Econ - Science topic

Dear Researchers, Scientists, Friends,

Economic globalisation has brought about many changes in the structure of world trade, investment and the labour market. On the one hand, it has enabled the growth of prosperity and the development of many economies, but on the other hand, it has contributed to the concentration of capital in the hands of transnational corporations and an increase in social inequality. Studies show that economic globalisation significantly promotes prosperity and increases economic efficiency in at least some of the countries involved. On the other hand, economic globalisation can also lead to increased income inequality and dependence on international capital. Furthermore, the impact of globalisation on economies depends on the policies of individual countries and their ability to protect their own economic interests. As a result, globalisation has intensified international trade and capital flows and increased market competitiveness. However, in many developing countries, it has led to economic dependence on foreign investment and production for international corporations. At the same time, jobs are being eroded in highly developed countries, where production processes are being relocated to cheaper locations. There is a need for a balanced economic policy that allows us to reap the benefits of globalisation while minimising its negative effects.

My articles below are related to some aspects of the above-mentioned issues:

I have described the main issues of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the economy and financial markets in my article below:

I have described the key issues of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the economy and financial markets in my article below:

I have described the issue of economic globalisation as an important factor in the systemic transformation of banking in Poland in the following article:

My highly cited publication on economic globalisation:

And what is your opinion on this matter?

What do you think about this?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

I invite you to scientific cooperation,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

The sharing economy model, i.e. the sharing economy, the sharing economy, the collaborative economy, is an important element of what is more broadly referred to as a sustainable circular economy. On the other hand, the processes of green transformation of economies aimed, among other things, at reducing the consumption of natural resources, decreasing waste generation and decreasing greenhouse gas emissions are expected to lead to a reduction in the scale of carbon emissions, i.e. greenhouse gas emissions and thus slow down the progressive process of global warming and reduce the scale of environmental pollution, reduce the scale of loss of biodiversity of natural ecosystems and the consumption of strategic natural resources such as water and rare raw materials. The phenomenon is based on people's willingness to cooperate, help others and share their time and resources, which is reciprocated in various ways (material and non-material). In the past, this form of cooperation was limited to a narrow circle of family, friends and neighbours, and with mass production, the development of trade and services and stronger migration resulting in the separation of multi-generational families and the loss of networks of acquaintances, this phenomenon slowly lost its importance and its functions were taken over by companies and institutions (e.g. public institutions). The other side of human nature, which is the desire to compete and look after narrowly defined self-interest, is the basis of classical economics, but under market economy conditions it sometimes leads to distortions (exploitation, fraud, etc.). Thanks to the development and application of new technologies, collaborative economics is once again gaining popularity and economic rationality. A key determinant of the dynamic development of the sharing economy was the financial crisis in 2008, as well as the need to save money, make better use of resources and change social relations. The development of the concept of a sustainable circular economy should therefore also take the sharing economy into account. The circular economy takes into account, among other things, the minimisation of the environmental impact of the production cycle. An important element of the closed loop economy can be the production method called in Polish 'from cradle to cradle'. This idea specifies methods for designing and producing objects in accordance with the concept of sustainable development, so that, at the end of their useful life, they can be put back into the production cycle. The circular economy also has a territorial dimension. In the context of the functioning of regions and especially urban areas, it refers to yet other economic solutions, e.g. the concept of the sharing economy, according to which unlimited consumption or accumulation of property gives way to sharing, exchanging or borrowing. According to this concept, people give up many goods for their own exclusive use in favour of others, i.e. they reduce the need for products whose production cycle often requires large amounts of raw materials and energy. The sharing economy is defined as a social and economic phenomenon that involves a shift in organisational and distribution models towards distributed networks of interconnected individuals and communities, involving both the direct provision of services by people to each other, as well as sharing, co-creation, co-direction, etc., enabling a radical increase in resource efficiency. Accordingly, the sharing economy model is an essential component of a sustainable circular economy and thus a sustainable green zero-carbon economy or one that strives towards zero-carbon.

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

As an early-career researcher, how crucial is it to aim for Scopus or Web of Science indexed journals from the start? Could starting with medium-indexed ( e.g. Google Scholar, Econ Papers,Crossref, ScienceGate, Academia.edu) journals help build a publication portfolio more effectively?

