What, social economics?
The study of economics needs another arm as significant as the study of the wealth of nations or that of business welfare, “the welfare of people.” That’s what “being born equal” was all about;” ‘the rights of ‘man’” and ‘his’ general welfare expectancy.
At this moment in the evolution of global economics, when what happens in the activities of stock markets hardly effect those without money to invest and those without money at all, the study of economics must include a section dealing with how those “earning a living” and the poor are to maintain a biological sustenance first of all and then a reasonable social standard of living.
Unions were an answer but not a very good answer to the manner in which human beings survive in money societies, where money sometimes and often means the difference between life and death.
Today’s economic science is still based on and motivated by the surviving traditions of slavery, on people as workers, paid slaves. Unions operated on and still function where they exist on the notion of the better treatment of slaves of society. If the slaves are not “reasonable,” then business will move to where slaves are better controlled.
To rid ourselves of slave mentality we most develop theory based on the freedom of “man,” born free and born equal. We cannot continue to express these ideals while buying and selling slaves, paying wages insufficient to sustain life. We must discard all those laws based on work for the poor and leisure for the rich.
Survival of the fittest is not an element of evolution theory that relates to human survival within society. That is what present economic theories offer us, the best for those who best survive within a system.
Consumption theory is a perspective for making profit, keeping consumption of industrial products going. The trickle down theory on the other side is equally without reason, a trickle of money for work for those without money after the rich have attained and are sitting on it during recessions, hoping their weight will squeeze it sufficiently so that it becomes sufficiently liquid to make it trickle.
Most of our welfare laws are based on wages, welfare coming from and added to labor cost. Social security is a cost of work both to the laborer and to owner or the unknown stockholders. Some of what is denied in wages is transferred to deficient operations called social security. Minimum wage is a concept of minimum upgrading of an insufficient income for living to another level of insufficiency.
Affordable Health Care, often referred to as a socialistic program gains its appearance as such through the subsidies it provides not to the care recipient but if we look closer, to insurance companies, the privately owned and government subsidized hospitals and now privately organized doctor groups.
Economics as studied over decades has become a study of what is good for the slaveholders, the owners, business, stock-holders and today what is good for the best trained in predicting stock market climate and its changes. The market, it would seem, operates in other climatic conditions than those who require steady small sources of money merely to survive.
It would appear that we need another basic type of economic study, one where we measure the climate and the means for “earning a living,” rather than the “job” one where people are trained for remaining in the “slave culture,” trained for getting a job, where the “job creators” are in a sense the slaveholders, who have less interest in the welfare of the slaves than when they actually invested in slaves they owned.
If we are a nation of the people for the people and not yet by the people, it would seem that some of us should begin studying “human economics,” for the people rather than so-called “progress” economics. Perhaps “income economics ”might get us closer to human economics and what is often referred to as “equality.”