Why It Is That Difficult to Change Economics?


The system Economics has evolved in time into Game Theories based on data mining; conceptions founded, many times, on idiosyncratic endogenous principle conclusions. Mathematics has been used to backup these conclusions: formulas taken as status quo in time. The over all philosophy of the orthodox economics accepts straggle to survival as bringing in individuals, markets the vivid powers to invent, innovate, create, organize, adjust to the changing economic conditions; when exaggerations, redundancies, inefficiencies compile a adjustment, recession occurs that could be self-adjusted by individuals, companies, institutions to a point when a new fun off can start; thus, spinally the economic pressures increase productivity, sufficiency the standard of living, better conditions of infrastructure, education, better life for the many. A minimum unemployment rate needed to carry on enough eagerness for the labor to support the demand for employment, labor without prompting inflation as if the unemployment goes under the % so the labor market is disrupted then high wages are required that boost inflation, high prices and limit businesses ability to increase productivity, production, keep competitive internationally in the US it means interstate, too.

The orthodox economics has evolved into game theories when in time varieties of factors, indicators appear that obviously invoked the need to use probabilities but still in an idiosyncratic, close system. Even though the game theories give certain wider spectrum of data and using that data, the overall scheme of certainty was retained: the principles of debt, investment limits, productivity have never been overwritten or taken in different but the developed trickle-down economics. From the pure Capitalism of the wild wild west to the Social Capitalism of some European Countries, to the Communism of the post communist block economies the system of spinally self-adjusting economic growth – recession – growth has been the status quo – the orthodox economics of the 20th Century. The Keynesians added more monetary through governmental intervention counter cyclical measures to shorten recessions, even accelerate business activities. Same of the game theories added to that by targeting different economic sectors to boost further business. However, the status quo of debt, investment, productivity has been retained and any substitute was considered be done by expanding the governmental role in business activities: the two opposite right to left either asking for less or more governmental intervention, and explaining economic developments by such economic interference; blaming one another for all the gloom and bust.

Actually, the leftists and the rightists of the present are both correct the economy in the developed and with few exceptions in the developing countries is grossly under-performing: debt, inequality, un and under employment, insecurity, diminishing middle class and rising poverty are spreading as a plague. But, when the pure Capitalism approach has been used it did not affect these developments neither prevented it – such as the 2007-9 recession that enveloped the globe, neither the Social Capitalism, not the least the Communism have done it, the Soviet Block disintegrated, the European Union is in a process of disintegration: the Brexit, Italian referendum, Hungary, Romania are good example of what have been the consequences to not working economies. The globalization and the rising Productivity of the 21st Century have changed the pro-supply economic pressers of the past to pro-demand, asking for equilibrium forces of the presence. China’s Industrialization, the Internet have aggregated these new conditions actually started and worked out by the Transnational corporations, the improving Technologies, the hugely accumulated Capital that exploited these new conditions to move, outsourced, expended industrial production, financial services, retail, wholesale, farming, services. The global marketplace has become overtaken by these forces to change the pro-supply economic prevailing force to the pro-demand, pro-equilibrium required such. The economies changed into markets; the economics must change into market economics to apprehend these new developments, but it did not happen: ideologies, status quo, politics have prevented the science of economics to evolve into market economics. That has brought the economic slam elsewhere but China who accommodated an ‘as it comes; as it goes’ economics that worked out the 2007-9 recession and post recession global slow down and instead took out of poverty 600 Million people, and maintained high economic growth.

The China example has not prompted the western politicians, economist to start figuring out what really has happened to adjust and adopt the orthodox economics, but in the opposite, it made them become hardliners insisting that these new developments are temporarily, or a result of not imposing even further austerity, debt restrictions, shady business environment.

The 21st Century calls for flexible market economics that will ensure less inequality, full employment, Earth’s environment protection, open global marketplace, however individual markets developing such flexible policies that can manage consistent market development, alleviation of poverty, saving of the personal freedoms and the democracy for all.