There are both optimistic and pessimistic factors in macroeconomic forecasts for the world economy over the long term. Depending on how they operate and which prevail, either more optimistic or more pessimistic scenarios are developed for the development of the projected economic situation realised in the future. In terms of optimistic factors, these include the use of new information technologies, Industry 4.0 and others, which, when implemented in companies and enterprises, allow for improved profitability of business processes, increased production scale, improved quality control systems and/or improved quality of product and service offerings, etc. Besides, the green transformation consisting in the development of renewable and emission-free energy sources and based on rapidly cheap green energy technologies and on generating savings in energy consumption contributes to economic efficiency and energy security. In addition, the development of sustainable economic processes, scaling up the sharing economy, improving waste separation systems, reusing recovered secondary raw materials, improving and scaling up industrial recycling, etc. will also generate savings in the consumption of raw materials and energy in the context of an efficient economy. In this way, savings will be generated that will allow for an increase in the scale of financial subsidies directed to special purpose funds supporting the development of pro-climate and pro-environmental economic ventures and the development of green economic sectors. Pessimistic factors, on the other hand, include the retreat of economic globalisation from the onset of the pandemic, the rise of economic isolationism, the prospect of deepening trade wars between the world's major economies, the introduction of prohibitive tariffs to protect domestic labour markets, the successive reduction in the scale of cross-border transfers of strategic raw materials, components, prefabricated products and technology, etc. The reduction in the scale of the international transfer of products and services, international trade also involving factors of production, strategic raw materials was already noticeable a few years before the coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19), and during the pandemic through disrupted chains of international supply and procurement logistics the scale of intermodal logistics, international trade decreased. It also resulted in the shortening of international supply and procurement logistics chains and the development of domestic industries supplying the necessary sub-assemblies and pre-fabricated components used in the production of various goods, products, mainly technological products composed of many sub-assemblies.

Such problems determining the deepening of trade wars and the backsliding of economic globalisation processes at the end of February 2022 are increased by a full-scale military war in Ukraine. This kind of war generates economic uncertainty, and uncertainty is an increase in the scale of economic risks that are difficult to measure, not easy to quantify, and holding back investment. In addition to military sectors, apart from companies producing weapons and equipment for the military, it is in many other sectors and industries of the economy that the aforementioned increase in uncertainty becomes a limiting factor for the development of investment and economic activity. On the other hand, when the war ends and the processes of reconstruction of Ukraine's economy begin, there will be a significant recovery of economic processes in some sectors of the economy, such as construction and heavy industry. However, it is unclear when the war will end. In addition to this, determinants contributing to the deepening downturn of the economy include continued elevated inflation at double-digit levels. In the context of high consumer inflation, the high proportion of core inflation determined by domestic factors is a matter of concern. In addition to this, there remains a high level of risk of further investment bank failures in a situation of falling stock market valuations of previously issued government bonds with fixed and significantly lower interest rates on new series of government bonds being issued than at present. Consequently, there is still a high level of uncertainty about the development of the economic situation in the financial markets, including the capital markets, the stock markets on which securities are priced.

In view of the above, I would like to address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

