Joshua’s Third Law of Market Economics

If the capabilities of the Market Economics are not explored and used globally under enforced Environmental Protection Laws and the rest ‘J Factor’ Laws & Practices the Earth’s Environment is to deteriorate and the inequality is to rise to the points of no return bringing Environmental Destruction and Global Social Unrest”.

This Third Law is consequential to the First and Second Laws and conclusive of the market imbalances that overwhelmed the global market with the 2007-9 Recession, the sluggish recoveries, the rising inequality between rich end poor: countries and individuals., the growing radicalization, discrimination and social impatiens.

Why inaction is considered futile? – Answers come to:

  1. The Globalization and rising Productivity diminishes the adequacy of the pro-supply Capitalism to manage long-term economic growth, as done in the Past.
  2. The Internet and other communications bring to the world open communications and information.
  3. And not the least, the Global worming caused by pollution and underdevelopment calls for immediate action for eradicating poverty that makes people destroy natural recourses as woods, drive old vehicles, dispose garbage elsewhere, and alternative energies inaccessible.

Joshua Ioji Konov,2014


Joshua’s Second Law of Market Economics

“If ‘the House is painted’ and ‘the Painter employed’ in limited Inflation/Deflation and higher than Zero ‘J Factor”s market environment: the market Entropy is boosted and Equity is built; therefore, thus Invested Capital/Subsidies/Low Rate Lending prompts Market Development”.

There are a few ways to finance Demand:

  • Investment
  • Low Rate Lending
  • Fiscal Initiatives
  • Subsidies
  • Social (Including Social Security, Pensions, Education, Unemployment Benefits, etc.) Expenses
  • Infrastructural Expenses

Whereas, the returns vary from straight return on the Investment to built in the market equity; the higher Market Security lowers lending rates and the return on the invested capital. The Monetary Policies on lending, Environmental Protection Laws, Consumer Protection Laws, Business Contracting Laws, Intellectual Property Laws, Personal Corporate Liability, and the Insurance & Bonding Laws guarantee Environmental Protection and proper Business Practices therefore higher than zero ‘J Factor’.

Market Economy under Market Development works mostly in low interest rate monetary environment.

Any ascend of Market Development increases Consumption, lowers Unemployment, and replenish Fiscal Reserves; it is Seasoned Entropy and Equity’s Growth.

The Invested Capital goes through ‘the House’ to ‘the Painter’ in materials, equipment, and proceeds; it adds to the market value and requires more goods, services, education, and improved infrastructure; it gives opportunities for development of many economies now undeveloped and impoverished. Current globalized marketplace and ever-rising productivity has the manufacturing and organizational potentials to offset excessive inflation/deflation in a way never experienced in history that made possible the Second Law of Market Economics.

Joshua Ioji Konov, 2014

Capital – Investment, Debt, Employment to Market Equilibrium before and in the 21st Century

market* – equals – economic, economy, macroeconomic marketplace

demand^ – equals – income, macroeconomic demand

market development** – equals – economic growth

In the currently used Economics, the employment is still considered as a market consequence to a natural investment of capital with rising productivity, whereas tight monetary supply keeps a “hungry” pool of unemployed making them under pressure to comply with the market* driven supply-to-demand labor and otherwise market*, therefore, a full employment was considered as counter-productive for the market* growth to be maintained, moreover, the inflationary forces of an over-demand would be sustained. The Economics of Scarce Resources of anytime before the 21st Century with relatively less developed technologies, limited globalization, political divisions, etc (the rest of the points will be given in later) had worked in proper for such successful Capitalism by the markets* of US, some EU countries, UK, and Japan.

Then the most developed markets* had used their mostly manufacturing capabilities empowered by the best at its time technologies and well developed labor market to dominate on a less developed, struggling to improve global market*.

However, the 21st Century has brought a few market developments that are new by nature to affect the real economy: developing and undeveloped markets* by tipping off the supply-to-demand market pressure into a demand-to-supply such.


  • Ongoing Globalization – sharply expanded by the end of the cold war.
  • Rising Productivity: accelerated by the Internet.
  • China’s Industrialization and WTO membership.
  • Transnational Corporations’ Moving and Outsourcing of Industrial Production from the Developed Countries.
  • Capital FDI mostly through the Transnational Corporations.


