The EU 3% Deficit Limit

The European Union’s Deficit/Debt Rule considered fundamental for members economies harmonic development through raising Productivity and cutting the dead branches of bureaucracy and governments spending:

The Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) is an agreement, among the 28 Member states of the European Union, to facilitate and maintain the stability of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Based primarily on Articles 121 and 126[1] of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, it consists of fiscal monitoring of members by the European Commission and the Council of Ministers, and the issuing of a yearly recommendation for policy actions to ensure a full compliance with the SGP also in the medium-term. If a Member State breaches the SGP’s outlined maximum limit for government deficit and debt, the surveillance and request for corrective action will intensify through the declaration of an Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP); and if these corrective actions continue to remain absent after multiple warnings, the Member State can ultimately be issued economic sanctions.[2] The pact was outlined by a resolution and two council regulations in July 1997.[3]The first regulation “on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies”, known as the “preventive arm”, entered into force 1 July 1998.[4]

“In the ‘corrective arm’ of the SGP, the Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP) ensures the correction of excessive budget deficits or excessive public debt levels. It is a step-by-step approach for reining in excessive deficits and reducing excessive debts.

The EU Treaty defines an excessive budget deficit as one greater than 3 % of GDP. Public debt is considered excessive under the Treaty if it exceeds 60 % of GDP without diminishing at an adequate rate (defined as a decrease of the excess debt by 5 % per year on average over three years).”

The two directions this Rule should ‘help’ individual members and the union overall is thus by obeying the Rule the countries are constrained from balking up unsustainable debt (in case over 60% of its GDP) and to the Union to overall setting common ground for such unification.

The Rule has become the economies measurement for righteousness in terms of balanced economic growth and therefore many if not all other EU economic policies have been designed and implemented in compliance with the Rule. And, for example, when Banks were receiving funds for re-balancing on very low interest rate most of the governments were not given access to such. The principle is to steer business not government spending, to raise productivity not social programs, particularly by less developed economies of the Union that have lower productivity and weak organization. Thus, business must be boosted in places of underdevelopment – not through governments spending but through market activities. The Transnationals are considered front-runners to spread economic activities and prompt productivity. The Trickle-down Libertarian Economics is the philosophy of the EU economics: the preferential status Transnationals and Large Investors in the EU is supported by High VAT pushed by the EU particularly to the Periphery along with Low Profit Taxation. thus the idea also goes that these Transnationals mostly coming from the most developed EU economies will spread out economic progress. The most advanced economies apply constant pressure on the EU government to keep on such direction. (TO BE CONTINUED)

Part II

2007-9 Recession and Post Recession Observations on the EU Deficit/Debt Rule’s Effect

On Macro level the Central Banks use Monetary and Fiscal Policies to adjust redundancies and shortages: over and under capitalization, and thus to prevent building up of balloons that can burst to recessions, or at least it goes in theory. The most recent usage of Quantitative Easing to pumping money into the system, even used since 2001 by Bank of Japan was a relatively new market tool until 2008-9 when the US Federal Reserve started using it on a large scale coming up to 89 Million USD per Month.

Over all, either by issuing long term bonds or by quantitative easing the Central Banks of the US, Japan, EU or UK;s or the China have pumped money through Tier One prime Banks, Financial Institutions, or even Large Corporations into government spending, finance and business activities to sustain the decline caused by the 2007-9 Recession and consequently boost economic growth.

The Central Banks analysis when changing economic policies have used Monetary and Fiscal Policies predominantly influenced by an Economics of Neoliberalism relying on the Large Transnational Financial Institutions and Corporations to help boosting productivity and business that consequently should have brought reduction of the unemployment, underemployment, and thus prompt consumption not by empowering further the governments involvement into business but mostly on the private sector in case on the large finance and corporate organizations.

The theory that have built the most prosperous economies of the US, UK, Germany, and Japan was considered solid enough to raise any doubts in its ability to prompt enough such business and than consumption: it (the theory) is a supply driven growth of ups-and-downs runs pf a trickle-down Capitalism. Life should have continued as usual.

“Eurostat released estimates of first quarter GDP for the Eurozone a little over a week ago (here), showing modest growth of 0.5% for the more inclusive measure of European countries. This is the 12th quarter in a row that the Eurozone has exhibited positive growth after suffering nearly two years of negative growth 2011-2013. The truth is, however, that the Eurozone has only barely recovered to its pre-recession levels. Furthermore, this growth has been driven by core economies, with countries on the periphery still years away from a full recovery.”

The economic growth of the post-recession EU could be considered anemic in it’s best. High underemployment, in some places high unemployment, rising inequality, declining middle class, rising poverty and debt: both personal and national have appropriated the period after 2007-9 up to now (2016). And this is not even the reality, because there are other factors to a bleaker situation, indeed!

debt poverty

A combination of factors that can paint the real picture of an economy/market:

– the Real-time Air Quality Index

– Pollution Index

– the Human Development Index

– Human Poverty Index

– the real employment and underemployment figures

– the Inflation/Deflation

– the inequality ( Gini Coefficient)

– the GDP Growth Rate

must be considered such the real effect certain GDP growth has on the market: whereas the GDP growth is just one of these, and if for example the Gini Coefficient is high and the GDP growth must deduct it (the Gini Coefficient) or at best adjust the GDP growth effect on that market the GDP growth’s effect must be substantially reduced!

