There is a naturally occurring economic balance that affects and is affected by every human interaction. Those things that nourish the economy lighten the human load. Things that are toxic to the economy increase the load humanity must bear. This balance has been ignored by the worlds social institutions such as government, business, and even religion. The result has been disastrous for the mjority of the world’s population.
Economic balance is both achievable and desirable, and it is safer than the alternatives. Success will require some revision of ethical social standards based on clarity, truth, justice, and responsibility. If economic balance is to be achieved, business will no longer be a cash cow that is milked until its resources, assets, and services are commandeered by a few morally challenged monopolizing entrepreneurs. If economic balance is to be achieved, government will need to offer protection to its citizens and respect to the world at large. If economic balance is to be achieved, religions will need to finally understand that though sin is a personal indiscretion, many major calamities are caused or are perpetuated by groups of pseudo-pious individuals who strut, taunt, and bully as they complain about the real or perceived sins of others.
Business is economical when workers work to serve humanity, and investors invest to serve customers whose payment supports workers, and investors. The citizenry receives healthy choices at a fair prices. After everybody gets paid, if there is a profit, it is at somebody’s expense. Government is economical when its allegiance is to its citizens rather than to monopolistic organizations that enslave the citizenry. “What the market will bear” is an example of pseudo-ethical logic that justifies the monopolistic behavior that takes resources from the needy, and gives them to the greedy.
Economically speaking, what is good for me is good for others, and what is good for others is good for me. “Ignore-ance” is a nonword that describes ignoring facts in favor of popular convenient misconceptions. “Ignore-ant” behavior over burdens the cost side of the economic balance. Economics has been historically viewed as if most of the world’s population didn’t exist, and the world’s resources were infinite. World leaders have covertly used heavy hands to balance the economic scale, and they have had little success.
Naturally occurring economic principles are practiced individually and socially. They are typically described with money. When income = outgo, economic balance is claimed. While a balanced budget is super, if there is not enough left for a responsible existence the economic scale is unbalanced. If there is nothing in the budget to repair the roof, feed the children, and dispose of the trash, economic equilibrium is not achieved. Institutionally and historically this type of unbalance is blamed on the poor quality of the citizenry, and since they have been under valued, the budget has traditionally been balanced by putting the most vulnerable at risk, saving money by ignoring their needs. Here is a a partial list of those who have been born into or drafted into sub-citizenry: — children, women, blacks, Hispanics, low income (below poverty, not rich, no ivy league education, skin not white, not famous, ill, injured, unemployed, foreign citizens, uninsured, ugly, fat, unintelligent, depressed, no family, pregnant, single — Those who are on that list typically pay more than their share of the natural economic cost of living, and typically get little for their efforts to help themselves or their peers.
People tend to make good decisions when they are centered. That changes when they work too hard or not hard enough; when they eat too much or they don’t eat enough; when they are religious zealots or agnostics; when they can be lead too easily or not at all; when they live in mansions or they are homeless; when they sleep too much or not enough; when they are optimistic or paranoid; when they are unpatriotic or hyper-patriotic. Being centered makes good economic sense socially and individually.
There are behaviors that seem to have no economic justifications. The list includes resource pollution, murder, rape, robbery, cheating, lying, mutilation, chemical impairment, toxic chemical abuse, threats, infidelity, meanness, mistreatment, and irresponsible reproduction to name but a few. There are those who believe that in the interest of open mindedness they should use some of these behaviors or be somewhat tolerant of them. There is little doubt that these behaviors in any amount exert a heavy downward economic pressure that is costly to the victims, the perpetrators, and the world at large. Economically speaking, toxicity has no defense. It is both costly and devastating.
I am writing this, because history is not a merry-go-round cycling mindlessly while its riders dread the end of their ride. History can go straight, in a good direction. We can steer it. We can be responsible. This time in history is the place, where our friends live, our children live, and we live. Shouldn’t we be taking better care of it and ourselves?