LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

      Another problem is that unhealthy, addictive habits can lead to social-economic inefficiency. To mitigate this problem, China also recently introduced a one-hour limit on gaming for children. Its goal is to lessen children’s overexposure to an unhealthy addiction to online video games and screens to avoid social problems.

      In inefficient industries, companies take the path of least resistance and lowest cost rather than using the latest technologies or production methods, so in time they become outdated and lose out to competitors. That was the case for German carmakers. They did not progress the automotive sector into new technologies, so competitors overtook them and conquered the market. Russia, in its various state investment programs, is strict on this issue and requires efficient production methods using the latest technologies. One example in Russia is fishing quotas, which depend on fishing vessels with high functionality and efficiency levels. Many fishing companies had to order completely new vessels to receive sufficient quotas.

      Yet another issue in capitalism is inefficient capital allocation for investments. As the capitalist model has evolved with its limitations, moments of wrong and inefficient allocation of resources persist. A case in point is when a company produces extremely large profits but does not invest in R&D for new products, increased production, or higher quality. Instead, it reinvests them to make even higher profits and returns for shareholders. Boeing provides an example of preferring share buybacks to product innovation. Without R&D, its new 737 MAX suffered two crashes and production had to stop to fix the issues and redo its aviation certifications. The perception and reputation hits were huge, and sales of all Boeing airplanes are lagging.

      Also, on the consumer side, the common good and the free market do not align. Thus, the government must intervene. Usually there are laws and regulating interventions to minimize the most common issues, like these:

      • Price fixing

      • Minimum wage

      • Pollution control

      • Protection of financial systems

      • Workers’ rights

      • Competition and antitrust laws

      • Consumer rights (privacy laws)

      • Restriction of products (tobacco, alcohol, junk food) for health reasons

      • Restriction of services leading to dependency or addiction (gaming, gambling)

      China is currently at the forefront of economic optimization and is severely curtailing and restricting unproductive and inefficient allocation of investments that have negative consequences for its economic and social well-being. While in the short-term there might be losses in GDP, the long-term benefit will be a healthier economy as investments are forced into more productive business activities. I hope that most countries follow China’s lead in this endeavor.

      Short-Term vs. Long-Term Financial Allocation

      Generally, private businesses prefer short-term investments, i.e., financial allocations have the best potential return on investment (ROI). But they also use KPIs such as return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), or similar indicators to reap profits as quickly as possible. R&D and long-term investments are frowned upon because risk, long holding times, and uncertainties might reduce profits or even turn potential profits into losses.

      Conversely, a government has longer-term strategic industry-wide or countrywide perspectives. So a government has the duty to reconcile the short-term views of private players with the long-term perspectives of government. Using carrot and stick, a government can require an industry to upgrade and become increasingly future-proof. Carrots are generous government support for development in new market sectors; sticks are strict regulation. A solid sovereign government can usually get its way even without imposing regulations. A compromise and a win-win situation are always the best paths forward for both government and investors.

      Wealth Distribution Is Profit Sharing

      The idea of distributing wealth comes up often in the Sovereign Economic Model. One significant occurrence is that state capitalism, through the profits of state-owned enterprises (SOEs), indirectly distributes wealth. By channeling profits to the state, the model uses the money to lower taxes, improve services, or support business. It lowers both the cost of living for citizens and the cost of doing business.

      A balance between the owner of production and the workers is needed. Both Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels discussed this topic broadly, advocating for the workers to own the means of production as practiced in communism. The following might be a better way:

      • Assign 20—30 percent of profits to workers.

      • Assign 10—15 percent of stock as company remuneration or for voluntary purchase by employees.

      Such a scheme could create a stabler balance in the economy.

      Politics of the sovereign economic model

      Politics and the Sovereign Economic Model

      The Sovereign Economic Model focuses only on economic theories for strengthening the economy. It is by itself apolitical. It is strongly driven by an attempt to fix the excesses and imbalances of liberal capitalism. The Sovereign Economic Model is not a rejection of capitalism, but an endeavor to improve its efficiency. It implicitly contains many political elements, not because of political inclinations but because economic control also implies political influence. As with any form of sovereignty, it means the country controls processes within its borders. In economic terms, economic sovereignty means a country controls the currency flow within its borders. When someone outside a country controls food, medicines, electronics, industrial production, energy, media, military hardware, land ownership, and other major businesses in that country, it means the country is not in charge of itself or is not sovereign. Therefore, the Sovereign Economic Model implicitly tries to reverse such external control. Through state capitalism, import substitution, market regulation, and industrialization, it tries to move the economic control levers back into the hands of the country and its people.

      The Sovereign Economic Model also has a preponderant long-term view of economic well-being in terms of independence, self-sufficiency, and stability. Simultaneously, it tries to capture and keep the wealth created in the country. Increased competition is not a welcome concept for many of the largest international industry players and for countries with such industries. Thus, a country that follows this path faces very intense pressure. It is therefore criticized, despised, and ostracized in both the media and academia by most economic experts and stakeholders. It is sad to see that only a few countries, such as China, Russia, India (partially), and Iran, have sovereign economic policies. Others, willingly or unwillingly, have given up economic control of their country. This negatively affects their economies in the longer term.

      The political implications of the Sovereign Economic Model also have an unintended political angle for countries that want to retake the reins of their economies to organize amended mechanisms suitable for local conditions. Some countries have more «socialist» inclinations. Russian President Vladimir Putin has several times mentioned the «social obligations» of businesses; in China, President Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party created the concept of «common prosperity» in 2021. Both of these leaders want to remove their economies from the «liberal order» -defined status quo and its economic modus operandi. Both want to create their own flavor that is more beneficial to their own country and its citizens.

      In countries like the US, economic nationalism, with mottoes such as «Made in USA,» «Buy American,» and «American jobs» still stir up a sort of nationalistic, patriotic sentiment in some people. It is comparable to the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, but generalized against any foreign brands or goods.

      Many think that import substitution is economic isolation, that it means blocking off all imports and becoming an economic hermit. This is not true unless complete sanctions

Скачать книгу