The EU Periphery runs high and higher than the most developed EU markets with the exception of the UK Gini Coefficient; Periphery that also is with a low GDP growth, high employment and underemployment, etc that could be considered results of the EU general economic policies effect: the 3% Deficit/Debt Rule is a fundamental EU policy along with the imposed high VAT, low business taxes and social expenses, raising the retirement age, removing labor protection regulations, etc.

 The conclusions drawn from the data is that Budgetary Economic as used by the EU insisted by Germany that is an exporting economy have holding effect to any possible growth. The Market Agents that could boost growth under the ongoing Globalization and rising Productivity differ from the Agents and Tools insisted by the EU: the weakening labor laws, expanding pension age, protection, lowered business taxation, and over the board privatization on discount prices, the high VAT are counter-productive under these new conditions of fierce exogenous market forces: by lowering the equities values and living standards thus farther diminishing the labor markets , consumption, and demand! The conception that by imposing tightening rules over an economy will boost foreign investment and then productivity is not performing under these new conditions, because when the marketplace loses consumption it moves foreign direct investment to expanding consumption markets like China, India, or Vietnam. The ideas of Transnationals being attracted just buy lower taxes and they can boost any market to adequate employment are as archaic when the need for labor has been declining disproportionately to the value of high equity markets with rising consumption.

The Budgetary economics of the Rule keeps tight leach on the indebted less-developed economies; however, as seen it also establishes conditions for high inequality and poverty, unemployment and underemployment. The two approaches to the 3% Rule by those that obey it like Bulgaria keeping lower deficit and those braking it constantly like Italy results seem just keeping the status quo of lower growth of underdeveloped Bulgaria and drifting toward similar but yet with higher standard of living Italy, or crashing down Greece. There could be well concluded that both approaches are not working showing fundamental structural issues in these non functioning markets: the limit of monetary policies is well seen elsewhere: from the US to Japan, where the Prime Rates are underground with fairly limited results. But, the more stubborn EU 3% Rule goes further by even weaker economic results of a prolonged in and out recessen into the 1% growth.

The EU Poverty well matches the Inequality; however, it differs in its Debt data sets: the Debt reduction means no Development, Poverty reduction, and Prosperity in conflict with the Economic theory. .

A Market/Economy combines equity, government expenditures, and consumption from its demand side and business activities and global exposure from its supply such (TO BE CONTINUED)

The balance of a markets must be don by using the market forces self-adjusting on Micro-level – the interference by governments and investors must be done on a Macro-level such adjusting is much more complex and needs interference because of the exogenous and endogenous forces over the real economy, forces being accelerated by the increasing flexibility though moving and outsourcing by the large transnational (TNC) corporations, the technologies that reduced labor expenses by mechanizing farming, production, and services. China that sharply developed its industrial production structures and trading abilities, the Internet that allowed access to information for the many, and not the least the access to capital and foreign direct investment for the large corporations.

The globalization seemingly change the trend from time of the mostly developed economies holding industrial production and technologies to now when large Transnationals do move and outsource wherever they considered it profitable: to places of limited environmental, labor, or consumer protection. In context, China differs from the formal statement and actually the Chinese companies are following the same trend, but many smaller countries are ready to compromise any regulations and laws to attract big business. The TNC employ in the very single digits globally however more than 80% FDI goes to them. The tax avoidance by the TNC is another side effect that literally have them established as above governance by countries entities being able to move capital and infrastructure from country to country in their convenience. Another, major factor that boosted Transnational’s productivity has been the consulting company such as Boston Consulting Group that evaluated entities on a large scale, compared them to their competitors, and then help them lift up productivity by improving management, technologies, and sales practices. The critical powers of these consulting companies may ell be considered in the same level of the technologies, because without proper information for their competitors the difference in proficiency would be wider, than productivity lower in general.

The access to capital through Public Financing or Foreign Direct Investment, or/and Governments subsidies and initiatives have been fundamental for the Transnationals global reach. The global financial structures have covered the entire global marketplace by taking advantage of any opportunities: acquiring assets, building infrastructure, developing markets. What really happened has been a global expansion of the vivid and flexible Capitalism from the more developed markets to elsewhere. The capabilities of the Transnational in combination with the large Chinese Corporations have brought a tipping off that turned around the pro supply market to a pro demand driven such. Occurrence never experienced in history that also brought some graving disadvantages to most world markets: such as inequality, debt, declining middle class, and more poverty. The conceptional inability of the trickle-down economics to deal with these new forces are to be blamed for the poor or very poor results. Some market like Chinese adapted better by manipulating economics using a ‘as it comes; as it goes’ approach of sharply imposed subsidies, tax breaks, or imposing restrictions and farther scrutinizes holding about the 6.8% growth. Another markets like the US and the UK poured huge amount of cash into the system and even though not using the Chinese flexibility succeeded moderate rebound holding 2-3% growth; third markets like the EU ones stuck to the trickle-down budgetary economics and kept in and out from recession and deepened into underdevelopment.

