You are on page 1of 6

Following is the very brief overview of the Biocompatible economy as proposed by the

Movement for Global Co/operation .

Each proposed measure will no doubt bring to mind lots of issues that need to be
extrapolated. Many are dealt with in the full draft document which is available on request.
The concept is still under development and we are seeking further insight, contribution and
collaboration. So should you have any comment please contact
and we will initiate a correspondence.
The reason for economic redesign and philosophical basis for the proposed new
model in brief:
It is our position that today’s economy is failing because it’s fundamental design and
paradigm is out of kilter with macro principles of natural law and practical reality.
To cite two primary examples : currently, the founding philosophy of our economy states
that individual ambition serves the common good which appears to be well rooted in
natural design. The opportunistic , often aggressive self interest and competition that we
see among plants and animals is the impetus and dynamic that sustains and balances
the healthy functioning of natural systems and in turn that of the whole , the biosphere.
Plants and animals however ,are only serving their immediate bodily needs. Humans on
the other hand; the scope of our understanding and operations is primarily systemic and,
having created systemic elements in our society ,such as the multinational corporation an
other big business, we have ignored the operating principles of systems in nature .
Natural systems exist only as cyclic and mutually replenishing “entities”. These economic
entities that have become systemic elements have not adopted systemic principles on
achieving said status, but continue as aggressively self serving competitive entities , only
in such cases ,now with vastly more power with which to manipulate dependant entities /
participants to their advantage. It is clear that in nature that would be a disaster. In our
economy it is also so, being the cause of inherent inequality and concentration of wealth
to cite one example. We are not advocating global “socialism” .MGC recognize the verity
of self interest as impetus.
Another core misalignment is of course that increase in fiscal wealth is directly coupled to
a decrease in natural / resource wealth and health. It is very difficult in today’s Uber
competitive economy to make the appropriate rapid and comprehensive technological
turnaround to remedy this considering that the outdated toxic depletive methods of
resource use are effectively subsidized by virtue of their being the established and
endemic systems.

The proposed redesign describes a radically different economic structure (and the bold
steps that could be taken to get there ) that attempts to remedy said flaws /
misalignments and others.
For a fuller paper on the philosophical founding of the biocompatible economy in relation
to current economic origin / design contact

the biocompatible economy- A Proposal: Economic redesign in three stages

Stage one .- transition phase , crisis management: initial broad stroke rebalancing of
skills and wealth distribution and financial liquidity, breather from intensive competition in
order to facilitate a more efficient turn around of our industrial direction. (from toxic to
sustainable / healthy) ;
Stage two - The Bio Compatible Economy - in which the structure of the economy is
more closely linked to corresponding principles of natural law and practical/ material
reality. – on the assumption that it would be thus more aerodynamic –so to speak
Stage three – Trajectories . the model so far has been designed with the end vision of a
money free economy in mind . That is because ultimately a money free situation would be
potentially , theoretically that is, in Platos world of pure form, the optimal vehicle in terms
of efficiency and un biased intelligent allocation of resources and stage three outlines how
stage two could move into that. However, as a non-monetary system is dependant on a)
some further development of our cooperative nature ( see note 1) as a whole, and b)
sufficient advancement technologically (see note 2) , stage three outlines some other
suggestions also. The variables are obviously great and impossible to confidently predict
from here, but the important point is , that the model does appear to reach a point
where at least partial redesign is necessary and, as is also apparent in nature,
structures / systems that lack fluidity will degenerate and/or collapse , so it would be best
to be thinking ahead . It should also be noted that removing the monetary system would
cancel out that which we see as the negative (economic ) consequences of sharing
information and the natural progression of labor saving devices and technology.

