Wachumi wa Magharibi wanaona kwamba mahitaji ya binadamu yanatimizwa kwa mambo mawili, nayo ni: bidhaa (goods) na huduma (services). Bidhaa ni njia ya kukidhi haja, ni vitu vinavyoonekana na vinavyoshikika, kama mkate, magari, simu na vinginevyo. Huduma pia ni njia ya kukidhi haja, lakini ni vitu visivyoshikika ingawa vinahisiwa, kama ushauri wa kisheria, ukarabati wa gari, kazi ya usafi na vinginevyo. Kinachofanya bidhaa na huduma kuwa njia za kukidhi haja ni manufaa yake (utility), iwe manufaa haya yanapatikana kwa sehemu au kikamilifu, moja kwa moja au kwa njia isiyo ya moja kwa moja. Katika mtazamo wa Magharibi, ikiwa manufaa haya yanapatikana katika kitu chochote, hicho kitu kinafaa kwa kukidhi haja. Kwa kuwa katika mfumo wa kiuchumi wa kibepari, haja maana yake ni tamaa, kila kitu chenye manufaa kiuchumi kinaingia katika kila kinachotamaniwa, iwe kitu hicho ni cha lazima au si cha lazima, bila kujali kwamba baadhi ya watu wanakiona kuwa na manufaa, huku wengine wakikiona kuwa na madhara. Kina manufaa kiuchumi mradi tu kinatamaniwa na mtu yeyote.

Economists in the West see that human needs are fulfilled by two things such as: goods and services. Goods are the means of satiation, being sensed things that are tangible such as bread, vehicles, telephone and others. Services are also within the means of satiation, but are sensed things that are intangible, such as legal advice, car repair, cleaning work and others. What makes the goods and services means of satiation is their utility (benefit), whether this utility is achieved partially or completely, directly or indirectly. In the Western view, if this benefit is available in anything, this makes the thing suitable for satiation. Since in capitalist economic terms, need means desire, anything that is beneficial economically falls within all that is desired, whether the thing is essential or not, regardless of some people considering it as beneficial, whilst others consider it as harmful. It is economically beneficial as long as it is desired by anyone.

Katika insha yake, "On Liberty, A Few Words on Non- Intervention," John Stuart Mill alisema, "both the cheapness and the good quality of commodities are most effectually provided for by leaving the producers and sellers perfectly free," hata alipokuwa akizingatia madhara ya pombe, afyuni na sumu kwa mnunuzi. "Alcohol and opium are commodities just like food and clothing according to the economic concept..." kama vile gavana wa benki kuu wa Uholanzi, Jelle Zijlstra, alivyosema katika kitabu chake, Introduction to Economics.

In his essay, “On Liberty, A Few Words on Non- Intervention,” John Stuart Mill asserted, “both the cheapness and the good quality of commodities are most effectually provided for by leaving the producers and sellers perfectly free,” even whilst considering the harm of alcohol, opium and poisons upon the buyer. “Alcohol and opium are commodities just like food and clothing according to the economic concept...” as the Dutch central banker, Jelle Zijlstra, said in his book, Introduction to Economics.

Hivyo, uchumi wa kibepari wa Magharibi huangalia njia za kukidhi mahitaji, yaani bidhaa na huduma, huku jambo kuu likiwa ni kwamba zinakidhi mahitaji, bila kuangalia mambo mengine yoyote. Kwa mtazamo huo, divai huonekana kuwa na thamani ya kiuchumi kwa sababu inakidhi mahitaji ya watu binafsi. Ukahaba huonekana kuwa na thamani ya kiuchumi kwa kuuchukulia kama huduma inayokidhi mahitaji ya watu binafsi. Katika kitabu chake, Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill alisema: "Wema, kwa mujibu wa dhana ya utilitarianism, ni mema ya aina hii. Hakukuwa na hamu ya asili kwake, wala motisha kwake, isipokuwa mchango wake katika kuleta raha, na hasa katika kulinda dhidi ya maumivu." Jelle Zijlstra alisema katika kitabu chake, Introduction to Economics: "Hivyo, uchumi hauhukumu mahitaji wala kuyafafanua kwa mtazamo wa kimaadili, kwa mfano kwamba yanaweza kukubaliwa au kukataliwa kwa sababu ni kazi ya sayansi ya maadili. Pia hauhukumu vitu kwa kuzingatia madhara yake kwa afya kwa sababu ni kazi ya tiba. Badala yake, uchumi huuliza tu kama kuna hitaji linalopaswa kukidhiwa au kama kuna uwezekano wa kukidhi vitu hivyo." Hii inamaanisha kwamba uchumi wa kibepari hauhusiki na jinsi jamii inavyopaswa kuwa. Badala yake, unahusika tu na nyenzo za kiuchumi kwa kuzingatia kama ni hitaji na lenye manufaa, kiuchumi, kwa asili yake, na kisha jinsi ya kuhakikisha upatikanaji wake. Unapima kila kitu kwa kadiri ya manufaa yake ya kiuchumi.

