When then confronted with the obvious failures of the current economic system, where so many are living below the poverty line (which by the way doesn't mean that only those people are poor), where crime runs rampant, where half the population can't even read or write - if we point those things out to economists, they'll point fingers at the government - saying - well, yes - that's because the market isn't allowed to freely operate. You have the government officials who fuck things up.
So - what's the deal with the government? Where the economic principles impulse individuals to act in their own self-interest, government officials are supposed to act in a way that is best for society as a whole. What needs to be understood, though - is that politicians form part of the very same economic system - they don't stand 'outside' of it - and so, they as well are being impulsed to act in their own self-interest - in fact, they are following the rules of the game of capitalism as it currently exists - the rules that free market economists like to defend so much. So - how can you point fingers at the government for not doing their job effectively, when they are actually doing exactly what you ask of them.
What free market economists will argue is that the free market must be allowed to just reign freely - and that the government really has no business interfering. But, I mean - isn't the very purpose of the government to correct market failures? There really is no other function for government - AT ALL. The origin of government is the realization that there's people who suffer if the market has free reign.
So - the entire philosophy - which is really just a belief - is completely debunked by practical reality. You can't argue your way out of this. So - having tried the idea that if you act in your own self-interest, you manifest a world that's best for all and seeing how it just doesn't work - the common sensical thing to do is to stop an economic system that is build on this philosophy - and to, instead, develop an economy that is based on the principle of: If you act in a way that is best for all, you automatically manifest the best solution for yourself as well. Considering that the world is a closed system and that we are not separate from the environment we live in - it makes sense to support the system as a whole in the most effective way - as this will ensure that we live in the healthiest and most supportive environment on an individual level. It is the most simplest common sensical truth that if you lift up society as a whole - you lift up each one that is part of society as well.
Equal Money Capitalism is the proposed economic system that is built upon and aligned with the principle of doing what's best for all, from which flows what is best for each one individually. To read more about this economic system, consult the blog-posts on the Equal Money Capitalism page of this blog: http://economistjourneytolife.blogspot.com/p/emc.html#.URKuI_JBnTo.
Part 1
ReplyDelete~ An invisible hand exists, but its not an economic function, it is our individual egos.
Our ego is the deciding hand that picks out our personal actions from the choices that we encounter. The problem with a capitalistic system is that is operates on the principals of a pyramid with the most fortunate at the top.
The self interest that supposedly feeds the other hand eventually, is the whole problem with society. A hand that serves itself, only takes cards from the deck and other hands, this causing the other hand to take a card from someone else’s deck or hand to stay afloat in the game.
This is societies excuse for individual greed and selfishness, sooner or later a few hands hold all the cards. This leaving the other players short on cards for their hand, and afraid of losing the few they have left. Because the player is now scared of failure, they do things they normally wouldn’t to avoid losing the game.
Our politicians and government officials should be at the top, but they are actually on the 2nd or third level with the wealthiest people on top as they are collecting the communities revenue through sales, stocks, and interest. Then they redistributing it as they see fit, often using it to persuade others politically or legally into doing what they want.
Because the system is based on a pyramid, we the people and structure of the system will never benefit from the affluent. Why? because they have little concern for the poor as they are to busy spending their hijacked loot, and enjoying the fruits of our labor as they chase down their own greedy little desires.
An economy based on the structure of a sphere is what we need to create. A circular system where the money flows from business and commerce back into the community is the only system that will encompass and support all of our societies needs.
It is the consumers and labor force that keeps feeding the troff of the wealthy and privileged. If everyone would stop playing their game, their way. Then maybe we could make some progress with restructuring our society.
Truth is that, as long as people keep buying from companies and corporations that wish to cut corners by sacrificing our health, environments, safety, or the quality of their products to raise their profits. The common people will always have to struggle to stay afloat in the economy.
This act of cutting corners, constantly forces us the consumers to live in fear of our health, environmental contamination effects, and receiving poor quality merchandise that may malfunction, or that we need to repurchase after a short time. It used to be a vacuum or toaster would last for several years, now were lucky if they last for two or three.
The system will not see change until the game of monopoly is over. Why? because the system is doing exactly what they want. Taking money from those who are struggling to survive at variable levels of success, and giving it to the people that already have more money than they need to comfortably survive.
~ Bret V
Part 2
ReplyDeleteWe can’t have equal pay because of the variable levels of experience, skill, and education. People should earn what they deserve, based on their education and skills. However, if we reduced the over inflated costs of crappy products, removed the fees for electronic services that don’t need manual labor, and diverted 50% of our national defense budget back into improving our infrastructure and economy. We would see new jobs, more tax income for the cause, and a happier, more productive community and labor force.
With our technology we should be able to develop less expensive and better energy sources for our products and consumer needs, supply a better quality safety net for our nations defense, and experience a less stressful life. But because new technology is classified as a convenience instead of a necessity. It is currently sold as high priced product that must be updated or replaced with a more expensive product or program every 6 months just to keep up and interact with the rest of our society.
Our tech is evolving so quickly now that by the time they get one product or program on the shelf, there is already a better one being packaged for shipment to the stores. As for the governments purpose, its purpose is to manage the states and create laws that protects its people from foreign or domestic arrogance and tyranny.
It is not there to tell businesses what to do, but to make sure they do it in a safe and responsible way that does not corrupt or harm our people or environment. Unfortunately because people are elected into government based on their popularity. The politicians and powers that be are paid more than the average home, even though they have no special skills or experience.
This leads to commerce and community decisions being made based entirely on the personal expectations, desires, and motives of the elected and now privileged group. With hardly any control from the people who elected them. Once they get there, they play a game of give and take with the community so they can keep their positions as long as they can.
Serving in congress or the senate should be thought of as a privilege, there pay should be limited to that of an average household, to insure that they remain concerned for the welfare and health of the majority which they are still part of.
In humanities quest for material items, fame, and fortune. We seem to have forgotten about the value of checks and balances. Anytime a system is out of balance, it is doomed to eventually fall apart and fail. Thus the proper individual course, is always one that leads to beneficial results for the community. Which then logically leads us to the success of our entire society.
As it sits now, life is great if your above or near the fulcrum of our economy. But it can be grand or desperate depending on where you are on the arms, and that in itself is a sign of inequality and unbalance. Logically if we are to advance in the long run and bigger picture of life, we need to change the process or procedure, to one that benefits human kind, instead of the individual.
Greed and selfishness are arrogant choices, and actually self destructive methods of accomplishing anything.
~ The moral of the story is: Social and community success requires balance, we can not succeed as a society while we are stealing from, and fighting amongst ourselves over the logistics and effects of profits and power, while others need and supplies.
~ An equally efficient and fulfilling life for all, is better than a stressful, demanding, and costly life for the majority of individuals that inhabit a community.
Have a great day and better future.
Whether you enjoy the journey or not, it is what you make of it..
Create joy with your attitude and beauty with your mind.
~ Bret V
Hi Anonymous,
ReplyDelete""WHat if we made the companies responsible for disposal/renewal/recycling. The law would stipulate that all resources used would need to be replenished by the corporations themselves. This would create many more jobs wouldn't it? And companies would want to reduce needless cost and waste since they will pay for it directly... if this sounds good, share it in your own words. ""
Thank you for posting, Bret - perspective on your comment was placed here: http://economistjourneytolife.blogspot.com/2013/02/day-188-simple-solutions-in-equal-money.html#.UR6MgvJBmSo
ReplyDelete