Joshua Ioji Konov 2017


Joshua’s First Law of Market Economics

See also Market Leap of ‘As It Comes; As It Goes’ Market Economics

“If a House needs Painting and a Painter is Available: Market Economics should have the House Painted and the Painter Employed”

By using an “invisible hand” (could be private or/and public investment; targeted subsidies or/and fiscal and monetary initiatives) a house that needs painting gets painted and a painter who needs employment employed: the Demand is ‘the House’, and the Supply is ‘the Painter’. Having such done without exceeding the targeted inflation/deflation boosts ‘entropy’ to naturally evolve into ‘equity’ of a seasoned Market Development made possible because of the ongoing globalization and rising productivity. While an ‘as it comes; as it goes’ system of economics is used to prompt business activities. Such approach differs from currently practiced economics by not being budgetary constrained, but tagged to the inflation/deflation variations.

^Market Agents* for the First Law’s Realization and Maintaining:

                             Demand                                  Supply
By-Sectors Monetary Policies in Lending

Consumer Protection Laws

Environmental Protection Laws

Insurance Laws


Infrastructure on Projects Investment

Social Policies (including: Pensions, Social Security, Unemployment Benefits, Medicare, etc.)

High Market SecurityHigh Education

Research and Development

Unlimited Liability Corporate Laws

Business Contracting Laws


Intellectual Property Laws

Bonding Laws

The level of the Market Agents*’ implementation in an economy will also give the ‘J Factor’ deviation which vary from ‘-2 to +2’ when -2 is lack of such implementation and +2 is completed implementation, thus if for example 4 is the invested capital in the project in a functioning economy 4 is multiplied by the ‘J Factor’ to give the gained ‘equity’ or if it (the invested capital) is done in a dysfunctional economy it adds to a loss.

Example of a gain: 4 x 1.25 = 5 (the gained amount is 1) 

Example of a loss: 4 x 0.75 = 3 (the lost amount is 1)

So, when ‘a house is painted’ and ‘a painter is employed’ the Return on Invested Capital in the Project could vary emulating the level of Market Agents* implementation. The ‘J Factor’ accumulates and projects different kinds of return for the effect an investment has on the economy/market: the ‘equity’ value added to such market is not necessary cash related, it could add to the market value of such property, to the consumption by the ‘painter’ resulted of received salary, and to fiscal gain from such project; However, plus the Market Agents* there are number of Market Tools** that must be used as Parameters in an ever fluctuating marketplace to prevent from sharp market fluctuations – such as the one that brought the 2007-9 Recession – which is a subject of an in progress Quantum Economics Research. In a well developed market with highly implemented Market Agents* the Market Tools** are very sensitive to manage variations and the market forces adjust such fluctuations. But, proactive actions in case of substantial fluctuations are necessary; as well a prevention system is required.

^^Market Tools** used as Parameters to manage Consistent Market Development (Project or Sector Targeted):

                               Demand                             Supply
·      Fiscal Expenses·      Low Interest Lending

·      Investment

·      Monetary Subsidies

·      Insurance Expenses

·      Social Expenses

·      Infrastructural Expenses

·      Educational Expenses  

·      Fiscal Breaks·      Stimulus Packages

·      Investment

·      Targeted Inflation/Deflation Prevention Interest Rates

·      Lending Rates

·      Borrowing Rates

·      Prevailing Wages

·      Bonding on Market Prices

·     Access to Public Financing

 The Joshua’s First Law of Economics allows an expanded if not full employment when properly implemented. Such is made possible by the exogenous forces from the Globalization and rising Productivity of a technologically advancing world. There are possibilities of both inflation and deflation to be used for accelerating and maintaining long-term Market Development that differs from currently considered limited-inflation driven Economic Growth. (A subject of another Research)

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 ONE/MINUS ONE ‘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 ONE/MINUS ONE ‘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

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

The Market Equilibrium Trend changes from Supply-to-Demand to Demand-to-Supply Ascendancy

In number of articles, I presented the theory of Market Economics as based on the conception of the tipped-off, from a Supply to a Demand driven Global Market Trend to a Demand-to-Supply Trend that was prompted by the ongoing Globalization and rising Productivity, which new Trend is consequential to the improving Technologies, the China’s Industrialization, the Outsourcing and Moving of Manufacturing, the Internet and etc developments that have accelerated these processes for the last 20-25 years.

Job automation will ultimately propel more people toward higher-paying, more productive employment that is better suited to the new era of “talentism,” when human imagination and innovation, not capital or natural resources, drive economic growth. But, if workers fail to acquire the skills to fill these new positions, they will be left behind.

