User:Wavelength/About society/Economics/Economic and related questions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

(01 CW) Currency and actual wealth[edit]

Is it not true that the total circulating value of a currency is symbolic wealth representing the actual wealth inherent in the total goods and services on the market at a given instant in the domain of that currency? (See sections 02, 03, 04, 05, 14.)

(02 CS) Currency and shares[edit]

Is a basic monetary unit not analogous to a share traded by a company? If the total circulating face value of a currency is increased by 1%, is the actual value of the basic monetary unit not decreased by 1/101, in effect and ultimately? (See sections 01, 15.)

(03 CD) Currency and distribution[edit]

How is new money put into circulation? How is old money removed from circulation? Does either or do both of these steps affect the fraction anyone owns of the total? (See sections 01, 16.)

(04 MT) Multilateral transactions[edit]

Although economics is commonly practiced in terms of many bilateral transactions, is there not, in effect, a collective contribution to a common repertory of wealth and a collective withdrawing of wealth from it? So, if everyone participates, is it not correct to consider the continuing economy as being a multilateral process? Is society with its millions of individuals not analogous to an organism with its millions of cells? (See sections 01, 06.)

(05 TG) Transfer of goods and services[edit]

Is it not true that economics is most often considered in terms of money being transferred to and from individuals, companies, regions, and nations? Is it not true that usually a transaction involves not only money being transferred but also goods or services being transferred in the opposite direction? (See sections 01, 06, 13.)

(06 ES) Economics on small scales[edit]

Is it not true that a balanced economy is characterized by equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth? Therefore, is it not possible for everyone to be adequately employed and adequately provided for? Can this not be studied on a small scale by the consideration of individuals who are stranded in various places on an island, and who find each other one by one, and who by collective agreement develop increasingly elaborate ways of sharing the work and sharing the wealth in an isolated economy? Is it not possible for both the support and the benefits of the economy of a family household to be shared equitably by all its members, who might include senior citizens, a professional housewife or a professional househusband, and minors? Is it not even true that babies impart emotional and physical benefits to their mothers who breast-feed them and a youthful spirit to everyone? (See sections 04, 05, 09, 24, 25, 26, 53.)

(07 CC) Cooperation and competition[edit]

What are the advantages and disadvantages of economic cooperation and competition, to society and to individuals in various economic positions in society? (See sections 08, 10, 41, 42, 46.)

(08 GS) Generalization and specialization[edit]

What are the advantages and disadvantages of economic generalization and specialization, to society and to individuals in various economic positions in society? (See sections 07, 09, 43, 44, 50, 51.)

(09 PP) Population management and prosperity[edit]

Assuming adequate natural resources of every kind, is the population of a company or a locality or a region or a nation or the globe not quite irrelevant to real economic prosperity, that is, economic prosperity for everyone, as long as everyone shares equitably in being both a producer and a consumer? Is it not true that perhaps the only advantage to a work force in having a larger population is more opportunities for specialization? (See sections 06, 08, 10, 31.)

(10 SM) Wealth and stress and moderation[edit]

If employers boycott their employer and get an increase in wages, is it not possible that the employer will try to maintain the same net income for the business by a decrease in the number of employees and/or an increase in the productivity of each employee and/or an increase in prices to consumers? Is it not true that any of those seven possibilities might increase stress among employed people and/or unemployed people? If the levels of productivity and income were moderate before the changes, and are made higher than moderate because of them, is there not also a decrease in the number of jobs and businesses having both moderate productivity and moderate incomes? (See sections 07, 09, 11, 33, 41.)

(11 DW) Differences in wealth[edit]

If someone has an annual income that is above the average, does it not follow that someone has an annual income that is below the average? Is it not inevitable that, if people of above-average incomes become generally richer, then people of below-average incomes become generally poorer at the same time, that is, their incomes drop further below the average? Is it not absolutely impossible for everyone to have an income above the average? If people of below-average incomes are to have their incomes increased, is it not necessary for people of above-average incomes to accept lower incomes? (See sections 10, 12, 34, 40.)

