Artificial and natural in the economy

One of the significant characteristics in my understanding of the economy is the concept of artificial, something created by man and natural, existing from nature.
These concepts are introduced in order to distinguish between ways of influencing them. So for everything artificial, and this is the result of any labor, competition is needed, from which the artificial becomes better, more skillful, that is, it depends on the skill, the quality of the labor invested.
While the natural, for example, water or the nature around us, is good in its original form. However, in nature, living beings compete with each other, but man has long since left this competition, leaving himself as the only competitor.
The characteristics of natural and artificial are polar, so that all processes in the economy are in an intermediate position, so that the creation of luxury goods, more skillful than agriculture, which is more natural, that is, simpler, so that competition does not play the same role in it. Any extraction of natural resources is just as natural and competition does not make this extraction much better, the owners, even without intense competition, seek to simplify their work by developing methods of extraction, just as any farmer simplifies his work by creating tools for himself.
Having determined the naturalness or artificiality of a phenomenon, we can establish that everything natural in itself has a direction of development towards the artificial. And further, proceeding from this, to determine the permissible limit of the artificiality of this or that kind of activity in the sense that its further artificial development is harmful to a harmoniously arranged economy.
For example, if we take agriculture, then its automation, when all the factors of creating a product depend on a person, is a development towards an artificial one. One of the negative factors of such development is the use of various kinds of poisons that can accumulate in the natural environment, as well as the low content of nutrients in products grown off the ground, the taste of such products, unlike products grown in one’s own garden, may differ for the worse. side. But in exchange for this, we have low cost and ability to transport, which is an obvious competitive advantage.
And speaking of setting limits, we are not talking about some kind of complete ban on the modern agricultural industry, but rather that its intensive development serves not only to reduce costs in a competitive environment, but has a positive or at least harmless effect, both on human health and on environment. In order to achieve these goals, the agricultural and other economic sectors must be thought out in terms of what ultimate benefits they can bring to human health and the natural environment where they are located.
I’m talking about some kind of political intervention in the economy, which is usually criticized, and yet, to some extent, when the economy by its actions directly harms health and nature, why not regard this as the same crime, for your own benefit. Although it would seem that people have a choice to buy and not buy healthy food, but in many ways the harm from low-quality food is difficult for the average person to establish, it is even more difficult to establish the harmful effects of such a production method on the environment. The cheapness of such goods is a key desired good, and yet, usually reasonable general restrictions on the market, create conditions for finding an effective solution to the problem. A more efficient organization of labor and a rise in the overall level of income in the OA system compensates for the redistribution of employment towards the natural productive sector of the economy and the fact that products in the system can be more expensive than in the market in a regular store. The economy of the ML system implies a decrease in the concentration of industries in certain regions, which can give work to those who, living far from a suitable job, could not physically engage in it without changing their usual place of residence, etc.
The purpose of such measures, probably at the expense of momentary profit, is to create as much as possible a natural, that is, environmentally friendly economy that will allow a person to exist in harmony with it for an unlimited amount of time.

And again speaking about the limits, I will give an example of the fact that, of course, any equipment, even a telephone or a computer that we all use in our production, is harmful; in this case, we inevitably face a negative impact on the environment, but why not create competition in this direction , so that the manufacturers themselves tried on their own to reduce it as much as possible on their own. So that they proceed not only from personal considerations and a certain fashion for everything ecological, so that this intention would fit into our economic infrastructure. For the most part, my articles are devoted to the organization of this process, but this is not such a simple question as it seems, since it is associated with people’s behavior, which will need to be limited, and then there will be a question not only of economics, but also of ethics, that people will themselves consider it correct, so that these restrictions created in the artificial environment of Open Money become a natural norm for us.