Improving economics
Below follow a number of suggestions that would, according to Alf Temme, vastly improve the economics of entire countries17/11/2008 | By Alf Temme
Too many faulty theories and emotional social agendas have made economics into the free-for-all alchemy that rightfully has been referred to as “The Dismal Science.”
www.ImprovedEconomics.com has established parameters, standards and definitions by which economic models can be evaluated for their effectiveness. Moreover these are parameters, standards and definitions that can be readily understood by legislators of average intelligence so that they can test old existing legislation and new legislative proposals against these exacting standards to improve the effectiveness of such legislation and thereby improve the economy.
The meaning of GDP to measure the effectiveness of an economy is unclear in the general public’s perception and is normally understood as the sum total of the money that has changed hands in the process of creating and consuming all the GOODS and SERVICES in a country during a one-year period. That makes GDP a very ambiguous measurement because the GDPmakes no distinction between GOODS and SERVICES and BADS and DISSERVICES (www.BadsAndDisservices.com) and lumps them all together in a single figure that cannot possibly serve as an indicator of the standard of living in any given country.
Economics would be better served with GDGS ‘Gross Domestic Goods and Services’ and GDBD ‘Gross Domestic Bads and Disservices’. The distinction between GOODS and BADS is that GOODS are all the products for which there is a free∞choice demand and for which people would willingly spend their money. BADS are all the products for which there is no free∞choice demand and for which people will not willingly spend their money. It is likewise with SERVICES, people are willingly consuming them and freely spend their money on them and DISSERVICES are not consumed by free choice.
Defining terms
It is important to note that GOODS and SERVICES are desired and people will consume them out of their free will. They could include products and services that are seen as undesirable by most people, such as currently illegal hard drugs and illegal prostitution. So the distinction is that they are desired by at least some people and and are willingly consumed by them. So there are desired desirable GOODS and SERVICES and there are desired undesireable GOODS and SERVICES.
BADS and DISSERVICES are all undesired even though some of them may be seen as desireable, and BADS and DISSERVICES that are consumed are often forcefed and seen by most as necessary evils.
To promote a higher standard of living governments should encourage, promote and support the production of GOODS and SERVICES and should not encourage, promote or support BADS and DISSERVICES. Governments at present have no knowledge or standard economic measurement that distinguishes between GOODS, BADS, SERVICES and DISSERVICES. That leads to their mistaken belief that they should devote all their efforts to increase GDP to increase the standard of living, even though that very ambiguous GDP measurement cannot measure the standard of living. So governments around the Globe will increase BADS and DISSERVICES along with the GOODS and SERVICES. They will also outlaw many GOODS and SERVICES because they deem them undesirable. All of that has, as a result, the lowering of the standard of living. Among the DISSERVICES that governments force the population to consume are taxation, mandatory liability insurance coverage and other undesired such DISSERVICES.
Taxation in all countries is seen as a necessary evil to collect revenue to meet budget requirements for all levels of government. As it turns out, it is an absolutely unnecessary evil. In the United States there are over 30,000 taxing agencies that have directly and indirectly created totally unproductive employment for about 12 percent of the working population. This has created a burden on the American economy of about $900bn per year.
Our www.GlobalTaxReform.com is a completely paperless tax collection process that will set 12 percent of the working population free to engage in productive employment that will improve the standard of living for all. Taxation that is based on income will create violent swings in revenue collection and that has a very destabilising effect on the total economy. When economies decline by three percent, tax revenue will decline by about 30 percent and when the economy strengthens by three percent, tax revenues will rise by 30 percent. When tax revenues increase by 30 percent governments tend to add social programmes that they must support when the tax revenue declines by 30 percent. That creates a revenue crisis and that in turn will result in governments cutting their expenses such as road and bridge maintenance and new construction infrastructure.
These violent tax revenue swings are totally eliminated with www.GlobalTaxReform.com because it is a simple excise tax that requires no record keeping and tax form filing. This new simple form of taxation would likely have prevented the recent Global financial meltdown because the economies affected would not have been burdened with 12 percent of the workforce tied up in unproductive jobs and many of the complicated financial games would not have been played. No one will ever have to endure an audit either. This tax can be phased in over a period of 20 years to prevent massive unemployment for the 12 percent of the working population that is tied up in tax-related employment.
Modern post industrial countries produce fewer and fewer GOODS and SERVICES and they produce more and more BADS and DISSERVICES. We stack up people in highrise office buildings and the only thing these people produce is dirty paper. They start out with clean paper in the morning and have dirty paper in the afternoon. There is no ready and willing consumption of this dirty paper. By discouraging and eliminating most of this unproductive activity and turning these unproductive jobs into productive ones, living standards would rise to very high levels.
Illness prevention would obviously be far more productive than health care and it would be less labour∞intensive and have greater results in gains for heath and fitness. Yet goverments will force national heathcare on people instead of promoting wellness and prevention.
At www.FastWorkout.com there is an exercise machine that requires exactly four minutes per day for a complete workout that produces health and fitness results that would require 60 to 90 minutes in a health club. With a machine like that, a national wellness programme would yield far bigger results and at a much lower cost than a national health insurance coverage plan would. Yet governments seem to be unable to make the smart choice toward prevention.
These and other ideas to be found on www.OneManThinktank.com can play a big role in improving the economics of entire countries. I hope that some of my ideas will find application in many countries around the Globe.
