Real Market Economics


Disproportionate Rising Inequality in the 21st Century shows the inability of the Capitalism to apprehend the powers of the ongoing Globalization and rising Productivity into a productive force to improve living standards and alleviate poverty!

vnYEy28iNvm5iq4K77n8WGwSDiEU1QuOgtvQGAVYLxM

The Industrialization of a Trickle-down Economics is the culmination of the Capitalism; however, such could not workout under these new global developments without destroying Humanity! Only by using Environmentally Friendly Technologies such destruction can be avoided!

The theory of Marketism i.e. Market Economics  is all about Market Equilibrium: a Demand that grows proportionately to the Supply capabilities (not the way around when it comes to most Globalized Markets) under moderate Inflation/Deflation. Whereas General Equilibrium is the target and compilation of the Parts i.e. Sectors Equilibriums (meaning contradictory to the current Central Banks policies of varying Prime Interest Rate). Marketism, however, does not reflect only Monetary and Fiscal Polities i.e. used by the Keynesian or Liberal approaches; it changes and enhances the Market i.e. Economic Structures to adapt to the exogenous and endogenous forces arousing by the ongoing Globalization and rising Productivity. The principle of Marketism is free flow of people and resources, freedom of speech and respect for human rights. Its main difference from the Capitalism is the dimming of existing ‘trickle-down’ economics into an ‘as it comes; as it goes’ economics meaning to not relying on the concentration of capital and related investment that mostly relates Large Corporations and Investors that benefit from such system; but, such system that deleverage such advantages into a ‘more just’ economic system that establish condition where Small and Medium Businesses and Investors would have similar access to capital and market competition. For such conditions to succeed the Rule of Law in Business should be firmly adopted along with Environmental Protection, Consumer Protection, Labor Protection, Insurance, Bonding Laws must be enhanced too, for supporting such deleveraging. Marketism obliges the Central Banks alone with the IMF and the World Bank to use not just discount rate but number of Economic (Fiscal, Monetary, and some new) tools either to prompt Market Development i.e. Economic Growth or to slaw such in case of exploding Inflation/Deflation occasions. The Social, Educational, Medical, Infrastructural expenses in Marketism are considered Equities under the conditions of moderate Inflation/Deflation, the development of Environmentally friendly technologies, farming, and tourism are paramount Economic Tools to be used to prompt such Development in the same limits.

The Market Economics takes market competition and re-balancing to a Microeconomic Level from the Macroeconomic such because of the same exogenous and endogenous forces formally mentioned: the economic tools used indiscriminately (not politically or ideologically motivated) to either boost Market Development through or slow such – whereas main indicator (trigger engaging) is the Inflation/Deflation fluctuations:  the currently used debt constrained Economics is to change into Inflation/Deflation constrained such. Market Leaps through targeting  artificially and semi-artificially boosted Environmentally friendly Market Development on National and Global scales is from one side to alleviate poverty and inequality, and from another to protect Earth Environment while such accelerated Market Development is succeeded. mThe Debt under Market Economic becomes Private Issue moderated by the Courts than the Governmental issue of the Present when the World Bank and IMF are backed by the Most developed Countries Governments. Lending, Crediting, Public and Private financing are risk taking enterprise that cannot and should not be individual nations issue; however, the strict Rule of Laws in Business of the Marketism ensure better Investment and Bonding Insurance along with Business Protection Laws: the difference is in the separation of National Governments from International Investment. The currently used Debt Controlling Policies constrain Economies from development not taking in consideration the exogenous forces of the ongoing Globalization and the endogenous forces of the rising Productivity that are bringing inequality, diminishing Middle Class, rising Poverty and Underdevelopment that affect straightforward the Earth Environment through polluting it and not implementing the more expensive environmentally friendly technologies: and from another side, bringing xenophobia, racism, nationalism, religious fanaticism, wars and dictators: the Middle East, Ukraine, Mr. Putin, and now Mr. Trump.

We should have seen a decrease in inequality with globalization, but that’s not what has happened in the last 25 years, according to Nobel Laureate and Harvard Professor Eric Maskin. While there are a number of reasons to care about inequality, he says there is a high correlation between high inequality and social and political unrest, with consequences for a country’s political and economic stability. tfNthGCPJzJj5lxFsPSkcAsFVeT6JS33gbTZ2RSIW-g

 The Large Transnational Corporations and Investors have been beneficiary of the underdeveloped economy supply driven and trickle-down for generations – system that had performed well ever before the 21st Century because the economies had run shortages and the pro–supply forces were overwhelmingly strong thus justifying such system. there how Western Europe, United States, and Japan succeeded incredible economic development.

The expanding Globalization and rising Productivity, the Chinese Industrialization and the Internet tipped-off the pro-supply predominant forces in economics to a pro-equilibrium on the demand side economics where the exogenous and endogenous forces of overproduction overrun the supply shortages market forces and thus the Social Economics (trickle-down) that worked in the Past have become inadequate – lacking the flexibility to ensure a commutative demand. The 2001 and 2007 Recessions reminiscent the powers of these new forces and accelerated the negative effects of the Capitalism’s incomprehensibility under these new conditions bringing inequality and rising poverty, diminishing the existing Middle Class, and finally xenophobia, religious fanaticism, wars and revolutions from the Middle East, Africa and Ukraine .

