Is the economy for the human being, or is the human being for the economy?

[Daniela_grefi]

Is the economy for the human being, or is the human being for the economy?

[1714109959]

1714109959

[1714109959]

1714109959

[1714109959]

1714109959

[Pab]

 Economy is human being sand his creativity,human capital are the best capital
If you want to know truth about economy go street,ask small shop owners how thayare doing,look people faces,street never lies

[andolini82]

Economy for human being in many sector and condition.. And it was start from along time ago qhen economy still only have barter/swap and appraisal

[greBit]

 Real economics is about human beings. Real economics which can offer real hope to real people. Most often, we are made to believe that we are being paid and we are buying things making us a part of the economy. Yes, we all are an equal part of the economy but even if a few hundred people won't buy or sell, it won't affect the economy and the economy doesn't need to care about that. Economy was designed to help humans, and now economy is what runs them and guns them.

[HarHarHar9965]

Real economics is about human beings. Real economics which can offer real hope to real people. Most often, we are made to believe that we are being paid and we are buying things making us a part of the economy. Yes, we all are an equal part of the economy but even if a few hundred people won't buy or sell, it won't affect the economy and the economy doesn't need to care about that. Economy was designed to help humans, and now economy is what runs them and guns them.

In short, we can understand our economy by asking simple questions like What goods and services shall be produced, and in what quantities? How shall goods and services be produced? That is, by whom and with what resources and technologies? For whom shall goods and services be produced? That is, who is to enjoy the benefits of the goods and services and how is the total product to be distributed among individuals and groups in the society?

[Erdogan]

Or even simpler: A human wants to live, collects or makes things to support his life. When he asks himself: I am really good at X, can I make more than I need, and trade it for other things I need? Then you have an economy.

Individuals create value and trade. If you can make or do something, someone else is willing to trade something for it, and you think it is wort the hassle, you have both created value.

It is a strictly human thing.

[Derrike]

Definitely economy is for human being.
It's us who make an economy.
It is present from the start of human societies and a society can never flourish without a proper economic growth and development.

[Snorek]

Is the economy for the human being, or is the human being for the economy?

Actually is not stupid question. I was wondering about changes in the world as economy nowadays. Greed being primary factor of business and can do little to prevent this.  
Economy is concept created by humans not the otherwise. While some think people are slaves of money I think we are free to chose. But when you are working for less than $1 per hour what choice do you have?
So yes, I think humans are slowly become subject of the economy...

[Erdogan]

The economy is the humanity, and humanity is the economy. It is also fair to say that the economy is for the humans.

But there is a catch: the dominators. Seen from the viewpoint of a politician, the economy has the purpose of creating useful stuff for the government. The people are just a means to that purpose.

As a bonus, the people serve to be crushed under the heels of the government. For a dominator, that gives even more satisfaction.

[Erdogan]

The free market serves the people.

[oblivi]

Economy is a result of a necessity. At the beginning we had barter system, once humans expanded and conquered earth, we needed something. Money is simply a token that says you can buy this or that, you owe me this or that. That's all. It's just a necessity to keep things in order. Of course people will keep taking advantage of each other with or without money, but it's better than total chaos.

[g1974ak]

Is the economy for the human being, or is the human being for the economy?

This dilemma seems to me like is the chicken that made the egg or is the egg who made the chicken. Who was born first? No one founded this riddle thing and I think that no one will answer correctly to the questions above.

[n2004al]

Is the economy for the human being, or is the human being for the economy?

This dilemma seems to me like is the chicken that made the egg or is the egg who made the chicken. Who was born first? No one founded this riddle thing and I think that no one will answer correctly to the questions above.

Right suggestion the above. But for me those words seems more a joke than a question to be solved or discussed. Sorry for my ignorance but what is the meaning of the expression: is the human being for the economy? That the people live to go ahead the economy. But For what exist the economy without the human being? What is the meaning of economy without the human being. Who will drive ahead the economy without the human being?

[Amph]

Is the economy for the human being, or is the human being for the economy?

Actually is not stupid question. I was wondering about changes in the world as economy nowadays. Greed being primary factor of business and can do little to prevent this.  
Economy is concept created by humans not the otherwise. While some think people are slaves of money I think we are free to chose. But when you are working for less than $1 per hour what choice do you have?
So yes, I think humans are slowly become subject of the economy...

because there is no limitation, personally i would put a limit on how much one person can earn per month or per year no matter what he is doing, this can serve to restore the overall balance

this can be especially true in a distant future where instead of human there are robot working for them

[Snorek]

because there is no limitation, personally i would put a limit on how much one person can earn per month or per year no matter what he is doing, this can serve to restore the overall balance

this can be especially true in a distant future where instead of human there are robot working for them

Personally I feel your point and I can agree but is not is this idea something like advanced version of income tax? Anyway I read that for example in Japan there is law that CEO of the company can't earn more than 20x or 30x of wage of low rank employee. And something like that I would like to be implemented in every country. This can be the first step to make economy more human friendly.

[Lauda]

I think that the OP is asking a different question than what some of you have in mind. He's asking whether the economy is there for humans, or are humans there for the economy.
I would say that the second one is true. Most of us spend our lives as slaves that make either minimum wage or more (incomparable to the top 1%). We are all working for the few. The current systems are not optimal, and the rich keep getting richer (instead of achieving economic equality).

Personally I feel your point and I can agree but is not is this idea something like advanced version of income tax? Anyway I read that for example in Japan there is law that CEO of the company can't earn more than 20x or 30x of wage of low rank employee. And something like that I would like to be implemented in every country. This can be the first step to make economy more human friendly.

Well obviously for the system to be more efficient, an adaptable income tax is needed. So what would this mean? That would mean that if you earn between $10-20k a year it would be a much lower % than if you were earning $100k or more. However, I do not think that the problem is really in low and middle class. The problem are the richest people in the world.
The problem: "The 85 richest people in the world have as much wealth as the 3.5 billion poorest".