L 'Dragons intervention, which incorporates and updates a number of ideas of method and thought of George Fua occasion of the tenth anniversary of his death, offers an important opportunity for reflection and discussion, which in our Mofir-blog we intend to open to any interested person to make a contribution.
A key statement of his reasoning is in the phrase:
"Wealth is the result of past actions and decisions, GDP, linked to productivity, is the result of actions and decisions taken looking to the future. Focusing on the past than the future well-being excluded from the evaluation of the vision of those for whom the future is the only wealth: the young ".
This is a sentence to that effect, especially if isolated from its context, may seem contradictory. For at least three reasons:
1) if you remain within the accounting variables, including wealth and GDP are close interrelations stock-flow, which pass through the formation of savings, which is a component of GDP and causes accumulation of wealth at this level of analysis does not seem possible to distinguish wealth-past and future GDP-
2) ; if you enter more specifically, a lot depends on which wealth has been accumulated in the past makes no difference whether it is wealth that produces unproductive rents (ie second homes, speculative financial wealth) and wealth production that brings progress technical, improve competitiveness, increase productivity, the first does not contribute to future development, the second
3) if you enlarge the perspective to the concept of welfare, wider than the GDP, as it does in the text Dragons taking the approach of Fua, the distinction applied to past-future wealth and GDP is less justified: for measuring welfare is necessary to take account of composite indicators, which include both the income (ie GDP) is the wealth, as well as socio-demographic variables, from this point of view, the second part of the sentence above focuses on the concept of "welfare assessment" in contradiction with the statement that precedes it.
point of view of Dragons if you retrieve it relates to the concerns of "disappointing productivity performance of" which is explained by the dualisms (technology, size, territorial, and workers) are typical of late development, already reported thirty years ago by Fua and Research Group Ancona. Italian developmental delays that unfortunately remains and has increased over the last thirty years (see data on the decline in GDP per capita).
In our country, the delay of wealth per capita is less than the delay of GDP per capita compared to other G7 countries. Part of private wealth but is compensated by the high public debt. The accumulated wealth is less productive than would be needed to fuel the ability of our socio-economic system to keep up the pace of development of other countries. Lagging behind in growth rate (not only productive but also socially) means to live "consuming" the wealth that pays for the decline, but does not stop him. In this sense we understand the alarm of Dragons for the future and for young people (who have just a future ahead).
His final recommendation is acceptable: "We have to go back to thinking on the strategic choices collective vision with a long" . But such choices, how to implement them, when to start and what policy framework? And 'yet to be defined. We will finish to also leave this legacy to future generations?
0 comments:
Post a Comment