The research I am conducting shows that the recent economic and financial crises, including the global financial crisis of 2008, the pandemic economic crisis of 2020, the strong increase in inflation in 2021-2022, the energy crisis of 2022, the recession of the economy of the first half of 2023 are the result of overdeveloped state interventionism, the manual control of monetary and fiscal policy and the deregulation of financial markets. From the research I conduct in the problem of the sources of economic, financial and other crises, it follows that strongly developed economic state interventionism is usually undertaken as an anti-crisis and/or pro-development measure aimed at reducing the scale, level and probability of occurrence of financial, economic crises, etc., but, on the other hand, often the mentioned interventionist activity of the government leads to an escalation of risk levels and generates the mentioned crises. Recent years of the Polish economy have been a series of economic crises generated by various factors but also by the government. In 2020, the government, through the introduction of lockdowns and national quarantines, generated a deep recession in the economy, then through the introduction of a large amount of printed money into the economy without coverage in the products and services produced, an increase in inflation was generated from 2021, a particularly deep energy crisis in Poland in 2022 (due to the blocking of the green transformation of the energy sector), an increase in interest rates by the NBP, a decline in investment and a downturn in the economy in 2022 and 2023, up to another recession in the economy in the 1st half of 2023. During the previous years, thanks to the applied chaotic economic policy of the government and monetary policy of the NBP in Poland, one crisis was replaced by another, and so on. And SME companies and enterprises lost a lot thanks to these crises, which were largely generated in previous years thanks to the applied, chaotically conducted, ad hoc, non-strategic, etc. economic policy of the government and monetary policy of the NBP central bank. In 2023, the scale of bankruptcies of companies and enterprises in the SME sector in Poland was the highest for many years. It is therefore necessary to continue research in the problems of the role and importance of economic state interventionism in the context of changes in the rate of economic growth and economic development, and to develop the most appropriate system solutions, economic programs, instruments for activating economic activity, activating innovation, counteracting the development of crises and implementing solutions that will result in increasing the macroeconomic stability of the economy with simultaneous sustainable economic development, including taking into account the implementation of the objectives of sustainable development, the principles of the green economy and closed-loop economy, sustainable and zero-carbon economy.

I am researching this issue. I have published the results of my research in several publications, including the following chapters in a monograph:

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

As the indebtedness of the state's public finance system has increased in many countries in recent years, it is increasingly important to consider what categories of risks this may lead to. The increase in the indebtedness of the system of state public finances has occurred mainly in connection with, on the one hand, objective factors such as the occurrence of financial and economic crises that are difficult to predict in advance, and, on the other hand, is the result of misguided economic policies, mistakes made in the framework of the management of the system of state public finances, the formation of the central budgets of the state and/or the financial budgets of local government units, the budgets of state public institutions, etc. Mistakes made in the framework of the formation of fiscal policy are due to, among other things, the mismatch of the expenditure side with the revenue side of the state budget and the specific structure of budget expenditures and receipts. On the other hand, the extent to which the mistakes made will manifest themselves and generate problems in public finances and the financial risks resulting therefrom is also largely likely to result from the economic and financial crises that are appearing with increasing frequency. Over the past few decades of time, the frequency and scale of emerging economic, financial, energy and other crises have been steadily increasing. The financial crisis of the late 20th century generated by the overvaluation and stock market crash of Internet dotcom stocks. Then the global financial crisis of 2008 derived from overly lax monetary policies, overly relaxed mortgage lending policies and moral gambling by financial institutions involved in the process of financing these loans carried out mainly through the issuance and sale of subprime bonds. After a little more than a decade, a pandemic economic crisis emerges in 2020, which is originally derived from the occurrence of panic in the capital markets, when the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020 declares the Covid-19 pandemic state and then the economic crisis and recession of the economy is aggravated by the introduced lockdowns imposed on economic entities operating in selected, service sectors of the economy and the so-called national quarantines also introduced in some countries. During the Covid-19 pandemic in some countries, in order to limit the scale of the increase in unemployment, historically record amounts of added money were introduced into the economy, which is described as a kind of interventionist financial anti-crisis measure. However, the inevitable result of this kind of ultra-lenient fiscal policy and at the same time the relaxed monetary policy also applied at the time with interest rates lowered by central banks was a strong increase in inflation. The increase in inflation caused an increase in the cost of economic activity and a decrease in the economic process activity of companies and enterprises. Then anti-inflationary central banks raised interest rates. The result was an increase in the cost of borrowed money in loans, advances and Treasury debt securities. This then generated a significant decline in the level of investment in many sectors of the economy, a process that worked most rapidly and on the largest scale in the cyclical sectors, i.e., the housing sector, for example. The decline in investment in the housing sector was also associated with a decline in the creditworthiness of potential borrowers interested in buying an apartment or house on credit. In 2022, there was an energy crisis, which was initially inspired by the outbreak of war in Ukraine and then by a strong increase in energy commodity prices. The energy crisis was particularly profound in those countries where, as in Poland, for example, the processes of green energy transition were carried out on a limited scale resulting in energy generation still from conventional combustion energy based on burning fossil fuels, mainly coal and/or lignite. The result of the economic crises of 2020-2022 was the occurrence of economic recession in a large part of the countries in the first half of 2023. During all these crises, many countries anti-crisis increased spending from the state's public finance system, and this despite the decline in tax revenues to the state budget. Thus, the obvious result of these processes and anti-crisis state financial interventionism was an increase in debt in the public finance systems of many countries. By 2024, in some countries, inflation had fallen around the inflation target and the rate of economic growth began to slowly recover from crisis and recessionary levels. However, the level of debt growth in a country's public finance system has been particularly high during this period, and it will probably take many years to reduce this level of debt to a level considered safe on an indicator basis (3 percent budget deficit to GDP and 50 percent public debt to GDP) even with certain restrictive fiscal policies and tightening monetary policy. The key issue of the problem of the growth of the debt of the public finance system of the state is that it is not a current problem, but, first of all, it is a prospective problem, the scale of which will grow in the future over the next decades of time, and not only in underdeveloped and developing countries but also in highly developed countries. The reason is the progressive process of changes in the demographic structure of society commonly referred to as population aging. Therefore, in the future, the scale of the risk of an increase in the indebtedness of the system of public finances of the state, the occurrence of a debt crisis of public finances and the deconstructive action of this process will unfortunately increase.

