Meconomics: I Want my Needs and Need my Wants to be Satisfied

The economic problem – the corner stone of economic theory – is defined as the satisfaction of unlimited wants and needs in a world with finite/limited physical resources. This implies that not all wants and needs can be satisfied, so the questions economic models attempt to answer are: How is it decided which wants and needs will be satisfied? How is it decided whose wants and needs will be satisfied? In our world today – the answer is: “those who can pay for the satisfaction of their wants and needs will see them satisfied, those who can’t pay for it – well, sorry, we have to draw the line somewhere”.

As I was reading about the economic problem for the first time – I found it fascinating that they used the words ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ in the same way and treated them as one term – like this: ‘wants&needs’ – lol. The difference between wants and needs was briefly explained, but then both words were thrown under the ‘wants&needs’ banner – as though ‘needs’ carry the same characteristics as ‘wants’ and ‘wants’ carry the same characteristics as ‘needs’. When you approach the economic problem by reading the words ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ as ‘wants&needs’ - then the world as it is today might make sense to you – then the economic problem might actually be a justification for the desolation and lack in which millions live. Perhaps that is how economists want us to read the words, so that we won’t hold them accountable for not yet having come up with a better solution.

‘Wants’ and ‘needs’, however, are two very different things. ‘Needs’ are things you NEED – that you cannot go without or you will be physically and emotionally compromised. ‘Wants’ are things you WANT – they go beyond what you ‘need’ – you can go without, but you would like or prefer to experience them or have them in your life. It is true to say that if you tally up all the individual wants of all the people on the planet – you will end up with ‘unlimited wants’. The same is not true for needs, however – there are certain things no human being can go without – say food, water, shelter, social interaction, medical support – where this is the same for every single person by virtue of them being ‘a human’ – and where for some, dependent on personal situations and circumstances, the list is expanded to include a few other things as well.

Considering that needs are limited – we may actually be able to satisfy the needs of all the human beings on the planet – and it is known that we can. So – instead of trying to work with ‘wants&needs’ where the task seems impossible and full of ‘sorry’s, we have to draw the line somewhere’ – we could start with the part that IS possible – satisfying everyone’s needs – and only then design an additional system or model that draws lines for ‘wants’. Our current model is one where some are able to satisfy all their needs and most of their wants, while others are not supported in their basic needs – which, you have to admit, is quite an insane situation. Part of why this is allowed is due to… ‘wants&needs’.

Now – this blog is part of my ‘Meconomics’ series – so you can already guess where I am taking this discussion next… For this situation to be as it is – with so few raising their voice and spurring into action to change the status quo – I started wondering how the same point exists within ourselves. The same point, meaning: do we in fact have a clear understanding of the difference between ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ inside ourselves and do we approach ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ appropriately in our own personal lives?

True story: Earlier as I was writing this blog and came to the section of clarifying the words ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ – I first took the easy route of simply looking up the words in the dictionary and copy/pasting the definitions in my blog. But! I couldn’t use those definitions, because they would have perpetuated the confusion between the words rather than clarifying the difference between them. Have a look:

If the dictionary uses the word ‘want’ to clarify the word ‘need’ and uses the word ‘need’ to clarify the word ‘want’ – we can be sure we’re on to something. Does this mean that wants simply imply needs and that needs imply wants – because the dictionary says so? No. Remember, dictionaries will reflect our own language usage – so if the word ‘want’ has been used over time to indicate a ‘need’ – then it becomes an ‘accepted use of the word’ and is reflected in the dictionary as such. In the same way, the word ‘need’ has been used to describe ‘wants’ – and so it has become ‘normal’. What the dictionary then shows is how we have confused the meanings of the words ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ for ourselves and started using the terms as synonyms.

In my next blog I will continue exploring how the ‘merging’ of the words ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ as ‘wants&needs’ affects and influences us on a personal level so that we can get a better understanding of the world as it exists today within the principle 'as above, so below'.

Read More

Day 175: The Economic Problem and Equal Money Capitalism

The Problem

The fundamental question which economics is built upon, is how to deal with limited means in conjunction with unlimited wants. It takes on the starting point that we live in a world of scarcity, of of finite resources – but that we also live in a world where humans have unlimited wants and needs, and thus inevitably not all wants and needs will be satisfied.

This is where the Pricing system within Economics comes from, where the price is determined through the interaction of supply and demand. Prices on products and services, are in the end an ‘elimination’ tool. Because we have only so many resources, and not everyone will be able to get them to satisfy their wants and needs – the pricing system works as a distribution system. If a loaf of bread is sold at $1 each – then this implies that everyone who has $1 and is willing to spend that one dollar on bread can do so. This also means that anyone who doesn’t have $1 dollar to spend on bread but wants and NEEDS bread to be able to survive = won’t be able to get bread.

So it seems that the distribution problem of ‘who gets what’ is solved – but this a more than ineffective solution, and is really unacceptable. 

Firstly, the problem starts already in the formulation of ‘the economic problem’. The problem lies in not making a distinction between wants and needs. It’s one thing to say that wants are unlimited and another to say that needs are unlimited. Sure, we can all make up unlimited wants, like wanting a cruise ship, a place, a few villas and a unicorn – but needs are not unlimited and can be clearly defined, such as say food, security, clothing, housing, medical care, participation, leisure, education, etc.

