Whether it is spiritual or not, I think that most people largely agree with the idea that economic growth is necessary. Although there are some who believe that "money is not needed," this idea that money disappears is at least a minority view at the present time.

My basic idea is based on historical facts that occurred in a sphere of co-prosperity that originated in Japan and spread along the Pacific coast of a certain timeline. However, since this is a story from another timeline, it is difficult to prove, but based on the assumption that it exists, I will explain its appearance from now on.


In the sphere of co-prosperity (in several of its timelines), the monetary economy shifted from a mineral-based system to a paper-based system at a relatively early stage. As a result, something very interesting happened in the sphere of co-prosperity. In the first few generations, people worked to earn money and food, just like in modern times. However, at a certain point, people began to accumulate enough money to be more than sufficient. Prices stabilized, currency flowed abundantly, and while most people became wealthy, there was no inflation, and prices remained stable. People continued their family businesses based on the spirit of helping others, even though they already had enough money.

In particular, people in rural areas, especially those who were famous or respected, such as the village chief who was the wealthiest person in the village, continued to work even though they had a lot of money. This made other people think, "Those respected and famous people, or the village chief, have more money than I do, and they could quit their jobs anytime if they wanted to, but they are working hard. So, I can't quit my job either." This can also be said to be a positive manifestation of the Japanese tendency to adjust to each other.

This phenomenon contradicts Western Keynesian economics. At that time, the sphere of co-prosperity extended to every corner of the Pacific region, including China and South Korea, and even included the central and western parts of the United States. Roughly, the Appalachian Mountains were the boundary, and the eastern side was a colony of European countries, where slavery was not abolished and was used, and the eastern United States and Africa, which were controlled by European countries, were hell, while the Pacific coast region centered on Japan, which had no slavery and where food was shared and free, so that no one starved, was a paradise.

In the "heavenly" realm, the concept of shared resources and free food became established relatively early, around 1600 years ago. However, this led to economic activities being focused on goods and luxury items, and land was stably passed down through generations, limiting opportunities to spend money.

Based on Keynesian economics, there is a concept of price equalization and the relationship between wealth and production. However, this may be true for the greedy people of the West, but it did not apply in this timeline. Simply put, prices stabilized, and people stopped spending money, leading to everyone accumulating vast amounts of wealth. The people of the "heavenly" realm, of course, did not know about Keynes, so the historical reality was that prices stabilized while people accumulated wealth, as described above.

After several generations since the establishment of the "heavenly" realm, when people, resources, and money were abundant, people suddenly realized that they had mountains of money in their homes. When they asked others, they found that other households also had mountains of money, and the situation was similar. Since food was freely shared and there was little need to spend money, people were not particularly troubled whether they had money or not, but they tended to keep it at home.

Then, like a dam breaking, people started saying things like, "Hey, I have a lot of money in my house..." "Yeah, me too." "If we quit our jobs, we could probably live off this." "Well, maybe..." However, for some reason, people did not quit their jobs, and they thought, "Even if I could quit financially, I'm not the only one with money. Everyone is in the same situation. And even though everyone has a lot of money, no one is quitting their jobs. If I quit this job, everyone will be in trouble. Since there are people who need it, I have to keep working." This common consciousness developed, and for generations, people continued to say things like, "After all, there are people who would be troubled if I didn't do this job."

In the "heavenly" realm, resources such as the sea and mountains were recognized as common assets. For example, when fishing, people did not take more than necessary, and when mining, they did not take more than necessary. Unlike today, where anything can be obtained if there is enough money, it became a system where one had to convince the administrator of the necessity of obtaining something. If someone tried to catch too many fish, they had to explain why they needed to catch so many, and if they exceeded the allotted amount, it was not allowed. Similarly, when mining, it was necessary to explain what the minerals would be used for.

Therefore, the fish resources within the sphere of co-prosperity were well-maintained, and even the mineral resources were abundant enough to last for centuries.

It was not a situation where, like today, one could take as much fish as they could afford. There was a system and regulations that set limits, but more importantly, the people who worked within the system needed to be convinced that they would expend more effort than their current workload. Nowadays, one might gather a large number of people and machines by paying a lot of money, but within the sphere of co-prosperity, the workers were relatively fixed, with generations of families managing the operations. Therefore, the basic principle was to maintain a stable production volume, and to obtain additional resources, it was necessary to convince the workers of the need for it.

This had both good and bad aspects. In particular, European countries that were far away and did not fully understand the situation often tried to purchase large quantities of resources, but the sphere of co-prosperity would often respond with, "Why do you need so much? You don't need that much," making it difficult for them to obtain the resources. European merchants likely felt stressed by this. There was a common perception among the people within the sphere of co-prosperity that "European merchants are greedy and are trying to obtain large quantities of resources to make money; they are dishonest people." Therefore, requests for large quantities of resources were often not taken seriously.