This article uses available data and respectful papers to prove the validity of such conception. And, brings upfront the necessity of comprehensive assessments and the needed changes of Economics to meet these new challenges. The beginning of the 21st Century showed the tremendous effect, technologies and globalization, has on the concentration of industrial production into a few players globally.

The economic model that dominated most of the twentieth century was mass production by the many, for mass consumption by the many. Workers were consumers; consumers were workers. As paychecks rose, people had more money to buy all the things they and others produced — like Kodak cameras. That resulted in more jobs and even higher pay. That virtuous cycle is now falling apart. A future of almost unlimited production by a handful, for consumption by whoever can afford it, is a recipe for economic and social collapse. Our underlying problem won’t be the number of jobs. It will be – it already is — the allocation of income and wealth.

The transnational corporation along with the Chinese state enterprises have succeeded in achieving immense capacities and potentials for swift expansion by using a large pool of international capital, improving technologies, better controlled management, and by outsourcing and moving of production (for transnational corporations mostly).

The global economy is awash as never before in commodities like oil, cotton and iron ore, but also with capital and labor—a glut that presents several challenges as policy makers struggle to stoke demand.

“What we’re looking at is a low-growth, low-inflation, low-rate environment,” said Megan Greene, chief economist of John Hancock Asset Management, who added that the global economy could spend the next decade “working this off.”

… “The classic notion is that you cannot have a condition of oversupply,” said Daniel Alpert,an investment banker and author of a book, “The Age of Oversupply,” on what all this abundance means. “The science of economics is all based on shortages.”

Consulting companies, e.g. BCG, Ernst & Young, Deloitte Consulting, contributed globally to share competitive practices, compare managerial and technological approaches that boosted competition and productivity.
The diversion between the large transnational corporation and Chinese state owned companies from one side and the small and medium companies and most developing economies from another has grown larger than ever, living the last in competitive disadvantage and thus prompting inequality not just between rich and poor in the most developed economies, but also between developed economies (including China) and the most developing ones. Even further, the success of their improvements has reduced the employment elsewhere, ironically “supported” by a shrinking and inadequate global demand, more like a “Catch 22’s perpetuum mobile”.

In fact, over the last few years there has been massive capital investment at a global level in developing new iron ore mining sites. This investment paid off in the beginning, thanks to the initial increase in demand for ore, mainly in China. However, circumstances have now changed, the pace of growth in China – the world’s largest consumer of steel and ore – has slowed markedly and consequently the global market is burdened by considerable excess supply.2 As there do not appear to be any immediate efforts (such as a rapid market adjustment on the supply side) to address the causes at the moment, prices for iron ore will remain under pressure with little prospect of them rising.3

2 For details, see Synagowitz, Bastian et al (2015a). Steel-Making Materials. Deutsche Bank Markets Research. Commodities Quarterly. March 31, pp. 92-113, 122. According to this analysis, global demand for iron ore may fall slightly in 2015 for the first time since 2009. It is therefore entirely possible that iron ore prices could fall below USD 50 per tonne in the second and third quarters. 

3 See also Synagowitz, Bastian (2015b). Negative momentum in iron ore and US prices continues. Deutsche Bank Markets Research. Steel Price Tracker. March 31.  

It has been argued that the “bottom billion may be trapped in poverty” (Collier 2007). The undeveloped markets i.d. economies along with the deteriorating such as Detroit will have to wait for their turn, until the giant industrial economies like China become rich and uncompetitive in manufacturing. When the technological changes have made manufacturing more capital and skill intensive. So, it is creating fewer jobs. Some form of pre-mature deindustrialization seems to have set in (Rodrik, 2013, Subramanian 2014). This might be because consumers and households in developed countries now spend a lot less on manufactured goods than they do on services. This can put a limit to how fast the latecomers to development can grow through industrialization. While jobs in the industrial sector are shrinking globally.
In the past, technological and structural underdevelopment consisted of shortages that provoked inflation; however, in the presence, excessive manufacturing capacity and rising productivity brings high unemployment and prompts deflations.


