Debunking More
More, more, more,
How you like it?
More, more, more
-Andrea True
The concept of “more” is viewed as a disease in media culture. "More" is used as a synonym for greed. In reality the latter is a mortal sin and the former is the essence of the human condition. The desire to have, to acquire and to
accumulate is ingrained in people; it is what we do even when no one is looking.
Every culture across our great, green planet is so enrapture with "more", marketplaces are created virtually every time people meet. Ideas, goods and services are exchanged. Trade and therefore economic activity are beyond the control
of legislation and other tools of government interference. Proof of this concept is found in black markets which exist to serve as a venue for extralegal goods.
People respond to the challenge of “more” in a number of different ways. Some try to master the creation of multiple skills that give them the opportunity to create
every last thing they could ever want. Others reach a savant level of understanding of a specific skill set and barter their knowledge for goods and services they desire.
Free marketplaces naturally expand and contract in response to need. Proof of this concept is cola flavored beverages. Is the world really clamoring for 25 different ways to drink a Coke? Or is the world looking for 24 alternatives to the Dominant market player, at a variety of different price points? No one had to legislate the cola market, it took care of itself. When people got tired of cola consumption; along came the coffee market and the bottled water market. Each of these markets also has 25 or so variants that allow the consumer to dictate the quality and price point that serves them best.
Fortunes have been made creating markets. New England was once the greatest exporter of ice in the known universe. Ice from in and around Massachusetts was shipped to
as far away as India. Frost begat fortunes, then the market figured how to create ice artificially and the wealth from the frozen pond harvesters magically rained on the people of Chicago.
Ice on demand created entire new industries, all centered around the packaging and distribution of meat. At the time, the innovation and new products developed was on par with the internet and digital communication boom of the last 20 years.
What fueled the expansion? “More”. People wanted more beef, pork and poultry.
Much like the coffee and bottled water markets of today, old-timers thought "who would ever pay for a frozen steak when you could just go out and slaughter a cow and butcher
the beef yourself". Frozen food to the rancher was sissified. (I don't believe ranchers of that era used the word sissified.)
The biggest problem with “more” is its use in controlling behavior, versus allowing behavior to evolve and develop naturally. Too many people in positions of authority apply “more” to regulations. Earlier this week a town in New Jersey
outlawed sleeping in public.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/11/16/nj-town-outlaws-sleeping-in-public/
No doubt the town already has laws on the books regarding vagrancy, public intoxication and loitering. When used in concert or individually these laws would resolve the “sleeping in public” issue. However the city fathers did not want to
use the existing laws, which may have been designed to arrest substance abuse and the proliferation of bums, to ensnare the public napping, crowd who are just too exhausted to make it home and need to crash on a bench. Proof of overregulation can be found in “drug-free zones” and “hate crimes”.
The regulating class obsesses on controlling other people's “more”. They see each dollar the cavalier consumer spends on frivolous pursuits as a dollar not spent for the collective good. They fail to see how each dollar, no matter how spent, is
an expression of someone's unique talents being rewarded in a market system that is both natural and just. Restricting trade enslaves the seller of goods to a less perfect expression of their professionalism, while frustrating the consumer who only wants more.
How you like it?
More, more, more
-Andrea True
The concept of “more” is viewed as a disease in media culture. "More" is used as a synonym for greed. In reality the latter is a mortal sin and the former is the essence of the human condition. The desire to have, to acquire and to
accumulate is ingrained in people; it is what we do even when no one is looking.
Every culture across our great, green planet is so enrapture with "more", marketplaces are created virtually every time people meet. Ideas, goods and services are exchanged. Trade and therefore economic activity are beyond the control
of legislation and other tools of government interference. Proof of this concept is found in black markets which exist to serve as a venue for extralegal goods.
People respond to the challenge of “more” in a number of different ways. Some try to master the creation of multiple skills that give them the opportunity to create
every last thing they could ever want. Others reach a savant level of understanding of a specific skill set and barter their knowledge for goods and services they desire.
Free marketplaces naturally expand and contract in response to need. Proof of this concept is cola flavored beverages. Is the world really clamoring for 25 different ways to drink a Coke? Or is the world looking for 24 alternatives to the Dominant market player, at a variety of different price points? No one had to legislate the cola market, it took care of itself. When people got tired of cola consumption; along came the coffee market and the bottled water market. Each of these markets also has 25 or so variants that allow the consumer to dictate the quality and price point that serves them best.
Fortunes have been made creating markets. New England was once the greatest exporter of ice in the known universe. Ice from in and around Massachusetts was shipped to
as far away as India. Frost begat fortunes, then the market figured how to create ice artificially and the wealth from the frozen pond harvesters magically rained on the people of Chicago.
Ice on demand created entire new industries, all centered around the packaging and distribution of meat. At the time, the innovation and new products developed was on par with the internet and digital communication boom of the last 20 years.
What fueled the expansion? “More”. People wanted more beef, pork and poultry.
Much like the coffee and bottled water markets of today, old-timers thought "who would ever pay for a frozen steak when you could just go out and slaughter a cow and butcher
the beef yourself". Frozen food to the rancher was sissified. (I don't believe ranchers of that era used the word sissified.)
The biggest problem with “more” is its use in controlling behavior, versus allowing behavior to evolve and develop naturally. Too many people in positions of authority apply “more” to regulations. Earlier this week a town in New Jersey
outlawed sleeping in public.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/11/16/nj-town-outlaws-sleeping-in-public/
No doubt the town already has laws on the books regarding vagrancy, public intoxication and loitering. When used in concert or individually these laws would resolve the “sleeping in public” issue. However the city fathers did not want to
use the existing laws, which may have been designed to arrest substance abuse and the proliferation of bums, to ensnare the public napping, crowd who are just too exhausted to make it home and need to crash on a bench. Proof of overregulation can be found in “drug-free zones” and “hate crimes”.
The regulating class obsesses on controlling other people's “more”. They see each dollar the cavalier consumer spends on frivolous pursuits as a dollar not spent for the collective good. They fail to see how each dollar, no matter how spent, is
an expression of someone's unique talents being rewarded in a market system that is both natural and just. Restricting trade enslaves the seller of goods to a less perfect expression of their professionalism, while frustrating the consumer who only wants more.
No comments:
Post a Comment