Wealth was always seen as representing such tangible resources as given by nature or those grown or domesticated or extracted. Obviously such wealth was limited and sharing of such wealth was always a ‘zero-sum’ game, in which if one got more, the other got proportionately less, as such material resources were always limited.
In the past few decades a new form of wealth has begun to grow based on intangible resources such as design, digital creations, more efficient use of resources, better energy generation and manufacturing etc. Thus sort of ‘New Land’ or ‘New wealth’ seems to be unlimited in potential and hence wealth distribution is no longer a ‘zero-sum’ game. The Innovation/’Jugaad’ of the Entrepreneurs, especially the Micro and Small ventures also result in greater employment.
It is therefore essential that ‘NEW’ wealth creation should be encouraged and ways found to allow everyone to share equitably in it.
- Today greater wealth continues to be created by Entrepreneurs who take risks and often fail and try again.
- Failure should been seen as gaining experience and venture capitalists should be encouraged to fund entrepreneurship. Back the Entrepreneur, not only the Enterprize.
- Well regulated and structured Financial Institutional Funds could encourage people to participate in equity markets and share equitably in the growth of such ‘New’ wealth.
Quotations for consideration:
- “I would rather see Finance less proud and Industry more content“- Winston Churchill as Chancellor of the Exchequer 1924 to 1929.
- “It has been usual to think of the accumulated wealth of the world as having been painfully built-up out of that voluntary abstinence of individuals from the immediate enjoyment of consumption which we call ‘THRIFT’. But it should be obvious that mere abstinence is not enough by itself to build ‘Cities or drain Fens’ – so what has actually done the trick and created the wealth of Nations- It is ‘ENTERPRISE’ which builds and improves the world’s possessions. If enterprise is afoot, wealth accumulates whatever may be happening to ‘thrift’; and if enterprise is asleep, wealth decays whatever ‘thrift’ may be doing” – John Maynard Keynes.
Distinguishing ‘thrift’ which is essentially only saving while waiting with hope for an opportunity for profitable expenditure in future, from the real motor of economic growth, which is investment / enterprise NOW to do things better with less resources.
- “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal share of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the unequal sharing of misery.” – Winston Churchill. Distinguishing a Market Economics from Capitalism will ensure greater innovation/’Jugaad’ and more equitable sharing of wealth and encourage greater employment
- “The best way to predict the future is to invent it.” – Alan Kay
- The Marxist /Socialist credo that calls for –“from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs” seems so right and utopian, till one considers the matter of who decides which abilities and to what extent the contributor has to be forced to contribute and to what level of ability the recipient has to perform, or not perform at all, and who decides the respective needs of each and how much he too needs to make such decisions. That’s why the corollary saying –“To not believe in the above credo, by those below 30 years age indicates a lack of ‘Heart’ (of Empathy) in that person. To still believe it when older evidences a lack of ‘Head’ (of Practicality).
That is why Subsidies and Freebies are not the right answer to problems of growth and distribution of wealth, except in cases of dire distress or disasters and that too for a short time. There can be no concept of ‘Free Lunch’. Note what has happened even in a country as rich as Venezuela. If the entrepreneur is not allowed to keep the rewards he may make by taking the risks of losing what he has, he may either not make the effort or go seek more friendly climes.
- The quantum of wealth, as it is conventionally recognized (Land, Minerals, Water etc.) is finite and hence in view of the ever increasing population, no equitable distribution methodology can be satisfactorily arrived at. It is a ‘Zero-Sum’ game where in as one wins the other loses.
- New ways to grow ‘NEW’ wealth that are not linked to the conventional resource base and which can keep growing are to be recognized and developed, especially in these days of growing population and dwindling natural resources.
- People should be encouraged to view such ‘New’ wealth as being as effective, if not better, than that based on historic concepts of land and natural resources and, be incentivized to participate in its growth.