This is a follow up of the ‘Of needs and wants’ series. It has already been explained that absolute delimiters of needs and wants are capped by subsistence of the individual and the finity of available resources respectively. However, while there is a use for the gaining of knowledge on the minimum level of subsistence as well as the limitations of one’s available resources, it is perhaps even more important to introduce the values of fulfillment and sustainability respectively into the argument, hence delving into the relative counterparts of the two absolutes (needs and wants).

The reason why it is more important to understand the nature and delineations between one’s relative needs and one’s relative wants (as well as the region of equilibrium in between) is because entire socioeconomic systems (such as Socialism, Capitalism and Communism) have sought to extract resources from the World in order to satisfy the populations concerned… yet they have historically sometimes had difficulty determining the requirements of the populations concerned.

In other words, if one has a better idea of the needs and desires of the population concerned and if one has a better idea of the nature and quantity of extractable resources are available, then so too should one be in a position to put into practice policies that are suitable to circumstances and so too should one’s perspective of prosperity be achieved with minimal excess or short-fall.

Through application of the law of diminishing returns one would recognize that the degree of satisfaction and fulfillment generated by a single unit of anything produced would diminish with every subsequent unit consumed. Therefore, taking the example of an individual who goes looking to satisfy his desire for shoes, for every shoe one purchases beyond the first the satisfaction garnered is reduced. The degree to which this happens but, presuming that all the shoes concerned are of the same level of quality, the degree to which one’s added satisfaction diminishes is somewhat elasticated. The second pair of shoes might provide only marginally less satisfaction and the third might also, but as one heads beyond the half-dozen point one would start to get progressively and more rapidly declining satisfaction.

In this situation the first pair of shoes represents the fulfilment of one’s relative need for footwear. Relative need concerns the fulfillment of a function. It is possible for a person to possess one pair of street shoes, one pair of work shoes, one pair of boots and one pair of slippers and yet each would touch upon one’s relative needs as they fulfill an essential function. It is only the first that fully resides within the realm of one’s needs but none would solidly fall within the realm of one’s wants. A second pair of slippers of different colour on the other hand would, itself fulfilling no function not already covered.

Further shall be said on this matter another time.

This entry was posted on Thursday, November 15th, 2007 at 11:36 pm and is filed under A matter of perspective. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.