1. Transition phase
It is important to understand some of the measures in stage one in light of the
primary mechanism for wealth creation that would be introduced in stage two :
bio impact tax and accreditation mechanism (BITAM) , whereby , as an industry
or activity starts to increase the health of living systems credit /money is earned.
Thus, of course, increases in the money in the system are directly linked to
increases in existent wealth - the renewable resource base / the carrying capacity
of earth; and those activities that deteriorate the health of living systems are
quantified and taxed accordingly .

i) Global forget debt day : all debt is cancelled from the top to the bottom , countries
to individual . creditors are reimbursed by computer design, of course in most
cases this is the banking institutions. so, the money in the system is thus
doubled. and no more money is created as debt banks have to lend on the basis
of actual capital . suggest banks as public service institutions , loans interest free
until stage two when the money supply can legitimately support the addition of
interests (by decentralized wealth creation aka : bitam ) . Budget allocation for the
repayment of debt incurred by governments / between countries should be ring
fenced entirely to invest in regeneration projects towards environmentally and
economically sustainable communities. ( Here I refer mainly, although perhaps
not exclusively , to very poor communities. eg. Those a), too poor to have
incurred personal debt and thus marginalized by GFDD , and b), so poor they will
willingly work for poverty or starvation wages. :Those having been trapped and
marginalized by today’s economy.) Clearly, skills transfer will be an integral part
of that

ii) Inflation is capped and we establish the value of materials based on the energy
input inc. labor against money in the system now

iii) Ordinarily a boom such as would thus be created would be devastating

environmentally but , and here’s the big collective sacrifice of the model , we
acknowledge that profiting from pollution is illegitimate in todays context and all
companies become -temporarily – a new breed ,” tax deductable NPO’s”,
investing all profits into the sustainable regenerative alternative : in this way
collectively, we know that every cent spent is an investment in a future viable
economy. The motivation to authentically implement this is BITAM coming up in
stage two. In this measure there is still growth not of profit but new industry jobs
and sustainable infrastructure.

iv) Pensioners drawing on investment portfolios impacted by this transitional period

should be provided for by a raise in taxes (now that we have relieved the debt
burden.) This limited pension system is alleviated by stage 2. ( any better ideas?)

v) Govts. Provide the start up capital for either private or state owned Bio impact
assessment institutions, which during transition phase would be intensively
concerned with determining the method and the calculations to accurately
approximate an activities impact on living systems and appropriately correlate the
tax and credits both to the bio impact and the value of materials. And then of
course training a work force to do this assessment in the field including
conducting feasibility studies /test runs.
vi) Many new clean energy solutions propose to make use of sources of vastly
abundant biocompatible energy, such as geo thermal energy or advanced solar
technologies. To ensure equitability in this new trajectory a publicly funded global
energy institution should be set up , first to research and then, gradually, to
implement the long term aim of providing clean safe energy for all at cost.

vii) TRANSPARENCY. This is a vital principle of the “bio-compatible” economy. All

life as we know it is manifest as structure and structure is sustained by a free
flow of information through the material . For example, imagine a net. If a person
were to stand on the net, and in this case information would be described as
movement, what would happen if the information could not travel freely through
the fibers. In theory, it would break for a start, but in reality we don’t know
because in nature we have no way of actually stopping that information transfer.
If we understand that economic activity ( including government decision making)
is, being a thoroughly interconnected activity , one global system, then we can
also see how in that field, a healthy structure that evolves and adapts
appropriately to actual need and circumstance can likely only be sustained by a
free flow of accurate information. Therefore in this model, the dealings of all
collective enterprise must be thoroughly transparent –and lucid by design ),
available either by publicly accessible database or on request . Applying
transparency is key in other ways concerning the trajectory of the model , but
these are mentioned later.

2. The “Bio Compatible” Economy


• The generation of credit according to ones bio impact I have already delineated.
Some more detail around how this could work is written in the attatched
document and this is one of the first areas of the proposal being presented for
detailed research as to it’s practice and viability…. Long way to go yet , but not
looking un-hopeful. (BP= bio positive , BN = bio negative BNu= bio neutral , BIC
= bio impact credit , BIT =bio impact Tax , BIS =bio impact Status) , . if the
impact on the health of living systems of a product , technology or process
cannot be determined (as yet) it may not be applied commercially / released
in to the “economy”. this in effect is the precautionary principle .

