For humanity...
A core part of my life theory is based on fairness.
The decision to act is based on 3 criteria:
When it's good for all 3 (or doesn't have a negative impact), I'd give it the go in a go/nogo system.
To clarify, when I reference ecosystem, I'm not necesarily referring to mother nature. I'm referring to the system upon which your action funcitons.
In a list of tasks, it may be the impact that task has on the other tasks.
Using the analogy of a recipe, it would be how adding (or removing) an ingredient effects the dish you are cooking.
In a song, it would be how the note effects the entire song.
Nothing functions independently - everything is part of a bigger whole.
As my friend Allen Duck points out, there's the element of time to consider. What will be the long-term impact of your decision? Wealthy people see the long term benefit of saving outweigh the short term benefit of spending.
In an a simple equation, the go/nogo every go decision must be a +1 at a minimum: +1 = it meets the criteria. 0 = it has no impact. -1 = it does not meet the criteria.
It's good for us +1
It's good for others +1
It's good for the entire system +1
The ideal win-win-win! Examples: Public service, teaching, volunteering, removing something causing everyone pain. Adding something that benefits all. It's good for the creator. Good for the receiver. Good for the ecosystem as a whole.
It's good for us +1
It's good for other +1
It's good for the system 0
It's good for us +1
It's good for other 0
It's good for the system 0
It's good for us +1
It's good for other +1
It's good for the system -1
It's good for us +1
It's good for other 0
It's good for the system 0
It's good for us -1
It's good for others +1
It's good for the system -1
An example is getting a hamburger at McDonalds. It's good for the people who work at McDonalds (and the entire supply chain), but not good for us or the cows.
The duration factor: It tastes good (+1), but the longterm impact on our health is a (-1). You could argue it's a net zero.
In ideal scenario, you'd eat what tastes good, is good for you, and good for the ecosystem.
However, let's add the metric of money.
Example: A burger costs $1. A salad costs $5.
Spending $5 would have a great negative impact on your bank account. From a financial perspective, you could argue the salad has a bigger negative impact than the burger.
It's comes down to what you value, doesn't it? And what you value varies depending on your situation.
If you can't afford to pay your bills, choosing a $5 salad over a $1 burger is not a realistic choice.
My point is that nobody except yourself can define the criteria for this system. But what's critical is that you do have criteria that takes into account your circumstances and stays consistent.
Example: I need to save more. If saving is a top priority, I would put $500 into savings before I spent money anywhere else.
It's good for us +1
It's good for other 0
It's good for the system -1
It's this scenario, something we do is good for us, does not negativity impact others, but is bad for the system.
The go/no-go decision criteria follows: 1. It's good for us (the initiator) 2. It's good for others (those impacted) 3. It's good for the entire ecosystem. If the answer to all 3 is yes (or if the net impact is zero), then you'd do it (or support it). If not, you'd look for ways in how the solution could be changed in favor of all 3.
The most vital step in any go/nogo calculation is to consider the criteria of the system first. If you use the wrong criteria, this doesn't work. This is because we can rationalize any decision we make.
Examples.
The criteria is based on financially literate individuals.
Health System
Wellness System
More specific...
Defined as selling more than 50 books per month. What's the go/nogo criteria of someone in this role?
Try this on...
I am looking at what criteria can I use to weed out items on my too many items todo list.
Initially, it's measured as a -1,+1,+1
This was a Net +1 request (-1,+1,+1) that I can turn into a +3 by finding ways the request can also benefit me.