Egalitarian Efficiency
Pareto Efficiency describes a state of allocation of resources where “it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making at least one individual worse off.” Egalitarian efficiency, on the other hand, describes an allocation of resources where there is both equality of opportunity and equality of outcome for all individuals. How is this possible? It is possible because both opportunities and outcomes are in constant fluctuation and adjustment - in terms of their availability and duration - so that everyone ultimately can benefit to the same extent over a given period of time. In other words, we could say that everyone will experience an equal outcome to the experiences of others at some point in time, but not necessarily at the same point in time. Group A will experience certain privileges or benefits while Group B does not, then Group B will experience those benefits and privileges while Group A does not. In egalitarian-efficient systems, nothing becomes an imposed static state, but rather a targeted dynamic that is facilitate by various checks-and-balances. In the case of Level 7 proposals, these include the social credits system, direct democracy implementations, worker-ownership of enterprises, money backed by common property shares, community NGOs, and so forth. Only if all of these components act together in a harmonized and mutually supportive way will equality of opportunity and equality of outcome be sustainable - as an-ebb-and-flow - over time. And if they don’t for some reason? Well that is where these same mechanisms can be relied upon to remedy imbalances and inequality. This is part of what a “breathing economy” looks like, and is in fact dependent on all the other factors of sustainable design being reified in the most diffused implementation of democracy, production, administration and regulation possible. I think it is inevitable that the ebb-and-flow of opportunity and outcome will also apply to different communities, regions and nations as a similar long-term balancing act. Again, however, this would be in gentle, often collectively directed cycles of give-and-take with continuous variation and adaptation to different regions - rather than either cookie-cutter top-down solutions imposed by the State, or the lopsided and always inequitable free-for-all generated by the profit motive.