(12 WN) Wealth and normalcy[edit]

Is "growth" of earnings or of capital necessarily normal for an individual or a business or a nation, or is it not really the acquiring of a larger share of the total buying power, locally, regionally, nationally, and/or globally? Is it not the acquiring of a greater share of the collective "economic security blanket"? Is it not sometimes a "cancer"? (See sections 11, 31, 32, 33, 34.)

(13 ME) Means and ends[edit]

Is it not true that, by using a means to promote an end, one is promoting also the means? Is that not true when advertisers appeal to faults of human character as a means to the end of selling products and services? Is it not true when one sells bad products or services (bad by nature or by faulty work) as a means to the end of acquiring monetary wealth? Is an effective way of doing something necessarily a good way? (See section 05.)

(14 GP) Gross national product[edit]

Is it not true that the gross national product (GNP) of a nation is defined as the total market value of all the goods and services produced by the nation during a specified period? Is it not true that a product which is sold three times before consumption might alternatively be sold two times or four times before consumption? Is it not true that such differences in the numbers of transactions can influence the calculation of the total market value? (See section 01.)

(15 ID) Investment and decisions[edit]

Is it not true that annual reports by companies can help shareholders to make good decisions about investing money? Likewise, is it not true that annual reports by charitable organizations can help contributors to make good decisions about contributing money? (See section 02.)

(16 BL) Banking and loans and interest[edit]

In a society with equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth, is there not little need for banking and little need for loans? Is it not possible for there to be a bank which simply stores money without investing it or paying interest, and which earns money by charging its customers for storage and recordkeeping? In a society with money, is money not simply a record of benefits receivable to its owners? (See section 03.)

(17 EE) Energy and ecology[edit]

Is it possible to design an electric generator which can be powered by human energy, by means of a trampoline or an exercise bicycle, and which can store electric energy? If the equitable production and use of electricity by such a device in every home and workplace replaced its production by energy from running water and fossil fuel and atomic nuclei and its distribution by power lines, would that not be beneficial, both economically and ecologically? (See section 18.)

(18 En) Energy[edit]

Is it not true that the least expensive and most abundant energy is solar energy? Is it not true that the best way to harness solar energy is photosynthesis by plants, which in turn feed humans and other animals? Is it not true that humans are more efficient and versatile than any machine they have made? (See sections 17, 19.)

(19 TH) Time management and energy management and health care[edit]

If the schedule structure and the daylight saving feature of electric civilization are together compared with the old schedule structure that depended more on the sun, then, all factors considered, which system is more energy-efficient, and which system is better for human health? (See sections 18, 20, 39, 58.)

(20 HE) Health care and education[edit]

If there were equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth, would it not be easier for every family to be responsible for the expense of its own health care and education? (See sections 19, 21.)

(21 RA) Real estate and agriculture and waste management[edit]

If there were more equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth, would it not be easier for every family (including every one-person family) to possess its own parcel of land, and to possess its own dwelling on the land? Would it not be easier for every family to practice its own agriculture, including composting? (See sections 20, 22.)

(22 AT) Agriculture and transportation[edit]

Is it not true that increased localization of agriculture would decrease the need for transportation, the need for preservation and storage of food, and the possibility of large crop losses to living and non-living things? (See sections 21, 23, 25, 37.)

(23 NG) Nature and genetic engineering[edit]

Is it really true that scientists can bring economic and ecological benefits by genetic engineering? Can mere humans really manage, simultaneously, millions of different interrelationships, interconnections, and interdependencies (nested sets), many among those millions being unknown, and have good results? Is it not more advantageous, economically and ecologically, to improve the management of life forms as they thrive and co-exist naturally? (See section 22.)

(24 MH) Money management and home management[edit]

If a husband works professionally for someone outside the home and his wife works professionally as a housewife inside their home, is it not true that one way for them to manage the family finances is by his depositing part of his paycheck to his account and part of it to her account, with mutual agreement about who buys what? (See section 06.)

(25 EU) Equitability and unequal circumstances[edit]

As long as people differ in the quantity and quality of their abilities and needs, is it not true that equitability will not always correspond to equality in sharing the work and sharing the wealth? How, then, can such equitability best be decided? (See sections 06, 22, 26, 27.)

