From: @yahoo.com   
      
   DISTRIBUTIONS OF WEALTH AND PEOPLE'S ECONOMY   
   (Including the Economics of Amartya Sen compared with P R Sarkar)   
      
   The question of wealth distribution requires a fundamental look at what forms   
   a wholistic economy.  Sarkar states that a developed economy should consist of   
   four parts: people's economy, psycho-economy, commercial economy and general   
   economy.  It is the    
   people's economy that offers economic liberation and security for all.  Its   
   scope, implementation and invigoration of economic and human rights needs to   
   be brought to the forefront, as conventional economists are unable to come to   
   grips with the failures    
   in economies around the world   
      
   Guaranteed minimum necessities   
      
   People's economy deals with the essential needs of the people in general and   
   with aspects such as production, distribution and marketing.  In particular,   
   it is directly concerned with the guaranteed provision of minimum requirements   
   like food, clothes,    
   housing, medical care, education, transportation, energy supply and supply of   
   irrigational waters.  The objective is continuous improvement and ready   
   availability of these essentials.   
      
   In order for minimum requirements to be assured there must be guaranteed   
   purchasing power.  The time has come to recognise that the right to guaranteed   
   purchasing power is a universal and fundamental human right and as such   
   requires constitutional    
   protection, ie there must be constitutional recognition of the benefits of   
   economic prosperity for all people.   
      
   Grossly unjust wealth distributions   
      
   Current laws emphasize property rights and give compensation for expropriation   
   and misappropriation of property whether by governments or other individuals.    
   However, in doing so there is disregard as to whether the distribution of such   
   property rights    
   can be or is justified, particularly in the case of over-accumulation.  A   
   highly skewed distributions of wealth ranging from some individuals amassing   
   billions in assets while others struggle on a few cents a day represents an   
   inefficient production,    
   distribution and marketing system that does not serve the needs of a people's   
   economy.  Despite capitalism being a relatively somewhat better system than   
   communism in terms of the production of goods and the incentive to innovate,   
   the large scale wealth    
   inequalities evident in capitalism does, of itself, mean that there are many   
   pernicious loopholes in such a free market system.   
      
   In terms of a comparison with investment theory, it is certainly arguable that   
   if a particular investor can derive an abnormal return consistently distinct   
   from what may be considered as being within a range of an average or normal   
   return in the market,    
   then the investor is probably privy to certain information that enables them   
   to exploit arbitrage or speculative opportunities.  Indeed the situation may   
   be worse and involve, for example, favouritism, collusion, cronyism, bribery   
   or other biased    
   distribution mechanisms.  Abnormal opportunities such as these represent   
   inefficiency and unfairness in the economy if such loopholes are readily   
   available and allowed to persist.  A truly efficient economy would   
   continuously marginalise and virtually    
   eliminate the opportunity to make such abnormal gains or profits.  This also   
   includes the ability to amass unprecedented or abnormal levels of wealth.   
      
   Minimizing the gap - a sign of an efficient and rational economy   
      
   An efficient economy would, instead, minimize the gap between the minimum   
   requirements needed generally by all people and the maximum amenities required   
   by particular persons or groups so that they are capable of rendering more   
   service and useful outputs    
   for the benefit of society. For instance, ordinary people may be provided with   
   motorcycles instead of bicycles.  Here, there is some difference between a   
   motorcycle and a car, but the gap that existed between a car and a bicycle has   
   been partially    
   reduced.  In an economy that is efficient in what it distributes (ie   
   marginalises and seeks to eliminate the ability to make abnormal gains in   
   wealth accumulation), or in another sense is a rational distributor, the   
   economic gap between ordinary people    
   and meritorious people is constantly reduced as much as possible, but the gap   
   will never vanish altogether. That is, the difference between the minimum   
   requirements of all and the maximum or special amenities of the meritorious is   
   never entirely    
   eliminated.   
      
   Even though the gap exists, there must nevertheless be efforts to continuously   
   reduce the gap.  An important reason for that is because if the gap increases   
   disproportionally there is every likelihood of economic loopholes again   
   arising to abnormally    
   skew the distribution of wealth to irrational proportions.  This affects the   
   economic welfare of all members of society and the common people, such that   
   the value of their labour and participation in the economy is not properly   
   recognised, thereby giving    
   scope for a large segment of society to become deprived - and exploitation   
   will again re-emerge in society in the guise of special amenities to which   
   no-one else is entitled to. Accordingly, the provision of special or maximum   
   amenities should not go    
   against the common interest. This is the relationship between minimum   
   requirements and maximum amenities.   
      
   It also, however, means the ordinary public will not and should not be   
   deprived of maximum amenities - efforts must be there to give them as much of   
   the maximum amenities as possible and available to society at the time, but   
   without destroying the    
   incentive of the more meritorious to produce better outputs and contributions   
   for society in all spheres of endeavour.  A close analysis reveals that such a   
   system of production is based on consumption for the benefit of all members of   
   society, rather    
   than profit being the underlying motive in the field of production.    
   Naturally, with the marginalisation of profits and the elimination of the   
   ability to make excess or abnormal profits, eg with the continual lessening of   
   opportunities to make    
   speculative gains, the economy is then in a better position to truly serve   
   consumption needs rather than profiteering objectives.   
      
   Rational distribution of rational profits   
      
   Profits, must of course be made, but these have to be rational or normal   
   profits.  What should be eliminated in an economy that rationally distributes   
   resources and makes maximum utilization of resources is the ability to make   
   abnormal or irrational    
   profits.  There is no scope for speculative gains in a people's economy.   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)