5.5.11

A crisis of the Max Weber view on the economy

While Chinese economists are studying Christian roots of the capitalist system American believers have more doubts about it. A new survey claims that significant ammount of Christians rethought their view on the capitalist philosophy.

According to the survey, conducted by Public Religion Research Institute, only 38% believe capitalism and the free market are consistent with Christian values while 46% believe the two are at odds. Half (50%) of women believe that capitalism and Christian values are at odds, compared to 37% of men.


What in this survey is interesting for me that even among Republicans, the political party with the numerous defenders of the free market system, only 37% say Christian values and capitalism are at odds, and nearly half (46%) say the two are compatible.

I think diligent and careful observers of the market cannot agree with the practices that led to the current financial crisis. Is it the begining of the end of the Max Weber protestant work ethic? Popularity of the recent movie based on the free market defender Ayn Rand's book seems to suggest that it is not. It maybe however a good time to think whether there is a third way between the socialism and capitalism.

About two decades ago an economist Louis Kelso noticed that key to the just economic system is a private property, a capital, owned by the every consumer - a rich and poor one.

You live in a great democracy. If the logic of capital acquisition is to buy capital assets on terms where they will pay for themselves in a reasonable period of time, AND THAT IS ITS LOGIC, you can persuade the government of your country to adopt - and implement - a national economic policy that recognizes your human right to acquire capital out of its own income.

Ownership of a reasonable holding of productive capital, legitimately acquired, is the prize of the great Industrial Revolution.
If the Industrial Revolution, at its outset, and as an ever-ongoing phenomenon, is sustained by the efforts of all citizens of every society, then every human being who lives in a democratic country should insist and work for the establishment of an institutional infrastructure through which he or she, over a reasonable lifetime, can acquire and own a reasonable holding of productive capital.
After all, when governments help their citizens to become capital workers as well as labor workers, the government is also cooperating with Nature, as it should.

  • It is enabling its citizens to augment their democratically-held labor power with capital power.
  • It will reduce, even eliminate, welfare costs, redistribution and subsidies.
  • It will make its people more productive and make it easy for them to pay taxes.
  • It will raise the quality of their lives.
  • Capital is the keystone of the life support system of every post-industrial society.
  • Every family and every single individual needs to legitimately acquire and own a reasonable part of that life support system - so that the principles of free market economics will work in the post-industrial age.

Two-Factor Theory: the Economics of Reality; How to Turn Eighty Million Workers Into Capitalists on Borrowed Money, and Other Proposals

The New Capitalists: A Proposal to Free Economic Growth from the Slavery of Savings

The Capitalist Manifesto



26.4.11

Chinese debate on values in the market economy

This essay by Chinese prominent economist, which appeared at the beginnning of the last decade, is being reread anew. Partly because an interest in the Protestant work ethic is growing among youth. But also that China is looking for a new economic and social strategy, which can help to increase influence on a global affairs.

That debate is not being widely transmitted in Western media. But it is present in major Chinese as well as its immediate neighbors forums.


Market Economies With Churches and Market Economies Without Churches
by Zhao Xiao
Roaming in North America was for the purpose of reading a wordless book, to have the chance to gaze at the heavens from a foreign land. In the country that has the most prosperous material civilization in the history of human society, the question that frequently occupied my thoughts was this: where does the greatest difference between China and America lie?


The greatest difference between China and America
What makes the deepest impression on our countrymen about the US is the forests of skyscrapers that this country puts up, representing the high development of America’s material culture. But skyscrapers are no longer scarce in China! It is evident that skyscrapers are not the greatest difference between China and the US.

Then, what about wealth? Without a doubt, the US is the world’s richest country. In 2000, China’s per-capita GDP was US$840, while America’s was US$34,100; there is great disparity between the two. But considering that China’s personal income levels are swiftly increasing, the wealth gap, though large, does not amount to the greatest difference between China and America.
Perhaps someone may suggest the gap in science and technology. However, China also possesses a great deal of high technology: for some time it has had the hydrogen bomb and the atom bomb, it sends rockets to the heavens, and it is developing a spaceship. So while a gap remains between the science and technology levels of China and the US, it is not an astronomical one.

Perhaps someone will suggest the financial gap. The pinnacle of the market economy is finance, and this is a weakness of China’s market economy. In comparison, the US has the world’s strongest financial system, and was the earliest to implement relaxations of financial controls to invite financial innovation. To date it has attracted 75% of the world’s financial resources, making finance one of America’s three superlatives (the others being sci-tech and political power). However, while China’s financial system lags behind, looking across the country one finds banks as common as rice shops, securities firms promoting themselves everywhere, and ads for funds airing one after another during prime time on CCTV. So the financial gap between China and the US, while large, still does not amount to the greatest difference.

