Since the beginning of the times until now the chiefs of tribes, monarchs, feudal lords, statesmen and politicians decided the mode of production and the distribution of wealth in all the societies.
The main economic influence has been of the governments and not of the private producers, the farmers, fishermen, craftsmen, industrials, traders nor entrepreneurs. They have played a second place because all them has been controlled by the governments, through laws and administrative decisions.
So that it is a historic lie of the Marxist philosophy assuring that the mode of production and distribution of wealth determine the political and social regime of the society; on the contrary, the politics determine the economic and social system of the society. In consequence, may be assured that the laws of market (supply and demand) have not dominated the economy of the countries. The true is that was the monarchs and now the politicians whose decide the limits of the economy and until where the economics concepts are applicable or not. Moreover, they have decided ever something essential in all the historic stages: the fiscal (tax) and commercial policies. At difference of the laws of the science, the laws of the economy are relative and are linked to the social behavior of the big human groups.
It is obvious that the monarchs and politicians has not been isolated and non permeable people; they are too human beings and like the rest of the people they receive the influence of the social media, the custom and the economic institutions of the society. But, in the reality, they have accumulated the true power; that power, in turn, has been supported in the most important of all the powers: the weapons.
In all the times the common citizens has understood this reality and in the most of the cases they have accepted the authority of whose exert the political power; when this not happened occurred the great revolutions.
The modern world knew two great revolutions: the French Revolution (1789) and the Bolchevique Revolution (1917); they changed the course of history. The first led to the born of a new social class, the bourgeoisie; this class was dominated by many years by the monarchs and the feudal lords but in 1789 the bourgeoisie took the power and began to govern a part of the world. This political revolution was, at the same time, a consequence of other important historic fact: the First Industrial Revolution that began at the middle of the eighteen century with the development of the industrial scale of production and the modern machines.
The effects of the French Revolution are still present in the world; they are the abolition of the monarchy in France and other countries, the creation of the Bourgeois Liberal State that encompasses the representative democracy and the capitalist system of free market.
In 1776, thirteen years before the French Revolution, appeared in London the first edition of the book an Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations of the philosopher Adam Smith; this book would be the economic bible of the new bourgeoisie class.
The second one, the Bolchevique Revolution, destroyed the Russia’s monarch’s power, imposed also a new class ---the proletarian class--- and the communist government in a very important part of the world: Russia, Eastern Europe, China, North Vietnam and North Korea.
The communism received their inspiration from the opposed thesis of the Wealth of Nations of Adam Smith. The new theory was presented in the book The Capital of the philosopher Karl Marx, in the year 1867, ninety one years after the first edition of the Wealth of Nations. The Capital became the new economic bible of the communists.
The effects of the Bolchevique Revolution are also still visible; these are the communist regimes that yet survive in some nations. The Communism demonstrated that is not sustainable in the time and for that reason disappeared in the Former Soviet Union and in Europe in the year 1989.
The capitalist system has passed also by serious and recurrent crisis; in the 20th century the most severe was the Great Depression of 1929 and now, in the 21st century, the international financial system fall in the years 2008 and 2009.
The indifference of the statesmen
It provoked those great economic crises. The lack of control on the financial system was one of the main causes of the economy fallout.
Until where the State must exert control over the economy is an old economic discussion.
The State has had ever the faculty of deciding the essential affairs of the economy but in some moments and circumstances the leaders of the governments has resigned to that prerogative. This caused the big economics problems.
It must have a balance between the State and the market, without this balance neither the economic development nor the business is possible.
In the last decades of the 20th century the monetarist thesis reborn promoted by Milton Friedman and his pupils of the School of Chicago. The principal idea of this conception is the absolute free market, this mean, the non intervention of the State in the economics affairs.
As it is obvious, because of practice and legal restrictions, the thesis of absolute free market was not possible of to apply in all their intensity, but she influenced the political action in some countries, especially in Great Britain and in the United States since the governments of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Regan until the recent government of George Bush Jr.
As consequence of the most recent financial fallout (2008-2009), the authorities have tried of exert a major control on the economy and especially over the financial system; on January 3 2010 in Atlanta, the Federal Reserve chief, Ben Bernanke, declared that “…Regulation must be the first line of defense against speculation…” But the lobbyists of the free market have a great power and influence. They got the bailout for the banks without restrictions. Essential industries, like the automaker and the common citizens did not have the same luck.
