Waste

Waste - it seems only a matter of morality, but what is the meaning behind the fact, I do have another view. 

Thinking in depth, this is actually a transfer of wealth. Businessman finds variety of ways to encourage us to spend that we did not really need. In this process, merchants earn rewards, and consumers have lost principal; waste items sent to landfills, but money flows to merchant's bank account. At macro view, the more wealthy countries, which consume more resources on the planet. That can be interpreted as the country "to be more wealth, must be more waste." Development of technology to improve our lives, but also accelerated the consumption of resources. Train, telephone, fiber optic and Internet, all of above is causing us to get the goods faster but cutting down the time to cherish them. 

Countries are actively encouraging domestic demand and promoting economic necessary. In the early stages of development it is correct, citizens will enjoy the treasure. However, after the middle stage of development, the resulting effect is already small. As mentioned earlier, because of wealth transfer, all the money in the hands of a few top companies. Government is a major role to balance the society’ need but it cannot get back much wealth from the hands of these companies to subsidize lower class citizens. Class conflict will ultimately lead to more and more frequent. Under the existing system, not much can be done. Increase the supply is not feasible due to the Earth's resources are limited, then reduce the demand may be more feasible. When look at the current situation in each country to increase the money supply. when, in fact, inflation has not increased. It is precisely due to weak demand, they may not want to spend just a small portion of the money accumulated in the hands of them, if they want to consume, the only way is increase borrowing. Unfortunately, this group of people is not the cup of tea of bank. As the market remains weak, we can only bet our money in the stock market now! Is it the reasons why the index keeps in higher over the world? With the wealth effect (due to rising market) demand should be increased in this turning point, plus herd instinct, inflation will be came more rapidly. History is repeating on and on, but the resource bubble must be ultimately borne by later generation. I think I cannot experience it. After reading this page, what do you think?

浪費，好像只是道德上的問題，但其實背後有什麼意義， 我卻有另一種看法。

想深一層，其實這是一種財富的轉移。商人不斷用各式各樣方法去鼓勵我們消費，無形中令我們買了更多沒有真正需要的東西。在這過程中，商人賺取了回報，而消費者卻流失了本金；浪費了的物品送到堆填區、金錢卻流到商人的銀行戶口。當我們再宏觀地看，越是富裕的國家，其消耗地球上的資源越多。那可解讀為國家『越要富裕、越要浪費』。科技的發展，改善了我們生活，也加速了資源的消耗。火車、電話、光纖、互聯網，當得到貨品的速度越快越客易，珍借它們的時間也越來越少。

各國都積極鼓勵內需，是推動經濟所必須的。在發展的初期這是正確的，國民都會感受到這個成果。但當發展到中後段時，所產生的效應其實已經不大。正如前述，財富轉移的關係，所有金錢都掌握在少數頂尖的企業手裡。政府作為一個平衡社會的機構，可以在這些企業手上取回部份財富再投放到低下階層的能力不多。最終引發的階級衝突只會越來越頻繁。在現有的制度下，可以做的不多。增加供應是不可行的，因地球的資源是有限的，那麼減少需求可能是較可行的方法。當看看現況，各國在加大金錢供應時，其實通漲也沒有增加。正正由於需求疲弱，他們可能不是不想消費，只是錢都累積在少部人手裡，若想消費的話只能增加借貸。可惜這一批人卻不是銀行心中理想的客戶，導致市場依然疲弱，大家唯有在股市上博一博吧! 不知是否這原因令各地股市在創新高呢? 隨著財富效應(因股市上升)，消費應該會增加，在這轉捩點上，再加上羊群效應 (見經濟改善也都重投市場了)，通漲可以來得很急。歷史不斷循環，但最終這個資源泡沫由那一代承擔，我是看不到的了。大家看完後又有什麼看法呢?