The 21st Century came with very high productivity and large pool of capital to a globalized market* taken literally by the Transnationals for a ride; with the exception of China, which well run market* policies boosted its internal market demand^ to properly capitalize on its long-run trade surplus: Stimulus packages into Infrastructure and targeted less-developed (internal) markets*, Fiscal breaks to targeted market* sectors and less developed areas, to SME (Small and Medium Enterprises), the usage of State-owned Enterprises to lower unemployment and raise salaries; or of Germany, which highly-competitive export oriented manufacturing kept it afloat in times of the 2007+ Recession and Post-Recession times to not accumulate excessive National Debt; or of a few markets* such as some of the OPEC countries and Norway e.g. The rest of the world has gone through the deepest 2007+ Recession followed by slow Post-recovery, increasing inequality and national debt, declining middle class, high unemployment, and most important: the over all lack of vivid market development** that could be improving the global market in environmentally friendly ways to provide to the majority a sustained probable access to employment and the related goods and services. The austerity measure that followed the ongoing theory in economics are pro-cyclical by nature, the trickle-down philosophy of lower taxation, the subsidies particularly in the EU: all prompted inequality lowered the market demand and established conditions of market imbalance that policies resulted in their worst in the most of the EU markets* slum, indeed. Casual of high unemployment, deficit, longer-term recession. What the US, UK and Japan did through Quantitative Easing, Stimulus Packages, Fiscal measures generally counter-cyclical measures have been avoided by the EU, and therefore, it could be said with certainty that these market* policies have helped these markets* to keep however sluggish market development** following the 2007-9 Recessions (the 2009 is added to these markets* performance while the EU is not included). With certainty the more active policies with a consistent long term the better performance e.g. China tops them all with very proactive and consistent market policies

the policy rate is but one of many instruments in thePBC’s toolkit. The PBC had traditionally deployedmultiple tools, including window guidance, softloan quotas, regulatory rules, reserve require-ments, issuance of PBC bills, open market opera-tions, relending and interest rates, both marketand administered — the interactions of whichcould reinforce or offset the policy effect (Ma, Yanand Liu, 2012)”. PBC tested a few new weapons in its arsenal, such asthe ‘Short-term Liquidity Operations’ (SLO), ‘Stand-ing Lending Facility’ (SLF), ‘Medium-term LendingFacility’ (MLF), ‘Pledged Supplementary Lending’(PSL) and ‘Pledged Relending’ (PRL), probably inan attempt to influence market-based interestrates in an environment of volatile two-way capitalflows and more liberalised interest rates. ,

Japan follows with the Abenomocs in action whereas the PM Abe holds firm powers, the US and UK follow less successful casual of using unorthodox methods more-like preventive as post-recession ones, than proactive “as it come; as it goes” market* policies, then finally it comes the EU with the most rigid orthodox market* policies based on deficit reduction and austerity measures that resulted in prolonged recession up to the end of 2013, high unemployment and slow recovery. Most of this information is supported by reliable data sources by “The (not so) Unconventional Monetary Policy of the European Central Bank since 2008″ | Read more at Bruegel

The utilization on the conclusions made by the previous section of this article clearly shows that pro-active market* policies by a government or governments brings better results to more consistent Market Development, whereas inactive policies, or ones based on the orthodox economics prolongs recessions and slow recoveries. However, contrary to this conclusion: in different levels all governments lack business sense and flexibility to manage economics, whereas populism and ideological polarization, mostly in the plural democracies, add substantially to the governments’ inconsistency in their market* policies, and it could be stated with surety that governments could be blamed for their offhand deregulation policies particularly in the financial sector that prompted the 2007 Recession; therefore, to rely just on the governmental market* intervention will be incoherent.

Second, the governments are not proficient enough to maintain adequate market* activities with low unemployment and underemployment, thus bringing fiscal shortages and rising social expenses and inequality.

The success of the most developed markets with the exception of EU to wrestle the 2007-9 Recession is real, but it was necessary because the system of economics well supported by the governments themselves was not proficient enough to do not allow it happening in the first place? The possible prevention was not activated whereas the needed reforms were not implemented on time.

The expectations of a shorter and milder market correction managed by the self-adjusting cyclical powers of the Capitalism did not work it out?

Therefore, when leveraging the positive to the negative effect of the governmental involvement: it appears the governments’ intervention was necessary, and when for the future: if the system of economics does not succeed to prompt enough business activities the governments will be the only saviors by using total market interventions?

What the Capitalism misses under the ongoing globalization and rising productivity to manage market equilibrium is the ability to properly use market tools to steer enough business activity matching the needed demand; unless in long human history, when the supply was the ruling market element alone with always boiling inflation; however, under the new conditions, the demand alone with ever pushing deflation is that issue. Therefore, deficit and national debt alone with inequality are on a rise, the globalization has had allowed large transnational corporation to access inexpensive labor-pool, low taxation, lack of consumer and environmental protection…. for the few large transnational corporations and large investors under such conditions the system has performed well, but for the many it has not had at all: declining middle class, high personal debt, unemployment and underemployment….., expanding governmental market intervention to prevent from total collapse in the recession time, and in attempts to boost growth in post recession time.

What distinguished China as the best performing market of the all developed ones has been the combination of social distribution well inherited in Socialists’ ideologies, combined with active market policies, however, even the Chinese policies and performance has been and still are the best, under the conditions of the very developed US, UK, EU and Japan on a global scale if their system of economics is enhanced by using more proficiently the variable market tools the results could be very advancing, indeed. What China has been and now Japan are following an “as it comes; as it goes” flexible economic policies adapting the ongoing and upcoming market* realities; policies that have been highly recommended by all my articles.

