Dear Friends,
It seems to me, the world’s ecosystem is an example of perfect competition. Habitats are an analogue of an economy. Or more appropriately, free enterprise is an analogue of an ecosystem. Each entity vying for the same limited resources. In doing so they increase the stock of resources, winnow out the weak and constantly improve in production and efficiency. Free enterprise is the same. In it people compete for limited resources, and in doing so increase the stock of resources, winnow out weak companies and constantly improve our standard of living… by increasing production and efficiency. As life has invaded every nook and cranny of Earth, the market system has opened every avenue of profit. Why is this important? Because any other view of capitalism is flawed and leads to error.
The entities within a capitalist system are people and firms, while the entities in an ecosystem, are the plants and animals. The entities in both are producers, consumers, and innovators. How can a plant or dumb animal be an innovator? By “evolving.” Panda’s are looking into the future… when bamboo will take over traditional forests, as modern trees took over the ancient conifer forests, and conifers the fern forests before them. In a million years bamboo will probably make up a huge percentage of the available edible biomass, and so Pandas are forcing themselves through an evolutionary choke point, to develop the ability to efficiently eat bamboo. Thus shoring up their dietary needs for perhaps millions of years. What does it matter if they’re doing it intentionally, accidentally or driven by a morphic field?
Left to itself free enterprise will seek the most efficient means of production as does an ecosystem. A habitat will have every possible area of habitation taken up by some species. Moreover, with a line of others looking to take that spot, if it should become available. In an environment then, each niche is taken by the most efficient. The moment a more efficient player comes along, that place is taken away. The nature of nature is to be efficient, reward the productive, and punish the sick. In nature, economics and human affairs, “To whom much is given, everything will be given, and to whom little is given, everything will be taken away.” In other words, in business as well as nature… it’s dog eat dog. Fairness however is a mammalian innovation. Which seems to give a strong advantage. Given our success.
The market system has critical industries like an ecosystem has keystone species. If a keystone species is taken out the system collapses to a new equilibrium. A far less productive one. Over time, if conditions are right, a new species steps in to fill that empty niche. There are critical industries as well. If the steel industry disappeared for some reason, there would be ripples of industry collapses across the economy. Everything that relies on steel would go away. Critical industries, like keystone species, are subject to the stupidity of mankind. Oil is a keystone industry yet the elite are hell bent on its destruction. Judging by its analogue in ecology, would result in the destruction of every industry that relies on oil. Should oil be taken out, the economy would collapse, to a new less productive paradigm.
If we want to understand free enterprise then, we have to look at its analogue. That’s how we discerned the collapse of the wave function. By judging the interference patterns as like the interference of waves on a lake. The analogue then was water. The analogue of the collapse was that of spray paint going through a nozzle. That’s how science is often done. By analogue. So if we apply this paradigm to economics we can better understand them. Both the economy and ecology are complex systems. So Mount Fuji type rules only apply to them in the most general sense. That’s why economies can’t be controlled by governments. It’s like a government controlling an ecosystem. Sooner or later a bad decision will eliminate a keystone species, and collapse the ecology… or economy.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