Then it must be a difference in the political and legal system. To be sure, there is a noticeable difference between China and the US in this area. However, the particular national conditions of the US and China are not very similar, and China is currently involved in a rapid transition and transformation. It is possible to imagine that a modernized China will inevitably move in the direction of an improved political and legal culture, and the prodigious experience and techniques of the US, as the the world’s most developed country, have been taken as a model by the Chinese, who absorb everything. From this perspective, though reference can in fact be made to many areas in politics and law in China and the US, this still cannot be called the greatest difference.

Then where does the greatest difference between the US and China ultimately lie? My personal opinion: churches. Only in this area is the difference between China and the US not a question of numbers, but rather an essential difference between presence and absence. In the US, the spires of churches are more numerous than China’s banks and rice shops. On a street near Harvard Square, I once stood and looked around to find that in three different directions there were three churches. Truth be told, from the east coast of the US to the west coast, from towns to cities, in any place you look you will find that this country’s most numerous structure is none other than the church. Churches, and only churches, are Americans’ center; they are the very core that binds Americans together.

Churches and the market economy
Americans are not idiots. Their need for churches is overwhelming, and churches provide something in answer to their call — there is definitely some principle at work. During my time in America, the relationship of churches with America’s economy, society, and politics became the issue that most often occupied my mind. I came up with many interesting ideas; because of length, I will only address economic issues here. At its heart the problem could be stated as a comparison between market economies with churches and market economies without churches.

Ultimately, why is it that we need a market economy? It is because the market economy has one major advantage: it discourages idleness. The planned economy is different — its faults are faults of having no system of encouragement. Good work and poor work are identical. Under a free market system lazy people cannot live. So the market economy will force competition; it is an efficient economic system. However, the market economy can only discourage idleness; it cannot discourage people from lying or causing harm. This brings to the market economy a certain danger; that is, it may result in an unsavory situation: it may entice people to be industrious in their lies, industrious in bringing harm to others, and to pursue wealth by any means. Some people may say that this is because the market economy is imperfect, and that a perfect market economy would not be this way. However, a market economy that relies solely on the individual will never be perfect, since it can only call people away from idleness but cannot discourage lies and injury.

Indeed, repeated game-playing in the market may minimize dishonest and injurious actions, and legal punishments may be beneficial to normal trading actions. However, in conditions where information in the market is unbalanced and incomplete, contracts are forever deficient. Completely relying on repeated gaming and legal punishments to achieve normal market actions is not only impossible, but is possibly even uneconomic — the implication here is that the market may have unlimited costs, so expensive as to be unusable, and may ultimately come crashing down. To a degree, China’s market economy currently has fallen into this trap. In the mind of a majority of Chinese people is a simple understanding that the market economy means getting rich, and to get rich any means may be used.

Hobbled market ethics have already lead to two chronic ailments in Chinese society. First, becoming rich without relying on labor or on the creation of wealth for society, but rather relying on collusion between government and business and the malicious repurposing of public finances to gain wealth. Second, dishonesty in market trading: backing out of promises and gaining wealth through swindles. So we can see that the market economy in China has brought out a group of “freaks”: day and night they ceaselessly seek personal profit through lies and harm. Naturally, this kind of market economy has a exorbitant cost. And naturally, what causes the exorbitant cost of these market operations is the widespread lack of self-restraint among Chinese people.

These days Chinese people do not believe in anything. They don’t believe in god, they don’t believe in the devil, they don’t believe in providence, they don’t believe in the last judgment, to say nothing about heaven. A person who believes in nothing ultimately can only believe in himself. And self-belief implies that anything is possible — what do lies, cheating, harm, and swindling matter?
However, market economies that have churches are different. Perhaps it is difficult for Chinese people to understand what Christians are like. Here, I can only say that they are rational beings, just like ourselves, and it is sufficient for you to avoid thinking of them as monsters.