(26 EC) Equitability and changes[edit]

Is it not possible to maintain equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth even despite changes in society in regard to knowledge, needs, techniques and technology, population (levels, composition, and distribution), priorities, and systems? (See sections 06, 25, 27, 28.)

(27 CE) Change to equitability[edit]

If a society does not have equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth, is it possible to achieve such equitability for everyone at the same time? If not, then can the various changes be prioritized in time and/or importance? (See sections 25, 26.)

(28 PR) Paper and recycling[edit]

Is it possible to produce a special reusable paper, even if that requires innovation in techniques and/or technology for writing and/or erasing? Can such a paper be beneficial, both economically and ecologically? (See sections 26, 29, 30.)

(29 PD) Paper and decisions[edit]

What is or are the best species of plant for making paper, for each of its various purposes, economically and in regard to the quality of the paper? (See section 28.)

(30 CR) Construction and recycling[edit]

Is it realistic to expect architectural structures to stand for more than a limited time? When architectural structures have stood long enough, is it not possible to dismantle them and recycle all their parts? If it is desired that various styles of architecture not become extinct, is it not possible to maintain the means by which the architectural structures were built? (See section 28.)

(31 TB) Total wealth and balance of wealth[edit]

Is it not true that the total wealth possessed by a specified population (by age, gender, geography, industry, occupation, and/or other factor[s]) is important for its dealings with other populations? Is it not true that a balanced distribution of the wealth possessed by a specified population is important for dealings within that population? (See sections 09, 12.)

(32 IE) Income and expenses[edit]

Is it really true that one should spend only a small portion of one's income on essentials like food and shelter and clothing, or is that just a misconception which originated with some people who could afford to spend money in that manner? (See section 12.)

(33 IV) Inflation and value[edit]

Does cost-push inflation not reflect a defensive measure? Does demand-pull inflation not reflect an offensive measure? Does either type of inflation really reflect the actual value of products or services to consumers? (See sections 10, 12.)

(34 WL) Wealth and limits[edit]

If the rich become richer by acquiring the wealth of the poor, is there not a limit to how much richer they can become by that means? (See sections 11, 12, 36.)

(35 TT) Techniques and technology[edit]

Is it not true that some innovations in techniques and technology can bring more inconvenience than convenience, either in the short term or in the long term, and either to the immediate users or to society? Therefore, is it not true that such innovations can be detrimental to an economy? (See section 36.)

(36 TL) Technology and limits[edit]

Is it not true that the potential benefits of various substances have measurable limits for various purposes? Likewise, is it not true that the potential benefits of technology have limits, beyond which we must consider trade-offs between various limits according to circumstances and purposes? If flexibility between mutually exclusive benefits is desired, is such flexibility not also a benefit which should be considered in the same way? Is it possible to quantify all possible benefits and express their mutual limitations by one or more mathematical formulas? (See sections 34, 35, 38.)

(37 TC) Technology and changes[edit]

Is it not true that, in many ways and to various degrees, many techniques and technologies and systems have been established as dependent on other techniques and technologies and systems? Therefore, if the use of some of such preliminary techniques and technologies and systems is to be minimized or eliminated, in some ways and to some extent is it not necessary first to minimize or eliminate the use of the dependent techniques and technologies and systems? (See sections 22, 38.)

(38 ET) Efficiency and technology[edit]

Is it not true that more efficient use of old technology is often more advantageous than new technology? Is it not true that old technology can often be enhanced with new techniques and new systems? (See sections 36, 37, 39, 51, 52.)

(39 TE) Technology and employment and time management[edit]

Is it not true that increased use of technology often causes decreased employment? Is it not true that, in many such cases, one full-time "job" can be shared by two people, each working part time? Therefore, is it not possible for increased use of technology to bring some shorter individual work schedules without decreased employment? Can that not help some individuals to have more time for contemplating life and for family communication? (See sections 19, 38, 40, 42, 45, 46, 54.)

(40 WP) Wage parity[edit]

Is it best to decide wage parity on the basis of location, industry, position, experience, something else, or a combination of factors? If it is not possible to base it on all those factors at the same time, how are they best prioritized? (See sections 11, 39, 41.)

