And why create society and then why create the rational world if we are only pure individual emotion?
Nothing stands in a more stark contrast than the rise of capitalism and democracy in conjunction with the rise of feelings of individuality, freedom of expression and originality. It seems that the more, and more, that capitalism and democracy succeed the more that people feel individual and free.
Democracy is however only arrived at through mass agreement, it is the denial of individual capriciousness, through mass compromise, for the sake of the many. It is indeed democracy that prevents individual expression, the only way for an idea to succeed under a democratic institution is through consensus. If I have an idea its expression is heard in proportion to the number of people that are believers in the same idea. Freedom of speech is important because many people think it is important. However if a person is saying something that no one else agrees with, that message will not be reproduced in the social medium, it will not acquire freedom of expression outside of that one individual’s orbit. The art exposition that you view in a museum is the end result of a combined agreement that what you are viewing is art; if only one individual were to appreciate the true aesthetic then that individual possessing true art would not be able to put on an exposition. The voice and opinion of the people is a choir.
Capitalism by its very nature is also based on the amassing of same in huge numbers. Thus, it does not pay to be original, the market only pay and pays mostest for what has the greatest value to the greatest possible number. The more unique your service or product, the higher its price and the more difficult it will be to sell. Unique markets are terminal in nature and forced to maintain exorbitant price structures that are primarily supported in very buoyant economies; that is, markets that are given to excesses. These markets are usually the first to collapse during periods of economic contractions. The market however will maintain well any commodity that has managed to acquire a large following, so capitalism rewards and secures most that which is in the end assumed by most to be the greatest benefit gained through monetary consumption. In difficult times people will purchase that which reduces the loss of value least, and lengthens value in time. At any given time the greatest number of people are actually operating under hard times; they must maximize their gains in the acquisition of goods intended for daily consumption. This being the case they constantly correct the market in real time and force aberrant capital agglomerations into ever changing investment patterns that never solidify into one particular condition that could otherwise induce an anchored collapse of the market.
In summary, the average person keeps the market working and honest by virtue of the fact that they are the majority and can not get rich. Force majure. The capitalistic engine is then maintained well in this manner but should such an engine see economic growth far exceeding the fundamental needs of the majority then such an engine will have to be manually controlled. Which immediately implies that a citizen class will have to rise to understand all of its parts and regulate capital development and flow. Such a thing is technically impossible because the margin for economic error is magnified by control. The economy floats, no one really knows why it floats, to try to understand this will require empirical evidence which will induce human error that is incalculable and thus sure to lead into turmoil and eventual collapse. In short, what keeps the markets sane is the fact that no one knows how they really work and so no one can control them.
The inherent wild nature of capitalism is produced by the fact that while capitalism is a mature and proven economic engine, no one really understand why it works. People will make guesses as to why things will work, some adhering to the benefits of regulation and government intervention while others will worship supply side economics or the complete elimination of regulation and tariffs. But the reality is that the economy runs in spite of economic theory. Again, it would be easy to make the argument that everyone is somewhat correct, the free traders and the control freaks alike, and it is that fact that makes it obvious as to how wrong everyone is. And they are wrong because capitalism was not born in a lab, it was born out of pirate trade, it was born out of need, it was born because people needed, or at the exorbitant level, wanted to trade things. The only rule that can be applied to this is: can you afford your needs and can you afford your wants? This is because capitalism is the most simplistic economic engine, it is the easiest way to run an economy precisely because it requires the least human intervention. Capitalist economics arrives at us from this very singular perspective. Once the human being is willing to expend the energy required on wants and needs, the market will do the rest and it will be completely dependant on those wants and needs, completely dependant on consumerism. It is then wonderful that most people want the same things and need the same things, it is that, and that alone that establishes, settles, and truly controls the markets. Who needs an economist to know that?
