Ming the Mechanic:
The Support Economy

The NewsLog of Flemming Funch
 The Support Economy2002-12-21 23:59
picture by Flemming Funch

The Publishers Weekly review of the book "The Support Economy: Why Corporations Are Failing Individuals and The Next Episode of Capitalism" says:
"Over the last two centuries, they argue, an increasingly efficient economy, coupled with a rise in democratic thinking and growing access to information, has opened up life's possibilities to increasing numbers of people. Because participation in the consumption-based economy is unavoidable, the general public looks to markets to provide 'deep support' in their quest for individualization, but 'are routinely punished for being complex psychological individuals in a world still fitted out for the old mass order.' This macroeconomic structure treats people as either employees or consumers and inevitably hurts their feelings. Zuboff and Maxmin would eliminate the 'little murders' of customer service interaction by replacing the current transaction-based model with a form of 'distributed capitalism' based on a customer-supplier relationship, so semi-anonymous customer service reps will be replaced by 'advocates' fully emotionally involved in their clients' needs."
I like that. Its gotta happen. The economic value of actually caring about giving people what they want - it must somehow turn out to be higher than the value of tricking or mistreating people into paying too much for things they don't really want. Sooner or later.

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic]



22 Dec 2002 @ 01:10 by strydg : assumptions
the assumption here, which we must accept to continue with this expert's argument, is that "...participation in the consumption-based economy is unavoidable." I'm not consumer-enough to swallow this. Anyway, "experts" are highly programmed robots masquerading as real people who know the truth about something or other - wolves in sheep's clothing, as it were. They do not know what is alive and being created in this moment. Experts tell us we should turn to experts to help us with our problems but the point of view they represent IS the problem.

Let's configure our electronic technology to maintain an artificial environment that can provide the conditions upon which our optimal function depends (which includes protecting the natural environment, as it seems we need it). So we can minimize work and maximize play, fun, creativity, etc... Isn't this our ultimate vision? Can we begin envisioning it now?  

23 Dec 2002 @ 15:54 by sharie : Emotionally-involved advocates
Who pays for their house?

I totally agree with strydg's first paragraph above. I'm an *expert* and the B.S. of my profession is taking this culture down the toilet and into a sewer.  

1 May 2016 @ 10:41 by Malerie @ : QUuFoXSpbqjQNXWrrY
What I find so innrtestieg is you could never find this anywhere else.  

Other stories in
2010-07-10 13:01: Strong Elastic Links
2010-07-08 02:27: Truth: superconductivity for scalable networks
2010-06-27 02:28: Be afraid, be very afraid
2008-07-06 23:20: Laws of social networks
2008-06-20 15:40: Peer material production
2008-05-06 13:57: Why can't we stick to our goals?
2008-02-21 21:16: Open social networks
2007-11-08 01:49: The value of connections
2007-11-07 00:51: Diversity counterproductive to social capital?
2007-07-13 23:42: Plan vs Reality

[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic] [PermaLink]? 

Link to this article as: http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010-000380.htm
Main Page: ming.tv