Instead of Supply and Demand, how about Manifest and Share

Don Novello, a favorite comedian of mine, did a hilarious comedy routine in the persona of Father Guido Sarduchi, called the “5 Minute University” where, in five minutes, he teaches the few things the average college student will remember 5 years after receiving their degree. On the final exam, along with the one Foreign Language question: “¿cómo estás”, there is one Economics question, the answer to which is: “supply and demand”.

I only have a problem with supply and demand when it escalates to “charge what the market will bear”. In other words, raise the price to the threshold of consumer pain--even when the vender could charge less (and in most cases, much less).  I mean, what is this inane notion that the vender would be a fool to walk away from such easily profit?  Does fortune favor the fool because the fool is a money grubbing miscreant?

How about slipping a little compassion and love for your fellow human into the supply and demand equation. Perhaps, then, consumers will have enough left over to buy other things, thus stimulating healthy commerce. If commerce is vigorous and fair, then, likely, prosperity will abound. The money will be in circulation, rather than languishing in the pockets (and offshore accounts) of the “top-heavy” tier. I mean, do these people really need billions of dollars? And, really, if they are raking in that much, aren't they charging too much?

Take Bill Gates. Kudos for providing a largely accessible solution to human interaction with that newfangled computing contraption. But, once it became an industrial necessity, once Microsoft had the world over a barrel, the price went up—way up. Even after building a 66,000 foot mansion, buying a combined total of 30 Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Porsches, and whatever else he squandered his money on, Mr. Gates has so much money, he's giving it away! In his own words: “I have no need for money”. Then why did you take so much?

I recently watched a show about the creator of the GoPro camera, Nick Woodman. Awesome invention, awesome dude—except that he's currently raking in billions. BILLIONS with a 'B'! That means the camera could be sold at a lower price and still net Mr. Woodman a tidy sum. The Silver Edition (the best everyman compromise between price and features) is currently $300 on GoPro.com (well, $299.99 if you don't ignore the penny). How much of that is the cost of making it? Apparently, not much, judging by the companies soaring bottom line. They don't even, really, have to advertise the thing anymore. There's already scads of free advertising on YouTube and Vimeo, not to mention the word-of-mouth firestorm. Again kudos for inventing a truly ground breaking and exciting product—but, seriously? Billions!?

I have a vision of business in the twenty-first century. A vision of compassion, collaboration and a bottom line that targets the common good. Competition is a grand thing, but not when it sacrifices camaraderie. Compete with yourself. Compete with what you have produced before. And, if you benefit from competition with someone else, honor their contribution by recognizing that your advancement was spurred by their innovations--and perhaps, show your gratitude by cutting them in on the profits.

Compete, yes, but then collaborate. Does it really matter who the star is? Not if the world is your family. Not if everywhere you go, the essence of you is recognized as a unique and equally valuable contribution to society. In fact, if the world had that attitude--the attitude that everyone is of value and every contribution significant--there would be far fewer deadbeats, because if everyone is valued and inspired to be the contribution they are, then, it seems to me, most people would participate and thrive.

So, why isn't the world like that? I've watched a lot of shows where intrepid cameramen (and women) went out into the wilderness to capture natures little moments.  Invariably, the weak, wounded and foolish wind up getting eaten. It's the way of nature, and I think it has been the way of humanity, since the day, so many thousands of years ago, we stood upright and asked the question, “Why not do this differently”.

The concept of corporation exists because we have risen above our ancestral animal mentality. Now it's time to take that an evolutionary step further, and shed the legacy of survival of the fittest. Humanity has already won this game. Proof of that is in how we raise our abnormal/malformed children. Children nature would precipitously dispose of. How we care for and even cure our sick, rather than leave them for predators to cull. Heck, sheltering ourselves from the elements, cultivating our own food, even taking measures to control the environment--in short, no other animal, in the kingdom, can compete with that!

I say we no longer need survival of the fittest. We, with our ability to imagine and invent, have the power to self evolve. We also have the power to project future possible outcomes. We can identify practices that are potentially harmful to us and/or our environment (which will, indirectly, affect us), and actively change those practices. No other animal on the planet can do this—at least, not deliberately.

Why is the world like that? Why is there so much strife and struggle and a glaring divide between haves and have-nots? Because, mentally, the world is still locked in what I believe are archaic notions. Every man for himself. Kill or be killed. An eye for an eye. Charge what the market will bear.

None of that is necessary in an enlightened society. A society that looks out for humanity as a whole. A society that loves its neighbors—all of its neighbors. We live on an orb. Everything, eventually, comes back to us. Doesn't it make more sense to send out love, rather than have hate circle back? If I love all my neighbors to my right, eventually I'm loving my neighbors to the left.
 
We have the power to outsmart our biology. Why not apply that power to creating a more peaceful world where everyone prospers? If everyone feels included and of value—if everyone feels loved like a brother or sister—such a thing as common prosperity is not only possible, it will self-generate.

BTW: the answer to the one Foreign Language question (“¿cómo estás”) is "muy bien".