Large retailers have penetrated markets and Internet sales have brought international goods to most markets, aiding the high manufacturing capacity. The market equilibrium on a macro economic level has become less perceptive to Supply than to Demand factor. [1] (see Drawing 1) Large Transnational Corporations employ about 0.82% of the global workforce taking more than a quarter of the global wealth adding to the widespread poverty [2], deteriorating middle class, rising inequality, and the Earth pollution, whereas poverty brings primitive fossil fuels heating, woods cutting, old car usage[3], and etc[4].; and, deteriorating middle class adds to the poor; what about excessive inequality? – It just accelerates the whole process, but most important it prompts the overall economic stagnation: market disequilibrium caused by inadequate demand.

Most of the Emerging Markets are hit by the same problems as the poor in the Developed Markets are, whereas the results are all the same no difference between Detroit and many Undeveloped or Emerging Markets: factors affecting the market equilibrium from the demand side, expanding Earth pollution, rising Discrimination and Radicalization caused by the economic upheaval of the 2007-9 recession and sluggish recovery. While the existing middle class has shrunk the poor was not given opportunities of rising to a middle class.

Shrinking fiscal reserves and trickle-down ideologies have imposed austerity policies to infrastructures, social and educational expenses, thus holding high unemployment from Spain, Portugal, and Italy to Greece, the living standards are free falling, or Bulgaria, and Romania in the European Union, where slow business activities and lack of vivid improvement prevails. However, from Guyana, Peru, and Ecuador to Bolivia, Paraguay and Colombia in South America, from Guinea-Bissau, and São Tomé and Príncipe to Republic of the Congo, Chad, and Zimbabwe in Africa, from Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Yemen to Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and Iraq in the Middle East, etc. markets are underdeveloped, infrastructure is either undeveloped or deteriorating, corruption is roaring along with poverty and disarray!

The world was never better, but it had never possessed the technologies nor the organization to be any better, but for the last few decades. In the past, the weak technologies and markets were a natural promoters of underdevelopment, poverty and the related discrimination and nationalism, but with the great technological inventions and improvements, the Internet and WIFI, the open globalized marketplace, and etc to have such roaring poverty and underdevelopment is inexcusable, thus I consider that if these if properly used these new developments would make the world advancing into a new era of prosperity; however, only a new system of economics that apprehends these new developments and abstract itself from the trickle-down philosophy would succeed in such improvement.

Joshua Konov, 2014

[1] [PDF] Global steel 2014 – Ernst & Young Excess capacity is the biggest threat to the sector While there are signs that the outlook for demand is slowly improving, excess capacity remains the biggest threat to the steel sector. The sector is straining under the relentless pressure caused by years of excess steelmaking capacity and low margins. While some capacity is expected to be removed over the next decade, the announced addition of capacity by steelmakers out to 2020 shows that investment is still alive and well. To counteract the investment in new steelmaking capacity, we estimate that about 300 million tonnes of steelmaking capacity needs to be closed for the industry’s profit margin to reach unsustainable level, and raise the capacity utilization rate for the sector globally, from below 80% to more than 85%. Permanent shutdown of capacity is the only real solution to bring balance to the market but in the short term it is difficult to see this happening given state participation in many countries and additional political incentive to retain employment, regardless of profitability. The overall net effect, however, has been an increase in steel making capacity despite the Chinese Government mandating 80 million tonnes of capacity to be removed restructuring and consolidation in the Chinese market, a handful of large Chinese steel players will emerge, leading to global competition intensifying. “Steel producers should test the vulnerability of their business models and the resilience of their strategies to ensure sustainable growth.“ Anjani Agrawal

[2] “It has been argued for more than 200 years that economic growth is associated with the manufacturing sector (Baumol 1967, Dercon 2014, Gelb 2014, Kaldor 1966, Rodrik and McMillan 2011, De Vries et al 2013, Winters 2010, UNIDO 2009). Services have been considered non-tradable, menial, low productivity, and low-innovation (McCredie and Bubner 2010). The East Asian Tigers are the classic success stories about how the conventional path to growth goes through industrialization. However, this conventional path to development seems to have hit a roadblock in other regions, especially low-income countries in Africa and South Asia. Indeed, several high level reports on Africa—the 2014 African Transformation Report, the African Union’s Agenda 2063, the African Development Bank’s long-term strategy, the UN Economic Commission for Africa’s 2013 report, and UNCTAD’s 2012 report—have all raised concern about limited industrialization and technological progress. Indeed, in many African economies, manufacturing—the sector that led rapid development in East Asia—is declining as a share of GDP. The worry is that without a major transformation, Africa’s recent growth spurt may soon run out of steam.”