The entire bleak global growth, however, brought rising nationalism, xenophobia, racism, and religious radicalism that consequences in many conflicts, terrorism, and in general instability.

The thing, however, that has been the most harmful affected by these development was the Earth Environment’s Pollution that have brought Global Warming with extreme weather, floods, drought, etc that most definitely must be sustained by alleviation of Poverty through global development but not by uncontrollable industrialization. The usage of old vehicles, the fossil fuels heating, the deforestation, the uncontrolled garbage disposal are byproducts of the poverty, underdevelopment, and lack of opportunities.

 The 3% Deficit/Debt EU rule is the worst trickle-down approach in such global environment, and it is not because the governments should spend endlessly by mostly wasting it, but because the policies through EU’s QE, high VAT, lower labor protection, or bailing banks are even worst by redistributing from the haves to the have not’s when the steering of general business development through SME and Investors should be a primary target along with a relatively fair market competition that is totally ignored. (TO BE CONTINUED)

The Budget Economics is a mindset continuation of controlling borrowers by the lenders; in a way the very old tradition and thinking. Up until the pointed new development in the world the supply driven countries were necessary to obey rules to retain stability. The control by the lenders was the stone to an economy’s success. But, as it was mentioned above, the things have changed to a pro-demand pro-market balance market economics of paramount environmental protection. This new world calls for discontinuation of the budget driven economics by adapting flexibilities to sustain long term Markets Development. Whereas the Rule of Law in Business is a founding Market Agent to succeeding Market Development the budgetary

approach is not primary but a secondary. The everyone’s access to Employment under the conditions of moderate to low Inflation/Deflation are the primary. The Investment by individuals, institutions, or governments must be on a risk-and-reward consistency the way public investment has been. However, subsidies and fiscal initiatives to reach such full employment are must, the Earth environmental protection must overwrite any other priorities, too.

The question: how social and global order could be retained anther such new market condition maybe unanswered by the imposition of the Market Agents as compulsory for participation in the global marketplace; thus, the Rule of Laws in business will replace multiple and many times avoiding countries’ business laws. High protected Environmental, Consumer, Costumer, Labor, Insurance, Bonding, Intellectual, and other laws are Market Agents, too.

The Market Tools, however, used by different markets are compulsory vary from market to market: example is if a market is more socialized than it should be the social market tools should be less applied than the private business ones: the targets, however, are exactly the same: to steer business activities and employment by a self-adjusting on micro-level marketplace.

The Globalization and rising Productivity are pivotal for achieving such targets that conceptually differs Market Economics from the Capitalism or Social-capitalism’s Economics! When on the Micro-level the market forces are free roaming on a Macro-level these forces are adjusted by using parameters – not allowing over or under capitalization excessiveness. The markets expansion is considered a force prompting and maintaining high business activities by developed and developing countries alike. The division of labor where in the developing markets high education, organization, and technologies will benefit straightforward from the developing markets expansion into environmentally friendly farming, tourism, construction, etc the usage of subsidies and targeted market leaps will lower interest rate on all lending under the higher market security while Market Agents are implemented that in longer terms will move from subsidies to micro-level market financing. It cannot be ignored the powers markets invoke when given the opportunities, therefor acting on time to prevent quick acceleration up or down wards is going to be paramount in succeeding such longer-term Market Development; however, its believed that if a market evolves in sectors’ relative harmonic ways the upheaval even when could not be prevented will be far from the overwhelming such under the exp 2007-9 Recession when the Real Estate alone with Construction and Financing were the only market sectors in development – whereas the rest were either just hanging around or on a down-slope.

The Market Tools (explained in detail at my other articles) are parameters used flexibly to prevent or overcome access; therefore, it is considered by me that the ‘uncertainty rule’ applies to modern day markets whereas ‘parameters’ are used more-like in Quantum Mechanics’ approaches than in ‘game theory’ such. I do not believe the ‘Game Theory could not appropriately apply because of the variety of factors that built variety of pressures on the real markets. The game theory implies to similar possibilities why the Quantum Economics’ Theory implies to ‘uncertainty’s situation that the principles are used more-like on ‘as it comes; as it goes; principles of an theory of dispersing of energies: meaning that the built up market energies might be dispersed into the rest of the market and globally when the rest of the sectors are kept ‘healthy; thus, a market must be seen from most angles to be censured in a certain position. The fundamental Market Tools are financial. lending, fiscal and some regulation that let say would shrink or expand access to some production or purchasing of i.e. products, services; the Central Banks current Monetary Policies of raising or lowering Prime Rates are considered to general equilibrium by having effect on all sectors in many cases that are not overheating or too underfunded – the Market Economics considers using Sectors i.e. Parts Equilibriums to fighting over or under heating of these Sectors! Approach currently used by the Chinese Central Bank to prevent the Real-Estate Overheating they raised the LTV requirement on the first house, and actually prohibited the second home landing simultaneously not allowing the developers to play with unit pricing – to hold on the declared prices. The idea was to cool down the supply alone with the demand until the dead brunches of oversupply is extinguished. It is considered a successful approach.

