This is not a story about only some people becoming rich, but a story about humanity's winning strategy.
Economic activity, and the act of moving people, controlling people, is based on "lack," "desire," "strong desire," "jealousy," and "desires." People act out of frustration, are driven by desires, act to strengthen their sense of superiority, act out of fear of attacks from others, and attack others to protect themselves out of fear of others. These basic behaviors are the foundation of economic activity.
As sometimes said in "solar policies" or "experiments where bananas are given to monkeys on an island (and the monkeys started sharing)," providing people with enough things and money is the foundation for saving humanity. (However, if it is done halfway, it will only result in unfair people accumulating wealth, so it is necessary to pay attention to the method.)
The rulers who control this world with money cannot control people if people have enough money, so they always keep people in a state of not having enough money. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and as I mentioned before, it forces people who would otherwise not act to move and become happy. Therefore, in the past, society was an era where a large number of people could be happy by being controlled by money. I think that in an era where people were driven by animalistic emotions such as jealousy and desire, a society controlled by people with a certain amount of reason could allow a large number of people to live happily.
On the other hand, from now on, there are already regions and people who can graduate from this system (although it may not be possible to do it all at once worldwide).
One winning strategy is a society where "enough money is distributed to all of humanity, the value of things is far greater than money, and sharing things is the basic principle."
- People who own land and food provide people with "as much as they need" for meals. People may or may not receive money. Money exists, but it is not that important.
- When the value of things is far greater than money, land basically becomes not a subject of buying and selling.
- Because there is already enough money, there is no need to excessively acquire Earth's resources for profit. Marine resources and minerals will be taken "as much as needed." (Ideally, global regulations agreed upon by governments would be in place.)
- Useless economic activities that only create money will disappear.
This kind of society is a winning pattern for humanity.
In order to achieve this, there are things that must be realized step by step.
- Gradually shift people's consciousness from being centered on money to sharing.
- Gradually increase the supply of money.
Along with this, the following will happen during the transitional period:
- The price of land will continue to increase relative to annual income. Ordinary people will no longer be able to buy land.
- The owners and managers of land will remain the same, but the amount of land recognized as common property will increase.
- Since there is enough money, people will no longer be motivated by money. More people will find interesting and engaging jobs.
- The leadership class, which has previously motivated people with money, will have to attract people with other motivations, or people will leave.
- Someone, or a specific group, will accumulate an extraordinary amount of wealth.
At this time, if the ruling class's consciousness changes and they can treat land and property as common property, society will progress in a good direction.
On the other hand, if the ruling class tries to control people by returning to a "state of scarcity" as before, there will be a significant gap in consciousness between the people and the ruling class, and there will likely be some conflict. It seems that this confusion is something that must be overcome to some extent.
If a society has enough money that people no longer work, then a society where the rulers motivate people based on a "lack" as they do now is not necessarily happier for all of humanity. Therefore, even if there is plenty of money, people are not necessarily happy. However, if people can be happy even without the "semi-compulsory mechanism" of money, then a society where people are not restricted by money and where sharing is practiced is preferable.
The ruling class's consciousness also needs to change. If people only move based on money, the ruling class will steer society towards a state of scarcity. On the other hand, if people move based on motivation rather than money, the ruling class will steer society in that direction. The ruling class is generally sensitive to people's behavior (although there are some who are insensitive), so they will change the rules and norms to create a society where people are most likely to be active. Therefore, if people start to be motivated by interest and motivation rather than money, the ruling class will also change their approach.
The ruling class will have their own reasons for this, and on the other hand, for the general public, if sharing leads to happiness, then both sides can be happy.
Probably, currently, it is in a half-and-half state, and if it remains as is, becoming a world where "money is sufficient" and a "society of sharing," the proportion of people who would degenerate would be large, so I personally think that the current social system is preferable.
However, if people spontaneously work and contribute, and share with each other, even without the constraint of money, then at that time, the constraint of money would naturally disappear.