The second problem arises when we look at our current distribution system within the way things are priced. Everything is price based, so even if things are scarce and finite – if you have the money, you can still get your hands on ‘scarce resources’ even though others can’t. This implies that some can exploit the amount of money they have available to use as many resources as they like, while less and less is available for others, and where others may not even have the financial means to acquire what is left.  Our pricing system is then in fact, a system of blatant discrimination. We are no longer looking at how we can support ourselves living life on this Earth – but playing a game of ruthless and unfair competition causing some to live in abundance while others live on the brink of death.

The Solution

The solution is a simple one, we require to re-evaluate the ‘economic problem’ as we have accepted and allowed ourselves to define it. A distinction needs to be made between needs and wants, where needs come prior to wants at all times, as part of being a Basic Human Right.

Instead of having a distribution system based on discrimination, we require a distribution system of inclusion, and this inclusion is that of Life – where the Real Capital that has actual Real Value is recognized as Life.  This is how the Equal Money Capitalistic System will operate.  It’s a biocentric system, and this is reflected within the pricing of Goods and Services. Pricing will reflect the value that has been added through individuals’ contribution as labour. Within this, each participant, each contributor – will receive an Equal Profit-Share of the sale of the product/service.

From Day 163: Equal Money Capitalism - Redefining Profit:

WHAT IS PROFIT-SHARE?
Currently profit is the money a company makes after they have covered their costs, including paying out wages. In an EMC - profit comprises of all the added value that is placed on resources - which is your labour. Therefore - within the price, the percentage share must be included of each one that was part of the creation of the product in such a way that each one ends up with an equal share of the company's profits, so - there will be no need for wages - as the profit becomes your wage.

EQUALIZING WAGES – COOPERATION AMONG CORPORATIONS
If a company at any time makes more money than they need to provide each one with their equal share of the profit as well as covering their costs - those monies will go into a fund that is responsible for assisting companies that are not making sufficient to cover their costs and provide each one with their fair share. That way a balancing effect takes place so that all companies are not only cooperatives in how they cooperate internally - but all cooperate with each other as well.

Equal Money Capitalism will ensure a Dignified Life for everyone, as everyone will be in a position to acquire resources to support themselves to Live their Life, where needs are taken care of while still allowing for wants to be explored.

The Reward

Within Equal Money Capitalism, one will be birthed into a world where one’s life is secure. Currently, the main point of focus that pre-occupies people’s lives is that of money, which turns Life to being a strife, becoming about survival. When you have a child in Equal Money Capitalism, you do not have to worry about your child’s future and how you’re going to fund it with while trying to make ends meet. Your life and your child’s – your entire family’s Life = is guaranteed.

It is in essence a Life where Fear as being part of everyday Life is removed, and where one can truly live and explore – to really find out what it means to live here on Earth in an enjoyable, yet responsible way.

Related articles

• Human Sweatshops will END in Equal Money Capitalism - Day 275
• Day 163: Equal Money Capitalism - Redefining Profit
• Day 171: Life-Force and Expression in Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 166: Corporate Social Responsibility in Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 173: Supply, Demand, Business and Scarcity in Equal Money Capitalism
• Equal Money: We want the Best Life for YOU. Do You?

Read More

Day 47: The Economic Problem - Part 2

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created an economic system which causes problems – and then make these problems one of the basic principles of economics

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that the ‘economic problem’ is not really a problem, and not even an economic one – but a human problem as we’ve designed the economic system in our image and likeness – and since we’ve decided that wants are more important than needs, and want to try and satisfy unlimited wants with limited resources – we are the cause of the problem as we decided that we’d rather have an unsustainable economic system which will only work out right for a few – than a sustainable economic system which works out for everyone

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that the ‘economic problem’ has only surfaced because we are more interested in entertaining ourselves with the various ways in which we could satisfy our desires – where the problem arises because of the simplistic reality that we cannot have what we want all the time, because our wants are unrealistic – and so we trouble ourselves over what desire to satisfy and the ‘conflict’ involved within this – while this conflict is not relevant in any way whatsoever as what is Best for All Life is in no way being considered – and so from the point on where economics as established that wants are valued over needs, everything else built upon this point becomes entirely and utterly useless and irrelevant – since we’ve accepted an unsound foundation for our current economic system and so everything which follows from that foundation is flawed and will only spiral out into further unsustainability and the inevitable demise and end of the entire system itself

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created an economic system which entertains itself by looking at value through what has been apparently ‘sacrificed’ as those ‘wants’ which you decided not to satisfy for the sake of the desire you did satisfy – how is this relevant in any way whatsoever when 24 000 children die a day from poverty and starvation? What value does their sacrifice bring to this world?

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created an economic system which does not serve reality as it is more concerned with some metaphysical plane of satisfying wants and desires and the costs/sacrifices involved within satisfying or not satisfying particular desires and then deriving some form of value from that – while the physical aspect of reality is being ignored and neglected completely – where we end up with half the population living in misery because we thought that giving economics a primarily metaphysical dimension as being concerned with satisfying unlimited human wants was so much more exciting than having an economic theory / system which focuses on the physical reality and ensuring that everyone’s basic physical needs are taken care of

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that all economic problems in the world would be solved if we all aligned our wants and desires to what is Best for All --- as then we would not have to deal with competing choices and competing self-interests as there would only be One interest as that which is Best for All Life, and so we’d actually for the first time have an effective and efficient economic system

Read More