The probabilities for Market Development without prompting high Inflation/Deflation is not unrealistic and somehow was done by China: by targeted subsidies and by the State owned Companies’ raisin salaries to raise income is successful to certain extend; even though, China has one of the world’s highest levels of income inequality, with the richest 1 per cent of households owning a third of the country’s wealth, a report from Peking University has found. The poorest 25 per cent of Chinese households own just 1 per cent of the country’s total wealth, the study found, the Disposable Personal Income in China increased to 31195 CNY in 2015 from 28844 CNY in 2014. Disposable Personal Income in China averaged 8046.18 CNY from 1978 until 2015, reaching an all time high of 31195 CNY in 2015 and a record low of 343.40 CNY in 1978. Disposable Personal Income in China is reported by the National Bureau of Statistics of China. That in all accounts must be considered successful, yet.

Market Economics will work at best a open democratic market: the freedom of ideas and the avoidance of any oppression make individuals advanced and more initiative risk taking, advantageous and forwarding who put under the right conditions would advance far beyond the alternative thinking.

The Perception and Psychology of Economics

The US Feds are well accounting when putting out decisions and explanations of their policies; it is clear that perception proceeds real actions: let say that the mentioning of possible real actions definitely affects markets. Investors always act in advance of probable actions trying to predict these actions and get ahead of the curve. The rightly explained economic policies are taken by the investors weighted by them on the effect such would have on the overall economy. It is considered that investors actions reflect the estimated effect on the business activities and the return on the invested capital.

Clearly, and what the Investors value the most are the relative market stability of the political and demand such! When the developed markets can be considered politically stable the demand such becomes the main value taken in consideration; thus, if business activities and employment are slow to boost such demand the market stability is down therefor the investors are to look elsewhere to invest for ROE. Under the conditions of a supply driven market the demand was always bigger than the supply, then the investment was more politically motivated than market such. The conclusions of a tipping off from supply to a demand driven markets has been well presented in most developed and some considered developing economies: rising inequality among individuals and countries alike has added to such processes of eroding demand – the declining Middle Class, the marginalized income growth, the rising poverty are accelerating by the ongoing Globalization, rising Productivity, the Internet, and the Chinese industrial growth: exogenous and endogenous factors that have never but in the 21st Century had a profound market effect. The Capitalism a Social-Market structure founded on industrial production of supply driven markets could not apprehend the powers of these new developments thus greatly under-performing. The Foreign Direct Investment into huge Transnational Corporations or by lending to emerging markets’ governments have both way contributed to the inequality by bringing huge returns to the very few prompting the productivity by improving technologies and more proficient management, but also by lower salaries and weak consumer, labor, and environmental protection laws. The ‘Catch 22’ of from one side rising Productivity and from another the decreasing demand and good paid employment have hit markets whereas the 2007-9 Recession is a good example of how harmful over-capitalization of a few sectors of a market in the case the Real Estate, the Construction, and the Capital Markets have overrun and left behind most of the rest market sectors, thus real estate prices in residential and commercial sectors rose so high that the supporting income that was suppose to match these prices were left well behind. The Recession hit the entire market with a unparalleled vengeance, indeed. The role of the easy money trickling up and down through up to 110 LTV loans aggregated the insufficiency of the US market inflating the huge balloon that finally burst.

The trickle-down Economics is based on such ups and downs to supposedly self-adjust by cutting the dead brunches of overheating markets; however, the Capitalism has been affected by the incredible exogenous and powers of the 21st Century that almost brought to destruction the US and many other markets, drained billions from pension funds, and impoverished many. Well, if the Earth Environment has not become in great concerns, maybe the self-adjusting could work their ways around, but with the Global Weather Changes that brought accelerating Global Warming and all the consequential disasters the probabilities for a natural trickle-down self-adjustment without total Earth destruction are bleak. The need for alleviation of Poverty, establishing stable Middle Class all over the world must be accomplished ASAP to reduce pollution, deforestation, careless disposal, etc. Such quick response could be done only by using active market economics that must exploit Environmentally friendly approaches of all human activities but yest succeed consistent Market Development and yet preserve Freedom, Liberties, and Democracy!

 The Philosophy of Market Economics is exploring the opportunities of current days economic structures to accomplish the targeted Earth Preservation! 

