The base problem
The base state
I'm going to start by explaining what I mean about base state. First for countries and then for people afterwards.
All countries in the world today are part of the international economy. The buy what they need from other countries and sell products and services back to other countries and their inhabitants. This is in a sense like a game where the main goal of every country and everyone in those countries, is to sell more than they buy. The base state in system, is to be a looser. Any country that can't sell enough to cover the cost of what they buy, is seen as a looser. The base state is a state no country want to be in. But because of the way trade works, when someone sells more than they buy, there has to be someone who buys more than they sell. So unless everyone buy exactly as much as the sell, someone is bound to end up in the base state. But no one wants to be in the base state. And that is why a system for creating money out of nothing in the form of loans where created. This system allows countries whit a negative trade balance to loan the money they need to cover the unbalance to a certain point. But ultimately if a country can't sell enough, they will eventually start to get closer and closer to the base value.
The base value is the worst place any country can find itself in. And if we disregard all the conflicts based on religion, then most of the major wars and diplomatic conflicts we see in the world today, occur because everyone want's to make sure that they have all the power and resources they need to get as far away from the base state as possible. When countries argues about or fight for ownership of uninhabited islands, or land filled with valuable resources, it's often, not because anyone in those countries personally cares about those areas, but because owning them gives the access to valuable resources or strategic locations that helps secure their position as a winner. Basically the way the international economy works pushes countries around the world towards various forms of conflict.
And on a person to person level it works in similar ways. The base state is to be poor and without any money and somewhere to live. And the only way to avoid this state, for most people, is to work. And the better your job is, the more you earn, which means you can spend more. Life becomes like some kind of race, where everyone are so concerned about getting ahead that they often forget to stop and ask themselves if they are doing what they want to do and whether the things they are doing are right or wrong. And the consequences of this is that people end up getting sad and depressed because they are living unsatisfying lives in order to make enough money. Or they betray steal or do worse thing in order to get what they want. Both People and countries are so terrified of the base state, that they are often willing to do just about anything, if it helps keep them as far away from it as possible.
And this fear greatly affects how people live their lives and how countries interact. People are afraid to take chances or make changes to their lives that can have an effect on their current income. And countries and companies, will rather look for ways to out-compete another country or company instead of trying to find ways to work together. Basically, the base state is the main cause behind unhappiness and evils in the world today.
What can be done about it
Since this state is causing so much problem then the question become, how can we change this state? If the base state wasn't so bad that people felt the need to run away from it in absolute fear. Then people wouldn't be afraid of making changes in their lives, or trying new things, starting new businesses and so forth. People wouldn't feel the need to hurt others in order to protect themselves. And countries would have fewer reason to fight or argue. But how can the basic state be changed?
The solution, I think, lies in changing society from one based on competition too one based on cooperation. But unless we want to cause more unhappiness, it has to be done in a way that doesn't limit the freedom of the people living in this society. This is why communism, for example isn't an option, because it's based on a system where individual freedom is sacrificed in order fulfill the needs of the society as a whole. What we need is a system that provides for peoples needs to such an extent that they don't fear the base state but at the same time pushes them to participate in society without forcing them into specific roles.
The ideal system, then, the way I see it, is a system where everyone is given a basic home and free access to food and other basic goods and resources they need to live an acceptable life. And if they want more than this they need to find ways to work and participate in society. Everyone gets a participation rating score of sorts. This score increase and decrease based on how much you work and how useful that work is. And a higher score means you get assess to more and "better" homes, goods and services.The amount of increase gained from any type of work is mainly based on how high the need for workers within that specific field is and partially on how much responsibility is involved. This is in order to encourage people to fill jobs that are in high demand. And it helps combat a situation we can sometimes see in today world where there is a lack of workers within certain low paying fields of work. The score gained from any given position, will go up and down based on demand, but in order to ensure a certain amount of fairness. It will never go down for those already employed. Witch means that most people who stick with a job for a while, will get a pretty good score after a while.
The job market should not be run by the government, but based more on private initiative. The government provides a list of what goods and services are needed and then it's up to private individuals an corporations to find ways to fill those needs. But since resources would be distributed by the state, it would have to be run a bit differently. The point here is that the state is not supposed to tell people what they can and can't do. But at the same time resources will always be limited and having lots of companies producing goods that hardly anyone needs, is not an ideal situation. So the most fear way to do it, is to have people send in applications for access to resources to do or make something and then the government would approve access too those resources if the service or good they want to provide/make is in some kind of demand And if there are more applications for fulfilling a need than necessary then the solidness of the plans provided by each applicant is looked at in order to determine where the recourse is best spent. And successful individuals can apply for access to more resources in order to expand their business and hire employes. In order to ensure a certain amount of usefulness, new businesses are given a very love score that increases as their efficiency and number of employees increase. This ensures that good concepts grows while less successful ones are abandoned in favor of something more useful.
This system would give people a very high degree of freedom to chose what to do with their lives, while still gently nudging them to go in certain directions in order to fill the need of the society as a whole. And if luxury and wealth is not important to them, they can choose to do other thing, that aren't necessarily seen as useful to the society as a whole, without being punished too hard for choosing to do so.
What about the world?
Ideally a system like this should be run on a global scale. Their would be one main world exchange, responsible for distributing resources in a fair way between regions in a way that gives every country equal opportunities to create equal amounts of wealth. And then those resources are distributed locally by each individual countries based on the priorities within that country, For many countries this would mean a pretty big increase in general wealth. But for some it would also mean a big decrease. And this is a big obstacle for this system.
There is enough resources for everyone. But certain countries spend much more than they need. And the constant push for change means that we trow a way old things in favor of new ones far more often than needed. If we want to distribute resources fairly and still be left with a pretty high level of material wealth, then we need to slow down a bit. We need to stop replacing old products with slightly better new ones and focus on how we can provide access to the same products to the entire world, in an environmentally sustainable way, before we start focusing on improving what we already got. It's pretty insane to think about how much resources we waste on replacing perfectly useful things.
Getting from where we are now to a system like this, seems pretty impossible at the moment. But I feel pretty certain that it could have made the world a much better place to live.