| The
destruction provides for depreciation fund to replace the machines
when worn out. Then how can we neglect the depreciation fund for
nature. From this point of view, it must be realized that the object
of our economic system should be, not extravagant use of available
resources, but a well regulated use. The physical objects necessary
for a purposeful, happy and progressive life must be obtained. The
Almighty has provided as much. It will not be wise, however, to
engage into a blind rat-race of consumption and production as if man
is created for the sole purpose of consumption. Engine needs coal
for its proper working, but it has not been produced merely to
consume coal. On the contrary it is only proper always to see that
with the minimum coal-consumption, maximum energy is produced. This
is the economic view point. Keeping in view the aim of human life,
we must endeavor to see how with the minimum of fuel, man proceeds
to his goal with the maximum speed. Such a system alone can be
called civilization. This system will not think of merely a single
aspect of human life but of all its aspects including the ultimate
aim. This system will not thrive on the exploitation of nature but
will sustain nature and will in turn itself be nourished. Milking
rather than exploitation should be our aim. The system should be
such that overflow from nature is used to sustain our lives.
If such human angle inspires the
economic system than our thinking on the economic question will
undergo through transformation. In the Western economics, whether it
is capitalist or socialist, value has the most important and central
position. All economic theories centre around value. It may be that
the analysis of value is very important from the point of view of
the economist but, those social philosophers which are based
entirely on value are for incomplete, inhuman and to some extent
unethical take. For example, the slogan commonly heard now-a-days
"one must earn his bread". Normally communists use this
slogan but even the capitalists are not fundamentally in
disagreement with it. If there is any difference between !hem, it is
only as regards who earns and how much. The capitalists consider
capital and enterprise as important components of production and
hence if they take a major share of profits. they think it is their
due. On the other hand, communists believe only labor to be the main
factor in production. Therefore they concede major share of
production to the laborers. Neither of these ideas is correct.
Really speaking. our slogan should be that the one who earns will
feed and every person will have enough to eat.. The right to food is
a birthright. The ability to earn is a result of education and
training. In a society even those who do not earn must have food.
The children and the old, the diseased and the invalids, all must be
eared for by the society. Even society generally fulfills this
responsibility. The social and cultural progress of mankind ties in
the readiness to fulfill this responsibility. The economic system
must provide for this task. Economics as a science does not account
for this responsibility. A man works not merely for bread alone, but
also to shoulder this responsibility. Otherwise those who have had
their meals would no longer work.
|