It cannot be denied that there are swindlers who go in and out of churches, but the majority of people are not going to church to fill their stomachs. The majority of followers go to church because they truly have a devout faith. Confucius said, “A true gentleman seeks out wealth according to the Way.” To the average person, this may be difficult to achieve since the average person is not a true gentleman. In comparison, it is people who turn their eyes to church spires who generally respect financial norms and integrity. Why? Here is the secret: Puritans, though they may be called the most fervent people in the world in their drive to accumulate wealth, nevertheless do not pursue wealth for personal benefit but rather “to the glory of God,” and to ensure that after they die they can enter heaven. This monetary ethic renders inseparable the motive and means of the Puritans’ pursuit of wealth, and those whose only thought is to create wealth for God will naturally be able to become true gentlemen — gentlemen among gentlemen. In passing, the following thought occurred to me: I suddenly have a new understanding of why Bush required his CEOs to swear according to the Bible when signing their financial statements: Bush was not only raising the the Damoclean sword of the law over his CEOs, but he also placed them under the threat of hell’s lakes of fire. The sword of the law together with the eyes of God is evidently more effective than the law alone. For this reason, the unity of means and method in acquiring wealth is able to remedy the market’s insufficiencies. From this standpoint, the market economy has an instinctive need for some kind of matching market ethics before its true force can come into play, just like horses have an instinctive need for the whip. From the perspective of human society, the most successful model is church + market economy. That is to say, the happy combination of a market economy that discourages idleness together with a strong faith (ethics) that discourages dishonesty and injury.
Is it not integrity that you are pursuing? Then you ought to know: places with faith have more integrity. For China’s crawling economic reforms, this ought to be an important inspiration. Market economies with churches are different in another respect from those without: in the former, it is much easier to establish a commonly respected system. The reason is simple: a people that share a faith, compared to people who only believe in themselves, find it easier to establish mutual trust, and through that to conclude agreements.

However, where is the cornerstone for the American constitution? In fact, as early as the first group of English Puritans who came over to the New World on the Mayflower, there was the Mayflower Compact, which would become the foundation of autonomous government in the separate states in New England. Its contents comprised civic organizations as well as working out just laws, statutes, regulations, and ordinances, and the first line of the covenant was “In the name of God, Amen.” So shared faith is the foundation for shared law. Otherwise, a legal system, should it arise, will not be respected.

Market economies with churches are comparatively open. The reason for this is perhaps explained thus: In the sight of God, all people are equal. It is easier for a core spirit of fraternity to extend to outsiders openness, acceptance, and respect.

Are there other uses of market economies with churches? Yes, and they are relatively important: guiding spending and modulating the close relationship between the poor and the rich.[**] In the case the wealth of a devout Puritan, the situation may be different. This is because his religious faith will tell him: gaining wealth is only for the glory of God; personally, he must use that wealth reasonably, for being forever humble is a virtue favored by God. So in the United States we can see that people with money must donate 10% of their wealth to the church for other church members to share. We can also see that the ranks of the richest people and the ranks of society’s largest donors overlap; the relationship between rich and poor is fundamentally unlike the antagonism found in mainland China. Some of the spending and handling of wealth on the part of the rich may violate the law, while others may not violate secular law, making legal oversight difficult. But I know that this malconduct does not please God. However, in the absence of God’s oversight, all of this is possible and even common.

Faith: the soul of the market economy
Modern economics—modern politics—modern culture form the trinity of the market economy. Seeking the fruits of the market economy, Chinese society ultimately will travel the road of cultural reconstruction, investing in market ethics. It is fortunate that in Chinese society there is already recognition that integrity is the cornerstone of the market economy, but establishing a good cornerstone is no simple matter.

Looking back at China’s recent history, what China has learned from the West stretches from superficial to deep, from externals to internals. From the power of the gunboats we learned to understand the enemy’s technology to defeat him; from the continual improvements to their military might we understood that we needed to develop our science, technology, and education; and because government-directed sci-tech and economics failed, we took a new road to the market economy, one that we have been on for 160 years now. However, this road to modernizing transformations is still far from finished. From the groans of present-day China’s market economy, we can see that danger draws near: we have already bid farewell to humanity’s most costly planned system, but because we lack a reasonable set of market ethics, we may be trapped in humanity’s most costly market system.

Reality unquestionably requires us to move forward another few steps. The first is cultural transformation. We must find a cultural framework compatible with the modern free market economy. To achieve this, we may unearth from our own long-standing traditional culture a set of ethics that are compatible with modern economics, or we may use absorption and introductions from elsewhere to recreate our cultural DNA.

From Boston to Indiana, traveling through North America’s vast lands, I could hear the serene sounds of church bells ringing in every church, and I recalled a poem by an angry poet that I wish to adapt as follows:
Be in awe of the invincible might,
Be in awe of the lightning,
And be in awe of the thunder in the sky;
Only through awe can we be saved. Only though faith can the market economy have a soul.

Zhao Xiao (赵晓) is a government economist, the director of macro-economics research at SASAC.

