Thinking Outside Disavowing The Box
Monday, May 18, 2009, posted by Q6 at 5:25 AM
In a presentation I often give to students and educators about technology safety, I end with explaining that much of the technology we use today was born out of ideas in science fiction. "To see where technology is going next," I explain, "we often look to the movies for answers." (I could cite some examples here, but those who are both tech-savvy and movie buffs already know what I'm talking about. Those who aren't should just keep reading; you'll get my point.) And lately I've been wondering if movies portend the future of other things as well.

Specifically, I'm thinking of a movie that was released back in 1979: "Americathon" was a campy film, the type popular at the time, that I expect wasn't seen by many people--or, at the very least, wasn't widely remembered. The IMDB plot summary puts it best: In the not too distant future, the United States government is virtually bankrupt and in danger of being foreclosed on by a group of Native Americans, now owners of the massive Nike Corporation. A desperate President decides to make a last-ditch effort to save the country... by raising money with a telethon!

I remember part of the film's opening sequence: people wake up in the morning inside their cars--in which they are living--and walk or ride their bikes to work. All phones are pay phones. Since it's a comedy, their destitute nature is something they make the best of, as if they don't even remember when things were good.

I'm no economist--a point which should be made very clear right now--so any thoughts I have about our nation's dire financial situation are probably naive and half-informed. I'm a layman, after all; but perhaps what's needed here is a perspective so fresh that it doesn't come from the business or economic communities at all. Once we have an idea, then let the experts kick it around. The Economy is tricky, and something seemingly counterintuitive to me the more I think about it. It would make sense to say, "Save your money, quit spending so much," but then businesses don't thrive. We could say, "Extend credit to all and buy, buy, buy!" but we've seen what that kind of thinking did to the housing industry. Every time I try to come up with an idea, there's some economic precept that raises another problem. It's an intellectual game of Whack-A-Mole. Douglas Adams's detective Dirk Gently called it "the fundamental interconnectedness of all things."

So I've been thinking a lot lately about radical solutions for the troubled economy, partly out of a sense of national altruism and partly because (if I do come up with a solution) I'd like to hear talk-radio change the subject. I'm just an average guy with a family, a couple of mortgages, a couple of cars, very little savings, and a job in a profession that's about to have a major funding-ectomy whether the Governor gets his way or not. In short, I'm just like millions of other people out there.

I began work on my ideas not long after reading an editorial letter in the LA Times about the $700 billion plus stimulus package. The idea has since circled the Internet half a dozen times, but it basically goes like this: There are roughly 40 million people in U.S. over the age of 50; give each one a million dollars with three conditions: they must leave their jobs, buy a house (or pay off an existing one), and purchase a U.S.-made automobile. The whole idea, radical in nature (in that "it's-so-dumb-it-just-might-work" sort of way), revitalizes the banks, the housing industry, automakers, and employment rates. Of course, the only problem with the idea is that it's author did the math wrong and missed a zero; although he thought he had a $400 billion solution on his hands, it would actually cost a whopping, cost-prohibitive $40 trillion. However, I like the way this guy thinks.

So what are some other ideas? (And so we're clear, I'm, not claiming any of the following as original ideas. I'm quite certain that others have thought of these things before, and I'm not trying to take any credit for their intellectual property.)
1) I thought about a Universal Salary Cap. Every job in every industry gets categorized in a gradient scale, and each job at each level is capped at a certain salary. First, this eliminates the corporate bonuses that have offended us all over the last eighteen months. Second, after everyone's paid there's a leftover sum (I think it's called "profit," but it's been so long since anyone's seen one . . . ) that can go back into the business, making it successful or enabling it to expand and hire more workers. Third, it helps to prevent money-grubbing, do-as-little-for-as-much-as-possible types from taking the CEO's chair--certainly SOMEONE must fit that bill. Hell, the President of the United States makes $400,000 a year; I'm not saying other jobs are more important than his, but I'm sure your average high school teacher gets more done in a week than he does. I know the problem with this salary cap idea is how it gives the finger to a free-enterprise system, and I'm sure somewhere along the line I'm going to sound like I'm endorsing Socialist or even Communist ideas; this isn't my intention. I love living in a free country, and Democracy and Free Enterprise are great; but if you think we can't look like Russia in the late 1980's at some point, you haven't been paying enough attention. I'm just trying to come up with ideas.

2) Perhaps outsourcing certain industries to foreign competitors would give us time to work on other things. Since the auto industry is about to be pulled off life support anyway, why not let Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, and the others have it? We could use the workers, the resources, and the effort to develop a better domestic mass transit infrastructure. Think about it: what better way to kill the foreign auto competition by making the automobile obsolete in most metropolitan areas? More mass transit means fewer cars, less pollution, fewer injuries and deaths in automobiles. Once and for all, we would limit supply of foreign competition by reducing demand; it hasn't worked for the drug war, but it could work here. (The nay-sayers will complain that this will kill the insurance companies, car washes, auto component makers, and cripple the oil industry. I never said the idea was perfect, but at least they're not complaining that reducing accidents would hurt the medical profession.)

3) Let's re-think foreign investment: instead of combating it, let's embrace it. Is the world map ever really finished? Let's find a country that's got it going on and partner up. Let's take a page from the corporate playbook . . . it's merger time. This isn't a new idea; corporations have been doing it for decades. At the very least, we could consider a few countries with loads of capital and add a few stars to the flag (no one said there was a ceiling on the number of states we could have, right?) I know this sounds a lot like Manifest Destiny and world domination, but I'm thinking more about those KFC/Pizza Hut or KFC/Taco Bell locations: they're saving money by sharing space. (I know, they're all owned by the same corporation; they weren't always, though, and it helps with my "we need a roommate to share expenses" metaphor.) It sounds radical, but it would be a better alternative to, say, national foreclosure. If we don't do something, soon those eBay hoaxes about states being for sale won't be hoaxes.

If someone else has other ideas, I'm all ears. I really don't think the blueprint for America's rescue is going to come from the economic eggheads in Washington; I think the solution is going to come from some ten-year-old in the midwest who develops a sound economic stimulus model from World of Warcraft scenarios. It's gonna come from somewhere unexpected, and it's going to be a radical idea.

I just hope it works.
 
0 Comments:
« back home
Post a Comment




« back home
Post a Comment