Money, the Grand Human Malevolence Metric?

Money, the Superfluous Intermediary between Existence and it’s Necessity. Further, is money ‘the’ malevolence metric?

Existence continues to Exist by servicing that to which is necessary for Existence; Existance’s Necessity. Vital Existence Necessities (VENs) are sustenance, that is types of food, water, shelter, safety and so on… Non Vital Existence Necessities (NVENs) are all the other life types. Money is the intermediary between Existence and it’s Necessities; that is, the intermediary between:

  1. Existence and Vital Existence Necessities and,
  2. Existence and Non Vital Existence Necessities. 

To Exist is true, and thus is the first good and thus Vital Existence Necessities are, ergo, good. Vital Existence Necessities are, like One’s Existence, in Existence for ineffable purpose but one, to continue One’s Existence. There is explicitly no argument for Non Vital Existence Necessities. (Epicurean Community comes to mind…)

One and One’s Vital Existence Necessities should endeavour for union, for intimacy, closeness and ideally, equipoise and the destiny of oneness.

Non Vital Existence Necessities are not Vital Existence Necessities. They are the infinite other phenomena to which have no supporting argument. They are superfluous per se.

Is One and One’s VENs, without the intermediary of money, synonymous to Animal Existence? Whos relation with their VENs is without money? Seemingly yes. Is therefore, money a pertinent intermediary for non-animal, ‘Human cooperation’ style Existence; and it’s Existence growth (i.e. Existence prosperity)? I, ponder and find no supporting argument…i believe in human reason, in human ‘common sense’ and its propensity for benevolence.

One has one’s VENs in providence from the Earth if you will. As Existences (community or more people) proliferate, more VENs are required yes though more Existences should maintain this equipoise. 

Contemplate the chicken and cow bartering argument for money and the need for exchangeability, quantification, portionalisation, fungibility… As mentioned, when Existence and VENs are in harmony, agriculture, specialisation, wholesaling and so forth are not needed. In fact, one could argue the speciality/agriculture/wholesale augments the disharmony between Existence and VENs. What’s more, 

  1. specialisation inevitably encourages money distribution inequality (‘special’, by definition) and thus encourages the destiny of NVENs.
  2. those with surplus money, that is money above that required to afford VENs, inevitably spend it on NVENs (often termed “luxuries”)
  3. NVENs are produced at the wage of those who are in VEN deficit (often termed “the Third World”; to which ~75% of human existence is in…???) and promotes more toil.

‘1st world’ pets ostensibly live a better life than 75% of our human family; that is ‘1st world’ humans remove the burden of VENs from their pets, before their human family. ‘1st world’ pet manicures, health insurance, fashionable clothing, travel are prevalent today! Alas, ‘1st world’ pets are now exhalited into the realm of NVENs!!

Where does money necessitate here? Why is money required here? Seemingly, Money is only required when NVENs (to which could fashion the name Indulgences…by ever sense of the word) are destined. So when superfluous phenomena (NVENs) bes a destiny, superfluous phenomena seemingly is required (Money).

Is the meer existence of this intermediary money a grand human malevolence metric?

Treat others as you would like to be treated.

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s