[3] 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-fueled 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 World’s Most Polluted Countries

[4] 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.”

Drawing 1 With the raised demand (from D1 to D2) the high Elasticity of the supply that has come with the ongoing Globalization and rising Productivity matches the demand by expanding (from S1 to S2) and thus living the same market equilibrium price (P1&P2). Such Supply Elasticity is probable to a certain turning point which approximate quantities are estimated (see next paper on “Probability Factors of Quantities Proximity”) DtoS

Can the Global Investment and Productivity Steer Growth

Can the Global Investment and Productivity Steer Growth

In the ways the Global economy works, the expectations for the investment and productivity as fundamental economic agents for growth vary in different countries:

Whereas the European Union relies generally on such to prompt and maintain economic growth, in the United States the market interference was much bigger through Quantitative Easing and Stimulus Packages, it when farther in Japan, and even farther in China whereas the market interference is basically running the whole economy through targeted stimulus packages, establishing tax free regions, using the state owned businesses to raise salaries, income and internal consumption. Unless in the US whereas the politics interfere with the government policies: in Japan and China such policies are roaming free: the “as it comes: as it goes”’s Economics of 21st Century has arrived and whoever understood it right and start using it indiscriminately from political views and ideas will benefit. The winners clearly are these the last one. To rely mostly on the Investment and Productivity to steer and stir up the markets into growth and possible employment has become a dream for a few economists in the West that excuses them from the failure to oversee and overcome the 2007-9 Recession that almost crushed the Global economy.

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the United States had the fourth highest GDP per hour worked ($59.50 USD) in Oct. 2011, behind the Netherlands ($59.60), Norway ($75.40) and Luxembourg ($78.50). Research at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that between 2000 and 2010, real GDP per hour worked in the United States grew from $48.47 to $59.28, or 22.7%. Productivity was clearly on the rise, and at a fairly quick clip.

The OECD also indicates that between 2000 and 2010, average annual wages for full-time employment grew from $49,981 to $52,607, or 5%. They were basically stagnant, but how did this happen? (For a look at GDP and what investors look for, read Can Global Investors Profit From GDP Watching?)

What the Chinese took off on the Recession was the practical ideas that relying only on the National and International Investment and the rising Productivity, which relies on the simple ideas of lower taxation and weak regulations to prompt economic growth causa finita est, therefor, they started targeted market interference by watching the Inflation and possible Bubbles, so the system has worked much better than everywhere else. The Social and Infrastructural Policies have been positive economic tools, too. What the Chinese discovered, followed by Japan, was that by using the “invisible hand” was much more effective than waiting for some investors to decide to boost their economies.

What the EU and now the US are doing is digging themselves into a perpetual circle of unemployment and underemployment that consequently will push them to start using so called unorthodox economic agents and tools to prompt long term economic growth. The Investment and Productivity always follow the winners, and guess who will be the winners if a long term economic policies are not undertaken.

Joshua Ioji Konov 2014

“As It Comes; As It Goes” Economics of the 21st Century; the End of the Budgetary Economics

“As It Comes; As It Goes” Economics of the 21st Century; the End of the Budgetary Economics

Joshua Ioji Konov, 2013


The Globalization, the rising Productivity, the Internet and the Chinese Industrialization have established some very new conditions to a global marketplace of vest industrial capacity mobile and highly effective that changed Economics forever from a pre-supply Libertarian and Keynesian budgetary approaches into the unorthodox innovative Market related pro-equilibrium approach. The Quantitative Easing, the Abenomics, the Chinese targeting certain areas for economic empowerment, the Federal mortgage security targeting lower lending rates in the US, etc are the first steps to an Economics of “as it comes; as it goes approach” which does not count just on a market liberalization through deregulation, low business taxation, and rising productivity to prompt Economic growth, thus the “invisible hand” has become more active. However, the economists and the Economics still retain their highly ideological stand up by either not evaluating these new developments or coming back to the status quo by just ignoring these developments as never happened.

