[The Kalistani Republic's] D[amon] F[ierro]: Comrade President, welcome. We're happy to have you provide this interview.
M[aria] R[eina-Rodriguez]: Thank you. I don't get down here enough. I'm happy to finally get a chance to speak with you.
DF: The recession has been over, by economic definitions, for more than a year now. Can you give us a brief history of the downturn?
MR: Sure. Al-Khali's assassination was only tangentially related to the recession. It happened, we discovered, to coincide with certain currents in the Kalistani economy, which themselves coincided with political currents swirling around at the same time, to create a perfect storm. This is something that we haven't seen in Kalistan for quite sometime. The assassination, while we were attempting to negotiate trade deals in both Lourenne and Vanuku touched off a powderkeg of investor insecurity that led us first to the rabbit hole. And then the reaction of the Government, some missteps at important junctures, and the slowness of recovery all added up to a complete disaster.
DF: Why did investors get nervous following the death of the President?
MR: Internal crises, coupled with some decisions we had made to counter the influence of ephemeral Parties in Kalistan made them jittery. My appointment as Interim President made a lot of the liberals in our society quite spooked. And then the dissolution of the main opposition Party at about the same time, which was unapologetically a Party of the Right, caused a crisis of confidence on the hard Right, and well, most of those bastards held most of the investments. Our Ruble was rock solid, and decades of anti-growth policies of the Socialist Party left the Ruble critically strong and the economy teetering on zero percent growth. As we slipped into a period of deflationary prices, investment from foreign countries could have potentially kept the inflation rate on the positive side, but delays in those negotiations tipped the scales and people started selling.
DF: And when people started selling overseas how did this turn into a monetary crisis?
MR: Well, when the sell off began, people started getting laid off. And when people started getting laid off, they started drawing on their savings to buy things which were becoming fewer and fewer in the market. The Money was worth more, but there was less to buy. And meanwhile, more people were drawing on the social safety net, because they were out of work, and requiring more help from the government. The surplusses we built up for years and years were depleted in months, because tax revenues dropped sharply, and nothing was coming into to replace what we were putting out the door. To protect the reserve, we had to close the banks. I finally got the government to finally raise taxes and lay out more money for social services and for job creation, but because the tax bill was not passed at the same time as the spending bill, people saw this as incompetence, and continued to sell off. And we have to keep the banks closed.
DF: Eventually, foreign investors rushed in and began investing. What effect did this have?
MR: Of course: they waited until they could snatch up a bunch of Kalistani stock super cheap. So you will forgive me if I don't count foreign investors as saviors of the nation. We were lucky and found local investors to partner with the foreigners. And we started putting putting people back to work. Soon, money began trickling back into the treasury, and we were able to open the bank again., and we haven't closed it since August of last year. By the beginning of this year, we got the currency problems back under control, and purchased back the first batch of District scrip. The increased confidence in the Ruble, and soon, the New Ruble had fully replaced the old one. We opened new businesses across the Republic, divested the KALNAMOCO, and put a lot of people back to work. The last two quarters were positive for job creation. Though things are pretty anemic, economists predict that we will spend the next decade rebuilding from the economic storm that swept the country. Which means that there will be bad months, there will be a lot of months where we don't hit our targets and so forth. But I want to stress, the Republic is back in business.
DF: Any final words?
MR. Yes, we'll be opening a stock exchange and all Kalistani owned companies which are publicly traded will be listed there, rather than in foreign exchanges which the Government has no control over. I don't want to cast aspersions, but, it is better to keep commodities and securities trading at home.
DF: Very well. From The Republic, thank you.
MR: You're totally welcomed.
John King wrote: "For Kalistan, there really can be no other system than the Dual Economy. A robust Private Sector, which manages consumer demands far better, as we see, than the Government can, and a solid public sector, to include a carefully controlled Ruble and shepherded investments, which supplies needs for the People are both intrinsic to the success of the state. The recent crisis in Kalistan which is really only just beginning to abate, and will take years, if not decades, to completely recover from, was caused by political turbulence, combined with almost no control over market forces that are subject to radical consumer and investor irrationality, especially overseas where investors neither understand, nor particularly appreciate the Dual Economy, but are chiefly concerned with the amoral quest for profit maximization. I admit my role in propping up the myth of complete market rationality and efficiency: I can no longer ignore the very basic and very obvious fact, as ironclad as the law of gravity, that market forces create political crises such as deflation, speculative bubbles, and vast joblessness, and tying the hands of the political sphere to address those crises is the sole cause of disasters of monumental proportions."