I have also described many of these above-mentioned aspects in my publications posted on my profile of this Research Gate portal.

I am researching this issue. I have published the results of my research in several publications, including the following chapters in a monograph:

“Recent economic crises and the prospective climate crisis of the 21st century and the green transformation of the economy” (Recent economic crises and the prospective climate crisis of the 21st century and the green transformation of the economy).

“Economic and financial crises in the 21st century and the anti-crisis state interventionism that prevents them” (Economic and financial crises in the 21st century and the anti-crisis state interventionism that prevents them)

The key issues of the problematic sources of Poland's exceptionally deep energy cross in 2022 are described in my co-authored article below:

POLAND'S 2022 ENERGY CRISIS AS A RESULT OF THE WAR IN UKRAINE AND YEARS OF NEGLECT TO CARRY OUT A GREEN TRANSFORMATION OF THE ENERGY SECTOR

I described the issue of the importance of activating entrepreneurship and innovation of business entities for economic development in the article:

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Thank you,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

1)https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381082669_Bennifer_Econ_JLo_Married_Down

2)"Multiracial individuals tended to have worse mental health outcomes compared to their monoracial counterparts, with variations depending on the outcomes, populations/subgroups, contexts, and reference groups"( https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165032723014088 ).

1) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373629748_The_Post-Eisenhower_and_Wagner_Effect

2)https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372341739_Fundamental_Theorem_of_Calculus_proved_by_Wagner's_Law

How should the financial subsidies of the European Union granted to Poland under the National Reconstruction Plan be distributed so that they primarily contribute to the effective development of the national economy?