However, even recommending the governmental involvement as an “invisible hand” to boost and maintain market development** particularly into environmentally friendly energies and industries, for such policies’ longer term market equilibrium some definite changes and enchantments are necessary: thus whereas the current Capitalism relies on the large transnational corporations to “export” development under the conditions of shady business; lower taxation, environmental and consumer protections, the so called Market Economics relies on Small and Medium Enterprises to steer business activities, and thus prompt employment and Fiscal stability whereas a strict rule of law in business; enhanced environmental and consumer protection laws are considered as preconditions for marginalizing the unfair market* competition and thus raising their market* security and lend-ability. The pro-active and counter-cyclical governmental “invisible hand” is considered necessary to keep deleveraging wealth inequality through social redistribution; however, the usage of the market forces for maintaining market equilibrium is paramount thus imbalances are prevented. Moreover, a system of probability in economics when economic tools are used as parameters is also necessary for succeeding such relative market equilibrium, because the mathematical principles would not work in such a complex market* environment. In my works the so-called Quantum Economics i.e. Market Economics is a foundation for making possible the rest of the market* approaches be implemented without causing major market* upheavals. The “as it comes; as it goes”’ economics could only logically work if Quantum Factors are used to leverage or deleverage markets*’ buildups when the needs arises, and my works uses such approaches to setup a market* system of economics called Market Economics. System that peaches for full employment boosted by market* noise of a relatively fair market competition supported by targeted investment national and global into environmentally friendly industries and products, and carried on mostly by small and medium enterprises and investors, whereas the large businesses and investors are not discounted in anyway: in the opposite their role is substantial. Social and infrastructural expanses are not considered just expenses anymore, but partial equities used to leverage the market variances: as market* tools, indeed.

The Market Economics comprehends ongoing globalization and rising productivity as main motors for market development by environmentally friendly approaches on a global scale in an interdependent and interconnected world. It is not a Budgetary and Scares Recourses Economics, even so market competition on micro and macro economic levels well complies with such economic principle, however, on a larger scale neither budgetary nor scarce recourses as economic principles are considered bounding. Capital and Debt are considered secondary to Environmental Protection and Market Development whose are attached to the Inflation/Deflation instead. Market* tools are used as parameters to maintain full or close to employment when protecting the Earth environment, Globally.

Joshua Ioji Konov, 2014

Globalization and Consumer Protection

In the system of trickle-down capitalism the consumer protection is counterproductive: along with the business taxation, the strict business laws and environmental protection laws. To succeed quick economic growth a market should lower weight on businesses and investors. The most developed economies under the pressure of democratically elected officials and the public opinion have developed stricter than the developing and undeveloped economies consumer protection laws: entailed by constant struggle between lobbyists and public pressure. In some developing economies the consumer protection is consciously avoided whereas in undeveloped such it is ignored all together to attract foreign investors and large transnational corporations.

For years the developed economies and their Central Banks, and the international financial institutions such as WTO and IMF, ignored the subject of promoting strict consumer protection laws to the rest of the world with the very simple idea to let the transnational corporation roar free that finally should have prompted global economic growth. However, the ongoing Globalization and rising Productivity, the Transnationals the Chinese Industrialization, the Internet, and the outsourcing and moving of Industrial Production have brought a new global market of close economic intercorrelation, and of a tipping off point of global industrial overproduction limiting the ability of many developed and developing countries to manage the necessarily for their fiscal stability economic growth, thus the global economy has come from a pro-supply factor to rule economics to a pro-equilibrium on the demand side factor. The weak consumer protection laws was an market i.e. economic agent that could prompt fast economic growth, which market agent is becoming counterproductive under these new global market conditions, whereas in the opposite an enhanced strict consumer protection laws’ market agent would bring more employment to a market i.e. economy and globally so. This change of values was proved by the widespread indebtedness of many developed, developing and undeveloped economies, which are straggling to keep their rising social and infrastructural expenses with their under-performing economic structures: the inequality, the deteriorating middle class, the increasing environmental pollution particularly by the undeveloped and some developing markets where the use of fossil fuels and old cars is substantial. The weak consumer protection laws are supply related while the new problems are lack of demand related, whereas the struggling to keep adequate employment markets is a pro-supply economics.

The consumer protection laws are demand related that will improve the quality of goods and services, cutting on officials and corporate managements’ corruption and fraud by giving to the consumers rights and voice. It will press businesses to carry out more responsible products and services development and promotion. It will boost the goods and services quality that will require more R&D and therefore more educated employment. On a global scale it will cut down on white collar crime: human rights violations. It finally will bring economic growth based on natural market forces. The quantitative supply economics of limited-mostly-national marketplaces and lower productivity of still undeveloped technologies evolved into a quality demand economics of globalized marketplace and rising productivity of high technologies, therefor, the pro growth system boosted by lack of consumer protection laws must change to a pro market development one boosted by an enhanced consumer protection laws that will unify the globalized marketplace under similar rules for business, quality and the rule of law; the highly sophisticated and succeeded by the most-developed economies achievements will apply to the rest of the world in their best bringing business and social improvement.

