Rethinking what we mean when we talk about “the economy”

Every few months, the cry goes up again: “We need a new economic system!”

You’ll hear it from opposite corners of the spectrum — from reform-minded economists wanting to “green” capitalism, and from idealists dreaming of a gentler, more cooperative world. Everyone agrees something has to change. But what exactly do we mean when we talk about “a new economic system” or a “new economy”?

Is it possible to reform the current system into something fair and sustainable? Or do we need to replace it altogether? Before we can answer that, it’s worth pausing to ask a more basic question: what exactly is “the economy”?

What Is “The Economy,” Really?

In theory, “the economy” is the social sphere where goods and services are produced, traded, and consumed. That’s how textbooks define it: production, distribution, exchange, consumption.

In practice, however, what we call “the economy” is just the part of human activity that’s measured in money.

You can work, cook, garden, teach, sing, care for others — but unless those actions are priced in a national currency, they’re invisible to the economy. They don’t show up in GDP or on a balance sheet. It’s as if the enormous realm of unpaid, informal, cooperative life doesn’t count.

So the “economy” we constantly hear about is really just a subset of human life — the monetized part. Everything else, no matter how valuable, is ignored.

The National Box Trick

We also like to pretend that economies have borders: the South African economy, the British economy, the American economy. What actually defines these “economies”? It’s not geography, culture, or even production — it’s currency.

The South African economy is wherever the Rand circulates. The British economy is where the Pound circulates. Each nation adds up all the monetary transactions made within its currency zone, calls that its Gross National Product, and decides whether it has succeeded or failed based on that one number.

But this raises some awkward questions.
Why is everything boiled down to a single figure?
Who decided that money-based transactions are the only ones that count?
And if human well-being and ecological balance aren’t included, what does this number really tell us?

If “the economy” is just the part of life where money changes hands, what do we call the rest of life?

Beyond the Money Bubble

Look closer and the illusion starts to crack. “Economic activity” is really just people acting together to make or move money. When we do things for each other without money — grow food together, repair a neighbour’s roof, share transport, cook for a friend — we’ve stepped outside the official economy.

And yet, these are the acts that hold communities together. They’re the real, living foundation beneath all the market statistics.

If we stripped away money and still made and shared what we need to live, would that be “the economy”? Technically, no. Without money, it wouldn’t fit the definition. It would be something else entirely — something like what we might call a “noconomy.”

Welcome to the “Noconomy”

Imagine a world where there’s no “economy” because there’s no need for one — no markets, no currencies, no GDP graphs. Just people exchanging what they can do for what others can do, using tools of their own design: local exchange systems, time credits, mutual aid networks, community sharing apps, or even old-fashioned generosity.

Sound utopian? Maybe. But the logic is simple.

Money is a tool we’ve mistaken for the thing itself. We built a measuring stick, then let it take over the workshop. We’ve come to believe that only what’s priced has value — a dangerous illusion that drives both exploitation and environmental destruction.

A “noconomy” doesn’t mean chaos or barter or going back to the Stone Age. It means rediscovering direct, trust-based ways of exchanging value. It means treating wealth as something that flows between people, not something hoarded in accounts.

Climbing Off the Money Grid

We already have glimpses of this world. When you lend a tool, share a ride, volunteer, or trade skills in a community exchange network, you’re already in the noconomy. You’re producing and exchanging value — without currency, without middlemen, and without enriching banks or investors who contribute nothing to the process.

Now imagine scaling that up — neighbourhoods, towns, and even regions organizing their lives around mutual exchange instead of financial profit. There’s no need for national currencies, no central authorities deciding who gets credit and who doesn’t. Value would arise directly from cooperation, not from the manipulation of money.

Why “New Economy” Still Isn’t Enough

Calls for a “new economy” often amount to polishing the old one: fairer taxes, greener industries, ethical investments. All useful — but still operating inside the same money box. As long as value is defined by price, we’ll remain trapped in a system that rewards extraction and punishes generosity.

What we need may not be a new economy at all, but a new way of living — a social order where money is optional, where production and exchange are embedded in community and care, and where success is measured by well-being, not wealth.

The future may not have an economy. It may have something better: a shared life without the illusion of scarcity.

From “Economy” to “Noconomy”

The word “economy” literally means “management of the household.” But perhaps the household no longer needs managing — at least not by money.

If we climb off the money grid and use the many other tools already available — from local exchange systems like the Community Exchange System (CES) to digital mutual-credit platforms and time banks — we can begin to rebuild society from the bottom up.

In that sense, the “noconomy” isn’t a dream. It’s already happening quietly, in communities everywhere — wherever people choose cooperation over competition and trust over profit.

Maybe the next big revolution won’t be the creation of a new economy, but the discovery that we can live well without one.