The Bitcoin Paradox and the Traditional Currencies' Certitude
Growth economics give us a well-established aspect of how important is the influence of the rising wealth on our happiness. Theoretically, rising wealth entails increasing happiness which means that in a given country, individuals with higher income seem to be happier. Nevertheless, by comparing chronological data or data between countries the correlation between wealth and happiness cease to apply. This is in a few words the Easterlin's paradox, a concept commonly found in the hedging industry and particularly in the "economy of happiness". Self-evaluation of happiness is a methodological problem, however, more recent surveys have used various measures to apprehend happiness, including biological features, showing similar patterns of results.
Traditional money gives you the certitude of some expected happiness. This happiness, whatever it is, is based on the wealth accumulated in a given economic environment. We could conclude in a few words that "markets" regulate the happiness cap, but is it the right conclusion? It could be for a certain kind of markets. "Experiential markets (such as holidays, travel, concerts, and meals in restaurants) tend to yield more lasting happiness than material purchases" because, "compared to possession of material goods, personal experiences, are less prone to hedonistic adaptation." -psychologists Thomas Gilovich and Amit Kumar published a report in 2015. By the other hand, the weapons market, for example, regulate only the happiness of the traders and military industry and offers a guaranteed misery to all the rest of the people.
Joy grows much slower than income. Although wealthy people are generally happier than the poor, raising living standards at a national level, or the state's standard of living is not linked to the happiness that citizens feel. With the rapid increase in income in some countries, it seems strange that no research records the improvement in subjective well-being that economists and decision-makers worldwide are expecting to discover. Chile, China, and South Korea are three countries where per capita income doubled in less than 20 years. At the same time, China and Chile showed a slight, not significant statistical decline in life satisfaction. We could conclude: That is what applies to people, too, does not apply to society.
We may need to focus economic policies more directly on urgent personal concerns related to issues such as health and family life rather than the accumulation of only material goods. However, this economic perspective is also based on the use of traditional money. The economic policies, due to the use of traditional money, are subject to restrictions, controls, plans of central banks and supranational economic interests aimed not at the individual well-being of the citizen but on the support of the currency and its preservation as a means of payments -whatever the price for individuals and societies. Thus, it is very difficult and sometimes impossible to focus on personal concerns or in other terms generate an economy of individual happiness.
A policy giving great importance in health, education, and relational goods generated by the involvement and interdependence of its citizens may be applied if there is no more traditional money and ownership of this printed money. In other words, if cryptocurrencies replace totally the existing traditional money then, traditional owners of the printed money will not be able to control all aspects of the individual everyday life by the obligatory use of their printed money. The paradox of Bitcoin could be the opposite of the traditional money's paradox as a mean of wealth and power. If, for example, every company could create its own coin based on the blockchain technologies, and use it for interacting with other companies, it could be possible to build new kind of markets and spread a new mentality about what is really "wealth", "valuable" and important for every single person separately. The traditional money's certitudes (buying power, social power, etc) might be illusions that serve only the lobby that prints this traditional money. At that point, traditional money tends to prove its inability to offer a constant and increasing feeling of well-being and happiness even when the numbers show a great economic growth in a given country. In essence, a new kind of policy will need to be formulated, because the political quality (level of political corruption, obscure relations with big owners of printed money etc) always determines developments at both ideological, social and economic levels. This new policy should be possible to apply at local, regional and global level thanks to the use of the new "cryptographic" money, i.e the bitcoin, the altcoins etc, but it can be easier to start locally, wherever the conditions are more favorable. And this new economic policy must have a new compass that will show her the way. It should be the compass of welfare, not the compass of the prosperity of the numbers through consumption (which is the total illusion).
Thanks for visiting
Have a nice Tuesday
Original Content by @imealien
@imealien All Rights Reserved
Donations for support are welcome
- STEEM/SBD only, please - Thanks
