Economic Theory Name?

[nokkieny]

Sorry, this is completely off topic, I was having trouble finding a good subreddit and know there's a lot of smart people here so maybe I can find an answer.

Looking for more information into what this ideology might be officially called:

The idea that decentralizing markets is the best way to distribute prosperity. Which would mean giving individuals the opportunity to personally produce wealth, rather than relying upon a single entity to fairly distribute wealth. For example, a solar panel will allow an individual to create personal income, to create capital gains, which would have otherwise been realized by the power company. Also, the assumption may follow that when markets are decentralized, broken down and returned to the individual, supporting industries may also take the same effect. For example, installation and maintenance of solar products are executed by a wider swath of individuals than what is required to maintain central, mega-power.
This is similar to and intertwines with the support small businesses movement. But, I really like taking the idea a step further by sorta focusing on the most logical and viable options involving both business and personal options. Such that the market evolves into something where investment into the individual is the most practical investment. While at the same time fully considering the impact on your neighbor, as well as the sustainability and efficiency of the production.
I think I am going off the deep end here, but I just feel like I am onto something, I am not the first person to think this and I just want to learn more. I believe I am interested more so in the economic theory, and how it applies across a broad spectrum of ideas, rather than picking a single industry.

[gcgang]

Utopian socialism?

[RonBoyd]

Sci-Fi... or perhaps "politician's promise."

[rayinpenn]

Funny thing... In a free market smart, creative and effective people ultimately will prosper so so much so that their wealth could potentially be multiples of the average person. Some of those in the same market who are less successful will envy their successes and others will say "it isn't a level playing field", "you didn't create that road" ...

Both are wrong - our society doesn't guarantee equality of outcome only equality of opportunity.
The rise to wealth can involve many factors risk, education, creativity, talent and sometimes a mix of all aforementioned coupled with patience.

Are we not all better off for the Microsoft's and Apple of the world? The hate mongers of the world will seek to misdirect your focus from the what truly is important -ensuring and improving the equality of opportunity. Ultimately that is all that matters.

What is a fair distribution of wealth? If a gifted engineer doubles the efficiency of a solar panel at a lower cost and becomes fabulously wealthy can that be anyway unfair? Life isn't unfair or fair it just is....

Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

[target2019]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nokkieny Sorry, this is completely off topic, I was having trouble finding a good subreddit and know there's a lot of smart people here so maybe I can find an answer. Looking for more information into what this ideology might be officially called: The idea that decentralizing markets is the best way to distribute prosperity. Which would mean giving individuals the opportunity to personally produce wealth, rather than relying upon a single entity to fairly distribute wealth. For example, a solar panel will allow an individual to create personal income, to create capital gains, which would have otherwise been realized by the power company. Also, the assumption may follow that when markets are decentralized, broken down and returned to the individual, supporting industries may also take the same effect. For example, installation and maintenance of solar products are executed by a wider swath of individuals than what is required to maintain central, mega-power. This is similar to and intertwines with the support small businesses movement. But, I really like taking the idea a step further by sorta focusing on the most logical and viable options involving both business and personal options. Such that the market evolves into something where investment into the individual is the most practical investment. While at the same time fully considering the impact on your neighbor, as well as the sustainability and efficiency of the production. I think I am going off the deep end here, but I just feel like I am onto something, I am not the first person to think this and I just want to learn more. I believe I am interested more so in the economic theory, and how it applies across a broad spectrum of ideas, rather than picking a single industry.

Independent thought police are gonna get you.

This link will help you out.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dece...ng_(economics)

Your example of solar panels is excellent.

[nokkieny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rayinpenn Are we not all better off for the Microsoft's and Apple of the world? The hate mongers of the world will seek to misdirect your focus from the what truly is important -ensuring and improving the equality of opportunity. Ultimately that is all that matters. What is a fair distribution of wealth? If a gifted engineer doubles the efficiency of a solar panel at a lower cost and becomes fabulously wealthy can that be anyway unfair? Life isn't unfair or fair it just is....

So my initial thought was not take something efficient and break it apart and return it to the people. But, rather recognize something that could be done nearly as efficiently by individuals as could be done by a single entity, and offset the lack in efficiency with gains in societal well-being and in some cases a better end product to market.

Also, it may only be viable with a fraction of productions and activities, so maybe manufacturing solar panels is best executed on a mass scale, but installation, maintenance and use can all be done on an individual level.

Basically this idea started to develop in my head after reading about things such as tesla's powerwall and watching a documentary about a micro-brewery. As viable options to break away from corporate dependence.

[nokkieny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by target2019 Independent thought police are gonna get you. This link will help you out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dece...ng_(economics) Your example of solar panels is excellent.

Sorta confusing, but the idea is, something like this does not happen without some sort of guidance? Possibly forced guidance to produce any results?

I don't think I ever wanted to go down a political rabbit hole, although I suppose if someone was serious about this idea they would have to. But, if I was going to have to communicate my stance on gov policy in any way. I think I would say, the idea is something completely voluntary. I don't even care for the idea of government subsidizing to create direction. To me it is more about people taking everything they can in an entrepreneurial and creative way.

But, maybe that is just utopian.

[target2019]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nokkieny Sorta confusing, but the idea is, something like this does not happen without some sort of guidance? Possibly forced guidance to produce any results? I don't think I ever wanted to go down a political rabbit hole, although I suppose if someone was serious about this idea they would have to. But, if I was going to have to communicate my stance on gov policy in any way. I think I would say, the idea is something completely voluntary. I don't even care for the idea of government subsidizing to create direction. To me it is more about people taking everything they can in an entrepreneurial and creative way. But, maybe that is just utopian.

Theory has a name, but true it eventually raises political questions.
When something like this happens without guidance (or permission?) then you have a disruptive economic force in the status quo.

Utopian has a pejorative meaning to some. Not me!

[nokkieny]

Quote:

Originally Posted by target2019 Utopian has a pejorative meaning to some. Not me!

That's exactly how I feel, at the very least it can be something to strive for.

I have heard someone say that if there is another society in the universe, it would have to operate in a way where your neighbors well being is just as important as your own. Otherwise societies destroy themselves.
So I felt that maybe this is possible through capitalism, where products are opportunities are created for individual and supported by individuals, so that everyone has more options to participate in prosperity. Where the wealthy create and provide the building blocks for these types of individual opportunities, instead of exploiting those who have no other options.

I have built wealth through selling online, owning a few different websites. But, I have put all that aside and am working on a new business that will allow consumers to transition some existing spending into a decentralized market. It may be a bit less efficient, but it is something that people can believe in. It can be competitive, and I think until you get to partake in or realize the benefits of supporting individuals, and allowing people to prosper from their own hard work, you will be swallowed by greed. I have been greedy for a long time, and now I finally have the opportunity to give back in an entrepreneurial way.

I suppose there can be good greed and bad greed, and now I know which one is better.

[rayinpenn]

Didn't the industrial revolution happen because the individual simply cannot compete against an organized group of many? Closest you can come to today is urban farmers they grow locally for the freshest and best product.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forumh