B. - business structure reformulated to look more like a natural system, and to

reflect the understanding that the actual nature of all significant economic
enterprise is cooperative.
i) Having established a new direction towards the sustainable /
regenerative industrial alternative, all companies become
cooperatives. The larger companies, those that made it on to the
stock market, become the central cooperatives (Cen. c/op)
ii) .All smaller companies must affiliate themselves to one or more
central cooperatives within the sector they see can most benefit
their company (see iv).
iii) These smaller co/op’s ,- affiliated decentralized co/ops (Adc/op)-,
pay a percentage of their profit (P%I) into the Cen. c/op of choice
iv) In return the cen. c/op pays quarterly dividends to all the AD.c/p’s
in the form of information, technical support, training, system
components, maintenance etc. or in the form of the set up of
localized production units. It is the affiliated smaller businesses
that decide which services offered by the cen. c/op’s that they
would like to make use of within the budget of their dividend. ..
v) in this way, the activities of the cen. c/op become more and more
research and development and training and less and less
production based theoretically, perhaps then, more efficient,
while simultaneously the smaller affiliated c/ops become more
profitable and prolific on account of the support they are
receiving and the subsequent increases in their BIS and / or BIC
. Therefore the profit percentage input can increase… in turn,
increasing quality and/ or quantity of dividend and so on. **(with
the BITA. mechanism this process would over time develop
information rich, locally sufficient ,ecologically healthy
communities .)
vi) The cen. co/ops develop capacity as training centers and may
link up with the universities to provide better funded education
and when ADc/op members ,in any given area, call for the set up
of localized production units (independent)- to be paid for by their
collective P%I this creates job opportunities for those trained at
the This concept is somewhat extended in the full
vii) The incentive for Ad c/op members to call for this measure is that
the independent production units (IPU) will provide products at
cost for the founder members, and as they continue to pay in to
the cen co/op, their IPU -in which they are now kind of silent
partners- , will receive the collective dividend in the form of
upgrade and maintenance etc. support. Again, see full draft doc.
viii) This model should by degrees bring about the possibility of self
sufficient localities supported by , but ultimately, were dissolution
to occur, not dependant on central development nodes.
ix) A new strategy for the delivery of investment as pension is set up
(details of one possible solution available on request.)
x) A key factor in the model is that inflation would remain capped .
The idea is to raise the standard of living for all people and not to
negate the increase in fiscal and resource wealth by inflation. –
This possibility and many associated issues, including the value
of materials, are explored in greater extent in the full draft
document available on request.

( re. - v) ** an addition to this proposal is that perhaps this process could

be exaggerated to the mutual benefit of the Cen.c/op and ADc/op if, for
every increase in Bio Positive Credit (BIC) generated by individual
adc/ops directly on account of the upgrade or other assistance from the
most recent dividend of the associated Cenc/op, 10% of that increase
was calculated and this sum awarded to the Cen co/op in question . That
is not to say that 10% be subtracted from the BIC income to the AD c/op,
but is additional gratuity. The question is which level of increase will
most appropriately correlate to the actual swell in resource health and
quantity. This additional proposal may well be apt because increase in
the health of a living system is exponential and of course linked to other
systems with the “butterfly effect” being the extreme illustration. This
being impossible to calculate, BIC is only awarded for increase on
directly impacted systems at local level and for a limited time. (in this so
far conceptual paper, Bio Impact Tax (BIT) is calculated by further
reaching criteria)