 There are just two fundamental ways to boost the demand side: either by expanding the governments interference in markets i.e. economies or to let the market competition create competitive conditions enough to prompt employment, income, and alleviate poverty on a national and global levels. However, the Large Transnationals and Investors under the Economics of just Productivity and Investment cannot prompt enough business activities, that must be environmentally friendly, too, to make this happen. The moving and outsourcing production prompts instead corruption, pollution, and inequality – the advanced technologies and desperate governments to give up anything to ensure some employment add to these new processes. The Internet Companies’ stocks busted balloon in 2001 and the Real Estate such in 2007 are a natural effect of not working US Economy that the lack of adequate business activities allowed the over-capitalization of the two pointed sectors. The letting markets competition in prompting enough business activity and raise income must be considered the most adequate to saving personal freedoms and most importantly flexible enough to avoid recessions and upheavals – so, a system of new economics must appropriate ways to allow market system that will allow competition to predominantly balance market equilibrium instead of giving these functions to inflexible, politically motivated governments do it.

The Small and Medium Businesses and Investors have become a leading market i.e. economic agent under these new conditions while the employment, income, and related fiscal and monetary effects have become paramount to succeed Market Development; however, under the conditions of ‘shady’ business laws of the Capitalism the markets i.e. economies treat unequally them comparing their large competitors.  Whereas Large Transnationals and Investors have access to lower rate lending, public financing, corporate pork, lower taxation, and etc the SME and Investors are lacked into a circle of high interest lending if any possible financing and lack of contract and other business laws to protect them from predatory actions. The interrelation between Business Laws and Financing is streight – the market i.e. economic security comprise the risk in lending: by improving the market security a market i.e. economy enhances finance-ability of in the case SME and Investors.

 Marketism is a Market Economics the enhanced Business Laws, (Insurance, Bonding, Environmental, Labor, Consumer Protection, etc Laws) improves Market Security and thus easier Financing to SME and Investors: Final result of such actions must be a natural to the market competition boosting business and investment activities, income and equity. These market Agents are mandatory for all markets i.e. economies, whereas the usage of Market Tools such as Stimulus Packages (National and Global), Social (incl. educational, medical, retirement) and Infrastructural Investment, Targeted Investment, Market Leaps, etc. vary from market i.e. economy to market i.e. economy because of the accent needed on individual to any market specificity (expl. China needs less accent on Social and Infrastructural targeted investment as it has already been developed than the US where it must expand further). The Principle of treating markets compatible to their specifications apply globally!

The limitation of the currently used Economics, in particular the EU orthodoxy may is well presented in: Vítor Constâncio: In defense of monetary policy “Opinion piece by Mr Vítor Constâncio, Vice-President of the European Central Bank, 11 March 2016.” One of the best example of how the Capitalism’s ideologically inclined Economics underperform and is hard to fix I consider The G20 has appealed for the use of other policies, notably fiscal and structural reforms. While other policies would certainly be welcome, one can have justified doubts about their implementation. For a start, active stabilising fiscal policy is restricted by law in the EU and by politics in the US. More generally, countries that could use fiscal space, won’t; and many that would use it, shouldn’t. That leaves us with structural reforms. Some, like upgrading education and judicial efficiency, are important but take a long time to implement and to produce results. The structural reforms economists often have in mind (i.e. liberalization and deregulation of markets) lead to lower wages and prices in the short-term, which does not help inflation normalisation. And concerning unemployment, higher productivity often initially implies labour saving. Structural reforms are essential for long-term potential growth, but it is difficult to see how they could spur growth significantly in the next two years, especially when the current problem is lack of global demand. And as regards their delivery by governments, we should recall the embarrassing results of the G20 plan agreed in Brisbane to generate an additional 2% in world growth via a long concrete list of reforms put forward by the IMF and the OECD. In fact, the world economy now risks not even attaining what was then considered the baseline scenario.”

However, the formal conclusions even brilliant do not lead Mr. Constancio to major changes on the structural economics but points into more aggressive Monetary Policies, which is a washout because the practical economic tools considered at the moment as well the market structures cannot accommodate Capital in away to boost business activities, income, and equity to a point of needed 90+% employment by using environmentally friendly approaches. Aggressive Monetary Policies in a low level transmissionability can only  create excessive over-capitalization, balloons, and economic upheaval.

The G20’s structural reform agenda should address income gap and financial system fragility BY: DATE: MARCH 15, 2016 “Traditional macroeconomic policies have been important in stabilizing the global economy, but they are no longer enough to addressing the fragility and low growth of the current economic environment. In particular, they cannot sustainably address the persistent weakness of demand, let alone drive new productivity growth. Such policies have far more limited ammunition now than 8 years ago, when the global crisis erupted. Monetary policy in numerous large countries is at the zero lower bound, and interest rates can hardly be lowered further. Fiscal policies are more constrained in some countries now than they were before the crisis.”
Everybody agrees: wages need to grow if Japan is to make a definite escape from deflation. Full- time wages have increased by a mere 0.3 percent since 1995! For example, despite its record profits, Toyota increased its base salary only by 1.1 percent last year. The average of 219 Keidanren firms managed just 0.44 percent. Clearly, an increase in base wages, colloquially referred to as “base up”, is long overdue.

The current Global Markets i.e. Economies situation vary from bad to worst the very exception is China that uses an aggressive method of Economics similar to this promoted by the Marketism; and when the debt-to-gdp ratios observed the negativity goes even step further – the Capitalism, as formally stated: is inflexible to anyhow accommodate the exogenous force coming from the Globalization and both exogenous and endogenous force of the rising Productivity; and thus running into a constant stagnation. On top of it the pollution result of driving old vehicles, using primitive heating, unsustainable woodcutting, etc may bring Environmental disaster before the Economic such to arrive.

The only way for the world to survive under these new conditions stands at apprehending these exogenous and endogenous forces to alleviate poverty, keep very low unemployment and underemployment, maintain and build sustainable Middle Class under strict Environmental protection Market Development: that is the Marketism – a Market System of Human Improvement in place of the Social System of the Capitalism, Social-Capitalism, or the Communism.

Advertisements