In this way, while the sphere of co-prosperity had aspects that were inflexible and troublesome, it essentially allowed people to live their lives by doing their assigned work and serving others.

I believe that this could be a model for Japan and the world to strive for in the future.

First, we need to ensure that money flows sufficiently throughout the world, and then stabilize prices. Instead of pursuing price equilibrium as in Keynesian economics, we need to create a situation where everyone has enough money. At that time, greedy people in the West might try to manipulate prices and create a situation where people are constantly short of money, but if we can resist those tactics and prices remain stable, and people begin to work with a sense of obligation and service, like in the sphere of co-prosperity, then the current capitalist economy can evolve into a sphere of co-prosperity economy.

From that perspective, the fact that Japan has experienced economic prosperity while maintaining stable prices and a deflationary situation has actually been a positive trend. After all, the sphere of co-prosperity originated in Japan in that timeline. If this deflation and price stability were to occur on a wider global scale, and if a certain number of people continued to maintain a sense of obligation and service, then we would be approaching an ideal state.

When looking at the world, Japanese phenomena are often perceived as being in a bad situation, and many countries around the world are wary of avoiding a deflationary growth similar to Japan. It is important to ensure that Japan's resources are not excessively taken by people driven by the desires of other countries, and that many regions of the world achieve a situation where wealth accumulates while prices remain stable.

Economists and politicians may view this state as a problem, and may think that it is a bad situation where the economy does not grow. However, looking at the situation in the "Co-prosperity sphere" (Sphere of Co-prosperity), it becomes clear that price stability and wealth accumulation are not problematic.

The capitalist economy that is occurring on a global scale will gradually transition to a "Co-prosperity sphere" economy, which takes Japan as a model.

However, the "Co-prosperity sphere" was not always successful. Some people lacked a sense of contributing to others, and ended up feeling stressed by a sense of obligation while doing their jobs. This resentment accumulated internally and may have contributed to the stagnation of the "Co-prosperity sphere" Even in an ideal society where people do not suffer from food shortages, there were many people who were bound by obligations and performing traditional jobs passed down through generations. As you can see in Kyoto, people often used a combination of "honesty" and "formality," and while seemingly contributing to others, many people were actually experiencing a lot of stress. In such a society, those who receive services become very careful. For example, when someone eats at a restaurant, the person who comes to eat is often very humble and sometimes nervous while eating a set meal, and money often seems like just a formality. There were many times when money was not requested, and when someone who came to eat said, "Um, the money...", the owner of the restaurant would often say something like, "Oh? Ah, the money. Just leave it there." The world had become a place where people could live without worrying about money, but it was also a place where those who received services had to be very careful. Basically, a society where people do not go hungry is a good society, but a society where those who receive services become nervous is not ideal.

In the past, the "Co-prosperity sphere" was created in a certain timeline, and the administrator of that timeline judged that it was necessary to put that timeline on hold. Indeed, people had become physically wealthy and hunger had disappeared, but it was noticed that people's hearts were becoming hardened. Therefore, the timeline shifted in the opposite direction, towards a direction where money had a very strong influence. One example of this is the current capitalist society. In the current timeline, money has a very strong power, and in most cases, no reason is required to receive services, and as long as you have money, you can receive services. This is quite the opposite of the "Co-prosperity sphere"

Both are quite extreme stories. The idea of creating and managing a shared resource, like the "Kyouryuuken," where people can use what they need, is also beneficial. What happened in the Kyouryuuken actually happened within that timeline, so it's not related to ideology. It may seem like the events in the Kyouryuuken are communist, but the concept of communism never emerged in the Kyouryuuken; it simply happened naturally. Furthermore, even if the concept of communism were to arise, if the people managing it are greedy, they will only accumulate wealth for themselves. The reason the Kyouryuuken timeline worked well is because it was managed and operated by Japanese people.

In that sense, ideology is relatively flexible. Whether it's capitalism or communism, if Japanese people manage it, it can create a world based on sharing, where no one goes hungry, just like the Kyouryuuken of the past. Conversely, whether it's capitalism or communism, if greedy Westerners manage it, they will accumulate wealth, leading to the kind of selfish and materialistic society we see in the world today.

