Let’s reinvent the social policy measures
A game of thought.
The video above offers some recommendations on how to develop independently, if you don’t want to rely on the offerings of the official education system. But wait: If a lot of people would know how to use these new forms of education for themselves, how should the education system be organised as such?
For one moment, let’s think about the education system in a radical new way…
If we wager the thought experiment of imagining a complete new restructuring of the education system, we start out with a tabula rasa and the fundamental question: what’s next?
First of all, we would reapportion the old, institutionalised education budget.
Furthermore, if we assume that the dynamics of the future of work are pushing increasing numbers of people into conditions of insecurity, but at the same time cannot be adequately trained in the inefficient training loops of the existing education system — then the concept of an unconditional basic income (UBI) suddenly enters the room.
Should we take it up, this concept could help avoid the absurdities of bureaucracy and thus clear the way for constructive development. An outline of the whole UBI debate is beyond the scope of this paper. Yet, if we track its possibilities on the theoretical level at least, one outcome would be that the money for the education budget would be supplemented by the complete holdings of the social system. From this fund, supported by a restructuring of the tax system, a new framework programme for a modern system of education could be evolved.
Now let’s go one step further and imagine that the whole education system acts in the same way that Google (or now Alphabet) acts as a company. Alongside UBIs, we would create individual budgets from the fund, which one could freely dispose of as a designer.
Systems would also be created that intelligently capture the collective intelligence of freely rotating ideas and projects and bring it into social circulation. Projects of importance for society would receive greater financial backing, others perhaps more (wo)man-power.
The aim of the exercise would be to think ahead in a modern way without stiffening oneself on a new “toll system”, but rather to develop the system dynamically with clever hacks on a collaborative basis.
Such a system, underpinned with smart algorithms, could open up a rich and diversified range of both social and individual potentials that would make for a much fairer distribution of budgets than is the case at present. This could open up a new space of opportunities which could be continually developed along the collective intelligence of the crowd. This would be a completely new approach to think and practice social policy.
What do you think?