16.3.11

Russian nuclear physicist calls comparison of Japan to Chernobyl a misinformation

Today, a small distraction from the situation of Polish economy. This blog is trying to de-code propaganda themes in the world media. Majority of them are intended to stir up emotions in people to make them buy their local or national newspaper. Unfortunately frequently people are scared for a long time and media managers happy to sell their twisted stories to them.

In recent days the strongest of them was an attempt to enliken the nuclear reactors' failures in Japan to the catastrophy of Chernobyl. It was propaganda attack on the nuclear energy industry without any evidence in the Soviet style. (For instance here, here and there)

A daily newspaper printed even such opinion without any comment:

It is common rhetoric that U.S. reactors are much better designed, but it is a half truth at best. In 1986, Chernobyl 4 was state of the art and its lid was stronger than domes covering some plants in this country. Soviet engineers pronounced it meltdown proof and that even if the worst happened, the lid would hold.

What kind of the start of the art could have been Soviet machine RMBK?





Where in the world such reactors were installed outside Soviet Union? Answer: Nowhere. Today they are still operating in the Lithuania, Ukraine and obviously Russia.

Modifications have been made to overcome deficiencies in all the RBMK reactors still operating. In these, originally the nuclear chain reaction and power output could increase if cooling water were lost or turned to steam, in contrast to most Western designs. It was this effect which led to the uncontrolled power surge that led to the destruction of Chernobyl 4. All of the RBMK reactors have now been modified by changes in the control rods, adding neutron absorbers and consequently increasing the fuel enrichment from 1.8 to 2.4% U-235, making them very much more stable at low power. Automatic shut-down mechanisms now operate faster, and other safety mechanisms have been improved. Automated inspection equipment has also been installed. A repetition of the 1986 Chernobyl accident is now virtually impossible, according to a German nuclear safety agency report.


And here is Japanese modern BWR reactor:





Another journalist also assumed that the Japanese nuclear plant's reactor is the same like the one, which was in Chernobyl.

The most immediate risk is to the workers who are attempting to keep the reactors cool and bring the situation under control. High doses of radiation can kill cells, causing radiation sickness, a slew of acute symptoms that can come on in hours or days. They include nausea, vomiting, burns on the skin, bone marrow destruction, and even death. At Chernobyl, 28 emergency and plant workers died of acute radiation sickness.

And another expert:

While the situation in Japan arose from different circumstances, Hulse says the two are linked because of the potential for irreversible consequences.


"The real question is would you be comfortable raising your children there, and my answer is no," Hulse said nearly 20 twenty years ago discussing the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl.


Perhaps such massive propaganda effort was nothing new only renewed efforts to promote certain lobbies for solar, water and maybe wind energy plant.

ABC Australia interviewed Russian nuclear physicist Leonid Bolshov who was in Chernobyl after explosion. He demolishes a myth of so-called similarity between a Soviet disaster and the Japanese nuclear industry problems.

In fact, when it comes to reactor design and safety systems, Fukushima and Chernobyl aren't even close. The Chernobyl reactor had no containment structure, just a thick concrete layer over the top of the fuel rods.


When the reactor exploded, highly radioactive fuel was released directly into the atmosphere.


The Japanese reactors are housed in pressure vessel tanks that are then encased in a reinforced containment structure. It's designed to stay intact even if the fuel begins to melt - a so-called meltdown.


All of that, in turn, is housed in a secondary containment building. Those were the structures destroyed when steam vented from the reactors caused hydrogen explosions.  


(...) For those such as Sergey Zaitsev, their lives would never be the same. He was sent to work at Chernobyl a month after the accident. He's suffered the health effects ever since.


(Sergey Zaitsev speaking)


"No one at that time understood how serious it was", he says. "They even told us what happened there but no one actually understood what it was".


In 1986 insiders from communist circles were saying that Soviets wanted to increased production of the plutonium for the military. That is why most probably the explosion was caused by excessive pressure buildup, hydrogen explosion and rupture of all containments, propelling molten core material into the environment (a “dirty bomb”).

It will not happen in Japan (the best explanation ever found why it is so) or anywhere else in the Western world.















11.3.11

Poland experiences goodness of carbon tax: electricity the most expensive in EU




Not long ago Polish politicians, who steer the country declared that free market is the solution for the economic problems. Their supporters thought that they won their prize in casino but it appears that in reality they lost in Russian roulette.

 Once Civic Platform (led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk and FM Radek Sikorski - former employee of American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC) won elections it appeared to them that economic crisis passed somehow Poland hitting all of its neighbors. New government criticizing the Polish president and the fmr president of the National Bank of Poland, thanks to whose decision to postpone the euro adoption (now it seeems to be again euro fever - clearly someone wants to push the Central Europe to that totally failured system)  the state's economy survived financial tsunami, in the same time were creating more "jobs for boys (*)" enjoying stable situation. In effect an average increase in the government bureacracy was about 10 per cent.