The global crisis seems to be permanent. In the last days have appeared the financial problems of Greek and probably Spain, situation that might have an important effect over all the Euro Zone.
Meanwhile, the jobless, the poverty and the environment problem everyday affects a major number of people in the entire world, including the developed industrial nations.
Which will be the future? What do you think?
martes, 16 de febrero de 2010
lunes, 8 de febrero de 2010
The political economy may contribute to build a better world, reflection on the evolution
Abandoned by the politicians and economists of the 20th century, the political economy necessary will reappear in the 21st century, because of a simple reason: man can hide the true, do not recognize it, but this not change the true; and the true is that the political economy is the most important of the social sciences because it synthesize the two most important activities that determine the live of the human beings. The politics alone is not sufficient; the economy alone neither. The combination of both is the base of the power and government an all the societies.
The political economy was abandoned at the begin of the 20th century because she could not respond to the main economical challenges of that moment, among them the economic cycle, the inflation, the devaluation of the currencies, the poverty and the growing unemployment.
Alfred Marshall (1842-1924) separated the economy of the politics and tried of creating an autonomous discipline; he did it and since then emerged the economics as an independent study. The new economics focused their attention in the microeconomics and the econometrics among other issues.
Marshall had interest in the human side of the economy and in contrast with the previous classical economists he asserted that was possible better conditions of live for the working classes. Marshall had a strong social sense and assured that the principal task of the economics should be to eliminate the poverty.
But the new economy promoted by Alfred Marshall and his pupils could neither resolve the accumulated problems. It was John Maynard Keynes, a traditional economist, former pupil of Marshall, which developed the politics and economic new system that gave to the world a partial solution for the economics problems of that historic stage. That new system was the macroeconomics, an integral political proposal that considered the increase of salaries and the private and public expenditure as the key factor for attacking the jobless and the economic recession. The thesis of Keynes was contrary to the ideas sustained by the Classical Economy, which thought that the reduction of salaries was the way for reactivating the employment and the economic growth.
The conception of Keynes let the recovery of the hit economies of the post war. For that reason the thirty years of growth between 1945 and 1975 was named the Age of Keynes. That period was very favorable for the developed nations of America and Western Europe but not for the rest of the world; in those years and the followings (80 and 90) the gap between the rich and the poor nations registered a great difference. The Capitalism generated an important progress but limited only to a small number of countries.
The Communist regimes of the past and of the present, like the Former Soviet Union and the nations of the Eastern of Europe, China, North Korea and Vietnam neither reached an economic welfare; on the contrary, they were and they are impoverished countries.
The first conclusion in this sense is that none of the economics systems has been able of to improve the quality of live of the majority of the world population so far.
Origin of the wealth and the poverty
The first form of property was the community property. The primitive man did not know the private property. It was the appropriation of the first lands by the stronger men the cause of the original richness; this was too the first economic sin. The consequence of this process was the born of two classes: the owners and the exploited, this means the rich and the poor.
A reflection on the evolution
The concept of evolution deserves an especial consideration. Man of the 21st century has the same predatory attitude of the primitive man. He commits murders, abductions, cheatings and stealing, terrorist acts against innocent people, maintain the slavery and do the war.
In parallel also exists the contrary: goodness, kindness, justice, love, religiosity and peace; the great problem is that in the majority of the societies this is not the common. This lead to an unavoidable question: until what the human being has evolved?
Man has achieved a great level of development since the scientist and technological point of view but not in his social and economic behavior.
In the 21st century exist the same social and economics conflicts of the Prehistory, it means:
a) The struggle by the property of the land: a minority is the owner of the majority of the urban and agricultural lands in the entire world.
b) The majority of the workers worldwide receives an insignificant salary that do not let them neither to buy the essential food.
c) The unemployment and sub employment affects the most of the workers worldwide.
d) The economics and social conditions of the work in the most part of the underdeveloped countries are in the practice conditions of slavery.
e) The struggle by the wealth distribution benefits to the privileged rich classes.
A new conflict has emerged
But a new conflict ---unknown in the past--- has arisen in the beginning of the 21st century: the global shortages of basic natural resources ---as water and petroleum--- that change the economic paradigm. The shortage of natural resources is a consequence of the overexploitation of the resources and of the pollution. The outcome is the scarcity of manufactured goods and more inflation.