(41 UD) Labor unions and democracy[edit]

Is a labor union not in some aspects analogous to a political party? Therefore, is it not totalitarian to require all employees of a company to belong to a labor union? Is it not true that a union can limit the power of an abusive company executive? Likewise, is it not true that non-union employees can limit the power of an abusive union executive? (See sections 07, 10, 40, 42.)

(42 UA) Labor unions and employment agencies[edit]

Is a labor union executive not in some aspects analogous to an employment agency? Therefore, is a labor union executive not like an employer to its members and is the company executive not like a customer to the union executive? By redesignating a labor union executive as an "employer" and by having another labor union executive mediating between that "employer" and its employees, and by repeating those two steps several times, is it not possible, whether desirable or not, to have a series of several mediating parties? (See sections 07, 39, 41.)

(43 VA) Career variation and appreciation[edit]

Is it not easy for us imperfect humans to ignore the large amount of energy responsible for even a small amount of matter? Likewise, is it not easy for us imperfect humans both to underestimate and to undervalue the work that other persons do? Is it not true that a person can, during a lifetime, perform various functions or have various occupations within one industry, or perform one function or have one occupation within several industries? Is it not true that such variety can help a person to understand and appreciate better the work that other persons do? (See sections 08, 44.)

(44 MP) Personnel management and participation[edit]

Is it not true that a manager, although specializing in management, can also have some skill and participation in the work of his subordinates? Is it not true that that can help him to understand their positions and to understand how to provide for equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth? (See sections 08, 43, 48.)

(45 ED) Employment and decisions[edit]

Is it not true that job placement in accord with aptitudes, interests, abilities, and good career counseling is beneficial for employees, employers, customers, and society? Therefore, is it not worthwhile to invest in the testing of aptitudes, interests, and abilities, and in good career counseling? (See sections 39, 46.)

(46 JC) Job seeking and competition[edit]

In a society without equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth, what are the advantages and disadvantages of a system in which jobseekers are able to bid on available jobs and employers are able to hire those with the lowest bids? (See sections 07, 39, 45, 49.)

(47 JS) Job seeking and job search counseling[edit]

Is it not true that employers can benefit themselves and society by advising jobseekers of why they are inadequately qualified for being interviewed or for being hired, and of what they can do to improve their qualifications? Is it not a small investment in time and money to sort applications accordiing to such factors, and to check off such factors on form letters or postcards to be mailed to the jobseekers? (See section 48.)

(48 MA) Personnel management and attraction[edit]

Is it really true that large incomes are needed for attracting managers and presidents? Is it not true that many of them could benefit from having a smaller share of the decision-making and a larger share of the routine? Is it not true that many subordinate workers could benefit from having a larger share of the decision-making and a smaller share of the routine? (See sections 44, 47, 49.)

(49 JR) Job seeking and resource management[edit]

If job candidates differ in their resources of money and self-marketing skills for advertising their qualifications, those resources being factors irrelevant to competency in most jobs, is it fair to anyone that those candidates be screened according to those factors, either directly or indirectly? Is it not possible to devise a screening system which is neutral to those factors but which discriminates according to what is important for competency in each job? (See sections 46, 48, 50.)

(50 TS) Training and standardization and personnel management[edit]

Is it really necessary to spend a large amount of time and money in training workers who are new to a company, a department, a position, or a function? Is it not possible to decrease such time and money by simplification and standardization, within and among industries? Is it not possible to accommodate both standardization and versatility by one or more levels of modularization in one or more dimensions? Is it not possible to establish standards for changes in standardization, if a need for such changes is possible? Is it not possible for a company or a department to have a personnel clerk who advertises for and interviews and trains workers who are new to a company, a department, a position, or a function? At other times, is it not possible for such a clerk to look after the finer points of personnel efficiency? (See sections 08, 49, 51, 54.)

