[lbo-talk] Physical economics

Barry Brooks durable at earthlink.net
Mon Nov 23 06:15:26 PST 2009


Physical Economics

Although it's not easy, we can change the rules of money economics, but the rules of physical economics can not be changed. Starting with knowledge of the things we can't change and the things we want we can begin to outline a new plan for economics.

Intelligent design of an economic system must be rooted in the study of physical economics. Never forget that wealth is not money; it is physical. Money and politics tend to obscure the physical basis of economics. When we study the physical inputs and physical outputs of the economy answers can be found to economic problems that money economics alone can not fix.

One example of the importance of physical economics is afforded by consideration of the relation between the rate of production and the goods-in-service resulting from that production. To provide cars for the whole population engineers will plan to put enough cars into service, but what rate of production is possible? Since the rate of production is limited by many factors, provision of the needed fleet of vehicles will take time.

If we needed 1000 cars in service, but could only produce them at a rate of 500 cars/year it would take 2 years to provide the desired fleet. Then, as the fleet wears out it could be replaced with a lower rate of production, which depends of the life-span of the cars. If the cars lasted for 10 years the final replacement rate of production would only be 100 cars/year.

Any rate of production above the replacement rate will increase the cars in service. We can have vast wealth even after we reduce our consumption to sustainable low levels if we start to think about providing a fleet in service rather trying to increase the rate of production. Instead of producing more we could make durable items last longer. We would have more wealth with less consumption and pollution, but the money economy would suffer.

Waste and war make lots of jobs and money, but they squander physical wealth. High rates of production and full employment are not indications of economic health. Economic health depends on our physical wealth. That can only be measured by the quality and quantity of goods in service.

Money economics can not always guide us to do the right things, because often the right things don't make money, and the wrong things can make us rich with no money cost. The new economy will need a money economics that supports physical economics. Where money doesn't directly apply to a situation the best thing money economics can do is to say out of the way. Physical externalities don't belong in money economics. We could plan around "hidden" costs, limit them by law, or we could just refuse to do some things because they are wrong.

Putting artificial prices on physical externalities is money-ism. It will not lead to effective planning. Artificial costs will not effectively guide the building of a better system. The external planning that money-ism hopes to avoid will still be needed. It would be so much easier to start with the direct implementation of a plan to build a sustainable physical economy that makes the money economy its slave. That would allow leaving prices up to the market and physical economics up to good judgment.

Barry Brooks



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list