In order to achieve such a Kyouryuuken in the future, what is necessary above all is a Japanese way of thinking. It is impossible to create a Kyouryuuken based on Western ideas and Keynesian economics, which focus on making a lot of money. This reveals what kind of leaders Japan needs. While I don't know who those leaders are specifically, there are certainly many people who cannot be leaders of the Kyouryuuken. The next generation of Kyouryuuken leaders, in a sense, would be better off being economically illiterate. The basic principles of MBAs are based on economics that pit people against each other and provide salaries that are "just enough to survive." This is a competitive system, and the idea is that by not providing enough money, workers can be controlled. This is the opposite of the Kyouryuuken philosophy. Therefore, the current leaders of major corporations are not necessarily suitable for the next generation of leaders.

The Kyouryuuken was founded by a rare type of person, like a Sengoku warlord, and it is difficult to create the same foundation in the current era. However, it is possible to create an economic zone among certain regions and people who share common values, based on a strong economic foundation.

To achieve this, one possible strategy is to accumulate wealth through investment, rather than management. Involvement in management often leads to an MBA-like way of thinking, but investment and IPOs can increase wealth beyond the MBA framework. By then, the wealth accumulated through investment can be used for economic activities, creating a situation where there is no shortage of money. This would create a society where people continue to work not for money, but "because others need it."

When you imagine a world without money, you might think of a world where people don't work and are always in a "Fire" state, constantly playing. However, in the Commonweal, there was no public obligation to work (although some people did spend their time that way). Basically, people were engaged in some kind of labor. Therefore, the goal is not "Fire," but a society where people continue to work with a sense of service.

In reality, people who didn't work and just played were looked down upon in the Commonweal. They were constantly asked how they were serving society. For example, when staying at an inn, the innkeeper might ask, "What kind of work do you do?" If you answered, "I don't do anything," you might even be refused accommodation. This was also evident in transactions. You had to explain what you were doing and get the other party to understand. It was rare for transactions to happen simply because someone had money. The exception was food. Unprocessed ingredients were free, and even meals served in restaurants typically only required paying for the labor involved in preparing them, excluding the cost of the ingredients. Many restaurants didn't even require payment. In everyday life, a person's status and credibility were valued more than money.

The Commonweal could be said to be a harsh world for those who wanted to live without working and just playing. There was a strong sense of shame, and people continued to work because they felt it would be shameful to be seen as lazy, even if they didn't have a strong sense of service. Ideally, it would be better if people worked out of a sense of service rather than a sense of shame or obligation. However, it is also true that the sense of shame was what kept people from quitting their jobs.

In the underlying structure, it is necessary to enlighten and guide people to transition from a society maintained by a sense of shame to one based on a sense of service.

When people become financially secure, their lives become stable, they become emotionally rich, and they are filled with love, a sense of service emerges. When more people become like that, a society based on service will be born. That is the direction that the world should aim for in the future.

▪️More important than being free from money

Therefore, things like "high energy," "not enough money," or "being poor," which are often talked about in the world, are secondary.

A "new world" requires many people who can fulfill their own roles, be aware of their purpose, and serve others, even without money. Otherwise, how can we maintain the infrastructure and essential goods, including luxury items, that this world needs?

This was also a problem in the timeline where Japan was at the center of a sphere of co-prosperity. However, because it occurred in an era when information was not as readily available as it is now, even if people had a lot of money, there were not that many people who would quit their jobs and roles. In that society, people who stepped outside the social framework lost respect, so people chose honor over freedom and leisure, and continued their own work, which was often a family business.

Farmers continued to grow vegetables and fruits, and there were also samurai and merchants who continued their roles in that era. Even in an era where money became less important, the role itself continued.

If a major economic transformation occurred in the world today, and it became the case that money was almost not needed for infrastructure, houses, and food, what do you think would happen? Many people would quit their jobs, and the infrastructure would collapse. Therefore, the current situation, where money is scarce, is actually better for the world.

If this were to happen in a sphere of co-prosperity centered around Japan and Japanese culture, it would take on a different form, and people would continue their work because of the reason that "others need it." This has actually happened in a certain timeline, so it is relatively easy to reproduce, but if it were to happen in the Western world, the infrastructure would not be maintained.

Therefore, it is not true, as some people say, that "an energy revolution will lead to an ideal society." It is simply a story of more and more people being unable to earn money and not being able to eat. The situation will become even more tragic than it is now. The energy industry creates a lot of demand and economy, and in this world that relies on money, the collapse of the energy industry would lead to an expansion of the impoverished population.

Nor is it a story like "people will no longer struggle with money because of cryptocurrencies." Even if people have money, if no one runs the essential infrastructure and stores that are necessary for life, this society will collapse.

These kinds of stories about "things becoming cost-free" are usually just about people wanting to get rich and make things easy for themselves. The majority of people want to maintain their convenient lives as they are, even if they are hungry, and do not want to spend money. However, if the infrastructure collapses, such dreams will not come true.

