Need or Want? A post full of questions.

Every kid goes through a time when they “want, want, want” something, and it turns into an all-consuming emotional moment while they are demanding that toy or that candy treat or that time with their friends.  Part of parents’ role in guidance and education is to help that child understand the difference between “need” and “want”.

Over time, the word “need” in the adult world of commerce in particular has become, somehow, something that means less-than-good or not-quite-enough.  It represents sacrifice and a minimum palatable result.  Even more, using the word “need” to define your own goals makes you into a beggar of sorts. And a person who is confident and responsible, a stable and settled contributor to society, gets his or her “wants” because the implication is they have paid their dues and now deserve that freedom and choice.

I have a big problem with this. Not about people having freedom and choice, but the notion that “need” is a bad thing. We have to re-engineer clearer words that do not connote negativity. It takes great skill to understand true need and what can be created in the process of meeting that need. Defining my needs is a strong, clear and honest approach to making a plan and achieving it well. And no one should think that defining what I “need” is synonymous with me low-balling my goals. There is no call for pity or contempt.

“Want” should also not be treated as always catering to the selfish or spoiled. People of all status levels deserve not only their “needs” but their “wants” – with the qualifier that their wants cannot take something away from others. This is where we are most askew in the modern age. The problem is that we have this mentality: if something is out there and usable and we don’t use it someone else will and that’s not fair (?). Water rights, for example, are often built on the premise of first use. In some cases, owners of water rights continue to pump and dump water out of aquifers even when they have no use for the water. By doing this, they legally ensure they keep their water rights, yet they spend energy and money on accessing something they don’t need when there are others who may truly have a need for the water. I have heard people say that they will not reduce their gas or oil use because they have just as much right to it as anyone else, so why shouldn’t they turn up the heat in their house instead of sitting with a lap blanket, or putting on a sweater? If they conserve, someone else will just use it anyway. They can bloody well afford to pay for it, so it’s their right.

Is it? Is there a way that we can reform our understanding of resource use, especially the natural resources that we now understand are closed systems and limited? Do we have the right to use something with total disregard for others just because we can pay for it? What are we paying for? We certainly are not paying, at this point, for the externalities such as the emissions from fossil fuel use or the degradations to our water systems as a whole. We create situations that enforce resource abuses, such as neighborhood agreements that fine people for using the clothesline. Yet then many complain when government must step in to pay for security during electricity brown-outs, or for cleanup from an oil spill or for provision of clean water, clean air or decent food to meet someone’s minimum need. Isn’t this just our current messy way of paying for the externalities? Pay for it in the bill (resisted) or pay for it with extra remediation services later, including hazardous cleanup, lawsuits, chronic and unmanageable healthcare costs, and bad press.

I’m not sure who the parent is in our current scenario, but I can tell you pretty much all of us are the kids, needing to learn the difference between what we need and what we want. This is not to say we shouldn’t work toward obtaining or achieving what we want, but being able to pay for it cannot be the only layer of permission. One of the many things I want is richer coffee, and I can pay for it. I don’t need it, in fact I don’t need coffee at all (my husband would argue that). In meeting my “want” I do better for me and for all by finding coffee that protects forests and uses fair labor practices. Our needs and wants can and should consider the effects on the greater community of planet earth. Buying fair trade coffee means I meet my want and do so with respect for others’ needs and wants. The same can be applied to food purchases, to clothing, to resource uses, to life in general.

Maybe the parents in this scenario need to solely teach us kids about our place in the world. We are each one small piece of a complex, richly diverse, and exciting planet-wide community that we have a role in fostering and cherishing. This role for each of us is valuable and critical. We need to embrace this role, even when we want to think only of ourselves.

Seeking my place in the world,

Jodi

 

1 Like this post (no login required)