The two sacred gerbils of socioeconomics are killing each other. They are making an absolute mockery of socioeconomics. Ridiculous rises in the cost of living are drastically devaluing both. People’s assets are evaporating on a more or less hourly basis. How is this growth or productive?
Productivity was a manufacturing term. It was originally based on a very clear set of metrics. Growth was a broad generic term applied to economics. Economies grew because they became bigger. Both terms have now basically been completely reversed.
Productivity is now anything and everything to do with any functions in a workplace. Growth is now largely a set of big numbers, based on the idea that numbers are supposed to be bigger if businesses and economies are growing. That approach has been a complete disaster.
Big numbers mean absolutely nothing if the value of those numbers is being destroyed by cost increases. This mythology is dangerous. In the most unequivocally prosperous times in history, numbers were much lower. You could actually raise a family of two kids and own a house on the basis of a single income.
Now, a couple with two jobs can barely afford to keep a roof over their heads and raise one child on a median income. From the constant harping and bleating about productivity in the news, this is all the fault of the workers. Those pesky people who do all the work and make the money for you are the problem.
Are these people discontented? Are extremely hostile workplaces, insane management cultures, and deranged results of ridiculous meetings a problem? How could anyone be unhappy with a constantly devaluing wage? Add to this image of bliss a totally failed crime-addled society, and what could possibly be the problem?
Growth is the other big issue. The numbers may be bigger but the actual asset values are constantly reducing. More dollars buy less. Socioeconomics has been trying to talk its way out of this grave for quite some time.
Theory and facts parted ways a long time ago. The poverty line keeps rising, and more people are dragged under by all the hype. Add to this wonderful scenario a political culture that no longer understands its own role in social management, and you get catastrophic failure.
This economic model is a rotting discredited relic of the past. These are theories which barely survived the mid-20th century. That was 70 years ago. Everything has changed.
Talking about productivity, if you remember the alleged debate about remote working, there’s a story there. Remote working is far more cost-efficient. It’s cheaper for everybody. It reduces unproductive time spent commuting and just paying for going to work. Fewer people in the office mean much lower operational costs for businesses.
This is where the theories of productivity and growth come totally unstuck. Appropriately enough, the only word that matters is the word “cost”. Productivity and growth are supposed to be efficient. How can they possibly be efficient when they create more costs for themselves?
Consider:
Absurdly expensive hiring practices.
Maniacally low wages.
Demotivation of everyone on a routine basis.
Mindless rituals.
Murderous levels of stress as a cultural norm.
Total distrust of management.
Reducing staff to cut self-inflicted theoretical costs you should never have had to pay in the first place.
The idiotic theory that the people who make the money are the biggest cost in the workplace. If you can’t put an accurate dollar value on a job, what in god’s name are you doing in business? This is Bonehead Management 101.
Terrible job design and astonishingly bad fits in the workplace.
Does this sound productive to you? Do you foresee bright vistas of happy executives prancing in the morning sun? How about growth? Does a workplace full of miserable, sick, underpaid, highly medicated people visibly shriveling up and, in some cases, actually dying under the cost of living sound hopeful?
You fizzy little optimist, you. Socioeconomics is very much like a car. When it stops running and goes nowhere, you need better options.
_________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