Increasing the efficiency of the use of financial subsidies from the state's public finance system, so that to a large extent the said subsidies are allocated to real pro-development investment projects, effectively activate economic processes, entrepreneurship and innovation of business entities, and thus the country's economic development can be significantly accelerated in the coming years. Unfortunately, there is little time, as only 2 years to effectively use this money which was a result of the failure to meet the so-called milestones set by the European Union by the previous government in Poland, which functioned from 2015-2023. The key issue is that most of these funds should realistically feed new investment projects, not be “eaten up”, consumed in current purposes that do not have the character of investment, not be wasted, not be subject to financial embezzlement, etc.., because then the impact of this money on the economy, on economic growth in the next few years, the impact on improving economic development will be much smaller. In view of the fact that the funds to be used, i.e. PLN 600 billion (total low-rate loans and grants), will be relatively large and the time to use them will be short, so it is necessary to improve the existing national procedures in the matter of application, substantive analysis of submitted applications for grants, granting of funds, ongoing monitoring of the implementation of investments and their settlement. One of the effects of unblocking access to these funds granted under the National Reconstruction Plan is the process of appreciation of the PLN against the euro, which is already taking place since the autumn of 2023, and reduces the scale of “import” of inflation into Poland thanks to such large euro subsidies to come to the country where I operate. Well, thanks to these funds, economic growth in Poland as early as 2024 can be higher than the projected about 3% if these funds are effectively, well invested, etc. This scenario will come true, assuming that other international, global macroeconomic variables do not deteriorate, i.e. current risks do not increase significantly, and there are various risks outside Poland that affect the Polish economy. A kind of symptom of this issue was the strong increases in shares on the Warsaw Stock Exchange on Monday 16.10.2023, i.e. just after the elections on 15.10.2023 when one of the internationally recognized rating agencies suggested that thanks to the outcome of these parliamentary elections, the probability of unlocking European Union subsidies for Poland from the National Reconstruction Plan would increase significantly. Besides, it is important to point out the legitimacy of continuing key investment goals such as accelerating the process of green energy transformation. An important determinant of increasing the scale of investment processes carried out as part of the green transformation of the power industry is the issue of reducing the risk of a future energy crisis like the one that occurred in Poland in 2022, in order to meet the guidelines of the European Union under the Green Deal, which should result in reducing the scale of future energy price increases in Poland, etc. The green transformation of the energy industry is a key rarity of the green transformation of the economy towards building a green closed loop economy. Besides, subsidies from the European Union's financial programs, i.e., primarily from the National Reconstruction Plan, should not only be used for investment projects carried out mainly by large, few energy companies, but should be used to a large extent to finance activities carried out by prosumer citizens to increase energy security for the household and reduce the costs incurred in subsequent years for energy purchases, i.e. prosumer ventures, e.g., installing photovoltaic panels on the roofs of their homes as part of the expansion of such programs as “My Current,” for example, so that prosumers' own participation in these investment processes is small, as it is currently still too large and is a financial barrier for many households. In addition to the economic processes related to the green transformation of the economy, including mainly the green transformation of the energy sector, the financial resources from the National Recovery Plan are to finance investment projects carried out as part of the continuation of the processes of digitization of the economy, including enterprises, implementation into companies and institutions of new ICT and Industry 4.0/5.0 technologies, including, for example, Big Data Analytics, artificial intelligence, cloud computing, etc. In addition, the aforementioned financial subsidies are to be used to support the implementation of investment projects in the field of investment, through which the state of road and rail transportation infrastructure is to be improved. In addition to this, support from the National Reconstruction Plan funds is also to be given to the health sector, although the importance of this support has significantly decreased since there is no longer a Covid-19 pandemic, and the European Union's program of these grants was developed in 2020 during the pandemic and was originally intended to largely support the anti-pandemic activities carried out within the medical sector.

I have also described many of these aforementioned aspects in my publications posted on my profile of this Research Gate portal.

The key issues of the problematic sources of Poland's exceptionally deep energy cross in 2022 are described in my co-authored article below:

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

When there is a strong decline in the level of activity of economic entities, the rate of economic growth slows down, there is a risk of the emergence of a recession of the economy, a serious financial and/or economic crisis begins then the governments of individual countries, fearing a strong increase in unemployment, increase the scale of anti-crisis state interventionism, launch programs to activate the economic activity of companies and enterprises under mild fiscal policy and active fiscal policy. With the growing risk of deepening the scale of the financial and/or economic crisis