By Joshua Ioji Konov 2014


Market Development Verses Economic Growth

Market Development Verses Economic Growth

 The global industrial overproduction capabilities have been gaining momentum accelerated by ongoing globalization, rising productivity, China’s industrialization, the Internet and mostly by the vastly improving high technologies in manufacturing, communications, and international trade. The Transnationals have been given great advantages to find new cheaper markets that they could relocate or outsource industrial production, whereas the huge Chinese marketplace has provided them the needed demand to expand and aggregate their capitalization and economic health even in the time of 2007-9 Recession and post recession time. Simultaneously to the rising profit of the transnationals and big investors, declining industrial employment, middle class, and fiscal reserves have been observed in the United States, many European countries, and Japan, the manufacturing jobs that used to replenish fiscal reserves and maintain large middle class have largely disappeared being moved and outsourced, moreover the industrial jobs still left in there have been highly robotized bringing down salaries and numbers of employed. The low paid jobs that have been gaining in post recession time could not compensate to the lost high paid industrial jobs from the past. In general, capitalism relied on industrial jobs and high interest lending rates to raise profits, boost economic growth and replenishes fiscal reserves; however, none of these three points is working under the conditions of most recent market developments, whereas aggregated super-production, moving, outsourcing, the long-term and deep 2007-9 recession and post recession time, and e.g., made these three points, which are founding for the capitalism, obscure and under-performing. Hence, the governments are keeping their discount tier one interest rates close to zero, but the poor transmissibility of the economies is establishing the condition for new market bubbles instead of boosting higher percentage economic growth with high employment and salaries in manufacturing. The idea that manufacturing will come back to the US, or most European countries to employ the high single and double digits unemployed is unrealistic in its nature. The austerity measures in UK and Europe, the quantitative easing and stimulus packages in the US, UK and Japan, and the stimulus programs in China are temporarily economics tools capable of reviving business activities of mostly lower paid jobs in service sector, however the majority highly paid industrial jobs are gone forever being undercut by high technologies, and moved or outsourced elsewhere, therefore the capitalism could not work out these economies to sustain adequate economic growth to balance rising fiscal social and infrastructural expenses.

 The main carriers of economic growth in the capitalism are big transnational corporations and big investors, which were suppose to stir economic growth by raising productivity supported by trickling down capital. Moving and outsourcing industrial production to wherever cheaper and qualified labor is found, these two economic agents are considered the noise in (1=f noise) formula for every country/market economic development that is suppose to close underdeveloped economies to the developed industrial ones. Hence, low taxes, low regulations, shady not particularly clear business laws, and corporate contracting are the keys to progress, industrial employment, and economic growth. However, for the last 20 years the system of capitalism greatly under-performed the 1=f noise formula has not worked, the middle class deteriorated, the manufacturing jobs are gone, and the business activities are shrinking lacking demand balanced marketplace.

 Moreover, the economic growth, which was suppose to keep at the least as high as to compensate for the natural energy related price rising could not keep up marginalizing into the very low, or like in EU into the recessionary minuses. The deflationary forces have been gaining strength, whereas Japan is the good example of it. Thus, the market forces pressure has degenerated economic growth into market development, however neither the overall financial system, business laws, lending approaches or market security have been adapted to the natural processes of this ongoing change, thus instead of a sustained market development be succeeded and maintained the economies continue accumulating fiscal debt, and under-performing with high unemployment and underemployment. The ideologies are ruling over the clear indicators of a system, which has exhausted its growth generating powers.

 Economic growth differentiates from market development by its fundamental change of priority from big business and investors as main economic agent for economic growth to small and medium businesses and investors as main market agent for market development. Hence, the economic tools such as high lending rates, shady business laws, deregulated financial system, tax breaks for the rich, limited liability corporate structures, cutting down on social and infrastructural expenses, e.g. that worked to boost economic growth are to change into more sophisticated deleveraging diverse business environment using market tools such as enhanced business laws, unlimited liability corporate structures (to the decision making corporate structures – not to the investors), higher market security allowing lower lending rates, using social and infrastructural expenses as an extra equity demand, e.g. that overall will provide better balance to demand-to-supply markets. Market development is an enhanced version of the trickle down capitalism that rely basically on market forces to balance markets demand-to-supply but uses indiscriminately market tools to keep this balance in marginal proximity.

Joshua Ioji Konov 2012

Poverty and Pollution How Inequality will destroy Earth!

Poverty and Pollution

How Inequality will destroy Earth!