CHANGE (Market I.E Economic, Economy)

As the Physics has changed from its orthodox ‘assertive’ knowledge into the uncertainty of Quantum, whereas probability theory so the Economics should change its ‘assertive’ ideologically motivated approaches of trickle-down into a ‘as it comes; as it goes’ Market Economics, whereas market agents and tools are used adequately to maintain market equilibrium and market development.

In real Marketplace such approach means by using Monetary, Fiscal, and others the Central Banks and Governments to target particular market sectors and areas to boost their development, sectors such as Alternative Energies, Tourism, Farming, etc should be prioritized. The ‘invisible hand’ that boosts certain market activities could be only implemented if markets transmissionability is appropriate to absorb and transform the liquidity into market equity e.g. to establish market equilibrium by maintaining low inflation or deflation. High market transmissionability could be achieved by enhancing the ‘rule of law in business’ through changing the limited liability corporate laws into unlimited such, by enhancing business insurance and bonding, by enhancing contracting laws, by enhancing environmental and consumer protection laws, etc then the ‘invisible hand’ of targeted liquidity and fiscal stimulus would work its best through the marketplace to buildup market development.

Currently used by the Central Banks monetary policies through lowering or raising Primary Rates a general market equilibrium approach should change into using lending rates, fiscal policies and targeted investment parts market equilibriums approach e.g. is the China’s handling their Real Estate bubble.

The Uncertainty Principle applies to Economics whereas the Probability Theory shows the ways market agents and tools are used as parameters to adjust market fluctuations; however, in comparison to the Quantum Mechanics the Market Economics i.e. Quantum Economics’ equations, oscillators, theorems, and etc differ in principles and values.


Market Economics does not put all markets i.e. economies under the same constant, whereas different markets posses specifics that should be taken in considerations in applying the best for these markets oscillators. Even when the free market entrepreneurship of the Small and Medium Enterprises is considered the best and most productive approach toward market development the ways some countries have their Markets/Economies entailed to specific social, medical and educational policies by more aggressive governmental involvement should be taken in considerations when simulations are put together.


However, for best performance, the principles of an open market competition whereas Small and Medium Enterprises and Investors are set on equal opportunity competition are paramount for a long term success. The marginalization of advantages Large Transnational Corporations & Investors is one of the principles for Markets to function properly, so to speak market transmissionability and overall market development could not be achieved if the market competition does not reach relative fairness.


THE Globalization of the Marketplace should be used to prompt business activities, build equity, and maintain market development, but for such to be fluent the principles of Market Economics must be implemented globally, which is highly achievable in the present day open politically and entailed economically world.

Joshua Ioji Konov, 2013

SEE Market Economy under Rapid Globalization and Rising Productivity http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/48750.html

Market Economy under Ripid Globalization and Rising Productivity

Market Economy under Ripid Globalization and Rising Productivity


Market economy of enhancing business laws in contracting, bonding, insuring, legal corporate structures[1], e.g. will marginalize the economic agents and tools that make market competition unfair, empower small and medium businesses and investors, and boost business activities, fiscal strength, employment, and capital transmission. Keynesian capital infusion will extend its market effect in such higher security marketplace.

[1]The law of unfair competition will not penalize a business merely for being successful in the marketplace and will not subsidize a business for failing in the marketplace. Liability will not be imposed for aggressive, shrewd, or otherwise successful marketing tactics that are not deceptive, fraudulent, or dishonest. The law will assume, however, that for every dollar earned by one business, a dollar will be lost by a competitor. Accordingly, the law prohibits businesses from unfairly profiting at a rival’s expense. What constitutes an “unfair” trade practice varies according to the cause of action asserted in each case.