central banks lower interest rates with a view to lowering the cost of money lent by commercial banks in the form of bank loans and thus increasing liquidity in the banking sector and indirectly in the economy as a whole. When the World Health Organization declared a pandemic state of Covid-19 on March 11, 2020, there was panic in the capital markets involving panic selling of assets. The high level of uncertainty and investment risk prevailing in the capital markets, including those of the stock exchanges, caused companies and businesses to put their investment plans on hold and some had already begun to see declines in the level of sales of their product and service offerings. Subsequently, citizens' fears for their jobs quickly emerged and politicians, fearing the loss of public support, quickly began to launch processes that would result in the introduction of certain anti-crisis instruments. The sharp stock market crashes on the stock exchanges, which lasted for several days, as well as declines in industrial commodity prices, were halted when central banks strongly reduced the level of interest rates. During the Covid-19 pandemic, anti-crisis state interventionism was applied on a large scale to limit the scale of the development of the economic crisis. These anti-crisis interventionist measures were intended to prevent the economy from deepening into a recession in 2020 and the occurrence of stagflation in subsequent years. Stagflation is a particularly unfavorable type of deep economic crisis characterized by high inflation, sometimes hyperinflation and high unemployment. For capital markets, including the stock market, it is a particularly unfavorable type of economic crisis. Triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic and the lockdowns introduced during the pandemic, the global economic crisis starting in the spring of 2020 could, in many countries, as it did during the 2008 global financial crisis, turn into another financial crisis, a debt crisis of the state's public finance system with the simultaneous occurrence of a recession of the national economy. If the anti-crisis, interventionist measures introduced at the time, the aid programs launched for businesses, public institutions, for citizens within the framework of the use of available instruments of fiscal policy and monetary policy did not work, a situation of a significant deepening of the then economic crisis could occur. Then this deepened economic crisis could have been more severe than the one that occurred in 2008 and could have been characterized by stagflation. In such a situation, also the interventionist actions of central banks, e.g. by continuing to lower interest rates, could no longer work effectively because there was already an excess of money in the markets, citizens and companies on bank deposits in commercial banks held record high amounts of money and inflation had already begun to rise in many countries as of 2021. After the anti-crisis reduction of interest rates by central banks, which in many countries took place between March and May 2020, the stock markets quickly returned to prosperity. When this kind of situation lasts for a prolonged period over many months, quarters or even sometimes several years then stock prices can rise to levels described as highly overvalued which can then result in a stock market crash at a time when most market participants do not expect it. In the meantime, stock prices may rise on a "buy the rumors, sell the facts" basis. It is not out of the question that this principle worked in 2023-2024, as most investors active in the stock markets expected the start of the announced interest rate cuts by central banks. Expectations were reasonable since inflation had fallen to levels close to inflation targets and central banks had not lowered interest rates, which had previously been anti-inflationarily raised after the Covid-19 pandemic.

I described the key issues of the central banking problem in my articles below:

Synergy of post-2008 Anti-Crisis Policy of the Mild Monetary Policy of the Federal Reserve Bank and the European Central Bank

Analysis of the effects of post-2008 anti-crisis mild monetary policy of the Federal Reserve Bank and the European Central Bank

A safe monetary central banking policy as a significant instrument for liquidity maintenance in the financial system

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

A bit of a loaded question... just working to nudge fellow economists to consider joining the effort to build a Humanomics, "an economics with the humans and their ethics left in" (quoting Deirdre McCloskey)." Metaeconomics is a Humanomics with a theory, lacking in the McCloskey version of it, as represented in Dual Interest Theory. And, yes, it is an economics about a Human, with the ethic playing a key role. In contrast, Single Interest Theory in mainstream Microeconomics, which is about an Econ oblivious to the ethic of the economic choice. If curious, see the website metaeconomics.info ...

