The reason I've been discussing the structural problems of NPOs at length is because, in reality, it's a subtle hint that NPOs, which may seem irrelevant to many people, might actually become relevant in the future. The situation where people involved in NPOs are making ends meet through other means while volunteering without pay can be seen as a glimpse of a future where basic income is a reality, or where energy revolutions eliminate financial constraints.

In terms of structure, it's similar to a situation where people are engaged in activities while having their living expenses covered by other means.

Therefore, if everyone blindly pursues a "society without financial constraints," it might actually become a very uncomfortable and difficult world. We should be more aware of this.

A society without financial constraints may seem like a good thing, but I believe it's not necessarily so. In such a society, where financial constraints are eliminated (by some means), "actions" are more likely to be justified, and it becomes a "survival of the fittest" environment. There would be fewer opportunities for organizations to shut down due to lack of funding, leading to a zombie-like continuation of projects. The opportunity to "learn through money" would be lost, service levels would decline (like "lordly businesses" by public officials), the overall level of awareness would decrease, and organizations would continue to exist without significant improvements (like old highway service areas), leading to an increase in misunderstandings and a maximization of self-justification. This is not an ideal situation. Previously, the stress caused by money served as a constraint, allowing for appropriate "closures" (when business continuity became impossible), which helped the society move in a positive direction. However, now, with a much lower break-even point, like in NPOs, society may end up permanently burdened with more difficult-to-solve stress.

I have a basis for this belief, as I remember experiencing a similar stress in a shared realm I saw in a dream or out-of-body experience, even though people were not financially constrained. In that realm, people made mistakes, justified themselves, and their egos expanded without restraint. There was a massive proliferation of people with low anger thresholds who would quickly become angry and yell at anyone who made even slightly unpleasant actions or statements. That was a suffocating society, far from ideal.

In that realm (which was a society of warriors), even if someone of high status (like a "lord") provided unnecessary services or assistance, the people living there would not be able to show a displeased expression, but would smile and say "thank you" with a strained smile, even while thinking it was a nuisance. People would not be able to relax while eating, and it was common to quietly eat and express gratitude to the host after finishing. Although there was money in that world, it was not essential, and it was more important to avoid offending the host.

The closed-knit society and unique relationships within NPOs show us what might happen in a society where people are not financially constrained. In reality, people who are financially struggling have the potential to be "good people." I believe that if this situation continues, it will be beneficial for people to learn. It's a matter of degree, as people can still eat the minimum amount of food they need, so Japan already has a basic level of living without financial constraints. However, the existence of money as a constraint allows for learning.

In reality, in a society without financial constraints, simply having money will not earn respect. Instead, factors such as family background, type of work, position, and the number of people who are associated with you will determine a person's value. You may not be able to stay in a good room at a good inn, even if you pay a lot of money, and you will only be provided with a good room and good food if the innkeeper recognizes your family background and character. This is something I learned from my experience in the shared realm.

Many people are aiming for a "society without financial constraints," but what I learned from seeing that society in the form of the shared realm is that simply eliminating financial constraints will create a difficult society. Instead, a society where people can equally enjoy services based on a common value of "money" and where there is room for improving one's life by earning money, like the current society, seems more promising than the shared realm.

However, this is a matter of degree, and it is also a matter of people's awareness. As I mentioned before, if people quit their jobs when enough money reaches them, it will lead to inflation according to Keynes's law of price equilibrium, and the situation will always be "not enough," which is how our current society continues.

On the other hand, if people continue to work even if they are not financially struggling, an ideal society will be realized. It will be a society that is neither an extreme situation like a "Co-prosperity sphere" nor a society that prioritizes money like the current one, but a society where there is money, but the basic necessities are shared.

Now, we are at a point where we are deciding which kind of society we will go to.

This is mainly the situation in Japan. In the United States, there are cases where people have no hope and live on the streets, so the extent to which society should support basic necessities is a matter of degree. In Japan, there is public assistance, so basic food and shelter are generally available. However, there is a "double structure" where money is involved, and I think that the current Japanese society is relatively moving in the direction that God wants.