The tight lenders leech on the poor undeveloped countries creates hazardous issues that harm the Earth environment and potentially will destroy it. The use of coal and wood for heating, the driving of old vehicles, the garbage disposal and water contamination, the relentless woods destruction relates a lock of market i.e.economic development;

Distribution of Wealth: Inequality in 21st Century
 The ability of Large Transnational Corporations and Investors to outsource and move industrial production, and invest globally has helped them gain profit in time of worst 2007-9 recession and post-recession accelerating and expending inequality;

“Many corporations have a greater turnover than the GDP of most countries. Of the 100 largest economies in the world, 52 are corporations and 48 are countries, and these corporations have sales figures between $51 billion and $247 billion.

Seventy percent of world trade is controlled by just 500 of the largest industrial corporations, and in 2002, the top 200 had combined sales equivalent to 28% of world GDP. However, these 200 corporations only employed 0.82% of the global work force.

In the US, ninety-eight percent of all companies account for only 25 percent of business activity; the remaining two percent account for nearly 75 percent of the remaining activity. The top 500 industrial corporations, which represent only one-tenth of one percent of all US companies, control over two-thirds of the business resources in the US and collect over 70 percent of all US profits.

According to the International Finance Corporation (IFC), inflows of foreign direct investment to the emerging markets have grown by an average of 23 percent per year between 1990 and 2000. The combined value of stock markets in emerging economies is set to exceed $5 trillion in 2006, and has more than doubled in the past decade.

In 2005 the number of millionaires globally swelled to 8.7 million, 5.7 million of whom are based in North America and Europe. Forbes reported a 15% rise in the number of billionaires since 2005, who now have a combined worth of $2.6 trillion.”[ Share the World Resources

While the middles class in developed countries has been deteriorating in numbers, and poverty has stricken many individuals and countries around the Globe.

In current research we therefore extend the work reported in “Leveraging Inequality” (F&D, December 2010), which dealt with only the United States, to include an open-economy dimension. We find (see Chart 1) that what unites the experiences of the main deficit countries is a steep increase in income inequality over recent decades, as measured by the share of income going to the richest 5 percent of the country’s income distribution.

This increase in inequality has contributed to a deterioration in the richest countries’ aggregate savings-investment balances, as the poor and middle class borrowed from the rich and from foreign lenders. This, along with the other factors mentioned above, can fuel current account deficits.

Indeed, we find that as income shares of the top 5 percent increased between the early 1980s and the end of the millennium, current account balances worsened. For example, in the United Kingdom, an 8.7 percentage point increase in the income share of the richest 5 percent was accompanied by a deterioration in the current account–to-GDP ratio of 2.7 percentage points.[ Unequal = Indebted

imbalancesFINANCE & DEVELOPMENT, September 2011, Vol. 48, No. 3

Michael Kumhof and Romain Rancière

Distribution of Wealth: Inequality in 21st Century

]The Earth environment has suffered farther deterioration by being polluted through burning coal and wood, by cutting woods and destroying rain forests, by driving old vehicle, by disposing of garbage and row sewer and etc.

Mongolia is the world’s most polluted country and also home to one of the world’s most polluted cities — Ulaanbaatar. The country’s main sources of pollution are its traditional coal-fuelled stoves and boilers used for heating and cooking, as well as congested traffic and old cars. Heating is essential for the survival of its people for about eight months of year. The country uses everything from coal, wood to refuse, such as black tar-dipped bricks and old car tires to fuel stoves and boilers.[]

Neither of the top 10 polluted sites are in the U.S., Japan or western Europe. However, a lot of the pollution in poorer countries has to do with the lifestyles of richer ones, noted Stephan Robinson of Green Cross Switzerland—for example, a tannery in Bangladesh that provides leather for shoes made in Italy that are sold in New York City or Zurich. “The pollution we see is not coming from the major global industrial companies, it’s all from small mom-and-pop shops, which prepare the raw materials that we then later use,” Robinson said. Or, in the case of Agbogbloshie, Ghanaians are polluted by the electronic devices Westerners have already used. Local people in such areas, Robinson added, “are very often polluting their environment not because they think it is fun but because it is a question of survival.[

 The most developed countries are taking prompt action to improve their environment through investing and tax initiatives to boost green energies and through enforcing strict environmental laws and regulations. However, it is not possible to take on some consistent environmental protection policies on just national level. To prevent from farther harmful environmental deterioration long-term Global policies should be implemented by the International Financial Institution of WTO, WB, and IMF widely supported and financed by the most developed economies of the US, EU, China, and Japan. But, most important, the ways the global marketplace “business as usual” should evolve into more engaging ways promotion of a Green Market Development for many if not all undeveloped markets i.e. economies. An end of the budgetary debt economics that relates economic growth to productivity and investment only, by keeping firm hand on borrowers: individuals or countries alike, is necessary. Even from purely historical stand point of view the system that had performed well in North America, Western Europe, and Japan until the beginning of the 21st Century has been tipping off: 

  •  the Globalization enveloped the entire globe with a very few exceptions,
  • the Internet and rising Productivity made outsourcing and moving of industrial production much easier,
  • and China has emerged as a great economic industrial power

 Developments that have distorted the market equilibrium in many developed and undeveloped markets alike (with the exception of China, Germany and Japan after the Abenomics) by bringing long-term high unemployment and underemployment, debt accumulation, falling standard of living, and rising inequality that were shaking the foundations of the Capitalism, which short term relatively high lending rates, low market security, weak business and intellectual property laws, weak consumer protection and environmental protection laws that were suppose to boost productivity, investment, and growth have established conditions for bubbles and recessions, instead: the 2001 $ 2007 Recessions followed by sluggish recoveries exemplify it.

