mental, and spiritual potentialities of the individual and collective beings. There should be a well-balanced adjustment among the crude, subtle, and causal utilizations. Utilizations vary in accordance with time, space, and form; the utilizations should be progressive. An initial glimpse of these five principles first appeared in Sarkar's earlier work, Idea and Ideology. The market As far as Prout's values and goals differ from those of capitalism and communism, so does its economic structure. Following a close analysis of the two systems, Prout's propounder argues that these philosophies are "anti-human“ in the sense that they encourage people to relentlessly pursue material attainment, like name, fame, etc. Another criticism of neo-liberalism and capitalism in general is the centralization of economic power in the hands of the rich leads to the exploitation of the masses and ultimately to the degeneration of society. Prout claims that both capitalism and communism have been built on shaky foundations, and identifies weaknesses to a point where a new market system is required. He heavily critiqued communism, indicating that one of the reasons the USSRs experiment with communism did not work, causing the eventual implosion of their political structure, is that the sovietic central planning committees (Gosplan) had too much economic decision and cohesion power in the federation (see Marxism–Leninism). Nonetheless, Sarkar observed aspects of market planning that help to create and sustain a healthy economy. In summary, Proutist thought considers that planning allows the market to protect its stakeholders from the meanderings of neo-liberal economics where profit-motive speaks highest. However, he stresses that a planning committee at a national level should only outline the broader aspects of economic development, leaving the details to be resolved by planning bodies at a local level where problems are best understood and more easily dealt with. (see diseconomies of scale). Consequently, this kind of top-down planning will leave communities, enterprises and ultimately workers with a significant level of freedom to decide their own economic future (see decentralized planning). Prout also claims that the nationalization of enterprises is inefficient due to the larger costs and amount of bureaucracy necessary to keep state-controlled industries running. Yet, there are some industries that should be nationalized, operating on a "no-profit, no-loss" principle. Concerning wealth distribution among the population, Sarkar argues for an "optimal inequality" where the wage gap between the richer strata of society is substantially subsided. Richard Freeman, a Harvard economist, points out