Tag Archives: contribution

Changing the GDP calculation?

According to an NPR story (Lady Gaga Writing A New Song Is Like A Factory Investing In A New Machine), the United States government is about to revamp the way gross domestic product (GDP) is calculated because economists are realizing that intangible investments contribute to the GDP and should be included in its overall calculation. In the Lady Gaga example, “the value of the time she spent working on new songs; working in the studio” is now worthy of being counted in the GDP. Investments in filming movies will also receive GDP status, as will investments in research and development.

Credit: MarkyBon

Credit: MarkyBon

So let’s get this straight: song-writing is a value-added activity and represents a contribution to the domestic product. While it may seem like a smoke-and-mirrors tactic to artificially inflate the GDP in order to make the economy look better (which could easily be the real motivation behind this change), the new calculation is a step in the right direction. It is an economic way to approximate heretofore unrecorded contributions to the public wealth. As such, it is a tiny bit closer to the implicit civilitic understanding that every value-added contribution is inherently beneficial to society and counts toward the wealth of a nation.

Since economics and civilitics are based in totally different principles, we must have a common measurement concept if we are going to compare them in a meaningful way. It would be just as inappropriate to discuss the overall ivi of an economic system as it would be to consider the GDP of a civilitic system. But let’s assume for a moment that GDP is a measure of the benefit to society (by the expenditure of effort and money) over the period of a year. Technically, this is not the case, since automobile accidents and disasters contribute to the GDP. But if we consider just the positive aspects of GDP, then the GDP might actually be an economic allegory for ivi. A national ivi (should we call it a GDI – gross domestic ivi?) would be a time-average positive contribution by a nation’s people, something vaguely similar to the GDP. Of course, ivi is a running average and is not bounded by any sort of annual calculation, but we could certainly measure it only once a year if we wanted.

An activity that is a freely-given contribution to the world and society is a civilitic activity. So song-writing – at least by reputable artists – is certainly an ivi-generating activity and the addition of song-writing to the GDP brings that calculation more parallel with an ivi calculation. The same is true for film-making or research and development. But what about other ivi activities that still will not be included in the GDP?

So far, the breadth of activities included by economists – even with the new rules – is grossly incomplete. For example, the GDP does not include domestic activity such as caring for children, cleaning house, or doing yardwork. These activities are also investments in the value of a nation and the well-being of its people. Child care only increases the GDP when it is being done for pay, usually by someone who is not the child’s parent, but doesn’t it still contribute to the wealth of a nation when it is being performed by the child’s parent? Is house-cleaning only important when it is done by a maid service? Is mowing a yard only important when compensation is paid to a landscaping service?

Economists need to explain where and why they draw a line between investing in a new song and investing in other value-improving aspects of our society. Furthermore, since they have now decided to add some of these activities into the GDP calculation, how are we to measure them or assign a GDP value? How much is GDP is that new Lady Gaga song worth while it’s being written and how does that compare with a song being written by my friend Peggy Lang?

In contrast, civilitics handles these questions intrinsically by allowing society to decide the value of all activities. If you mow a lawn, write a song, take care of children, or research a new technology, civilitics calls upon society to assign an ivi value. How much real value is added to society when a board chairperson spends the morning preparing for a shareholder meeting? How much value is added when a mother is available to help guide her child through a moral crisis? Ultimately, economics can only attempt to model calculations which are simple and natural for civilitics.

Definition of ivi

Introducing a new word: ivi, which rhymes with divvy. It will be taken to mean those things which are done in a civilitic sense. This word is appropriate for a number of reasons, not least of which is that it is contained within the word civil – even though technically not the root of that word. It is also contained within the words giving and living, which are also relevant to the discussion. Besides all that, it is short and easy.

ivi

A new word

Ivi is about doing what is right or good or beneficial without consideration for the immediate personal return. Ivi is working for the common good. When a billionaire makes a public donation of a million dollars to a university, that might not be an ivi action. But when a homeless and hungry person shares their last loaf of bread, that’s an ivi action.

When people stop working to make a living and begin working to make a difference… that’s an ivi civilization.

[Update: 2015-08-21] In review of this post, it will be noted that the original definition of ivi, offered above, has already morphed into something slightly different. At this time, ivi is most often used to describe the merit achieved in contributing to the public good. So it is less often used as a verb (to do a public benefit action) and more as a noun (the merit or esteem earned for having taken action in the public benefit).

National Public Radio (NPR) and civilitics

National Public Radio (NPR) is already organized in a quasi-civilitic way. The model is based upon giving service and depending, in part, on the supportive behavior of people who listen to the programming.

Credit: deviever

Credit:
deviever

In its most basic form, NPR broadcasts are produced as a free contribution to the public benefit. This includes news, art, music, and specials. Anyone in the broadcast area is welcome to listen to the programming without any need to pay. Of course, because there is no fully civilitic framework, the radio stations have fiscal obligations and need financial support in order to survive. To meet those needs, they need some listeners to contribute money for the programming, but there is no binding requirement to do so. As a result, NPR programming certainly is a gift to the listening audience.

On the other side of the radio signal, listeners of NPR are encouraged to contribute money to help support the programming they like. While many listeners might never send a payment, there are many others who do. Those who contribute have some influence over the programming choices and thereby encourage specific behavior by NPR. Ultimately, those contributions are gifts made back to the radio stations as a way of saying “I like what you are doing, please keep doing it.”

Civilitics works in much the same way as NPR except that it works at a global human scale. Rather than considering the preferences of radio broadcasts, it is the actions of people which are considered for public approval. Rather than payments being made to a radio station, people (other than the original beneficiaries) act as the providers of goods and services to one another. A civilitic framework allows people to know how much contribution others are making and reward them accordingly. High contributors are more likely to be rewarded and will be more highly rewarded while low contributors will be less so.