Consumption Theory - Economics and Ecology: United for a Sustainable World - page 59

be traced in large part to abuses resulting from extreme concentration of
surplus, or wealth, of the ruling class. An obvious example is the objec-
tion of Martin Luther to abuses by the Church, which led to the Protestant
Revolution. This leads to one reason the American experiment of a broad-
based, middle-class society is so uniquely noteworthy in human history: It
embodies the premise that surplus should be shared by all, even though it
embraces a capitalistic economic system. In summary, the role of surplus
throughout the ages cannot be overstated as one seeks to understand either
the evolution of economic history or the discipline of economics. We do not
purport to solve, or even to discuss in any depth, these issues here. Our focus
at this juncture is on the structure of economic methodology. The critical
point is that consumption above basic requirements is seen as a desirable
goal by economic theory.
Assumed Insatiability
All the models conclude that success is based on the amount of consump-
tion—the higher the consumption, the greater the success. This notion goes
back at least a century and a half and can be contributed to the ubiquitous
methodological push for quantification, an analytical trait of economic anal-
ysis that required something to maximize as a measure of “success.” Higher
mathematics begins with calculus, and calculus is the mathematics of opti-
mization—or, in other words, maximization and minimization.
Over the years, a subtle transformation has occurred. At first blush, how
could one more logically choose something to maximize than human sat-
isfaction or well-being? After all, facilitating survival is the original, stated
purpose of economics. But the question arises of where to stop. Put differ-
ently, when is enough, enough? Do people reach a point of satiation, at which
they conclude: “That's enough.” If so, this is a problem of sorts for mathemat-
ics. Having some quantity simply maximized by increasing forever does not
make sense. Maximization is normally subject to some constraint, and the
chosen constraint for economic methodology is income.
Thus, the task of the individual citizen, or worker/consumer, is to maxi-
mize the individual's level of satisfaction subject to his or her fixed income.
This methodological premise gives rise to a frequently stated version of the
economic problem as unlimited wants against limited means. Stated differ-
ently, the consumer is assumed to always want more, no matter how much
the consumer already has, despite being constrained by his or her fixed
income.
What if it is pointed out that, either due to the nature of the product or
the existence of a very high income, having more gives no satisfaction? At
this point, the economic answer becomes adroit: “Well, even though they
are satiated with that product, there are always other goods and services
for which there is positive demand.” The individual is therefore assumed to
be permanently acquisitive, no matter what. Nevertheless, from a systemic