The Fund in the Service Industry
Article 3-4
The Fund in the Service Industry
Most of what people buy is not a product at all. It is a service — the visit to the doctor, the phone connection, the loan, the insurance policy, the delivery, the software that runs a life. And services, even more than goods, are where ordinary people feel squeezed: by the giant insurer that denies the claim, the carrier that overcharges for data, the lender that traps them in fees. So the fund competes in services for the same reason it competes in goods — to run them, for once, for the people who use them rather than the shareholders who extract from them.
As with everything the fund does, this comes in two very different forms, and the difference matters. There are global service companies — the worldwide giants the fund can take an ownership stake among — and there are local services, the neighborhood businesses the fund will never own but will quietly make stronger. This article is about both.
The global service companies
Where a handful of giant companies dominate a service worldwide, the fund does what it does in any global industry: it builds or buys a company to compete among them, run for its members. A few of these matter most in daily life.
The digital bank — the most important of all. Of every service the fund provides, the bank comes first and reaches furthest, because money touches everything. A fund bank gives a member a fair account, fair credit, and a safe place for savings, without the quiet extraction that ordinary banking runs on — and, as we will see, it is also the engine that lifts the local economy around each member. The bank is important enough to have its own full article; here it is enough to say it is the first service the fund builds and the one the most members will feel. [Cross-ref: Article 5-7 — The Digital Bank: Why and When.]
Healthcare. After the bank, healthcare is the service where the fund can do the most human good, and it is worth explaining how. The fund does not try to replace a country’s health system; it fits itself to what is already there. Where a nation already has strong universal healthcare, the fund operates on the supplementary layer — filling gaps, lowering the cost of the things people still pay for out of pocket, offering fair coverage on top of what the state provides. Where universal coverage is weak or missing, the fund’s healthcare services reach further, providing fair-priced care and medicine to people who had little. Because the fund also owns companies that make generic medicines, it can lower the price of treatment at both ends — the care and the drugs — in a way a pure insurer never could. Healthcare run for patients rather than for quarterly returns is a different proposition entirely, and in the places that need it most, it is the difference between treatment and going without.
Telecommunications. A fair telecom company means honest pricing for the phone and data connection that modern life now requires — no padded bills, no exploiting the fact that people cannot function without a connection. In much of the world a phone is the only computer a person owns and the only gateway to the fund itself, so fair, affordable connectivity is both a service and a doorway.
Logistics and delivery. The fund’s logistics arm moves its own goods efficiently and offers fair shipping and delivery to members and businesses — lowering a cost that sits, invisibly, inside the price of nearly everything.
Insurance. Insurance is meant to protect people from catastrophe, yet too often it is built to collect premiums and deny claims. A fund insurer, owned by the people it covers, has no shareholder demanding that claims be minimized — it exists to pay what it owes when its members are harmed, which is the entire point of insurance and the part the industry most often betrays.
Software and platforms. Rather than fight the proprietary giants head-on, the fund builds on open foundations to provide the digital tools its members and companies need — the software that runs the bank, the marketplace, the voting and information systems — owned in common rather than rented from a tech landlord. Rather than locking people into proprietary software, the fund encourages open-source solutions and, through a dedicated company, provides training on them to members, to local businesses, and even to governments at affordable rates — turning open software from something you merely use into a skill the fund helps spread.
This is not a hypothetical. Governments are already making exactly this move, for exactly these reasons. As of 2024, the European Union’s Interoperable Europe Act requires public bodies to consider open-source alternatives first, and individual states have gone much further: the German state of Schleswig-Holstein moved about 80 percent of its government workstations off Microsoft Office to open-source software and expects to save on the order of 15 million euros a year in license costs, while the French city of Toulouse saved roughly 1.8 million euros over three years by moving about 90 percent of its desktops to open-source office software. [Sources: Schleswig-Holstein Ministry for Digital Transformation, 2025; EU Open Source Observatory, on Toulouse.] Their motive is the fund’s motive in miniature — one official put it as never letting yourself become so dependent on so few that you can no longer act freely. [Source: Danish Ministry for Digital Affairs, 2025.] Where governments are reclaiming their digital independence, the fund can help its members and their local businesses do the same.
Energy and utilities. Over the long run, the fund moves into the provision of power and essential utilities where it can, applying the same rule it applies to food and medicine: the things people cannot live without should not be priced to extract the maximum the desperate will pay. Lowering the cost of power and utilities leaves people and local businesses with more disposable income — and, through the companies they own, larger dividends.
A necessary honesty runs through all of this: none of it happens at once. Like the fund’s industries, its services arrive in phases, country by country, over years and decades — the bank first and most widely, healthcare and the rest following as the fund grows and as each country’s rules allow. A member should expect the fund’s services to reach them gradually, not on the day they join. [Cross-ref: Article 5-6 — What Industries, and in What Order; Article 5-9 — The First Decade.]
How the bank makes the local economy richer
Now the hinge of this whole article, and the reason the fund’s services do not threaten the small businesses people love.
The fund will never own your neighborhood’s local services — and it does not want to. But its bank changes the conditions those local businesses live in. When a fund bank reaches a community, it brings fair credit and fair savings to people and small businesses that were starved of both: the local shop that could never get a loan, the family that had nowhere safe to keep money, the would-be founder with an idea and no capital. Money that used to leak out of the community to distant lenders begins to circulate inside it instead. [Cross-ref: Article 5-7 — The Digital Bank: Why and When.]
A community with fair access to money is a community that grows richer — and a richer community spends more, on exactly the local services the fund does not own.
The services the fund leaves alone — and lifts anyway
This is the part that turns a worry into a strength. People are right to want their local service economy protected: the plumber, the hairdresser, the corner restaurant, the mechanic, the local clinic, the tutor, the electrician, the café, the repair shop, the accountant down the street. These are the texture of a community, and a fund that swallowed them would be a curse, not a gift. So the fund does not touch them. No global giant dominates the local plumber’s trade; there is nothing there for the fund to compete in, and it stays out.
But here is what happens anyway. As the bank makes the surrounding economy wealthier — more people with stable income, more small businesses with access to capital, more money staying in the community — the demand for all those local services rises. People who are doing better get their homes repaired, eat out more often, hire the tutor, call the electrician, visit the clinic, take their car to the mechanic. The local plumber has more work, not less. The café has more customers. The fund, by strengthening the economy and deliberately not competing for local services, ends up doing the local service economy a favor: it raises the tide that lifts every small business it refuses to own.
So the fund’s relationship to services has two faces that point the same way. In the global services — banking, healthcare, telecom, logistics, insurance, software, energy — it competes among the giants and runs those services for its members. In the local services, it competes not at all, and instead makes the community rich enough to support more of them. The fund takes on the distant corporations that extract from people, and leaves untouched — and busier — the neighborhood businesses that serve them.
Join the conversation
This series belongs to everyone, including its critics. Tell us where you were convinced and where you were not — and if you see a way to make the proposal stronger, say so. You'll need a free account with a handle of your choosing.
Reset your password
Enter the email you signed up with. If it's registered, we'll send you a link to set a new password.
Be the first to comment.