(51 SE) Standardization and efficiency[edit]

Is it not true that simplicity in standardization contributes to more efficient training and more efficient use of techniques and technologies and systems, and decreases errors? Is that not true of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system, the International System of Units (SI) of measurement (the metric system), the international auxiliary language Esperanto, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) recommendations, the AMS Simplified Letter style recommended by the American Management Society, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard (DSK), and the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)? (See sections 08, 38, 50, 57.)

(52 WC) Working conditions and productivity[edit]

Is it not true that the quality and quantity of work can be improved if workers perform under wholesome, enjoyable working conditions and receive genuine appreciation? Are those factors not often more important for repetitious or laborious work than are advanced technologies or high wages? Can they not decrease the need for mental and physical recreation? (See sections 38, 53, 55.)

(53 EW) Enthusiasm for work[edit]

Is it not true that parents can promote enthusiasm for work in their children by using imagination to find them ways to help, especially when they ask to help? (See sections 06, 52, 54.)

(54 Ed) Education and employment[edit]

Is it not possible for all members of society to participate both in being trained and in working, during every week of every year? Is it not possible for one to progress in both training and work experience every week? Is it not possible for one to decide from work experience when to discontinue or resume training toward more advanced levels? (See sections 39, 50, 53.)

(55 Ru) Ruralization and population management[edit]

Is it not true that global ruralization would magnify the glorious design and beauty in nature? Would that not promote opportunities for wholesome recreation for everyone? Is it not true that a globally balanced distribution of people would make it easier to achieve equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth? (See section 52.)

(56 IR) Insurance and risk[edit]

Is it not more equitable to price insurance according to individual risk assessment than according to group risk assessment? Is it not possible to establish individual risk assessment according to the ratio of past insurance benefits divided by past coverage duration? Is it not possible to calculate the basic premium of an individual by dividing that one's individual risk assessment by the total of all relevant individual risk assessments, and by multiplying the result by the total estimated benefits to be paid? If this involves an insurance company with operating costs and a net profit, is it not possible to divide the expected gross profit by the number of customers and add the result as a surcharge to each one's basic premium? (See section 57.)

(57 JE) Justice and equitability[edit]

If the legal standards of a jurisdiction are simplified and expressed in simple language in a general publication for standards which apply to all citizens under all circumstances and in supplementary publications for standards of limited application, and if the general publication has questions about specific factors which refer the reader to the supplementary publications, and if the publications (and revised publications when needed) are available to all citizens and to all visitors when they enter the jurisdiction, would that not enable all literate citizens and all literate visitors to be fully informed of their legal rights and obligations, and would it not decrease the need for legal advice and the time needed for court proceedings? Is it not possible for there to be one or more organizations providing legal insurance to cover the costs of court proceedings, with premiums assessed according to the individual records of the insured parties as successful plaintiffs or successful defendants? Ideally, should justice not be free to everyone and equally understood and appreciated by everyone? (See sections 51, 56, 58.)

(58 RP) Resources management and problem management (including health care)[edit]

What is the best way to divide resources (including time, money, and human resources) for research in problem management (including health care) among the areas of etiology, prevention, preparation, detection, treatment, and cure, in order to bring the most good in problem management (including health care) to the most people, and in order to spend the least in resources in the long term? What is the best way to divide resources (including time, money, and human resources) for applications in problem management (including health care) among the same areas, for the same purposes? What is the best way to divide resources (including time, money, and human resources) for problem management (including health care) between research and applications, for the same purposes? (See sections 19, 57, 59, 60.)

(59 CP) Challenges and problems[edit]

Is it not true that not all challenges are problems? Is it not true that equitability in sharing the work and sharing the wealth can be maintained even if problems are decreased or eliminated? (See section 58.)

(60 HA) Health care and animal welfare[edit]

Is it not true that some health practioners claim to be able to use muscle testing to determine which substances are good and which are bad to an individual at a given time, both qualitatively and quantitatively? If the claim is true, is that method not preferable to animal testing, both economically and ecologically? (See section 58.)