"The best example of this we see is in Kalistan, where the Government maintains what the ruling socialists refer to as the Dual Economy. That economic program allows the private sector to flourish, while ensuring that for-profit businesses are not responsible for provision of the basic necessities of human life. When you separate out need from economic activity, then the market functions more correctly. When you change the conditions under which labor and management negotiate with one another, to take away the power to starve from the business owners, you see labor and management come to an agreement that is mutually beneficial, and you give the worker a stake in the health and success of the company. In other words, the old Metzist cannard that workers and management have nothing in common is shown to be facetious and instrumentalist on its face. The goal is to give everyone an interest in seeing all do well, rather than pitting one class forever against another." - (King 4442, 543)
John King wrote:1. Focus on Constant improvement. This can include growth of the plant, ensuring that workers keep their jobs, increase in efficiency of the worker, ensuring that workers can afford to buy the products they produce if they wish, and improvement of the conditions and safety of work.
2. Focus on decreasing costs. This does not mean that workers must be laid off or factories must close. Instead, it means getting rid of redundancies in the sector, getting rid of non-value added steps, and increasing the value of value-added steps in production. If you increase the value of the value-added steps relative to the value of the non-value added steps, you will increase the quality and efficiency of your production processes, and the previously wasted money will either be saved to the consumer, or will be used to grow the company and protect the workers' jobs. We know, from statistical analysis that there will always be some x percent of failure in any lot. Rather than obsessing on those failures, and treating the symptoms (the failure), we should focus on decreasing the rate of failure: on consistently doing better. Decreasing the rate of failure, whether it be in product manufacturing or in worker attrition, means we save money on rework and rejection.
3. Focus on leapfrog development and export oriented growth. Developing nations traditionally have trade deficits as wealthy nations rush to take advantage of cheap labor and raw materials in developing nations, and import in their wake expensive finished goods. What leapfrog development means is that the developing world needs to acknowledge that it will always lose to economies of scale, especially in cutting edge areas of development. So the developing nation will take the ubiquitous technologies of the developed world, the technology and processes that they are now dumping on the world as they attempt to deal with the crisis of the business cycle, and improve it. We should use our strengths to make those technologies better, and add value to them which we will then feed into our economy, rather than sending it to them.
4. Focus on use of weakness as strength. This builds on point 3. The Developing world is usually flush with potential which is not tapped. There are a million reasons why not, but in fact, they represent a source of strength for the developing world that the developed world cannot exploit without our say-so. We may have cheaper labor in the developing world. But this can be a strength to attract investment. We should do what we do well, and become the leaders of that thing, so we occupy a niche. It is possible to do several things well, to occupy several niches. But the most important point here is that we not compete with economies of scale. We work to compliment them, to bring consumers across the globe our own goods and services which are significant improvements, both in terms of quality and quantity, but also in price point over the previous generation of the same thing still being half heartedly produced by economies of scale. Producing old technology for them is an inefficiency. They incur and bear alone the opportunity cost. Producing the exact same thing for the developing world is an opportunities. Since the R&D has already been completed, we merely have to take it apart, find out how it works, reduce redundancies and non-value added steps, and build one of our own, much cheaper than it cost them to build theirs. They are then free to make new things, while we continue to improve on what they have already built. In this way, the profit for those older technologies is re-direfted toward the developing world, rather than being monopolisitcally held by Developed nations." - (King, 546-48)
John King wrote:"I was wrong. Forget everything I ever wrote: Liberal Economics is a completely dead-end ideology, at least in middle economies like Kalistan's who wish to get out of the perpetual middling position they constantly find themselves in. Blind faith in Markets is a death sentence. But again: so is full planning. What we need is an economy which is flexible enough to allow consumers to obtain whatever they want from the Market, but protection from the sorting mechanisms of the markets which will always take wealth from the many and hand it over to the few. We need a strong public sector side by side, to ensure that the Four Steps are enforced. Doing otherwise should legitimately create an existential crisis for private sector investors. There can be no other way, unless there is a significant enough cushion to absorb market shocks, and for the vast majority of the population of Terra, that insulation simply does not, cannot exist, because the society is mitigating risk incorrectly."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests