When it comes to usefulness, economics has a supply problem. Things with with the greatest value in use are in short supply and things with the greatest value in exchange are not.

why the collapse in useful things and what Can be done about it?

In response to the great collapse in useful things I formulated the millennia challenge in 2021:

How do we decide the best (or even better use of thing)

In the following years I’ve developed what I call “modern value theory” based on the idea that the best use of thing is that which increases the capacity of a system to change when in crisis. I propose that the property that makes change possible in a crisis is value in use or energy in its social form.

Phi or the letter O with a vertical line represents energy in its social form and measures the capacity of a system to bring about change.

A calculation made theoretically possible because all things of use objectively possess a shared characteristic or universal measure of equivalence in their ability to bring about change over time. Something I describe in my work as as phi - Φ.

Based on this understanding of value in use, I’ve gone on to propose that the mechanism by which value in use increases or decreases can be understood using a simplified energetic model comprising:

• sources of value in use - physical and fiat capitals; and

• prime movers that transform those sources of value into change and new ( and either greater or lesser) sources of value in use .

Why does value in use matter and why bother theorizing about the best use of a thing.

At an elemental level, value in use is a predictor of sustainability and the generation of the conditions that are necessary for life and longevity. Other factors remaining constant, a society tends to thrive as the value in use, available and accessible per capita and across all capitals, increases. Likewise, a reduction in either or both the sources in value or the number and types of prime movers required to generate value in use from them, is a harbinger of decline. Put simply, if less useful things exist (whether by action or omission) fewer useful things can be done.

My Workings

Starting with a an explanation of the problem in MC 1, I’ve followed a kind of old fashioned "a priori" approach to the problem of "lessness".

Deducing from the antecedent axioms of both modern value theory mainstream and mainstream economics why the latter leads to less useful things and the the former offers hope of more.