    20__21___________________   23          Fig. 1.  The 83
    EH  RA                   \  NG          interconnections 
   /                          \  |          between the 60 
  /                            \ |          nodes represent 
19__18__17  03__01__04  24  25__22___       the 83 pairs of 
TH  En  EE  CD  CW  MT  MH  EU  AT   \      cited cross-ref-
 |\        /   / |\   \  | / |\       \     erences.  Some 
 | \      /   /  | \   \ |/  | \       \    interconnections 
 |  \   16  02  14  05__06__26__27  29  \   cross each other 
 |   \  BL  CS  GP  TG  ES  EC  CE  PD   |  but none forks.
 |    \      |     /   /  \   \    /     |
 |     \     |    /   /    \   \  /      |
 |  60  \   15  13   /      \   28__30   |
 |  HA   |  ID  ME  /   /\   \  PR  CR   |
 | /     |         /   /  \   \          |
 |/      |        /   /    \   \         |
58__59   |   ____/   /   ___08__09__31   |
RP  CP   |   |      /   /   GS  PP  TB   \
 |       |   |     /   /   / |\   \   \   \
 |       |   |    /   /   /  | \   \   \   \
 |   ____|___|___/   /  44__43  \   \   \   \
 |   |   |   |      /   MP  VA  /   /    |   \
 |   |   |   |     /   /       /   /     |    \
 |   |   |   |    /   /       /   /      |     \
 |   |   |   |  50  48__47  07__10__33   |  32  \
 |   |   \  /   TS  MA  JS  CC  SM  IV   |  IE  /
 |   |    \/   / |\  |     / |\  |\   \  | /   / 
 |   |    /\  /  | \ |    /  | \ | \   \ |/   /
 |   |   /  \/   |  49   /   |  41  \   12   /
 |   |   \  /\   |  JR  /    |  UD   |  WN   |
 |   |    \/  \  |   | /     | / |   | / |   |
 |   |    /\   \ |   |/      |/  |   |/  |   |
 |   |   /  \   \|  46__45  42  40__11   |   |
 |   |   |   |   \  JC  ED  UA  WP  DW  /   /
 |   |   |   |   |\  | /   /   /   /   /   /
 |   |   |   |   | \ |/   /   /   /   /   /
 |   |   |  53__54__39___/   /   /   /   /
 |   |   |  EW  Ed  TE      /   /   /   /
 |   |   |    \      |\    /   /   /   /
 |   |   |     \     | \  /   /   /   /
 |   |   |  55__52__38  \/  34___/   /
 |   |   \  Ru  WC  ET      WL      /
 |   |    \        / |\    /       /
 |   |     \      /  | \  /       /
 |   |______51___/  37  36__35   /
 |          SE      TC  TL  TT  /
 |            \       \        /
 |             \       \      /
 |______________57__56  \____/
                JE  IR

When economists speak about the creating of wealth, are they speaking about the creating of goods and services, or are they speaking about the assigning of monetary values to goods and services? When they speak about the creating of jobs, are they speaking about the creating of a need for work to be done, or are they speaking about the assigning of monetary values to work that needs to be done? Does not the creating of a need amount to the creating of a liability, and therefore a step backward? Is that not the case with property damage, theft, work stoppages, and planned obsolescence?


If someone asks for 25% more money for his goods or services, does that not devalue the currency by 20% to the buyer for such an transaction? If many people do the same locally, regionally, nationally, or globally, does that not devalue the currency for the respective area?


Is a meter not still a meter, whether it is measured as one meter or 10 decimeters or 100 centimeters or 1,000 millimeters? Likewise, since money is only symbolic of material wealth, is not the value assigned to a currency quite irrelevant?


Is blood not meant to circulate in an organism? Likewise, is money not meant to circulate in a society? When money is invested in weapons, does it not reach a dead-end, with no return?


Is it not best to pack larger items first, because they can be matched with fewer places? Likewise, is it not best to employ disabled people first, because they have fewer options?


Is it possible to co-evaluate apples with oranges? Likewise, is it possible to co-evaluate all the various goods and services? If so, how? If not, why not?


Since gambling businesses are designed for their own profit, is it not a bad business risk for anyone to invest in them by gambling?


How can consumers be helped to distinguish between impulsive buying and good use of opportunities?


What are the advantages and disadvantages of mass production and mass servicing?


Does anything come from nothing (whether or not it comes for nothing)?