Philosophy of the Globalizing Market Economics verses Capitalism

With the Globalization and Intellectualization  of the Market the “Trickle down” Economics of Capitalism cannot provide functional system for long term economic development; by shady business practices promoting mostly big businesses, by ideologically motivated system for wealth distribution and by inadequate Fiscal and Monetary policies: Capitalistic Economies could not develop properly to expand and envelope Globally. Social Structures of the Capitalism which are well established and supported by ideologies and governments could not reflect properly to the possibilities of the globalizing markets: when these capitalistic structures historically have given the best and most prosperous tools of Economics and have established the most prosperous economies of USA and Japan in the new conditions are very short of sustainability. The Global Market is to be mainly consumption (Demand) so the Capitalism which is founded on Supply does not provide the needed security for enhanced Monetary and Fiscal policies to carry on such possible Global expansion and the ideologically motivated “Trickle down” deregulated Economics and  Social policies does not provide needed economic flexibility to carry on an appropriate balancing of “Demand to Supply” ratios; Karl Marx’s philosophy of classes’ confrontation, cyclical dialectic development and scarce resources Economics of the Capitalism may work well in an underdeveloped World limited technologically and politically but it has no chance in the new age of communications, rapid technological advances and open borders Global market, therefor instead of cyclically advancing Capitalism a more pragmatical Economics of balancing “Demand to Supply” Marketism  will work much better by enhancing business activities around the World through direct investment and higher security by business regulations and social policies which will expand Monetary and Fiscal reserves.

Karl Marx – A big hit with capitalists
Faced with a crisis of labour due to abolition of slavery, Europe (specially England) started looking at alternatives for a new economic model. They selected a fugitive theorist, whose theories were creating interest in mainland Europe. Karl Marx. Fearing unrest, some European countries exiled Marx. However, Marx was popular with capitalists and in capitalist nations of Europe – and in the USA.
Communism awarded a monopoly over slavery to one employer – the State. Single employer, total monopoly (on labour, political power, economic resources), impress the slaves with the glory and future – were the elements of the new political system that Europe devised. This was the only Western ideology that was born out of design. With the demise of slave trafficking, 1832 in Britain; slavery re-introduced in 1802 by France) Europe was concerned about labour and industry.
France, Brussels, Britain etc. took the lead and provided patronage to Karl Marx and Frederick Engels to devise another system – an alternate to slavery. In the next few years, their publications found eager publishers and sold well. Their books, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, The Communist Manifesto (published in) 1848 laid the basis for an alternative to capitalism. Marx and Engels received significant royalties from the sale of their books – and could survive on earnings from their writing careers.
Obviously, Communism could not be ‘sold’ to the designated victims, that they were the new slaves. It had to be ‘bought’ willingly by the ‘target audience’ as yet another ‘level of freedom’. Slavery sold as a promise of freedom – You have nothing to lose but your chains.
Economics must be a science of parameters in a quantum economics dispersing and enhancing energies of Marketism  instead of a classical philosophical system of cyclical dialectic development of Capitalism.


Some of the differences between Marketism and Capitalism are:

Marketism                                                                  Capitalism

Based purely on Demand to Supply Economics balancing: no ideological and political involvement
Trickle down Economics: ideologically and politically motivated
Totally regulated business and investment activities: business laws more like common laws:
Mostly deregulated business and investment activities: regulated by Governments
Market structures to promote medium to small businesses and investors
Social structures promote big businesses and investors
Expanded Fiscal and Monetary quantities: equity based accounting
Tight Fiscal and Monetary quantities: cash based accounting
Educational, Infrastructural, Medical and Social expenses more like short term equities to balance other business 
Educational, Infrastructural, Medical and Social expenses more like cash based expenses: ideologically distributed
Global market plays under common rules
Individual countries and economic blocks markets have different rules
GNP include Farming, Industrial production, as income plus return  on Investment and short term equities GNP include Farming and Industrial production as income
Tools of Economics are used indiscriminately  to prevent Demand to Supply dis-balances  
Tools of Economics are used politically and ideologically motivated.
Intellectual property  over physical property
Physical property over intellectual property

Marketism Economics is a very sensitive to fluctuations so different tools of Economics must be promptly used to balance “Demand to Supply” ratios: Interest rates will be used in much less then historically variances; Fiscal and Monetary policies will reflect %% of total GNP and will expand or contract appropriately following market fluctuations;   
© Joshua Konov, 2009

I do not want to be a prophet but Discrimnation I wrote about makes its ways

Bulgaria in EU | August 20, 2010, Friday, France continued with its controversial deportation of Roma migrants on Friday afternoon, when 130 passengers boarded a charter plane, bound for Romania…. Rome: Problem is Many Roma Possess Italian Citizenship “As Italy is bracing to expel from the country all European Union (EU) citizens that had violated basic requirements for living in the country, the interior minister has complained that unlike in France, many Roma have Italian citizenship.” see http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Ab7fduuwI_M3ZGZmdzc1OHFfMTI0Mm13OTk1cG4&hl=en