A new economic order

2009/02/17 - 00:30

A new (economic) order


1 - should reduce Production Push and Buying Craze (PPBC)

The famous Ps of the marketing mixed could well be associated differently to the describe the current economic order:

Publicity Pushes Products Producing Poor People

Poor people in two ways:

  • the Poor People from the underdeveloped countries that are, in many cases, collectively ripped off by the rich country's companies
  • the Poor People from the rich countries that are mentally poor due to too much publicity that blurs their mind


(by the way, now that I think of it, the Third World or, since we turned "politically hy... correct", the underdeveloped countries are not under-developed, they are under-payed!)


Less PPBC should return mentally healthier and richer people

A way to convert PPBC into something that enriches everybody:


Multiply taxes on publicity (2x, 3x,....)

To double or triple the TAX on Publicity in mass-media (TV, radio, press & internet) would have a great number of positive economic and social effects!!

I have come to the conclusion that this so called consumer-society in reality is a producer-society. The producers (Multinationals) are the ones that psychologically force people into buying stress with their overkill of publicity (the walmart stampede - nov 28, 2008 - is a dramatic example). This buying stress (to have more things than we all really need/want) is one of the main reasons why so many people engage(d) in loans they cannot pay afterward. 
This buying stress is not just specific to the product that has been pushed with publicity, it has turned into a global (wealthy country's) mindset of buying craze. You have to have this, you have to have that or else you don't count anymore! :-(

The biggest companies are at the same time the biggest investors in publicity. And most will at the same time be also the ones that achieve the lowest prices (with the biggest gain) for their raw materials in poor countries (labor, minerals and commodities).

If these companies are so eager to spend money to push their stuff more than the competitor's, have them REALLY PAY for it, BY LAW!

This extra tax income for the state could (should) then be used for fundamental social goals on a national AND international scale: 
1. Education, 
2. Health care, 
3. Support underdeveloped countries.
This last point is, in fact: a (still too) small additional payment for the resources that the companies, directly or indirectly, "bought" from those countries for peanuts in the first place. 

An additional advantage is: less publicity!
Not only is the public in general fed up with the overkill in publicity, it most surely isn't even healthy either on an individual scale as on a collective scale. 

The tax could be implemented at different levels, depending on the size of company (small scale?, large scale?, multinational?, on the stock exchange??? or local entrepreneur?) the type of publicity (mass media, local media,...), the bigger the game, the higher the tax, exponentially!


To be continued/improved/updated... 17/02/2009



Related links:

De ijsberg die reclame heet - Jos Verbrugge 2007



2 - Fair trade!

Have industries stop buying for peanuts from third world countries to "maintain our living-standards" in the developed countries. It only maintains and improves the living standard of the "happy few" on the top. Their money should be used to buy at decent prices from the poor countries. It wouldn't hardly lower the living standard of the mass in the developed countries. That would be authentic leveling of world wealth!

Groningen en Goes eerste fairtrade gemeenten van Nederland

Verkade goes Fair Trade in chocolate!