Joshua Ioji Konov, 09-2016


The New World of 21st Century

The modern day’s economic developments have brought the following very new and enhanced some already existing powers with a force never seen before.: the Internet, the worldwide globalization along with the hugely empowered Transnational corporations and Foreign Direct Investment mostly hold by Big Investors, the Chinese Industrialization that shifted industrial production from the supply to the demand side of Macroeconomics, the highly improving technologies and corporate organization that reduced insufficiency and labor force.

Life, as known, has changed forever, the supply driven philosophies of Communism, Social-Capitalism, and Capitalism deepened in economic incoherence and under-performance: rising inequality, national and private debt have come naturally causal of such not performing Economics. History has shown that anytime excessive economic deficiencies bring extreme political ideologies and current situation from the Middle East to Donald Trump, through rising Far Right and Left Parties confirm such conclusions. The trend to attack the weak, the refugees and immigrants, the different in view or religion has been the same for centuries, but what makes it really different lately has been the speed with which such trends have been developing: nationalism, chauvinism, xenophobia, racism, and ext just broadened to excesses and blindness only such could bring!

The declining US Middle Class looks for someone like Trump to reduce immigration and eventually bring prosperity by using his experience even when he filed 4 bankruptcy and ruined hundreds of businesses! Whereas, in Brussels and Berlin the weak EU economics is directed to all the wrong reasons: from Debt to Productivity: pushing the weak countries to dismantle labor and social protection with the only idea of triggering consistent growth; however, the weakness prevails instead – thus the Brexit, the on the brink of collapse Greece, the high unemployment and underemployment, lost generations and political instabilities in Northern and Southern Post Communist Countries. On top of all the refugees that are flooding most developed economies. The EU Periphery has been the best example of poorly handled economics: high VAT and Subsidies that redistribute taking from the have not’s and giving it to the have’s. While the trickle-down effect has become more like an illusion than reality, indeed. The people in charge, however, have not stopped using all political and financial control means insisting that early or later the system will start working!?

The system of the Chinese economics seems to be the most adequate in comparison to the rest, and guess what if personal freedoms and democracy have been under-performing to a centralized practical Chinese approach many openly deny it by even calling Second or First depends of the view Economy still developing just to not answer the question how such thing happened and is happening? Why deregulated capitalism under-performs to a centralized China?

The same ‘Economists’ that predicted the collapse of the UK economy after the Brexit, wondering why this did not happen, or even before that ‘overlooked’ the 2007-9 Great Recession, mishandled Greek economy and overall the entire EU, or the Abe’s Second Arrow of raising taxes that undermine the Japanese economy revival resulted of his first arrow even though the flow of Quantitative Easing capital could not trickle-down choked by the system.

In the US the economic growth give to the very few the majority of it: the inequality, marginally leveraging income kept the Middle Class further deteriorating and Poverty rising. The lowering unemployment has not helped these development to reverse.

The gross reality is that ‘orthodox’ approaches in economics have brought nothing but even more debt and inequality; underemployment and hard times that finally brought Mr. Trump who ‘has a quick solution’ to any problem: from underemployment and poverty to crime he ‘can fix’ it for a week or two, just entrust him with the Presidency!?

The Chinese economy is bettering others because of its ‘as it comes; as it goes’ approach that has been using any market tools to boost sectors or slow them down. The practicality and flexibility with which these economic tools can work in different economies differ, however the principles are the same: boost Small and Medium Enterprises and Investors under a stable market competition environment: prompt environmentally friendly industries to save Earth, boost consumption but not by blind industrialization and pollution!

The 21st Century has brought exogenous and endogenous forces unknown and powerful with the Globalization and rising Productivity: if these forces are properly used the global market development may eliminate pollution, poverty, and bring stability!

Joshua Ioji Konov, Sep 2016

Marketism – To Avoid Environmental Disaster

Eventually the current system of economics may naturally evolve to accommodate the strong exogenous and endogenous market i.e. economic forces consequential of the ongoing Globalization, rising Productivity,  Chinese Industrialization, and the Internet; however,the fastly developing global warming and occurring sharp temperature variances and disasters urge more quick and radical interference to prevent Earth destruction. The developed economies are taking action by enhancing green energies usage thus gradually cleaning their environment; whereas, the most polluted cities have been moving into the developing world mostly invoked by usage of old vehicles, fossil fuels heating, and the following deforestation, water pollution, and widespread garbage disposal!

 Economically, the poverty and deteriorating (if any) middle class are the driving forces behind such pollution that may destroy Earth in a short term, and therefore prompt actions are necessary for prevention: alleviation of poverty and establishing of middle class but without deregulated industrialization – the Market Leaps are needed to accomplish such targets and the Marketism is one of the ways that will do it without governmental take over, as we all know how inadequate the governments might be when handling business!

 Taking business from the large corporations and investors to the small and medium such by saving micro economic competition, individual freedoms and democracy is the ways of Marketism.

