There is no secret that the current economic success is sustained by the housing market and the consumer population. And its shadow is cast directly across the homeless and addicts. For some of us it is living in darkness of a private business boom.

The Housing Crisis, Traffic Congestion, Methamphetamine and Addiction are major issues highlighting current affairs. Their urgency should prioritise immediate needs to reduce harm and minimise ongoing negative consequences.

But our two party system approach only represents extreme ends of the issue. No ideal solution is met but static debates stagnate the issue for years. For housing, doing nothing in this environment is economic profitability.

The issues are inherited and ongoing but there is no silver bullet. However, looking at the big picture, it's a market approach to resolution that maintains economic development and keeps everyone relatively happy.

If so, then it draws attention to the cause; remember a little while ago, McDonald indoctrinated young children with its brand by dishing out toys and extras with their burgers? This time, drug dealers and manufacturers are promoting their product at school.

Meantime, politicians are only looking at addressing the consequences or symptoms of the problem. But this is the very source for both the social and material business industries. On the one hand socialism takes advantage of the consequence to promote a social industry and on the other hand materialism takes the opportunity to redirect funds for the business industry.

In either case, the victim is still left helpless in between bureaucratic mountains.

It's fair to say therefore that criminal activities or underground market is generating addictive behaviour in maintenance of the consumer population. In so doing, the consequences of illegal activities give rise to the maintenance of the Police Force.

When the previous government raised the price of cigarettes, dairy burglaries increased. And immediately, a call to increase the number of police was raised. It became a popular idea that carried a few votes.

Clearly, the social organisation of society is based on economic consequences. So there, it's another brown point towards decriminalisation of consumer behaviour when addicts are merely serving a purpose to the organisation of the economy. Oh yes, there is a silver bullet in the form of the magic little pill.And now you know why such measures is considered unproductive; it's the economy.

We are beginning to see that good economic management is essential. At the same time, it should not all be material economic development. Look at the social consequences of Housing, Addiction, Congestion! That is why a linear material economic manager is a problem. He/she leaves behind a social mess for some other poor guy to fix.

And we have periods of economic booms for the private sector and poverty for the public sector.

I have been calling for a manager of social organisation of the economy. Today we have it in Labour and the Green with a bit of NZ First. I couldn't stress Objectivism enough in here as it targets society more than selfish individuals. Individuals in anyway are protected within the framework of society.

Anyway, this government was more or less formed on the basis of social consequences accumulated from the previous government. But as social policies are rolled out, lobbying from the opposition takes advantage of its rich sector to proliferate propaganda including smearing rumours and scandals at individuals in government.

As usual, this type of political activity is rife on social media. But if the right wing lobby has a single cell of objectivism to balance their brain sphere, there is a good chance of progressing forward for the whole country. Instead, this right wing sphere would rather see the population drugged and living in their cars on the road to nowhere.

Yes, they would rather see earth and its habitants perished as long as they get their fossil fuel fix. In the absence of objectivism, right wing thinking is dangerous and destructive.

Where reducing harm while maintaining economic development is equal to a balanced approach to a resolution. It is not (linear) 'material' economic development where the social consequences determine the social (criminal) organisation of society, but rather it's 'social' economic development that structures economic organisation.

The former is where society is organised by controlling the social consequences of raising prices and effects of consumer behaviour. Society is a bi-product of the economy. The latter is where society is organised by citizen's collective agreements on production and behaviour. Society determines the organisation of the economy.

We could live as criminals in cars and on roads in polluted environments, or we could live as citizens in a clean environment where quality of life sustains wellbeing.

The alternative to organisation is sharing the middle ground. This is reinforced when both left and right wings hold a bi-partisan approach to issues. Granted that the electoral system provides for thorough debate that the motion is modified to reach a consensus, the outcome produces a balance approach to society. But so far, the ruling party is locked on making decisions alone. The opposition can load mud and stones but that's as good as dud missiles. She has a job to do and no amount of distraction can sway her…

To be legally and morally fair, so-called crimes of poverty status and addiction should be treated as patients and not criminals. But since debate only provide extreme ends of the issue, we have to wait for another ten or twenty years for another ideal and bold government to lead us somewhere.