A look to the past
The evolution of the humanity is divided in two great stages: the Prehistory and the History; the first is the period previous to the invention of the writing and the second begin since that moment until the present.
In the Prehistory man built the basic elements of the progress: constructed the first instruments of stone, learned how to transform the matter through the fire and discovered the agriculture, the ceramic, the metals, the road, the tools, the architecture, the textile, among other great advances.
At the beginning of the history in successive stages developed the writing and after created the print, an instrument that changed completely the history.
The other great historic jump occurs in the 18th century: the creation of the machine of vapor and of a new scale of production developed during the First Industrial Revolution in Europe.
In the 19th century appears in the scene the Second Industrial Revolution; this was the revolution of the energy and emerged two inputs ---the petroleum and the steel--- that joined to the electricity modified completely the live of millions of people.
In the 20th century the progress of the chemical and the medicine and the creation of the mass media represented the other great changes of the history. In this century happened, moreover, two extraordinary facts: the discovery of the nuclear energy and the conquer of the space.
All the mentioned advances suppose a great dominium of the exact sciences, the mathematics, physics, chemical, biology, medicine and the astronomy.
Man do not dominate the social sciences
But the human being has not been able of to reach the same level of development in the social sciences, especially in the economics and in the politics.
Man has not been able of:
a) Diminishing the poverty and for that reason more of two thirds of the world population lives in the extreme poverty with an income of less of two dollars per day.
b) To guarantee a decent salary to the most of the workers neither to create enough employments in the world.
c) To avoid the war and to live in peace, employing the politics and the diplomacy.
d) Preserving the forests, the nature, neither of does not contaminate the planet.
What does it reveal?
Similar to the savage’s animals
This reveals that man can dominate the external things but he is not able of dominating his primitive’s impulses and his conduct. It means that in his essence man is a predatory animal similar to the savage beasts. A simple example is sufficient for validating this concept: observe the behavior of man against the other men in the war scenarios. Currently, in plenty 21st century there are unbelievable examples in this sense in the Middle East, in Africa, in Asia; you know which those scenarios are and it is not necessary to do explicit mention of them.
Has evolved the human being?
What is evolution?
What do you think?
Conclusion
The political economy may contribute to build a better world.
The first step is recognizing the failure of the economics systems so far.
The Communism has been a complete failure in the nations where has been applied.
The Classical Economy could not anticipate the depression nor the unemployment. It had a non realist and theorist vision of the economy. The classic economic model of pure competition and equilibrium supported in the laws of the supply and demand has never existed. For that reason the Classical economists could not believe that a crisis might occur as a consequence of a fail in the demand.
The Marginalist thesis of Stanley Jevons (1835-1882) and Leon Walras (1840-1910) had also a capital sin: they considered the economy as an automatic mechanism that work in independent form of the rest of the society.
By other hand, the partial vision of the microeconomics imposed by Alfred Marshall at the beginning of the 20th century neither represented a solution for the practice economics problems of that epoch.
The Keynesian model ---that combined the participation of the investments and the regulatory action n of the State with the productive action of the private sector--- has been the most successful economic model until now.
But in the eighty years of the 20th century came back again the formulas of the Classical Economy, especially the Quantity Theory of Money, from the hand of Milton Friedman and his pupils of the Chicago School. The new monetarism caused a severe damage to the world economy because it stressed the difference between the rich and the poor nations and increased the poverty in the entire world, through a mechanism known as globalization.
Which would be a solution?
A synthesis of the best of the capitalism and the best of the socialism might be the possible solution.
The recurrent economic crisis in the capitalists nations put in evidence that the free market policies without none class of restrictions generates graves consequences. The most recent economic debacle of the years 2008 and 2009 is a good example of the assured.
On January 3, 2010 during the American Economic Association meeting in Atlanta, the chief of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, pointed out that:
“Stronger regulation is the best way to prevent financial speculation from getting out of hand and throwing the economy in a new crisis…” (a) By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer, On Sunday January 3, 2010, 1:41 pm EST.
Other leaders have expressed opinions in the same direction but the resistance to any change is enormous. This happens not only in the United States but in the rest of the capitalist’s nations of the Western World.