When finally tsunami hit Poland, government reached for the reserves and the flexible credit line from the International Monetary Fund. The reserves were used to keep public debt at the end of 2010 on the psychological level a little below 55 per cent GDP.

In January however ruling politicians did not find new ideas except tax increase. Government increased taxes raising VAT rate from 22 to 23 per cent and from 7 to 8 per cent. Food tax and books/magazines tax increased from 0 to 5 per cent. Higher taxes are paying also taxi drivers. Government taxed more constructing materials increasing VAT tax from 22 to 23 per cent.

Economic crisis hits homes with higher food prices. For instance, only in one month average price of sugar increased about 35 per cent per kilo. (from 2.9 in Jan to 3.9 Feb.). More expansive is flower and salt, as well. The other reason for sugar price hike is the fact that EU imposed production limit on Poland and current government capitulated resigning from any negotiations.



Negative result of the EU policy is also increase of the electricity prices. In January 2011 Poland was forced to implement the white certificate, which is another name for a carbon tax. It is an obligation of the EU member to reduce their consumption of the electricity about 20 per cent to 2020. Poland has to support also renewable energy technology development and to purchase the CO2 credit. In effect government imposed on consumer 20 per cent of the new hidden tax in the price of an electricity to cover all of these obligations.

Looks like also the new bank tax will be imposed allegedly to provide more financial stability.

New president of the National Bank of Poland has the same view on euro adoption as his predecessor.

(...) backs the government's long-term strategy of taking Poland into the euro zone but says "we are not obsessed" with the common currency. The plan has moved to the back burner due to the global crisis and more recently the euro zone's own woes.

In such situation I wonder from where these people get so much optimism about the Polish economy, which seems to be nothing more than indeed Russian roulette. 

28.2.11

Poland has almost the worst unemployment rate in EU after Greece and Spain

Poland is losing economically or its economic foundation was not solid? One should know that Polish state's institutions were left unchanged from the final day of the communism. Walls were repainted, new furnitures arrived and even computers here and there appeared in the state's bureaucracy offices. However philosophy of government and what is more important the mentality of the people mirrors socialists' way of thinking. To prove or falsify that claim one can easily check political parties promises during elections and their popularity. There is sentiment for a strong state and deep disbelief in free market. Neo-marxists views are becoming increasingly popular among youth. Academia in its majority leans toward left views. Catholic Church talk about social justice does not help, either.

I agree with Mr Glassman assessment about Poland. I would only add that Poland is politically unstable because it has failed electoral system which promotes the weakest and punish winner. It cannot remain without influence on overall economic condition of the state.


James K. Glassman
Why Poland Matters

On a trip to Poland in 2003, I positively gushed over the nation’s prospects for the future. “Poland truly wants to get on,” I wrote in the Washington Post, “and that’s the first step to actually doing it.”

Aspiration, however, isn’t everything. Poland has certainly done well in the past eight years, but not as well as I had hoped. Currently, the economy is sputtering along with an unemployment rate of 13.1 percent – fourth-worst (after South Africa, Spain, and Greece) among the 43 countries surveyed by the Economist. Unlike its neighbors Hungary and the Czech Republic, not to mention the European continent as a whole, Poland is running a trade deficit, and its budget deficit (at 7.5 percent of GDP) isn’t a pretty picture either.

You are probably asking, “So what?” Or, to paraphrase Shakespeare, “What’s Poland to me, or me to Poland?”

Actually, Poland means a great deal. It stood a chance of teaching tired European economies – and maybe even our own – how to thrive. And I’m not giving up on it. There are problems to address, but they’re not difficult to solve.

To attract the investment it needs, Poland must become a place where businesses are comfortable investing. Some recent incidents are worrisome. The last thing Poland needs is a reputation for a casual attitude toward the rule of law. The country needs to be seen as Singapore, not Russia.

In 2004, after 15 years of negotiation, Poland was admitted to the European Union along with other Eastern European nations that had also thrown off the yoke of communism (Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Slovenia). At the time, again perhaps caught up in the enthusiasm of the moment, I believed that these new E.U. members, as “New Europe,” would help drag “Old Europe,” in Donald Rumsfeld’s felicitous formula, into a more prosperous free-market future, providing a demonstration of the benefits of lower taxes, less onerous regulation, and more flexible labor practices.

Continue reading