Impartial Observers

As a debt owner, everyone in a political economy pits themselves against every other member in their own system. This is what Adam Smith tells us is the case in The Wealth Of Nations. We are pitting lust against power against the need for money. It is presumably normal for people to want to succeed, but at what point is wealth gathering (greed) treated as amoral? In the protestant faith it is highlighted that work ethic can be treated as rewarding with a byproduct of material wealth. This is to say that there is no correlation between wealth and religion but merely as something that is tolerated. My understanding is that passions can be executed in a manner that accumulates wealth and power over ones life. When the power trickles over into the subservience of your fellow man it can become a flaw. This to say that living humble can also be rewarding….and in America this can be a capitalist dream. I would posit that the idea of money being equated to greed is somewhat a notion of old. In a mirrored image where coins take the place of non-tangible assets then work ethic is a old fashioned idea and the working man can be engineered as a morally sound person due to their humble attitude. “Labour was the first price, the original purchase – money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased.” – Adam Smith

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *