Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Living wisely: Addressing economic faults for a sustainable future

Living wisely: Addressing economic faults for a sustainable future
Getty Images

Leland R. Beaumont is an independent wisdom researcher who is seeking real good. He is currently developing the Applied Wisdom curriculum on Wikiversity.

Introduction


In a world where economic systems drive much of our decision-making, it’s imperative to scrutinize whether these systems are truly serving the greater well-being of humanity and the environment. This essay delves into critical economic faults that hinder our pursuit of a sustainable and prosperous future.

It identifies the misallocation of resources, the undervaluation of ecosystem services, the neglect of externalities, the failure to acknowledge growth limits, the oversimplified view of human behavior, and the pervasive influence of money in shaping our world. By recognizing and addressing these economic shortcomings, we can pave the way for a more equitable and sustainable society.

Sharing the Commons

Common-pool resources, such as clean air and pristine wilderness, are vital to our well-being. However, our current economic systems often fail to account for the value of these resources, allowing their exploitation for private gain. This leads to the tragedy of the commons, where shared resources are depleted by self-interested individuals. Solutions include individual restraint, cooperative agreements, government regulation, usage fees, or privatization. Advocates of free markets must propose fair solutions for the allocation of these resources.

Valuing Ecosystem Services

Ecosystem services, which range from pollination by bees to clean drinking water, are indispensable to human survival. Yet, we seldom assign economic value to these services, leading to their degradation without financial consequences. Destruction of, for instance, wild bee populations, can result in substantial economic costs. Properly valuing ecosystem services can incentivize their preservation or prompt regulatory protection.

Paying for Externalities

Externalities, the unintended costs or benefits of activities, often go unaccounted for in economic models. Coal mining is a stark example of externalities, with miners bearing health risks, and communities suffering environmental consequences. To ensure honest economic analyses, externalities must be internalized, with businesses responsible for the full costs of their actions. Avoiding payment for externalities shifts the burden to others, akin to trespassing rather than freedom.

Acknowledging Limits to Growth

The pursuit of endless economic growth, often measured by GDP, has led to various crises, from financial collapses to environmental degradation. An obsession with growth, regardless of its consequences, is unsustainable. We must recognize that unlimited growth is a fallacy and poses risks to our planet and well-being.

Humans are Complex Actors

Economic theories often oversimplify human behavior, assuming rationality and ignoring intrinsic motivations, social influences, and conflicts between short-term and long-term goals. Behavioral economics challenges these simplistic models, revealing the multifaceted nature of human decision-making. Realizing the complexity of human behavior is crucial for crafting effective economic policies.

Money is Power

Money wields significant influence in politics, research, and various industries. Its power distorts democracy, research agendas, and societal values. Many economic faults underpin this influence, highlighting the need for more equitable and accurate economic models.

An Inaccurate Model

Our current economic models are flawed, leading to false signals in our financial accounting systems. Economics, as a money-based model, must align with the realities of economies, the exchange of valuable goods and services. The gap between the two is widening, necessitating a shift towards more accurate and holistic economic models.

Taking Action

To address these economic faults and forge a sustainable future, we must challenge arguments that prioritize economic growth over well-being and environmental health. This requires advocating for fair resource allocation, valuing ecosystem services, internalizing externalities, acknowledging growth limits, considering human complexity, and combating the undue influence of money. A focus on genuine prosperity, grounded in well-being and sustainability, is essential.

Conclusion

Living wisely entails recognizing and rectifying the economic faults that hinder our collective well-being and environmental sustainability. By addressing these issues and shifting our focus from mindless growth to meaningful well-being, we can foster a society that values peace, integrity, clean air, clean water, and the beauty of nature. The path forward involves redefining prosperity, embracing sustainability, and working together to bring wisdom to life in our economic systems and everyday choices.

This article was generated by ChatGPT based on the previously written essay Economic

Read More

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians

Capitol building, Washington, DC

Unsplash/Getty Images

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians

There may be no greater indication that voters are not being listened to in the escalating redistricting war between the Republican and Democratic Parties than a new poll from NBC News that shows 8-in-10 Americans want the parties to stop.

It’s what they call an "80-20 issue," and yet neither party is standing up for the 80% as they prioritize control of Congress.

Keep ReadingShow less
Nationalization by Stealth: Trump’s New Industrial Playbook

The White House and money

AI generated image

Nationalization by Stealth: Trump’s New Industrial Playbook

In the United States, where the free market has long been exalted as the supreme engine of prosperity, a peculiar irony is taking shape. On August 22, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced that the federal government had acquired a stake of just under 10% in Intel, instantly making itself the company’s largest shareholder. The stake - roughly 433 million shares, valued at about $8.9 billion, purchased at $20.47 each - was carved out of the Biden-era CHIPS Act subsidies and repackaged as equity. Formally, it is a passive, non-voting stake, with no board seat or governance rights. Yet symbolism matters: Washington now sits, however discreetly, in Intel’s shareholder register. Soon afterward, reports emerged that Samsung, South Korea’s industrial giant, had also been considered for similar treatment. What once would have been denounced as creeping socialism in Washington is now unfolding under Donald Trump, a president who boasts of his devotion to private enterprise but increasingly embraces tactics that blur the line between capitalism and state control.

The word “nationalization,” for decades associated with postwar Britain, Latin American populists, or Arab strongmen, is suddenly back in circulation - but this time applied to the citadel of capitalism itself. Trump justifies the intervention as a matter of national security and economic patriotism. Subsidies, he argues, are wasteful. Tariffs, in his view, are a stronger tool for forcing corporations to relocate factories to U.S. soil. Yet the CHIPS Act, that bipartisan legacy of the Biden years, remains in force and politically untouchable, funneling billions of dollars into domestic semiconductor projects. Rather than scrap it, Trump has chosen to alter the terms: companies that benefit from taxpayer largesse must now cede equity to the state. Intel, heavily reliant on those funds, has become the test case for this new model of American industrial policy.

Keep ReadingShow less