The market balancing forces are the most important particularly on Microeconomic level: their self-adjusting powers limit markets from exacerbations,worthless items and services, and financial balloons; they also boost market development and productivity. On Macroeconomic level such forces are not capable to self-adjust without interference because of the exogenous and endogenous forces of the globalization, the rising productivity prompted by improving technologies, China’s super-productional abilities, and the Internet. The trend of reducing labor because of the global competition is natural for the markets: the high proficiency is enhanced by the high education: the graduating CEO’s, managers, and consultants are evaluating and comparing how companies function labor and technology’s wise. It is natural for market competition to always reach new heights in proficiency – that raises productivity and profitability. The globalization has opened some unknown doors for foreign direct investment, moving and outsourcing of industrial production, and financial services that give to the large corporations and investors access to cheaper labor and quick setup of such production and  services. Whereas, the weak international and national for some countries business jurisprudence gave some tax avoidance and money laundering. The lack of reinvestment broke the trickle-down path thus basically creating unfavorable business conditions for the middle and starting up employment.

This market pattern is highly improbable to be reversed but if the small and medium companies and investors are let into the competition by marginalizing the market advantages given to the large corporations and investors: which are these advantages? – the supply trickle-driven economics relied on the down-up concentration of capital and therefore the large corporations enjoyed limited liability corporate structures, shady business laws in contracting, costumer and labor protection, insurance and bonding, environmental protection and other laws. Such disadvantages keep the market security and the following lend-ability in the margins mainly hurting the small and medium businesses and investors:

 On a Macro level, however, the market forces could be used along with market ‘parameters’  to prevent harmful recession, and avoid slangish Market Development: the most important targets of such conditions should be full employment and moderate inflation/deflation – the productivity is important, too: however, considered micro market competition on full swing the market forces will accelerate productivity – on a macro level the targeted Market Leaps into predominantly environmentally friendly energies and industries will steer business activities building equity. 

Joshua Ioji Konov 2016

The Balancing Weights in Market Economics

The developing technologies in a highly organized and globalized marketplace have established conditions of overproduction simultaneously diminishing demand resulted of same these technologies, excessive capital for the large transnationals and investors. The Capitalism’s trickle-down economics was founded on industrial production with wide margins that is underperforming under these new conditions of reducing industrial labor and low percentage profitability. Therefore, debt, inequality, and declining middle class income have become fundamental issues: the service employment is generally less paid. China’s targeted economic policies are exception of the rule; but everywhere else from the most rigid EU economics through the US and UK down to the least rigid Japan the ideology of the budget trickle-down economics has been bringing stagnation, debt, slow development (i.e. growth), declining middle class, thus all the ‘goods’ of inadequate economics that cannot take advantage of the 21st Century’s globalization and rising  productivity. Along with the economic underperformance has come general radicalization based on national, racial, religious, etc differences: the 2007-9 Recession and the Middle Eastern Unrest have aggregated these developments that brought ISIL, refugees, Brexit, Donald Trump, and all similar extremes.

 For balancing market weights, there should be considered two directions of adopting these new global developments: Globalization and rising Productivity –  first approach goes toward more governmental business involvement and wealth distribution and second toward prompting Small to Medium Businesses and Investors by boosting business activities and letting microeconomic forces work its ways out. However, the ways a particular economy should be directed to is individual for this market i.e. economy: meaning some need enhancing social and infrastructural expenses others may need the opposite  way; but, it is going to be a mixup of economic policies and measures of an ‘as it comes; as it goes’ Market Economics.

 Market Agents and Market Tools are to be used in steering business and enhancing activities:

 The Market Agents (follows) are mandatory to establish relatively fair global market competition.

  1. Strict rule of law in business contracting, financing and full corporate liability

  2. Strict laws in Environmental, Consumer, Labor Protection

  3. Strict laws in Insurance and Bonding

  4. Strict laws in antitrust, intellectual property, anticorruption

  5. Strict laws in open market,

Thus when these Agents are implemented the high Market Security would allow lower rate lending to SME and Investors

 The Market Tools (follows) are flexible in usage differing from market to market

  1. Foreign Direct Investment

  2. Bank Lending

  3. Public Financing

  4. Targeted Subsidies

  5. Social and Infrastructural Expenses

  6. Market Leaps

  7. Fiscal and Monetary Policies

Tools to be at an ‘as it comes; as it goes’ approach individual for markets i.e. economies.

 Marketism i.e. Market Economy is not strictly budgetary constrained whereas investment and lending are on risk and reward principle; even the Business laws are strict it is not responsibility of governments to impose restrictions or weights based on belonging to nationality or an economic bloc. The Rule of Law in Business must equally apply to all participants.

 On a Microeconomic level the market forces should be decisive for market balance; however, on Macroeconomic level – priorities as environmental protection should overwrite market forces by being used as main economic i.e. market agent/tool for targeted development.

Accelerated Market Development under the balance between the Supply to the Consumption in the conditions of Moderate Inflation/Deflation is what Marketism i.e. Market Economics is all about and since different economies actually differ in the involvement of these variables Market Tools; therefore, the action and taken should change weight depending of their individual characteristics.