Thus, the Western capitalist economy looks into the means of satiation, goods and services, with the dominant consideration that they satiate the needs, without looking into any other considerations. Thus wine is seen as having an economic value as it satiates the needs of individuals. Prostitution is seen as having an economic value by considering it as service that satiates the needs of individuals. In his book, Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill said, “Virtue, according to the utilitarian conception, is a good of this description. There was no original desire of it, or motive to it, save its conduciveness to pleasure, and especially to protection from pain.” Jelle Zijlstra said in his book, Introduction to Economics, “Thus, the economy does not judge the needs or define them from a moral perspective for instance, such that they can be accepted or rejected because it is the work of ethical science. Also it does not judge the things in terms of their harm to the health because it is the work of medicine. Instead, the economy asks only whether there is a need that is to be satiated or there is a possibility of satiating the things.” This means that the capitalist economy is not concerned about how society should be like. Instead, it is only concerned with economic material in terms of it being a need and beneficial, economically, in origin and then how to ensure its provision. It measures everything according to its economic benefit.

Huu ni mtazamo wa wanauchumi wa kibepari kuhusu mahitaji na manufaa. Mtazamo huu, kama ulivyo, si jinsi jamii inavyopaswa kuwa. Mtazamo huu unaonyesha kwamba mtu wa uchumi wa kibepari anamtazama binadamu kama mtu wa kimaada tu, asiye na mielekeo ya kiroho, mawazo ya kimaadili wala malengo ya kimaadili. Hajali roho ya maadili ya jamii wala kuinuka kiroho ambako kunapaswa kuenea miongoni mwa jamii. Hajali chochote kati ya hivi. Badala yake, anajali vitu vya kimaada tu vitakavyoshibisha tamaa zake za kimaada peke yake. Hivyo, hatadanganya katika biashara yake anapopata faida. Lakini akipata faida kwa udanganyifu tu, basi udanganyifu utahalalishwa kwake. Hatawalisha maskini kwa kuitikia amri ya Allah (SWT) ya kutoa sadaka. Badala yake, atawalisha maskini ili tu wasimwibie. Mwenye kumtazama binadamu kwa mtazamo huu, na mwenye kupima maisha ya kiuchumi kwa msingi wa mtazamo huu, kwa kweli ndiye mtu hatari zaidi kwa jamii na mataifa. Hiyo ni kwa sababu atageuza jamii ya binadamu kuwa msitu, ambako wenye nguvu hula wanyonge.

This is the view of capitalist economists on needs and benefits. The view is not as such how society should be. This view indicates that a man of the capitalist economy looks at man as a purely materialistic person devoid of spiritual inclinations, moral thoughts and moral goals. He does not care about the moral spirit of the society and the spiritual elevation that should be prevalent amongst the society. He is not concerned with any of this. Instead, he is purely concerned with the materials that would purely satiate his material cravings alone. So he will not cheat whilst he profits in his trade. However, if he gets profit only by cheating, then cheating will be legal. He will not feed the poor in response to the command of Allah (swt) to give charity. Instead, he will feed the poor only to stop them stealing from him. The one who views man according to this view, who evaluates economic life on the basis of this view, is in fact the most dangerous person for societies and peoples. That is because he will alter human society into a jungle, where the strong devour the weak.

Kwa upande mmoja. Kwa upande mwingine, mali na juhudi, ambazo wao huziita bidhaa na huduma, hutafutwa na watu binafsi ili kuwanufaisha; kubadilishana kwake baina ya watu huunda mahusiano baina yao, ambayo kwayo jamii huundwa. Hivyo basi, ni lazima kuangalia jamii ni nini, pamoja na mahusiano yake, kwa jumla na kwa undani, wakati wa kutazama mali na mahitaji. Kwa mujibu wa hayo, kuzingatia uchumi wa kimaada kwa upande wa kukidhi mahitaji na kutosheleza matamanio, bila kuzingatia yale yanayohitajika ili jamii iwepo, ni kutenganisha uchumi wa kimaada na mahusiano. Ni kumfanya mwanadamu awe mtumwa wa uchumi wa kimaada, badala ya kuufanya uchumi uwe mtumishi wake, kwa kupanga mahusiano yake nao. Hili ni kinyume cha maumbile na ni batili. Kwa mujibu wa hayo, haturuhusiwi kuona vitu kuwa vyenye manufaa kwa sababu tu kuna mtu anavitaka, iwe kwa hakika vina madhara au la, iwe vinaathiri vibaya mahusiano ya watu au la, na iwe vinaruhusiwa au vimekatazwa kwa mtazamo wa watu katika jamii. Badala yake, vitu vipaswavyo kuzingatiwa kuwa vyenye manufaa ni vile tu ambavyo kwa hakika vina manufaa kwa mwanadamu, kwa kuangalia yale yanayowajibika kwa jamii.

This is on the one hand. On the other hand, wealth and efforts, which they call goods and services, are sought by individuals, to benefit them; their exchange by people creates relationships between them, according to which society is formed. Thus one must look into what society is, with its relationships, in general and in detail, when looking at the wealth and needs. Accordingly, paying attention to the material economy in terms of satiating the needs and satisfying the desires, without attention to what is necessary for a society to be, it is the separation of the material economy from relationships. It is the subjugation of man to the material economy, instead of subjugating the economy to him, by organizing his relationships with it. This is unnatural and invalid. Accordingly, it is not permissible for us to consider materials as beneficial, just because there is someone who wants them, whether they are in fact harmful or not, whether they negatively affect the relationships of the people or not or whether or not they are permissible or prohibited according to the view of people in the society. Instead, things should be considered beneficial only when they are in fact beneficial to man, with a view of what is obliged for a society.