Good goods and bad Goods
An expanding economy!
Where society is in conflict between the forces of tyranny, anarchism, and altruism. Goods that are manufactured will be more those that benefit chaos itself, as weapons of war, than benefit stable society. The side that wins this conflict may at least bring stability of sorts. At worst war itself will reign, with the rules of war as the measure of society itself. But where society is stabilised in peace, 'goods' that are produced must be for the benefit of that peace, with the weapons of war as no more than an insurance.
To that degree at least there are 'goods' that benefit and those that do not. Within genuine society goods must be qualified according to the 'mores' of that society.
It would be consonant for goods in a totalitarian society, or tyranny, to be those that benefit authority itself. Something which has been the hallmark of almost all ages in the past, as in Britain. Those who serve doing so in reverential awe.
For anarchistic society, it would be consonant for goods to be produced, and services naturally, to suit the whim and pockets of the producers. Purchased by the whim of the customer, as he may be induced to by the seduction of advertising. As a morally relativist society, only those few goods that are directly destructive may be proscribed. It may be that weapons for personal protection will be the norm.
Finally there is a contrast of the above with altruist society. In this it would be consonant, or plainly necessary, for good goods and bad goods to be distinguished at source. But with the virtue or products measured by their mutual benefit and overall benefit to society - holistically it may be. Goods that are harmful to health are an obvious target. Beyond that there will be goods or products that may be dubious but to be tolerated. The critical point for altruist society is reached where goods increase the overall national economy, but include products and services that are not in themselves beneficial, or other goods should have priority. Gold plated limousines, to cosmetic operations for outright vanity. The question not being who pays, but whether the limited labour and expertise of society should be absorbed in the produce of trivia.
Money is a mere vehicle of exchange. It is goods and services, and the environment, that ultimately pays.