The Marketplace must have relatively fair competition under the Rule of Laws in Business whereas employment and development should be done by engaging the majority without damaging Earth Environment. Budgetary economics must evolve into targeted but still market driven on a micro level Market Development: stability and poverty alleviation are paramount.

 By steering the SME & Investors business activities and proactive Government as  an Invisible Hand a consequential employment/demand/consumption/anatropy will expand the Marketplace for the Large Corporations and Investors: the natural for the Micro market balancing forces are going to be very uplifting and prolific for Fiscal and Monetary Reserves, Social and Infrastructure Policy On a Microeconomic level the market forces should be decisive for micro market balance; however, priorities as environmental protection should overwrite market forces by being used as main economic i.e. market agent/tool for targeted development.

Joshua Ioji Konov 2016

Marketism i.e. Market Economics and Governments

The Marketism is based on firm rule of law in business. environmental, consumer, labor, insurance, and intellectual property protection laws. the Governments under such conditions are obligated to implement and hold these Market Agents in order these markets to deleverage from the current system that give advantage to Big Business and Investors: thus causing increasing Inequality, stagnation, declining middle class, and global unrest to more fair competition with higher market security: thus prompting more business activity particularly through the Small to Medium Businesses and Investors. It is a change of priority and powers from the centuries ran trickle-down economics into a market run on a micro and macro levels such: a revolutionary change of the ways societies and markets i.e. economies work. Such changes have only become possible because of the ongoing Globalization, rising Productivity, Chinese Industrialization, and the Internet: factors unknown in the Past that prompted global, exogenous to most markets i.e. economies, forces of industrial overproduction. The Capitalism which is based on such industrial production could not manage these new developing overproduction forces: rising inequality, falling standards of leaving for developed economies and not improving such for the developing economies, and ongoing Earth pollution have invoked from the Capitalism inadequateness that brought back the excessive forces of nationalism, bigotry, chauvinism, religious fundamentalism and finally global unrest: wars, refugees, instability.

The usage of old vehicles,  primitive heating devises, the poverty driven world continues polluting, cutting and burning woods, disposing garbage elsewhere are the main sources of environmental pollution; therefore, to save Earth from destruction elimination of poverty and imposition of environmental protection laws are necessary and paramount.

The Marketism uses market forces on Microeconomic level to boost business activities globally; it is not a Budgetary approach, as all historical systems have been, but connected to Inflation/Deflation variedness whereas Budgets and Investment are raised to an open level to free flowing capital more like the current Stock Exchanges are: with the risk comes the reward; so, it is not any governmental role to protect or control these capital flows – the general rule of law in business incl financing should do the job; for an example: if someone fraudulently breaks the laws elsewhere in the participating markets, he or she will fall under the justice system; the common laws, or personal laws in their current meaning will apply to business laws as well; even though bankruptcy, insurance, and bonding will limit some liability causal of market forces when personal fault is proven no exception to the rule of law should apply. Corporation’s managers or investors, large or small, should have the same liability to the law.

 Such market driven system of business will raise market security thus lowering risk for borrowing or insurance coverage thus taking business (financing incl) to some new hights. The governments are not to interfere into business or financing disputes nationally or globally.

 Now, the so called ‘invisible Hand’ by the governments becomes very important under these new condition because the markets and investment may not be sufficient to steer enough business activities, and also the Market Tools used differ for individual markets (for example more socialized markets may need less social expenses to boost such business activities than less socialized): an ‘as it comes; as it goes’ Market Economics targets very low unemployment through high business activities under limited Inflation/Deflation by using the Market Tools in any flexible way possible. The Market Tools are FDI, Subsidies, Prevailing Wages, Social incl Educational and Infrastructural Expenses, Quantitative Easing, Market Leaps. The ‘means justify the deeds’ as long the Market Agents are mandatory.

What the Marketism does is taking the level of self-adjusting from Macro to Micro  Economic; thus, on a Microeconomic level the markets i.e. economies must self-adjust while on a Macroeconomic the system of using Market Tools as Parameters must persist to prevent from recessions/depressions. The Nash Equilibrium should be used on Macro Level indiscriminately meaning not politically motivated approach. The Central Banks should use any possible way to prevent upheaval! Example is the ways Chinese Central Bank avoided the Real Estate bust by imposing limits on second mortgages and asking for high LTV on the first.

 The WTO, WB, IMF must be the frontrunners for opening global markets through implementing the Market Agents and then providing the sufficient capital plus the FDI to succeed accelerated Market Development in all markets. Educational programs, apprenticeships, prevailing wages, maybe necessary to setup and boost  business activities.