The conception of using market i.e. economic agents and tools in an “as it comes; as it goes” attitude to prompt Market Development i.e. economic growth is called Market Economics. It has become possible for short-term in History: since the turn of the new century, which brought some new capability for industrial overproduction by the same development that distorted the existing Capitalism. Whereas the technologies that improve Productivity, the Globalization, and China that utilized at best these new opportunities could become the market i.e. economic agents to offset the possibilities for shortages and inflation to allow long-term market development.

 The Market Economics utilizes on such counterproductive for the Capitalism developments to prompt Market Development into targeted Environmentally friendly industries that could prevent from further pollution causal of an industrial production, productivity and investment approach, and in the same time create employment, replenish fiscal reserves, and allow a more balanced market approach in economics.

 The economic agents in Market Economics are flexible parameters that adjust most recent fluctuations on “as it comes; as it comes” probability principle. A high Market Security is paramount to improve the investment transmission-ability, whereas less developed and undeveloped markets, and small businesses and investors are given access to relatively fair market competition. Targeted into Environmentally friendly industries and technologies capital infusion should be adjusted to the Inflation (not to the budget). On local for the developed countries e.g. Detroit and international for the International Financial Institutions the “invisible hand” should prevent from pollution, wasting of resources, destruction of woods, wetlands, etc.

Joshua Ioji Konov 2014

Social and Infrastructural Expenses to Help Balancing Markets i.e. Economies

Social and Infrastructural Expenses to Help Balancing Markets i.e. Economies

 social expenses include social benefits, pensions, educational, unemployment expenses
market equals economy, economic
Market Economics is about Demand and Supply (it is not an error of the Supply and Demand of the past) of goods and services that have gone Global, which complicates the ways Economics explains these processes. Some market sectors have become less Nationally dependent than Globally such, therefore the inflationary forces could not be explained anymore in a closed marketplace as it was before. The ongoing Globalization, the rising Productivity, and the Chinese Industrialization have accelerated the up mentioned processes that have given the opportunity to many markets to develop into not industrial production related market sectors without prompting necessarily Inflations, whereas the Deflations instead have become bigger issue.
 The foundations of current Economics has been less or more a Socialized Capitalism, which lays on the Industrial production. The most developed markets are called Industrialized Economies. However, the most recently expanding Global capabilities of industrial overproduction has invoked the needs for reevaluating Economics and finding ways for Fiscal balance by not accenting on industrial production and industrialization: the most common method is by imposing high taxation. Social and Infrastructural Expenses have become a main tools for re-balancing market demand to supply: however, high National debt run by the most developed countries, but China, has undercut the abilities of governments to continue such policies; Neo Liberals, Big Business and Investors have put political pressure on these governments to reduce Social and Infrastructural expenses. The situation with less developed and undeveloped markets is even worst because of their dependence from their debt holders: the World Bank, European Union, IMF, WTO, which serve their lenders and apply constant pressure to prevent these countries from adding more debt to the already accumulated such.
The unorthodox approaches in Economics by China to use their public sector and stimulus packages for improving consumption have proved productive, as well the Abenomics and the US Quantitative Easing have had. The indifferent European Union orthodox approach has proved a disaster. All of these are good proofs for the changing Global markets’ realities and the need for action by the “Invisible Hand” to re-balance markets under these new arousing realities.
 However, the market interventions by governments or international financial institution may finally backfire and prompt new recessions if the ongoing processes are not properly apprehended and long term policies are not implemented. Policies that can boost market development i.e. Economic growth must prevent from bubbles and major market imbalances. Whereas the Social and Infrastructural are market tools to be used for maintaining markets’ balance they also could be used to prompt market development by targeted capital injecting into Market Leaps without prompting Inflation. If properly executed such Market Leaps could accelerate business and investment activities in these particular market sectors. What is necessary before using these market tools is a detailed evaluation of this market overall abilities to absorb such expansion of consumption and business. Market Economics is an “as it comes, as it goes”’ approach in Economics that tolerate the usage of all market tools to expand and manage market development, therefore, if Social and Infrastructural expansion could prompt employment, consumption and business activities without excessive Inflation, than such approach is considered appropriate. The Uncertainty Principle and the Probability Principle are used for simulations of Market Leaps and prevention of Bubbles. Market Tools are used as parameters for maintaining relative fluency. Parts Market Equilibria are used to maintain General Market Equilibrium. (SEE the related Papers and Articles).
 The Market Economics considers Social and Infrastructural Expenses to certain percentage as equity: such change is made possible by the Globalization and rising Productivity, which allow some extra consumption and business activities balanced by the globalized markets overproduction. Even partial equity such expenses are supplementary approach toward Market Development that that supports the main production and services based approach. Social and Infrastructural Expenses could have a good use for fighting deflation (example for such is Japan).
 The percentage of equity Social and Infrastructural Expenses reflects ta market’s success in adapting the principles of Market Economics, not that much the level of Market Development i.e. Economic Development. An open market with adapted Rule of Laws: Contract Laws, Consumer Protection Laws, Environmental Laws, Intellectual Property Laws, Insurance & Bonding Laws may well be suitable for using such expenses to start a Market Leap, even though this market i.e. economy is not developed in compare to the most developed markets.
 Joshua Ioji Konov 2014