Two concrete measures
The politicians and the economists have lost the time in non important affairs. For example, they have not been able of paying effective attention to the three most important problems that affects the humanity: the poverty, the unemployment and the destruction of the nature and the environment.
A concrete Policy of Global Wellbeing should begin with two activities:
a) A Global Program of Employments. The ecological employments ---through the reforestation--- would be an effective way in that sense.
b) A Global Program of study and improvement of the salaries for the working classes.
These two programs might create the conditions for the construction of a better world.
The political economy was abandoned at the begin of the 20th century because she could not respond to the main economical challenges of that moment, among them the economic cycle, the inflation, the devaluation of the currencies, the poverty and the growing unemployment.
Alfred Marshall (1842-1924) separated the economy of the politics and tried of creating an autonomous discipline; he did it and since then emerged the economics as an independent study. The new economics focused their attention in the microeconomics and the econometrics among other issues.
Marshall had interest in the human side of the economy and in contrast with the previous classical economists he asserted that was possible better conditions of live for the working classes. Marshall had a strong social sense and assured that the principal task of the economics should be to eliminate the poverty.
But the new economy promoted by Alfred Marshall and his pupils could neither resolve the accumulated problems. It was John Maynard Keynes, a traditional economist, former pupil of Marshall, which developed the politics and economic new system that gave to the world a partial solution for the economics problems of that historic stage. That new system was the macroeconomics, an integral political proposal that considered the increase of salaries and the private and public expenditure as the key factor for attacking the jobless and the economic recession. The thesis of Keynes was contrary to the ideas sustained by the Classical Economy, which thought that the reduction of salaries was the way for reactivating the employment and the economic growth.
The conception of Keynes let the recovery of the hit economies of the post war. For that reason the thirty years of growth between 1945 and 1975 was named the Age of Keynes. That period was very favorable for the developed nations of America and Western Europe but not for the rest of the world; in those years and the followings (80 and 90) the gap between the rich and the poor nations registered a great difference. The Capitalism generated an important progress but limited only to a small number of countries.
The Communist regimes of the past and of the present, like the Former Soviet Union and the nations of the Eastern of Europe, China, North Korea and Vietnam neither reached an economic welfare; on the contrary, they were and they are impoverished countries.
The first conclusion in this sense is that none of the economics systems has been able of to improve the quality of live of the majority of the world population so far.
Origin of the wealth and the poverty
The first form of property was the community property. The primitive man did not know the private property. It was the appropriation of the first lands by the stronger men the cause of the original richness; this was too the first economic sin. The consequence of this process was the born of two classes: the owners and the exploited, this means the rich and the poor.
A reflection on the evolution
The concept of evolution deserves an especial consideration. Man of the 21st century has the same predatory attitude of the primitive man. He commits murders, abductions, cheatings and stealing, terrorist acts against innocent people, maintain the slavery and do the war.
In parallel also exists the contrary: goodness, kindness, justice, love, religiosity and peace; the great problem is that in the majority of the societies this is not the common. This lead to an unavoidable question: until what the human being has evolved?
Man has achieved a great level of development since the scientist and technological point of view but not in his social and economic behavior.
In the 21st century exist the same social and economics conflicts of the Prehistory, it means:
a) The struggle by the property of the land: a minority is the owner of the majority of the urban and agricultural lands in the entire world.
b) The majority of the workers worldwide receives an insignificant salary that do not let them neither to buy the essential food.
c) The unemployment and sub employment affects the most of the workers worldwide.
d) The economics and social conditions of the work in the most part of the underdeveloped countries are in the practice conditions of slavery.
e) The struggle by the wealth distribution benefits to the privileged rich classes.
A new conflict has emerged
But a new conflict ---unknown in the past--- has arisen in the beginning of the 21st century: the global shortages of basic natural resources ---as water and petroleum--- that change the economic paradigm. The shortage of natural resources is a consequence of the overexploitation of the resources and of the pollution. The outcome is the scarcity of manufactured goods and more inflation.
A look to the past
The evolution of the humanity is divided in two great stages: the Prehistory and the History; the first is the period previous to the invention of the writing and the second begin since that moment until the present.
In the Prehistory man built the basic elements of the progress: constructed the first instruments of stone, learned how to transform the matter through the fire and discovered the agriculture, the ceramic, the metals, the road, the tools, the architecture, the textile, among other great advances.
