapable of provding much of substance for
>my own survival - and hence am dependent (like a huge number of people
>in the Western World) on my ability to generate exchange for my
>survival.
>
>I find the current processes which provide exchange value very limiting,
>and like Keith, would like to see the range considerably expanded
>(community currencies seem like a powerful opportunity).
>
>I agree with Keith totally that education is critical to any of this.
>Most of the population has no idea how the current system of economic
>jobs works, and the thought of trying to introduce a parallel concept
>(such as a community currency) to such people is stress inducing (though
>I spend a considerable amount of my time trying).
>
>It will be a lot easier when our education system comes to grips with
>work other than employment, but perhaps I shouldn't hold my breath.
>
>--
>Charles Brass
>Chairman
>Future of Work Foundation
>PO Box 122 Fairfield 3078 Australia
>Ph: 61 3 9459 0244
>Fax: 613 9459 0344
>
>The mission of the Future of Work Foundation is
>"to engage all Australians in creating a better future for work"
>
>
>
>
___________________________________________________________________
Keith Hudson, General Editor, Calus <http://www.calus.org>
6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727;
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________