How Economic Changes can boost US Economy and save Free Entrepreneurship

How Economic Changes can boost US Economy and save Free Entrepreneurship

Under the brand new global market conditions

  • of rapid market (i.e. of economy, economies) globalization and rising productivity;
  • of China’s industrial growth;
  • of improving technologies in manufacturing and the Internet;
  • of colossal size transnational corporations;
  • of Vietnam, India, Brazil, and e.g.;

the theory of Market Equilibrium, Philips Curve, Productivity Effect^, Starving the Beast, Frontier Economics^^ the Frontier Thesis^^^ and many other theories of economics, sociology or politics do not  explain comprehensively the needed changes that could prompt under these new conditions the US economy into longer term market development (i.e. economic growth). The 2007-9 Recession with its deep global equity reduction effect and the post recession sluggish rebound is a good example for how dysfunctional modern day economics is where it comes to predicting and countering the effect such upheaval had on the US and many other economies. The WTO, WB and IMF and the entire international financial system, which was suppose to prevent the spreading of economic decline in production and capital failed to do it.

The monetary, stimulus packages, quantitative easing, and e.g. measures taken and being in process by the US, Japan, and China were counter-cyclical by nature far beyond Keynesian theories or even farther the rigid Austrian Economics so much practiced. Moreover, these have been acts of desperation pressured by the real market forces, however the governments helped save the global market from total collapse, whereas the ideological in its nature science of economics has been predicting inflation and doomed dollar that never materialized. Only the European Union continued following the ideological postulates, and the results has been catastrophic, indeed. Throughout this time, the US, Japanese and Chinese governments have been taking over business functions by physically buying share of companies, by giving easy money to different sections of the markets, and by interfering with the market balance (i.e. equilibrium). Many forms of wealth distribution have been implemented too. It has become obvious for the governments to save the market is necessary to raise demand and to help large financial institutions get rid of their evaporated equity, thus lending could be ignited, so the government acted for which high appreciation to President Obama and his decisive approaches.

However, what the US and other governments have been doing by direct market interference should be supplemented and extended into long-term economic program to boost the market share of Small & Medium Size Businesses and Investors (SME&I) bringing them to the front-line as market agents.

The market transmission-ability, whereas large sums of liquidity have been injected into the market through QE and other ways, is a paramount issue needing immediate solution; the options are two either the government takes bigger role in the overall business activities, or the SME&I are given such, thus the choice is between the inept governmental market interference or the market forces and competition to prompt a long-term market development. It is clear who should be doing it: the SME&I, but for them to do it the overall Market Security should be enhanced to raise SME&I’ lower-rate borrow-ability; through changes and enhancements of the intellectual property protection, the contract laws, the insurance and bonding provisions, of the corporate governing bodies personal liability laws, e.g. (

^Australian Economic Papers, Vol. 48, Issue 2, pp. 105-123, June 2009
^^^by historian Frederick Jackson Turner in 1893

that will raise the Market Security and bring the related relative Market Competition Equilibrium in favor of SME&I.

The overall globalization and rising productivity that brought deindustrialization of many developed markets followed by high unemployment and declining middle class and fiscal reserves could be positive to these markets if diverse business activities expands; the Productivity approach (only) cannot keep up with these new global market developments, therefore more diversified business environment is needed to boost employment, whereas the Inflation/Deflation are the main indicators for Market Balance (Equilibrium).

The R&D and Better Education are equally important, however, diverse market activities will expand overall capital and bring more opportunities for connecting R&D and Education to the real markets.

The Social and Infrastructural Expanses under these new conditions will become more equitable thus equally been used for Market Balance, however their Market Share should be limited to additives whereas the free Market Completion should be considered for primary market agent.

To comprehend the market possibilities such approach a detail and comprehensive research ( of should be taken in consideration.