Taken together , the idea is that part a and part b create, by the
conditions of abundance, support, transparency, increase of biological
resources and health, cooperation and greater equality, a system which
allows or facilitates the development of humans more cooperative nature
……. And ultimately a more tangible grasp on the unified nature of
reality.(see stage three.)
Stage three
Trajectories :
The element of wealth creation in the model, as it stands, is unsustainable and is in
effect more a rebalancing act. At some stage BPC / money in the system increases to
the point that the supply of money has overtaken the productive capacity. (This could
really take some time to arrive at as resource use becomes regenerative and increased
in efficiency, as we employ recycling and the productive use of waste streams. ) That is
to say once there is more money in the system than the combined value of goods

Possible Trajectory # 1) At this point we could carry on increasing the money supply
until money is so abundant as to be effectively obsolete. Theoretically, we would be in a
position to do away with the monetary system and to asses the most intelligent use and
distribution of resources (Having advanced the science of bio impact assessment as
related to productivity we would be well placed to understand such an allocation,)
importantly, coming from a perspective of abundance and equal entitlement. (*1) This
trajectory does ,however, depend on certain elements having been established which are
at this stage uncertain.

• The prevailing psychological impetus would have to have shifted from competitive
this is possible given that we would have been collectively experiencing
abundance (*2) and given that the focus of our economic survival will have been
on biological health, that is to say, on balance symbiosis and health and on the
cooperative model.
• Another important factor that stands in favor of the likelihood of this kind of
further development in consciousness is that advancement in intelligence by
definition entails a clearer and broader perception of objective reality and thus by
proxy recognition of our equality and the overall increased efficiency of the
cooperative mindset. This is not the whole story as it may be that for many
reasons emotional intelligence remains stymied while technical intelligence
advances. This does not enable a clear perception of objective reality to
accompany ones understanding. This can be dangerous. However, the
experience of abundance within families does decrease the instance of emotional
abuse and neurosis. Thereby probably increasing the natural growth of emotional
health and morality in individuals and society.
• This kind of overall direction of evolution would, in the proposed scenario of a
money free economy, be exceptionally important as it is an uber cooperative
system. In nature , we see that cooperative systems need to be either policed as
with ants or, rigidly instinctual as is apparent in ground hogs (see krebs and
davies …) . As they are vulnerable to collapse if any member takes advantage
of the system motivated by competitive self interest. Humans are not rigidly
instinctual and you may be unlikely to find many volunteer police.
• We have spoken about the competitive self interested level of thinking and
natural dynamic (around which we have built our present economy) and how from
a broader perspective individuals merge in to systemic entities – the level at
which humans are operating today, and the basis for the model described in
stage two.- But there is a third level at which we see systemic entities are also
mergent (the water cycle becomes animal, vegetable mineral, the food chain and
the forests, become geology, becomes water etc.) in which distinctions serve
only the purpose of analysis and conversation . This we will call the unified
perspective the mergent and thoroughly objective level of reality. There is
evidence that people are capable of operating from this perspective. The human
experience of unity is called love. From this perspective, fully integrated, the
impetus for deceit and subterfuge is gone, as is the urge for unwarranted power
and domination. The well being of another is perceived as it is, to be completely
as important as ones own, and the well being of the whole more important again.
If we focus on taking steps to realize this level of consciousness objectivity (see
full doc stage 2 point 8 ) we will be having a stable basis for a money free
economy. I believe it is not so far fetched. But it is also not necessarily
imperative that we all reach this saintly level of vision and function for a money
free economy to work ,only that the system serves us well and that by and large
there has been notable progression on this front . As it stands this is all clearly
opinion and here say and research is required.

a money free economy :
• would have to have automated most of the monotonous and /or physically
degrading tasks
• would have to have enough data and interlinked advanced computerized
decision making programs to make objective optimal solutions regarding
technical problems and resource use.
It is important to note that in a monetary economy there will naturally be serious
problems of job loss as technology advances. However with widespread wealth and
consequently broad access to training and higher education this could be potentially
largely mitigated.

This document is unfinished and will be revised shortly .

If you have any comments or questions contact Elbe Everson :