Page 74 - Ekonomija i Biznis_May 2016.indd

WORLD
in Vietnam expect that their children
could only live better (94%). This per-
centage reaches 84% in China, 77% in
Chile and 71% in Bangladesh. In Europe
and in Japan there is a prevailing skep-
ticism in regard to market economy,
and its greatest representatives are
part of the communist countries Viet-
nam (95%), China (76%), India (72%),
Venezuela, Brazil.
It is almost certain, as a prophet,
Naim writes in 2011, that the politi-
cians in the developed world will start
to blame the booming countries for the
economic decline of their countries.
The antiglobalism of some American
candidates in the presidential elec-
tions goes precisely in this direction.
Such claims will continue to strength-
en although data shows that the lower
salaries and the lower number of job
positions are not primarily a result of
the rise of the countries, rather they
are dominantly a consequence of the
technological changes, the anemic
productivity, the tax politics and the
other causes that originate in the very
national economies.
In the common study of the Interna-
tional Labour Office and the European
Commission, published in February
this year, one of the researchers, the
economist Daniel Vaughan Whitehead
(as well as, for example, the American
economist Robert Reich before this,
and many others) concluded the fol-
lowing: “weaker middle class leads to
weaker aggregate demand and it is a
brake for the long-term development
which may lead to social and political
instability.” On the same occasion, the
ILO regional director for Europe and
Central Asia, Heinz Kohler, says that
the holders of public policies, in order
to reduce inequality, have to formulate
policies that will be explicitly directed
towards the middle class. These have
to refer not only to the field of labor,
but also to the related taxation, educa-
tion and social protection policies.”
If we read what Branko Milanovic in-
dicated, led only by his pessimistic ob-
servations, one of the two right move-
74 May 2016
In the focus
In the common study of the International
LabourOfficeandtheEuropeanCommission,
published in February this year, one of the
researchers, the economist Daniel Vaughan
Whitehead (as well as, for example, the
American economist Robert Reich before
this, and many others) concluded the
following: “weaker middle class leads to
weaker aggregate demand and it is a brake
for the long-term development which may
lead to social and political instability.”
ments will win: “one that supports
globalization and defends its advan-
tages, especially for the 5% on the top,
which may lead to gradual transition
from democracy to plutocracy and, let
me quote Gramsci, to reestablishment
of the hegemony of this narrative and
these interests. On the other hand,
we have the right-wing anti-globalist
movement.” In other words, we are al-
ready on the way to further deepening
of the intra-national tensions.
On the other side the economists,
from Milanovic to Piketty and the oth-
ers, propose a sequence of measures on
the line or even more radical measures
than the ones that are mentioned in
the already quoted document of the
ILO and the European Commission,
and which strive for return of the pro-
gressive taxation, better access to edu-
cation and diverse intervention on the
labor market (including diverse forms
of workers’ self-management) and in
the field of social policy. “Of course,
this is not easy”, concludes Milanovic
in one of the interviews on the occa-
sion of the publishing of the already
mentioned book, “however it is far
more sustainable than the options we
have today.”