Natural Gas 4 Us: BIG, BIGGER, is BEST or Could Small Be Beautiful?

In my last attempt to describe the “BIG” that we find surrounding us, I sought to be somewhat philosophical as well as comment on what could be considered the juxtaposition of current economic reality.

To expand further, Adam Smith, a Scottish economist and moral philosopher, in 1776 published a book, a “treatise” entitled The Wealth of Nations. According to Wikipedia, Smith laid out a system of political economy with the famous metaphor of the “invisible hand” regulating the marketplace through individual self-interest. He provided a comprehensive analysis of the economic aspects of stock, price determination, the flow of labor, capital, and rent. Possibly as important as the book contained Smith’s critique and warning of what was called at that time mercantilism, monopolies, and oligarchies protected by political allies (in this case, the King of England. He advocated for free competition and open markets. To paraphrase, he believed that multiple sources of "smaller scaled" enterprises, of competition, were best for markets. He warned that government regulations, coupled with the protection of large global trading companies known in his time as mercantilism, would be one of the biggest threats to real capitalism. Two centuries later, Dwight Eisenhower would warn of what could be the rise of situational mercantilism in the United States with the “unwarranted influence” of the overreaching military-industrial complex and their corruption of the country’s politicians’ morals and ideals. Add to this today's unparalleled influence of “the Big” huge global fossil fuel corporations, worldwide technology companies, the agricultural, and mining sectors, the bigness is staggering. The mad rush to embrace AI again pits global versus local.

Adam Smith’s work evolved and gained widespread recognition, shaping economic philosophies, government policies, and the intellectual discourse on trade, taxation, and economic growth in the coming centuries. Again, beyond the critical examination of the Mercantilist policies of the day, it advocated the implementation of free trade and effective tax policies to drive economic progress. It represented a clear shift from previous economic thought by proposing that self-interest and the forces of supply and demand, rather than regulation, should determine economic activity. As indicated, he is attributed to advancing the concept of Laissez-faire, literally “allow to do” no interference with the marketplace, as he called it “the invisible hand” that would allow those accumulating wealth to see in their best interest to share. In today’s world, with both Big government protection, along with monopolistic and oligarchys of huge companies, it is a tendency for the extreme wealthy to share after one is regarded, excessively rich. One wonders, is there a place for smaller scale and rewarding outcomes both in wealth and satisfaction?

Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered, according to Wikipedia, is a collection of essays published in 1973 by German-born British economist E. F. Schumacher. The title “Small Is Beautiful” came from a principle espoused by Schumacher’s teacher, Leopold Kohr[1] (1909–1994), advancing small, appropriate technologies, policies, and politics as a superior alternative to the mainstream ethos of “bigger is better”.

Overlapping environmental, social, and economic forces, such as the 1973 energy crisis and popularization of the concept of globalization, helped bring Schumacher’s Small Is Beautiful critiques of mainstream economics to a wider audience during the 1970s. In 1995, The Times Literary Supplement ranked Small Is Beautiful among the 100 most influential books published since World War II. It resonates with contemporary concerns about sustainability and the quality of life, advocating for the shifting towards smaller, more ethical enterprises that prioritize community needs along with or over economic growth.

Whether we struggle or not over what to call our BIG System. Wikipedia strives to portray what is called capitalism today, by so many is an elevated and desired economic theory. However, the economic system has shifted, and perhaps unknowingly, this definition and belief has now reversed itself. Capitalism is now possibly Mercantilism. Capitalism calls for a minimum of government intervention and ownership of capital, trade, and industry by private entities and individuals. Mercantilism involves state control, regulation, as well as protection. Capitalism is heralded to promote individual freedom. Mercantilism is said to suppress it. Presently, it seems our so-called big-time capitalism is mercantilism in more aspects than economists and politicians, and maybe the current president wants to admit.

Globalization also has an elevated meaning. It is the process of the world’s economies, cultures, and people becoming more connected and interdependent through increased trade, investment, travel, and the exchange of ideas and technology across borders. In simple terms, it’s the idea of a world that is becoming one big global community, with fewer barriers to the movement of goods, services, and information between countries. This all sounds like a big, bigger, wonderful world.

Ideally corporate globalization is considered a positive process where businesses expand and operate across national borders, fostering deeper economic, technological, and cultural interdependence between countries. This involves increased international trade, foreign investment, the dispersal of global supply chains, and the free flow of information and talent, ultimately creating a more interconnected global economy.

As we advance, the "Big” could ask the questions: Is there the resolve to equally support and preserve local community economies, such as in the Allegheny River Valley, with the same passion and equitable resources? Is "small" a sublime solution? Is there still time to engage in meaningful discourse?

---

For more from Natural Gas 4 Us, go to: www.naturalgas4us.com