In answer to your questions:

Is there a way everyone is able to get well compensated using their specialized skills, as they work towards a common goal?

- Universal basic income?

What’s the unifying goal that connects all humans?

- most humans want to see their children prosper, not experience famine, war, heatwaves, societal collapse. Not all, but most.

How can we get everyone on board despite their different worldviews?

- we won’t. But thankfully there are more people who will be better off under a different economic framework than there are people who are benefiting from this system. We need to harness these people, the numbers are on our side.

Expand full comment

I am afraid human health is much too narrow and anthropogenic centred. It needs to specifically include the health of the biosphere, because without a function biosphere there is no future for the human race on this planet. Of course, in a sense the health of the biosphere is implicit in promoting long-term human health, but it is too indirect to be effective in my opinion. However, think about unifying goal that unites everybody to work in the same direction is a brilliant idea. It also makes sense from a systemic perspective. Whatever, that idea might be, I think it will turn out to be completely incompatible with capitalism. Perhaps, the concept of ‘furthering the general good / interest’ as a guiding objective for all organisations could fulfil that role.

Expand full comment
Jan 14, 2022Liked by Brad Zarnett

I've also been working on the 'paybacks' of health, wellbeing and productivity as the business/economic case to retrofit workplaces. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315658834-23/making-economic-case-good-design-workplaces-sarah-daly

This sets out a methodology for assessing the ROI of non-carbon/energy factors that are substantially greater than the energy benefits but rarely feature as monetised value in the business case. This is vital because the higher the new build or retrofit spec (ie net zero) the faster the payback (incentives) to deliver value that resonates with eco-resistant owners.

The logic can be applied in other building settings like homes, hospitals, schools and universities etc too .... as all buildings account for 40% of emissions.

If you only talk about energy (and carbon, which most people don't understand and can't visualise) you get stuck in unconvincing paybacks. If you build in health, productivity, increased educational outcomes, reduced crime and social value you create a compelling case that makes people WANT better homes and workplaces. I've been working on this on and off since 2008.

Expand full comment
Jan 13, 2022Liked by Brad Zarnett

I've been waiting for someone to ask this question.

The unifying element is a new economic theory such as my Economics of Needs and Limits (ENL). This is based on precisely what you suggest: human health. It's "socially neutral" to include both progressives and conservatives, it seeks to modify capitalism as little as possible, and it strives for sustainable well-being. See bit.ly/3Dyp4Vq.

Expand full comment