At the beginning of the history in successive stages developed the writing and after created the print, an instrument that changed completely the history.
The other great historic jump occurs in the 18th century: the creation of the machine of vapor and of a new scale of production developed during the First Industrial Revolution in Europe.
In the 19th century appears in the scene the Second Industrial Revolution; this was the revolution of the energy and emerged two inputs ---the petroleum and the steel--- that joined to the electricity modified completely the live of millions of people.
In the 20th century the progress of the chemical and the medicine and the creation of the mass media represented the other great changes of the history. In this century happened, moreover, two extraordinary facts: the discovery of the nuclear energy and the conquer of the space.
All the mentioned advances suppose a great dominium of the exact sciences, the mathematics, physics, chemical, biology, medicine and the astronomy.
Man do not dominate the social sciences
But the human being has not been able of to reach the same level of development in the social sciences, especially in the economics and in the politics.
Man has not been able of:
a) Diminishing the poverty and for that reason more of two thirds of the world population lives in the extreme poverty with an income of less of two dollars per day.
b) To guarantee a decent salary to the most of the workers neither to create enough employments in the world.
c) To avoid the war and to live in peace, employing the politics and the diplomacy.
d) Preserving the forests, the nature, neither of does not contaminate the planet.
What does it reveal?
Similar to the savage’s animals
This reveals that man can dominate the external things but he is not able of dominating his primitive’s impulses and his conduct. It means that in his essence man is a predatory animal similar to the savage beasts. A simple example is sufficient for validating this concept: observe the behavior of man against the other men in the war scenarios. Currently, in plenty 21st century there are unbelievable examples in this sense in the Middle East, in Africa, in Asia; you know which those scenarios are and it is not necessary to do explicit mention of them.
Has evolved the human being?
What is evolution?
What do you think?
Conclusion
The political economy may contribute to build a better world.
The first step is recognizing the failure of the economics systems so far.
The Communism has been a complete failure in the nations where has been applied.
The Classical Economy could not anticipate the depression nor the unemployment. It had a non realist and theorist vision of the economy. The classic economic model of pure competition and equilibrium supported in the laws of the supply and demand has never existed. For that reason the Classical economists could not believe that a crisis might occur as a consequence of a fail in the demand.
The Marginalist thesis of Stanley Jevons (1835-1882) and Leon Walras (1840-1910) had also a capital sin: they considered the economy as an automatic mechanism that work in independent form of the rest of the society.
By other hand, the partial vision of the microeconomics imposed by Alfred Marshall at the beginning of the 20th century neither represented a solution for the practice economics problems of that epoch.
The Keynesian model ---that combined the participation of the investments and the regulatory action n of the State with the productive action of the private sector--- has been the most successful economic model until now.
But in the eighty years of the 20th century came back again the formulas of the Classical Economy, especially the Quantity Theory of Money, from the hand of Milton Friedman and his pupils of the Chicago School. The new monetarism caused a severe damage to the world economy because it stressed the difference between the rich and the poor nations and increased the poverty in the entire world, through a mechanism known as globalization.
Which would be a solution?
A synthesis of the best of the capitalism and the best of the socialism might be the possible solution.
The recurrent economic crisis in the capitalists nations put in evidence that the free market policies without none class of restrictions generates graves consequences. The most recent economic debacle of the years 2008 and 2009 is a good example of the assured.
On January 3, 2010 during the American Economic Association meeting in Atlanta, the chief of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, pointed out that:
“Stronger regulation is the best way to prevent financial speculation from getting out of hand and throwing the economy in a new crisis…” (a) By Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer, On Sunday January 3, 2010, 1:41 pm EST.
Other leaders have expressed opinions in the same direction but the resistance to any change is enormous. This happens not only in the United States but in the rest of the capitalist’s nations of the Western World.
Two concrete measures
The politicians and the economists have lost the time in non important affairs. For example, they have not been able of paying effective attention to the three most important problems that affects the humanity: the poverty, the unemployment and the destruction of the nature and the environment.
A concrete Policy of Global Wellbeing should begin with two activities:
a) A Global Program of Employments. The ecological employments ---through the reforestation--- would be an effective way in that sense.
b) A Global Program of study and improvement of the salaries for the working classes.
These two programs might create the conditions for the construction of a better world.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
Entradas
