More for Me: When Systems Thinking Goes Too Far

Imagine this: You're in the kitchen. You hold up a teabag.

You ask your friend, "Want more tea?"

If they say no, you smile - "Good, more for me." One less mouth to brew for. One more teabag in your pocket. A simple win.

But if they say yes?

You still smile: "Good. More for me."

Wait - what?

Welcome to systems thinking, stretched to breaking point.

Demand and Delusion

In economics, we're told that rising demand leads to rising supply. More people want something? More producers emerge, more resources are allocated, and eventually - like magic - the market balances itself.

But this logic, like our teabag, has limits.

Because in that moment in the kitchen, demand doesn't magically summon another box of Twinings. There's still just one teabag. And now it has to be shared.

The "more for me" logic collapses.

Models Aren't Reality

So why does this matter?

Because everywhere - in tech, in finance, in policy - people forget that systems are models, not truths. They assume a rule that works at macro scale (e.g. "Markets respond to demand") must also apply at the micro level.

But models don't scale infinitely. They have failure points, lag times, and human friction. They're approximations, not laws.

Take Open Banking. Or energy grids. Or social networks.

Build a system thinking only in flow diagrams and abstract supply-demand loops, and you'll miss the real-world bottlenecks: developer hours, user trust, regulatory inertia, teabag count.

Real systems leak. They jam. They misfire.

And most of all, they behave differently when you zoom in.

The Takeaway

So next time someone waves a teabag and grins "more for me," stop and ask:

Is this really abundance?
Or are we just modelling nonsense?

Related reading: Why I Built My Own Solar + Battery System