Two weeks ago the Pencil Warrior kicked the can a ways back down the road. Or at least tried to, by posing the question “what is an economy for?” Judging from the current state of world economic affairs, which no one disputes is now in a constant state of emergency, it is clear the majority of well-intentioned people left the question untended while the answer was embezzled.

Nudging the topic a little further along, perhaps we should also ask “WHO is an economy for?” While I like to think my column is so widely read that you, dear reader, are a high-flying corporate CEO swooping down for a glimpse of what the common folk are saying, I doubt it. It is very much more likely you are among the 90 percent of Americans who work for a wage (or did until recently), and have seen your inflation-adjusted income shrink while your expenses rise unmanageably. Small businesspeople, those hearty entrepreneurs big business and both major parties claim to adore, are in the same sinking boat.

According to the Council on International and Public Affairs, the income of America’s uber class comes overwhelmingly from wealth, not work. According to figures released last month by the Internal Revenue Service, capital gains — income from the sale of assets already owned — supplied 63 percent of the income of our country’s wealthiest 400 individuals in 2006. Many millions more came from dividends and interest payments. Thus Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz’s recent reference to “deeper questions many people do not want to address because this system has served a very few people extraordinarily well – even as it’s caused enormous pain to the rest of us.”

How we answer what an economy is for and who it will reward is critical because within our decisions about how to revive the engines of economy lie the seeds of future collapse or the possibility of something infinitely better than the regime that has left us here. If our goal is merely to restore the same corporate structures, creating wealth in the same corrupt (yes, corrupt) manner, we need not do a thing – it “will be taken care of.” Yet we stand at a truly historic moment; possibly our last chance to invent a new economy responsive not only to the broadest range of humanity but also the needs of the places in which they live. We’d best choose wisely.

In terms of human social justice, there are already many examples of more equitable economic models, largely unrecognized in the blizzard of corporate promotion / self-preservation. Nationwide there are about 11,000 employee-owned businesses (such as W. L. Gore, makers of Gore-Tex), with a combined assets holding of $400 billion. Other thriving models include 10,000 credit unions, customer cooperatives like Recreational Equipment Inc. (REI), neighborhood cooperatives ( with 120 million members nationwide), nonprofit businesses, municipal enterprises, community-owned corporations, and more. What these business configurations have in common, distinct from the standard corporate model, is meaningful levels of decision-making by their workers and long term commitments to the health of the communities in which they operate. They represent the transformation of business from external predation to local empowerment.

But if we are satisfied with one possible definition of an economy’s purpose: “The greatest good for the greatest number over the long run,” we will miss the mark. No economic model will succeed by focusing solely on the human community. Indeed, the term “community” has become far too narrow within the world defined by market capitalism. For too many of us – especially among younger generations - the primary point of contact with the natural world is the weatherman. In those marble temples from where economic decisions routinely undermine the health of forests, rivers, soil, oceans, and the air itself, the voices of these much broader communities are not heard. As surely and unavoidably as trade deals now affect multitudes of people across continents, the destruction of wild habitats has far-reaching and often unknown effects in our biologically interlinked world.

We should see to it, then, that any talk of “reform” translates into business structures that justly reward people for their labors, with an equal emphasis not only on living in harmony with natural systems but restoring those that have already been wounded. The key to developing this necessary economy lies in a simple yet eloquent fact: nature produces no waste. As with a concept of wealth building that serves the broad needs of a whole society rather than enriching a few, examples of so-called “green technologies” already exist in abundance. What is needed now is the political will to overcome entrenched interests that continue to hold the futures of our descendants to ransom. Just as we cannot allow the legal equivalents of Ponzi schemes to waste human lives, neither can we afford obsolete thinking to ravage what is left of our planet.

Dave Wheelock, a member of the Oneida Nation, is a collegiate sports administrator and coach who lives and home-studies in Socorro. Reach him at davewheelock (all one word, lower case) at yahoo.com. Mr. Wheelock's views do not necessarily represent those of Socorro News, but frequently do. This article originally appeared in The Mountain Mail and is reprinted with permission of the author.

Copyright Dave Wheelock, 2009; all rights reserved.