Sam GhandchiCreating Abundance in the Current World

Sam Ghandchi


Persian Version  متن فارسی



In the last three centuries, many solutions were implemented to address the lack of food, clothing, housing, education, and healthcare among the needy in all modern societies, but none seems to fix the problem effectively.


Almost all ideologies included measures to promote social justice and offered hope that as we approached some ideal society, we would eradicate these social ills.


Ray Kurzweil, although a scientist and not an economist, has opened a new way of thinking by going first for what others considered to be their ideal society, namely to create abundance in our current world instead of using interim solutions today and hoping for abundance or a ‘land of milk and honey’ in some unknown future.


For example, Kurzweil's law of accelerated returns makes it possible to solve issues such as food production in innovative ways to achieve abundance for major food crops (1).


Let us propose that we use an approach akin to Kurzweil’s to fix the economy (2).


The question to ask is, which organizations in our current society will take on such endeavors? 


For example, charities traditionally were the organizations that provided help to the needy.  Shall we expect those same charities to change their approach and spend their resources to create abundance of basic food crops, clothes and shelter?


Government entities, whether in European welfare states or developing countries, have provided universal education and healthcare (3). Can we expect governments to change course and use their resources in a new way to create abundance of basic needs in these areas?


Non-governmental organizations, ranging from religious organizations to community groups, are also very active in these efforts. In addition, many wealthy individuals and private companies are interested to help.  The example of Gates and Buffet to combat malaria in Africa is a major international effort in recent times.


In other words, many currently active enterprises could change their approach and address these global issues from a different angle. Yet it seems like they are all continuing their old ways of providing help to the needy, help that is mostly wasted by bureaucratic red tape, as well as government corruption in developing countries.


If these basic needs could become abundant like the air we breathe, then these numerous programs that constantly try to help the needy would become obsolete.  Let’s remember that in all human societies, organizations were not needed to provide air to the needy. Then why don’t those with such noble intentions use a new approach? Is the problem a shift required in their thinking, i.e. a paradigm shift?  Or are there other reasons that such efforts are not being picked up as fast as one would expect؟


People like Peter Diamandis have been working on this approach for a long time (4). 


What is holding the economists, governments and charities from taking this kind of approach?

Sam Ghandchi, Editor/Publisher
September 25, 2012