Bullshit Economy Kills!

Time to start caring more about the Givers than the Takers.

Floris Koot
Feb 11, 2019 · 13 min read
Many children show a natural desire to freely contribute, which we break down in secondary education, pushing them to compete and be one of the ‘winners’. Why?

Why don’t we value the Givers rather than the Takers?

There’s a certain kind of people, who make a huge difference, yet hardly get the recognition they should. I call these people the Givers. Think teachers, who spend their own money to buy school utensils, because the school doesn’t. Think people reforesting barren wastelands often destroyed by industrial enterprise*. Even more so, they often struggle to make that difference out of their own pockets. Our economic system doesn’t seem to value their contribution. Which, in systems perspective, is madness. We pay millions in taxes to destructive industries in funding, millions more to clean up their mess and millions more in healthcare for the damage they do to people. Why don’t we spend those millions on the heroes who do make a difference, who are healthy for the planet, people and society. Why?

Rutger Bregman shook up the billionaire conference in Davos, by claiming the very rich should pay their taxes. He makes more than sense, for me. He sheds a light on an essential aspect of wealth and real wealth.

Bullshit Jobs damage the human spirit

In the Netherlands about 70% of all jobs have a control function. Some necessary, like guarding the dykes, others born out of a system that puts mistrust above anything else. Indeed. Managers, controllers, overseers all seem to not trust professionals, but rather stifle every mistake they make with new regulations and protocols. They also normalize the fact that we value ‘leadership’ higher than doing the real work. Just think about it, way over 50% of jobs don’t create value, costs lots of money, yet are valued the most!

Fallacy of Capitalism: Tribes that only feed the hunters can’t survive.

Why do we value the Takers, rather than the Givers?

The culture of grabbing has ruled our ‘civilization’ throughout the ages.
Social heroes in the Netherlands get a ‘lintje’ (medal) from the government, read when proposed by others. Sometimes even for work protesting said government. (not in this case, but this was a copyright free picture)

Why we need to reward the Givers and take from the Takers.

I think it’s pure biology, like being gay or straight. We either grow up as giver or taker. Yes, and many nuanced variations in between. Takers being the hunters. Givers being the nourishers and caretakers of society. Takers could be hunters and take risks, because they had a home to return to with their spoils of the hunt or war. These they shared, because they were related to the givers and perhaps because banishment was then the worst possible punishment. But now in our complex society we lose such relationships out of sight. Takers can buy whatever caretaking they need. They can pay to avoid the consequences of their actions, like the war hawks of the arms industry. And this is poisoning their minds. They live in bubbles (watch them in Davos vs Rutger Bregman) that never confront them with the consequences of their actions, until it’s too late and unbalanced nature destroys them too. Yes, Mar a Lago will drown!

BONUS 1: Logic to consider

By investing in those who help heal the whole, we invest in ourselves.

2. Killing some of the arguments of the very rich:

Billionaire philanthropy doesn’t work!

The very rich keep on claiming their philanthropy makes a huge difference. Well, if you include how they got the money, they should be embarrassed like hell: underpaying workers, bribing politicians, destroying nature, hiding reports that show products are failing or even poisonous in effect or production and the list goes on. Philanthropy means you don’t change the system, at all. It’s distractive PR. It’s like most NGO’s: mopping the floor with the tap open. The Red Cross takes care of the victims of war, but it doesn’t seek to stop the wars. They’re not allowed. Most well intended philanthropical organizations seek to help, but won’t challenge the causes that are the root of the problem. Think inequality, corruption, injustice, oppression, war, mono cultures, all kinds of pollution by big industries. The only real challenge to that has been socialism (no wonder it’s hated so much), mass protests, bottom up innovations and caring governments.

Bonus 1: More people come to the same conclusion

This is Anand Giridharadas with overlapping view. Listen to his finale. On point, clear phrasing and clear call for change.

The rich getting richer hurts everyone and everything else!

It may sound strange. I’m not a socialist, nor a liberal. I rather seek the meta-level in systems to rise above broken systems. For one the promise that the rich getting richer will benefit the economy and thus us all, has been disproven many times. Go google it yourself. The USA on average did best when the taxes for the superrich were about 75% to 95%! Yes, read your history.

Greta Thunberg: started at 15 waking the world up! She fights for her and everyone’s future. That is essential giving. Many don’t dare to follow her, out of fear for their, often hurtful, jobs. This is madness.

The rich didn’t work for it, as you may think!

It seems to be the logic of many who say, socialism takes away well deserved earnings. They say these rich worked for it. Then how come Trump-like inheritors also count as hard workers? Then how come we think those who work over 60 hours and still can’t feed their family aren’t hard workers, but those who have an army of lawyers, lobbyists and CEO’s are? So it isn’t the amount of hours, that we can say brought in the money. They made their money often by playing the rules, or even cheating. Most millionaires have some shame about their own first million. That should have you thinking.

We’d all go bankrupt when we’d do this to the very rich.

Well, is the money in the hands of the very rich to everybody’s benefit currently? Or do the billionaires play Monopoly with fewer and fewer ‘winners’? The worth of a living tree in the Amazon is currently over $100.000 in healthcare benefits, eco benefits, stress reduction, tourism. What is it worth cut down? Made into 3000 papers and 130 Ikea cabinets I guess the net profits for the industrial aren’t even above a $1000 per tree. Talk about value destruction. And do I need cabinets I throw away in 4 years, because the construction is too sloppy? For the industrial this is a gain, for me and our planet this is a loss. Thus the ‘keep the giant wasteful industries working’ argument is actually a losing argument, except for anyone investing is this madness.

The Gentle Revolution

Towards a revolution we all want to dance in, for a…

Floris Koot

Written by

Play Engineer. Social Inventor. Gentle Revolutionary. I always seek new possibilities and increase of love, wisdom and play in the world.

The Gentle Revolution

Towards a revolution we all want to dance in, for a flourishing planet.

More From Medium

More on Politics from The Gentle Revolution

More on Politics from The Gentle Revolution

An Online ‘Discussion’

More on Politics from The Gentle Revolution

More on Politics from The Gentle Revolution

Want Sane Politics? Address The Inner Monkeys!

More on Social Change from The Gentle Revolution

More on Social Change from The Gentle Revolution

Techno Sink Sci Fi

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade