We buy cheap and regret later, whether it is a business purchase or a birthday present, a big saving or just a bit off, we get the message, you get what you pay for.
This seems a core idea in business when it comes to salaries. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys, justifying huge salaries for people leading companies, who then justify paying peanuts as cost cutting? Hmmm. But they get wages, not salaries, so maybe the rules are different.
I have known people who always give their time and even their goods freely, and who seem to live in abundance, certainly an abundance of happiness. Give freely you get back more than you give, give meanly and you get just what you pay for.
Returning to yesterday’s theme may help develop this line of thinking, are you running on empty?
Another expression is cut to the bone, meaning there is no fat left, no reserve, the next stage is failure, collapse, the end.
Our political leaders have toyed with the idea that if you work rather than live off benefits, then you should be entitled to more income, seems reasonable, but more means, well, anything above zero, and the benefits system works it out at £5 per week, yes, that’s £1 a day, for going to work, a pretty minimal incentive when the bus fare may cost more than that, or the money for canteen coffee, or, well, going to work costs.
Whether you are running on empty or living a full life is not going to depend on that £5 per week, it is going to be more about family, friends, and what you have in reserve from previous times, including your knowledge, your skills, and your attitude and temperament.
The welfare system should be about what the State gives freely, and in abundance, not just the benefits cheque but the roads, schools, the parks, the health services and the community events which all help us live fully, whether low income or not.
We have had several years of ‘austerity’ now, so services are being cut to the bone, there is a lot less reserve, and with that reserve gone, those who have least will be more and more running on empty, and then will deliver at most what they get paid for, and often a lot less. Good will goes, if what you get is meanly given then it becomes damage limitation, survival.
It seems to me that in times of ‘austerity’ what is needed is a programme to rebuild the fat in the system not cut it, so people give freely and more comes back in return. The rebuilding is not spending, it is investing, and can be accounted for, if those who run the system of accounting can only get away from beans and count nourishment instead.
So what we need is a nourishment programme, we need more libraries not less, we need more smaller schools which are community resources, not more academies which run their own affairs away from the public view. We need more community health programmes, programmes which are about building a physically and mentally healthy community, not more operations per £1k.
We need fewer millionaires, thank you not National Lottery, we need more people to give not gamble, and on the basis that what you give freely you get back in abundance, here is one idea:
What about all big businesses declaring that they will release their ownership of the business within 50 years maximum! So they will then act on the basis that they no longer have an infinite amount of time in which to conduct their affairs, they are leaseholders not shareholders, so the best thing would be to give freely bit by bit, instead of dropping it all at the last minute it would make sense to slowly hand over the company to the community, to become embedded in the community.