From such a perspective all regulatory action is equal to magic, it does nothing but satisfy its audience. More intrinsically important is the act of the mass, the fact that they are “mostly” in need and have room for a few wants. This lot of humanity forces justice upon run away capitalism. It is the need of the capitalists to cater to mass so as to acquire wealth that keeps them honest. This is because mass consumption creates a mass logistical apparatus which can not be inconspicuously used. More important no capitalist owns the system, for that matter not even the people own the system, the system can not even be bought, it is purely theory that tells us it exist, and we can only verify its existence through the trades.
That both democracy and capitalism are a perfect match is more than just a simple coincidence, they both cater to mass appeal. The momentum as, acquired by the mass. You can not and will not marry an elitist political structure like a monarchy with a capitalistic engine because a monarchy by virtue of its communication and power structure would constantly be overpowering the market’s growth dynamic. A free market guides itself, neither a monarchy nor a communist government is able to expand or communicate with all of its parts efficiently enough to make responsive changes to the nature of expanding or contracting markets. A free market, in a free democracy, expands at a more or less balanced rate, which is that as accelerated or decelerated by mass behavior and no faster. Certain powerful individuals are able to create anomalies of reserves via the agglomeration of wealth, or by monopolistic advantage, but in order to maintain this abstract position the controlling interest will always have to outguess the mass momentum and direction; which, fortunately, probability guarantees will eventually be misinterpreted. So, all advantage is temporary, and the system inherently corrects itself by constantly robbing back any hoarded wealth and returning it to the public purse.
The accumulation of wealth offers individuals, governments or companies a temporary financial advantage while as a result nurturing a consistent problem called unemployment. Imagine the economy as a perfect circle, that has the elasticity of a tight rubber band. The economy is a perfectly tight elastic circle because it can expand in the expression of inflation or growth, or it can contract in the expression of a recession or depression. Further it is a close circle because regardless of how many middleman it produces it has to complete a transaction in order to exist. A transaction is not linear but rather circular in that it can not take place unless it benefits, or creates the feeling of benefit, for both parties. No one buys and no one sells unless a condition of satisfaction is met, that is what makes the economy a perfectly tight elastic one to one circle.
Aside from being elastic and circular the economy is rigid, it is rigid in that the only factor that acquires or has value is labor, you can store productive labor in the form of money for future use, or into goods for immediate satisfaction, either or any other value manifestation is labor energy. Profit that is not reinvested is ultimately unpaid labor. Money is then merely a stored labor unit, stored labor can accomplish future work, but only actual labor can add or deplete value. Rigid indeed, no one can produce anything without labor, same as without money. But it all gets even more rigid than that because the economy is based on the flow of transactions, the money, labor, that is human energy, needs to keep moving to stay alive, if you do not use it, it will deteriorate in value, the economy requires a constant flow. If the flow is restricted by temporary monetary agglomerations then the elastic circle economy develops a bulge, and that bulge manifest itself as unemployment.
Above you can see perfect economic flow, full employment, all transactions are loops immediately reinvested into the economy.
Above you can see an economy that is suffering from unemployment. The one to one ratio of all transactions has been warped by the accumulation or restrictions of capital interest in some sectors, such as governmental, private, or black markets of the represented economy. Because the stored up labor is not being reinvested into the economy, it creates an economic flow restriction that causes an artificial bulge, that is the accumulation of capital, that is the flow of capital is being restricted. The gap in economic flow, created by such restrictions, determines the amount of unemployment. It is then certainly in the market and public interest to tax heavily any accumulation or stagnation of wealth, or any removal of wealth from the market economy. And it is also in the public interest to tax lightly, or preferably not at all, any wealth that is being invested in the economy. In fact taxing wealth that is being invested in the economy is one aspect of an economic flow restriction.
In pure principle all economies ought to suffer zero unemployment, that is a farmer trading his ducks with a farmer trading his corn create an absolute employment economy and sense all economy is created out of the transaction then unemployment can only be created when transactions are not constant. This being the case, economies that do not reintroduce stored labor from productivity back into development and production will invariably experience high unemployment. The job of government is then to steal the money so that it can squandered back into the economy, by taxation, tariff, regulation, etc… the capital then will find its way into the hands of those that “desire” it most, which will fall victim to others that desire it more, and in this way the lumps in the elastic band iron themselves out.