Joshua Konov, 2016

Marketsm – Active Economics

Economics has been a playground for the governments for the good part of the 20th and the 21st Centuries; from the far right trickle-down Austrian liberalism to the Soviet style ultra left total control by the government. Such extremes were prompted by the ideologies of from one side firm believes in the free Libertarian economics founded on the pro-supply marketplace, vigorously suppressing Inflation through tight Monetary and Fiscal policies and a generally controlled economies by the Communists believing in the Marxists views proclaiming the constant classes’ straggle for who to control the means of industrial production: a pro-supply economics, too ‘from quantitative aggregations to qualitative improvements’ dialectic theory that is just on the opposite side of the Libertarian philosophy whereas the pro-supply principles that create economic growth are the same! Both theories rely on a ideological control over the economy using very common explanation of how a pro-supply economy works: the dialectic powers of the industrialization establishing high profit margins economics!

 When the Communists economies and economists are gone for good with a very few exceptions of Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea the Libertarians continue ruling the global economics almost unconditionally. By its nature the pro-supply economics is trickle-down driven: either by the rich or by the government owning and controlling the industrial means of production – makes no difference philosophically and practically – the ideas and ideologies are based on the same principles: ‘shady’ business (remember the huge factories polluting, filthy. full of injustice and Communist officials in total control on individuals freedom or the big businesses and investors using Offshore Banking and many other ways not to pay taxes). The Communism and the Capitalism have many things in common even when the results are different: the first is gone without glory when the second has succeeded in building prosperity in North America, Western Europe, Japan. etc 

 However, the industrial production capabilities evolved from a pro-supply short marketplace into a pro-balance such: the ongoing Globalization, rising Productivity, the Internet and Chinese Industrialization have reached very highest tipping off the supply driven markets. The exogenous global forces are up to the point of suppressing markets invoking stagnations: dilation instead inflation.

 The Global Warming is a turn-off on the old style pro-supply economics factor, too: the inability of the libertarianism to establish stable markets with less inequality and alleviation of the global poverty necessary for reduction of  old vehicle usage and primitive heating, excessive deforestation that is a main source of pollution and improper garbage disposal.

 A practical economics able to comprehend and apprehend these new developments into  productive force is needed more that anything because the global marketplace is ruled by conceptions and ideologies. In the modern age of high technologies and the Internet the probabilities for setting up such productive economics are as high as ever, but the ongoing believes and conveniences of the old even underperforming practices are overwhelming.

 Such economics, I called Marketism i.e. Market Economics saves on a Micro level the markets and market competition as factors that can limit excessiveness by keeping free entrepreneurship the main source for development, and by limiting governmental powers and market take overs.

Economics that marginalize the inequality with which Small Businesses and Investors participate in the market competition in compearance to the Big Businesses and Investors, and makes economic tools such as Social and Infrastructural expenses of the past partially equitable parts of the Market Equilibrium. Takes in account the exogenous powers and environmental protection to steer business activities in these very complex marketplace.

 Marketism is also flexible: it differs from market to market, from country to country, where even though, the Market Agents such as the Rule of Law in Business, Contracting, the Environmental Protection, Consumer and Labor Protection, Intellectual Property Protection, Insurance and Bonding Laws must be mandatory the Market Tools of Private and Public Investment, Subsidies, , Social and Infrastructural expenses, targeted Market Leaps with less or more governmental involvement are disproportionately used and specific for individual markets.

There is no status quo in using Market Tools: some markets where the governments are much involved may need less involvement some to the opposite may need more; however, targeted are Full Employment and Low Inflation/Deflation: the Budgetary Economics goes to a secondary factor – the risk to reward investment of Marketism is similar to the Stock Exchanges present system – Governments should not be neither becker nor  investors; even though the strict business laws call for personal liability the insurance and bonding,and bankruptcy are market tools,

Joshua Konov 2016

EconPapers: Enhancing Markets (i.e. Economies) Transmissionability to Optimize Monetary Policies’ Effect

Joshua Ioji Konov (

No 205, EY International Congress on Economics I (EYC2013), October 24-25, 2013, Ankara, Turkey from Ekonomik Yaklasim Association

Abstract: Monetary Policies of expanding liquidity through bottom low interest rate; stimulus packages, quantitative easing, etc should be transmissible to the entire market (i.e. economy) for best performance. However, current markets (i.e. economies) do not posses enough market security to provide the transmissionability to reach adequate market development (i.e. economic growth). This paper theoreticizes that by mitigating of A) the shady business practices of B) vague personal corporate liability and C) contract laws, D) vague insurance and bonding laws, E) inadequate 1) intellectual property laws, 2) environmental protection and 3) consumer protection laws, etc market marginalization in fact will enhance the market security, and improve the transmissionability and the effectiveness of the monetary policies to boost market development (i.e. economic growth).

Keywords: Monetary Policies; Market Economics; Transmissionability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A1 D01 D5 P48 K0 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-mon
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link) (application/pdf)

Source: EconPapers: Enhancing Markets (i.e. Economies) Transmissionability to Optimize Monetary Policies’ Effect

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!


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.

2015 in review

The stats helper monkeys prepared a 2015 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

A New York City subway train holds 1,200 people. This blog was viewed about 5,900 times in 2015. If it were a NYC subway train, it would take about 5 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.