- As a fundamental premise, the idea of sharing can be established among people.
- And, based on that fundamental premise, people gradually begin to have more and more money.
- Then, even though people have a lot of money, they continue to work for others.

This ideal world can only be realized through these three stages.

Since there are many agricultural products, people will start sharing them.

People worry about their lives in old age, so they get married and have many children to prepare for the future. However, if everyone's life is sufficiently guaranteed without marriage or children, the number of people who choose marriage and having children, which are troublesome, will decrease, and the population problem will be resolved.

In fact, in the timeline of this prosperous realm, the population did not increase much, and when officials investigated the cause, they analyzed that people may not feel much benefit from getting married and having children, and that they are becoming tired of only experiencing hardships and choosing to live freely. Based on this result, it can be said that the population problem can be naturally resolved through the methods of the prosperous realm.

When this state is reached, people suddenly realize, "Hey, we can live perfectly well without taking so many resources from the Earth." They then stop overproduction, and the Earth's environment becomes rich again.

Then, people involved in the energy industry will also realize, "Hey, we have been suppressing free energy all along, but people can live well even with free energy. What have we been doing all this time?" They will realize this, and the energy problem will be resolved.

The fish in the ocean will no longer be excessively taken, and they will only take what is necessary, and their populations will recover.

As you can see, visible problems are often surprisingly easy to solve if the mental aspect is resolved.

▪️The era when professions become fixed.

In this way, the sharing world is realized only when wealth accumulates and people are no longer worried about food, clothing, and shelter, and only when people do not quit their jobs. And soon, the era when professions become fixed will come.

When the motivation to work to satisfy food, clothing, and shelter disappears, what remains is the motivation of "someone will be troubled if I'm not there" and "there are people who will be troubled if I quit my job." In addition, self-esteem such as "I am doing ⚪︎⚪︎" and "I am in the position of ⚪︎⚪︎" will be added.

On the other hand, there is also a feeling of "I can't quit because ⚪︎⚪︎ is not quitting," while looking sideways at people who are more important, respected, or much richer. However, basically, the above two motivations are what keep people working.

It becomes important to maintain this basic principle not only in one's own life but also in interactions with others.

- I am doing my job because someone wants to do it. I continue working because if I quit, someone specific would be in trouble.
- I can publicly state that I am in a certain position. By doing so, the attitude of others towards me changes, which is beneficial to me.

For example, when traveling in the "Kyōei-ken" timeline, I am always asked, "What do you do? (What is your occupation?)" The answer to this question can change how the innkeeper perceives me, from "You're just playing around without fulfilling any obligations" to "You're a respectable person." This also affects the specific services provided.

In the current world, the principle is that services are the same as long as you pay the money. However, in the "Kyōei-ken," the value of money itself was very low, and the provision of services often changed significantly based on the situation. The person's credit, their behavior in the moment, and their occupation, family background, or social status were important, and respectable people received appropriate services, while others received just adequate services. People in the "Kyōei-ken" naturally accepted this flexible approach to services.

In reality, this was a negative aspect of the "Kyōei-ken," as it led to various disharmonies due to arbitrary judgments. I believe that in this timeline, there have been approximately 100 years (especially after the war) dedicated to learning about equal services, particularly for Japanese people.

Despite these negative aspects, by referencing what happened in the "Kyōei-ken," it seems that when there is an abundance of money, the choices of occupations become limited, and occupations become fixed. While we can now pursue various jobs, in the future, occupations may settle into certain areas. The motivation of "making money" diminishes, and the aspect of "contributing by doing what I can now" becomes stronger.

At that point, what becomes increasingly important is "whether or not I like that job." While being good at a job is also important, what is fundamentally more important is whether or not you like it. The jobs that are continued when there is an abundance of money are those that are to some extent good at, and even more so, those that are to some extent liked.

However, if you try to change your job after a world where money is abundant, the job market's flexibility will likely decrease by then. Therefore, it's better to change jobs sooner rather than later. Eventually, as money becomes abundant, professions will naturally become more socially fixed, and this is a change that will likely occur within a person's lifetime, even though it's a relatively long period.

Therefore, I think it's better to prioritize "doing a job you like," even if it's a little difficult now.

And then, when money becomes abundant and you no longer have to worry about food, clothing, and shelter, and when jobs become more fixed, being able to say "I'm doing a job I like" will be a significant advantage.

If you're doing a job you don't want to do when jobs become fixed like that, you might end up quitting, and while you might not have to worry about food, clothing, and shelter, you might completely lose your sense of self and your mental state might become difficult.

Therefore, even now, (even if it's just a hobby), it's a good idea to find a job you want to do, or to develop your skills through hobbies or work.