On the question, can the US economy succeed and maintain long-term Market Development under these new global market conditions? The answer is definitely yes, because in the equity based new arriving global economics the well developed and with high equity flexible US market/economy could be a leader; however, the revolution of prioritizing SME&I role should be implemented.


  1. 2001 & 2007 Recessions prompted remaking of the international organizations
    MPRA Paper, University Library of Munich, Germany View citations (1)
  2. Piercing the Veil’s Effect on Corporate Human Rights Violations & International Corporate Crime (Human Trafficking, Slavery, etc)
    MPRA Paper, University Library of Munich, Germany

Joshua Ioji Konov, 2012




Philosophy of a Governing Economy

THURSDAY, MAY 27, 2010

Philosophy of a Governing Economy

In contrast to the US economic policies China uses much more decisively economictools when a situation arises. In many cases when either Global economic crises was on its ways as it happen in 2008-2009 or now when Chinese economy shows overheating the Chinese government does not hesitate to act and to act promptly and decisively. When Real Estate bust in the US provoked rambling effect over the entire Global Marketplace in China a curbing on speculation and targeted low housing prevented similar to what happen to US and EU effect in there.

When in 2009 stimulus packages were needed to add monetary supplies and keep the economy from falling as a result of decreasing export elsewhere and particularly in the US as a main trade Chinese partner, a “flexible” usage of raising Chinese internal demand and expanding trade relations elsewhere and particularly with South Asian markets kept Chinese economy in relatively strong growth of over 9%. In the First Quarter China the world’s fastest-growing major economy expanded 11.9 percent in compare to the last year and now Chinese government takes prompt action again:

China’s Rules to Curb Property ‘Madness’ Will Take Effect Now

“The market is having its “last madness” and speculation may dissipate in a year or 18 months on extra action by local authorities and an increased supply of low-price, so-called policy homes, Li said.

Cheung Kong (Holdings) Ltd., the Hong Kong developer controlled by billionaire Li Ka-shing, said yesterday that efforts to cool the Chinese property market are “timely.”

“You want to take action before the market gets too hot,” Justin Chiu, executive director of Cheung Kong, said in a Bloomberg Television interview. “Prices have gone up really quite a lot; people buying for their own use should do it within their means. If they invest, they need to be cautious about interest rates.”

Chinese government is not persuaded by lobbyists of falling stocks prices “The Shanghai Composite Index fell 1.1 percent yesterday” to moderate or change their policies, they are acting indiscriminately using the available “tools” of economics for prevention or stimulus when needed.

In comparison to China, here in US a partially pro political and ideologically motivated system of the ways of economics is used by the government for prevention of economiccrisis or stimulating the economy when needed.

President Obama spent years to promote the Health Reform in fierce fight over details sometime quite irrelevant when the Health Reform is a purely economic “tool” for expanding economic activities and overall for so much needed wealth distribution and redistribution in US. This constant talk of US deficit and constantly rising National Debt also handicaps the Government to take decisive prompt action when situation arise.

The economic “tools” are more considered ideological prerogatives for political gains andEconomics is more considered as a believe in something could be the Right “trickle-down” Capitalism could be the Left more business involved Government, whenEconomics is a Science by which any “tools” of economics should be used indiscriminately under different arousing economic conditions, any economic tool should be on the table: curbing speculations, financial regulation, enhancing personal liability of risk management of corporate structures, social policies, infrastructural expenses, healthcare expanses, SME tax breaks and low interest financing, subsidies and etc.

In time in ever globalizing marketplace and rising productivity, industrial production of the production based economics is not going to maintain conditions for many countries all over the world to keep up with their Fiscal expanses. When countries like China are building industrial production to new heights in combination with Japan, Germany and US, these may well build capacities filling the Global supply for such industrial production. Here in context the exhausting Earth resources, the Global pollution and deteriorating Environment should be taken in account, too: showing limitations to a constant Global Industrial Growth for all countries so these countries could keep their Fiscal expenses under control.

Industrial production adds the most to any country’s GDP at the moment, therefore under the current production based economics for a country to not be industrialized means either this country is very much underdeveloped like Bulgaria or it runs high deficit like Greece and Portugal. For US the effect of decreasing industrial production has a very similar effect to the Bulgaria and Greece: when in some areas like Detroit poverty roars just like it does in Bulgaria in some other areas like Chicago high deficit is becoming imminent. Thus the policies President Obama is implementing of “artificially” boosting Healthcare, SME and tax breaks to the low income are the only economicpolicies possible under the circumstances, though there should be some better ways for sustained economic growth in which private enterprenuarship is not curbed and freedom of business is not overtaken by governments, because what all learn from the last Great Recession was that Governments could take over businesses, financial institution in a very quickly, and as a conclusion when future recessions hit Governments will go even farther.

China’s handling of the last Recession is a good example of how such crisis should be handled but when a well balanced economics is combined with personal freedom of the US the results could be much higher, but to preserve this freedom we should adjust currently used economics to the arousing developments of the New Century.

©Joshua Konov, 2010