Страница 1 из 14
To Understanding of Macroeconom у
of State and World
1. Introduction to the Topic
Both existing and possible economic theories may be ranged into one of the two following categories:
The first group of theories describes the economy of a society in a way, which implies the need to give the answer to the question how an entrepreneur can legally fill up his pockets.
The second group describes the economy of a society in a way, which implies that the economic activities in the society are to be used as a means of approaching some other, fundamentally noneconomic, goals.
Theories of the first-group originate from understanding that there are the following means of influence, a sensible application of which to the society lets us manage its life and death:
outlook-type information, that is methodology, whose retention allows the people to create (either individually or collectively) their own standard automatisms of recognition and conceptualisation of specific processes as the integrality of the Universe and, being perceived, define the hierarchical order in their mutual embedding.
a
factual (descriptive) information; a description of particular processes and their interrelationships comprises the essence of the Third Priority Information; the latter includes religious beliefs, secular ideologies, technologies and factual content of all the branches of Science.
economic processes as means of influence; they are subject to sheer informational means of influence through the finance (money), which is the ultimately generalized type of economy-wise information.
genocide factors, which cause damage to both contemporary and future generations and destroy their genetically specified ability to grasp and develop the cultural and spiritual heritage of the ancestors, include nuclear blackmail, or a threat of nuclear weapons use; alcohol, tobacco and other kinds of drug genocide, as well as food additives; some kinds of cosmetics, the whole lot of pollution factors, and some medications. There is also a latent threat of ‘gene engineering’ and ‘biotechnological’ application consequences.
The other factors are mainly conventional arms, which kill and wound people, damage and destroy the tangible artifacts created by civilizations.
There is no univocal distinction between those factors. The hierarchically ordered structure outlined above is based on the selection of predominate factors of well known heterogeneous means of influence.
When it comes to application of such a set within a single social system, the means represent generalized tools of its management. In case these means are applied by one social system (group of society) to other systems, whose concepts of management do not coincide, they turn into generalized weapons, or means of waging war, in a broad sense; otherwise they can epitomize means of self-rule support in a different social system in case both systems do not feature any conceptual inconsistency between their means of management.
Economic theories for ‘clerks’ apply respectively to the third priority level of generalized arms; they are the ones that constitute the fourth priority of generalized means of management, namely, behavioural algorithms typical for large groups of entrepreneurs, politicians and their economic advisors, journalists, etc. Economic theories for ‘clerks’ can circulate in a society provided the latter warships some distorted notions concerning the way the top priority generalized means of management are believed to affect the life.
Rival and really operable economic theories for masters ensue from recognition of uncertainty in the opinions at the first and third priority levels as well as certain answers to arising questions in terms of which is true and which is glaring falsehood or misapprehension of the essentials.
The lack of opinion and ‘opinion pluralism’ regarding all the six priorities of generalized means of management have to be expatriated; otherwise none of the societies (including the USA) can avoid following the way of ancient Rome; all the neighbouring countries had no choice but to obey the victorious march of Roman legions, they were trembling at the Roman military might; nevertheless Rome went down before such means of war that had not been perceived by the Roman strategists and politicians as means of war at all.
“Commonplace” production goal is the satisfaction of individual wants. It is based on the public joint labour and exchange of products, which follow manufacturing and distribution. Well-being is a mutually complementary unity of manufacturing and distribution; however, that thought is still beyond most politicians and their economic advisors’ grasp.
Well-being is created or undermined by address instructions within the ‘vertical of power’ as well as, outside the ‘vertical of power’, by spontaneous market trade, which operates on the base of established rules, either codified or not.
The ground for trade on all occasions is inability to administer the exchange of goods by force of decrees; such an approach will neither work in manufacturing, nor in distribution of the end product among individual households, the ‘seeds’ the society sprouts from in the continuity of its generations.
Regardless of the particular set of public events in which the inability to handle the exchange of goods is observed, the primitive cause behind trade that creates the ‘market spontaneity’ is inability of single-core structures of management to cope with the huge and complete dataflow (to do with social and economic processes) in real time mode. As a result, the life of society is represented by a multi-core structure of management surrounded by the structureless society management on the basis of addressless data distribution.
Hence, the solution to some socio-economic problems implies the coordination of multi-core structured management and stuctureless social self-rule in the tideway of a unified strategy. Herein, one has to realize that structured management originates from stuctureless management as the profile of data transfer turns steady and people at large start treating them as some professional secular public institutions.
Those involved in self-rule of economic relations in a society would evaluate the improvement of such relations on the basis of such a criteria as the growth in their individual purchasing power. However, their estimations depend on which category the subjects identify themselves in market environment, so those estimations turn to be mutually exclusive. There is an increase in the quality of self-management in producing and consuming social systems.
for a private entrepreneur (microlevel of manufacturing), this is the price growth for his products relative to the prices of products consumed by him for manufacturing purposes;
for a consumer of end product (household consumption) this is the growth in his purchasing power: a drop in price for all the products relative to his incomes.
The task of macroeconomic management is a continuous arrangement of quality evaluation of a‘consumer-manufacturer’ macroeconomic self-regulation conflict, both in manufacturing and distribution. That requires to keep the purchasing power of the buyer and the manufacturer within the limits that let the dynamics of particular types of manufacturing at the regional level grow, which, in turn, affects the demographic dynamics, predetermined at 1st – 3rd priority level of generalized means of management in a subjective, ethics-based, voluntary way given the understanding of non-economic factors.It is necessary because the majority of population is deprived (first and foremost by market competition) from a chance to move into better-of social groups. If a society is unable to reconcile such kind of conflict, it makes internal social conflicts more acute, which can lead to the downfall of the society.Basically, there are two means of macroeconomic management: