You are on page 1of 3

Commentary of “Philosophy of the Economy”- Changing Priorities.

The main difference between Capitalism and Marketism is the prioritization of the
Governmental policies and following tools of Economics toward Medium to Small
Business and Investors instead of the trickle down ones toward Big Businesses and
Large Investors; such change is a basic change of the ideologies of the Capitalism and
who the Government should represent and promote;

But why it should happen and what effect on the whole economy it might have?
*The answers of these questions are logical following of the changing Global economic
environment: the pro supply Economics which promoted the large corporations and
investors cannot anymore be a feasible tool for distribution of wealth; the increasing
productivity and the globalization of the markets backsplash over the existing system of
economics of Capitalism which is founded over pro supply production and allows
speculations and deregulations which support small percent of the World’s population. In
effect as an example when the Real Estate Boom in US was heating up many individuals
were borrowing money against their houses and reinvesting into all kinds of enterprises
which being deregulated in part of a shady Capitalism trickle down business approaches
of speculations failed to bring return on their investment which finally brought the
current crash in the whole Economy; thus the Economy which is based on RETURN ON
INVESTED CAPITAL failed to provide the necessary conditions mostly to the medium
to small businesses and investors which do not have any protection or means to access
any reliable tools to do profitable business or make money by investing which affected
the whole Economy in the end and broke the system of Economics; the process of such
drainage of wealth in the new conditions of very high productivity which by the way
accelerate such processes brought the investment crisis of 1999 when more then 3 trillion
dollars was even appropriated by speculators or disappeared in lost equities. The idea of
the High Tech balloon as a reason for that crisis is only the carryon of it: but over all the
system of Investment and Economics had allowed it happening. The current system of
business relations and investment does not provide reliable conditions for sustained
business and investment which are the only possible tools in a Globalizing World for
development and growth: currently countries monetary policies and budgets are tighten
to industrial production, agriculture and services which are not the answer to
resolving such crisis and provide condition for less volatile economic environment
because the globalization itself provide an open space for relocation of those tools of
Economics and an speculative Capitalism does not support reliable investment.
Another way of development is by socializing the Economics such as China and partially
in some countries in Europe, or by protectionism of some countries such as Japan; also
the current processes in US where the Government becomes a bank and businesses
owner and main investor. Which systems do not provide any sustainable development,
because these system create corruption, bureaucratization and further slows growth.

What particular business and investment practices in the US Economy are
overwhelmingly harmful for sustainable growth?
{There are many points in this chapter which could be taken in consideration but a few
are the most important such as}:
The limited legal power of the business contracting and contracts;
The lacking individual liabilities of corporate management;
The corporate structures which allow potentially harmful to the investors, the
shareholders, the other businesses and the public business approaches and activities;
The seemingly deregulated and purely speculative system of exchanges and private
investment: regulations, laws, accessibility, accountability, protection of investment
and investors;
The unenforceable lending regulations and usury laws and the dare consequences of
locking liabilities against the violators.
The legal business system of laws and regulations and its accessibility for the medium
to small businesses and investors;
The Medicare and Social system which are not providing enough so needed income
balance and the following market demand;
The overall political attitude of tolerating and benefiting large corporations, financial
institutions and investors of the trickle-down economics.
All of these and many others have been very much the contra productive tools of the most
recent economics which by the way worked well in a pro supply and law productivity
environment of the past economic conditions. The Globalization and High Productivity
have had a negative effect over the existing trickle-down structure of the real economy or
actually this processes could be considered as new developments and further a coming
new era of new economics.

The most recent actions by the US and other Governments to stabilize the financial
system and from there the whole of Economy is an adequate reaction in the recent
circumstances and developments but they will not work in a long term or even in a short
term the whole system of Economics must be changed with the new developments in
account. The ways of such changes could differ varying from a further socialization,
protectionism, more governmental control or it might well use the forces of the
market by implementing laws and regulations enforced by the US Judicial
Brunches and International Courts; individual liabilities in corporate structures,
investment and business activities: “Philosophy of The Economy” is tracing these tools
of market economics and social structures which can best seek long term growth and
global development

Social Programs, Medicare and other social redistribution of wealth in the Marketism
are considered equities instead of expenses in the Capitalism. The value of these equities
are up to the extend of the individual country’s general economic activities and will
become expenses if it expands these level of development. There are formulas which
could properly adjust such ratios. The current levels of such equities is inadequate and do
not provide a proper possible level of Demand.

These and many others are the issues of a Market Economics discussed in “Philosophy
of The Economy” which could be considered very actual and important.

I hope the ideas in this article are clearly stated.
Sincerely,
Joshua Konov