1 It’s a static balance sheet solution/policy.
There is nothing so dynamic and meaningful in the entirety of economics and the economic/productive process as a monetary policy that is executed at a terminal summing, ending, problem expression and pivotally inverting paradigm changing point, when after all, money is the most significantly powerful factor in a monetary economy. And that perfectly describes the Discount/Rebate policy at the point of retail sale.
2 The “powers that be” will never allow it.
This objection dramatizes the great Japanese military strategist Sun Tzu who correctly noted that if you can convince the enemy that going to war is useless…you will have won the war without even fighting. Don’t surrender. Be brave enough to fight, and smart enough to win.
3 It will make everyone lazy/It discourages work/purpose.
There are many, many wealthy people who lack purpose and probably even more poor/held down by the system people with the same problem. The fact is that, except for employment, of which much more will be available with the policies of Wisdomics-Gracenomics than if we don’t have such policies, creating positive and constructive purpose is an entirely separate process from employment. Employment is in actual fact a much smaller subset of all possible positive and constructive purposes, and having the time and monetary resources to pursue those purposes….is exactly what the policies of Wisdomics-Gracenomics will provide….everyone.
4 It’s just another theory.
Not correct. It is a new paradigm. A paradigm is simultaneously a single concept and an entirely new pattern that changes the present paradigm and resolves its deepest and most chronic problems…..with the reality of that single paradigm alone. Theories are what fit within a philosophy and a new paradigm so a paradigm is actually two mental integrations above theorizing.
5 Change must go step by step.
Reform is step by step and is as often as not a step forward and then a step or teo backward. Not so with a new paradigm which is discovered by the wise after contemplation of only the truths in the opposing perspectives which cannot seem, or will not even try to integrate those truths into a thirdness greater oneness that is the signature OF a new paradigm, but only contend and/or arrogantly make claim to the entire truth…despite the lingering problems that are always present before an imminent paradigm change. Paradigms are supremely mentally and temporally powerful and transformational occurrences.
Choosing a reform, a palliative or compromise when a new paradigm is possible…is actually an unethical act.