Thanks to high inflation, tax revenues increase in the central state budget, the main element of the state's public finances. Research centres independent of the government estimate that, thanks to high inflation in recent quarters, around PLN 5 billion has additionally flowed into the state budget. As the indebtedness of the public finance system has increased dramatically over the past few years and, in addition, during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic, the government has injected over PLN 200 billion of additional, printed money into the economy, so the risk of indebtedness of the public finance system is growing. In the situation of a deepening downturn in Br 2023, the scale of the debt of the state's public finance system could still increase significantly. In such a situation, rating agencies operating through investment banks could significantly lower the solvency and creditworthiness ratings of public finances, which would result in an increase in the investment risk of funds invested in Treasury bonds and it would be necessary to increase the interest rate of these securities sold to foreign investors. This would significantly increase the cost of rolling over successive series of issued treasury bonds and increase the cost of servicing the debt of the state's public finance system, the cost of servicing public debt. For the government, it is better to keep inflation high, because this way the scale of the increase in the cost of servicing the public debt is smaller. Unfortunately, this comes at the expense of the rapidly declining purchasing power of the money available to citizens and economic agents. From mid-2022 onwards, the wage increases that employers are implementing for employees in companies, enterprises and institutions no longer compensate in full for the rapidly declining purchasing power of money due to high inflation. This whole process, which began with the use of so-called Anti-Crisis Shields during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic, is the result of Poland's short-sighted and chaotic economic policy. These Anti-Crisis Shields consisted of non-refundable financial subsidies for the majority of economic entities operating in the country in the form of government subsidies to salaries of employees working mainly in commercially operating companies and enterprises and other forms of financial support aimed at limiting the scale of growth of unemployment during large-scale lockdowns imposed in Poland on selected sectors of the economy and national quarantines introduced during as many as three consecutive waves of the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic from March 2020 to early 2021. The procedure of imposing the Shields on operators in certain economic sectors during the ongoing investigations in many countries was considered questionably legitimate as so-called 'anti-pandemic safety instruments', i.e. slowing down the development of coronavirus infections. The main effect of the aforementioned Anti-Crisis Shields was an increase in inflation already from the beginning of 2021, followed by an increase in interest rates by the central bank in Poland, i.e. the National Bank of Poland, between October 2021 and September 2022. This resulted in a significant increase in loan instalments paid by borrowers to commercial banks and a decrease in the creditworthiness of new borrowers. Then, from as early as the beginning of 2022, economic growth began to decline rapidly, inflation continued to rise, investment levels began to fall and by the end of 2022 the beginning of a decline in consumption was noticeable. From mid-2022 onwards, housing developers have been reducing investment levels in the construction and delivery of new houses and flats. Accordingly, the chaotically short-sighted economic policy pursued, in which the pandemic crisis of 2020 was exacerbated by lockdowns imposed on selected, mainly service sectors of the economy, and the so-called Crisis Shield programmes applied, triggered an increase in inflation and an even more serious and economically realistic deepening of the downturn in 2022 and 2023. In addition, the applied restriction (solar energy, biofuel-based energy) and inhibition (wind energy in 2016) of the development of renewable and emission-free energy sources caused a significant decrease in the energy security of the domestic energy sector resulting in an extremely acute energy crisis of 2022, highly costly for citizens. In view of the above, the chaotic short-sighted economic policy conducted by the increasing level of state interventionism carried out by the government over the past 8 years, including the increasing level of government control of certain sectors of the economy, the increasing scale of the application of the so-called "Anti-Crisis Shield", the increasing scale of the introduction of additional, printed money into the economy without coverage led to the formation of even greater crises. As the next parliamentary elections are due to be held in autumn this year 2023, which the PIS political option in power for the last eight years plans to win, so further programmes of non-refundable subsidies for selected types of enterprises continue to be applied, which becomes another pro-inflationary factor. However, high inflation for the government apparently is the least of all problems, because thanks to high inflation, as I wrote above, tax revenues to the state budget are higher and thus the cost of servicing the high public debt is lower.

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

And what is your opinion on this?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

I have written about the sources of high inflation that occurred after the Covid-19 pandemic from 2021 onwards, based on research I have conducted, in my article below:

I invite you to collaborate with me on research.

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Unfortunately, not all such social policies have worked effectively. For example, in the country where I operate, such a social policy programme whose official strategic goal was to counteract the rapidly declining birth rate of children and the rapidly progressing process of demographic changes in society defined as ageing since the end of the 20th century in Poland is the Family 500 Plus Programme, introduced in 2016. Apart from this, the key ongoing objective of this programme was to improve the material status of children, financially support families raising children and reduce the scale of family poverty in Poland. In the first years of the programme's operation, i.e. from 2016 onwards, this programme became one of the important factors of economic growth. The Family 500 Plus programme consists of a monthly non-refundable transfer of PLN 500 for each child in the family. I have described the strategic goals of this programme as a key element of long-term, i.e. on a multi-year scale, socio-economic policy planning and implementation in my published articles and monograph chapters on my profile of this Research Gate portal. I invite you to join me for research collaboration on this issue. However, the Family 500 Plus programme has already been in place for several years. The design and introduction of this programme drew on models of similar programmes operating for years in other countries in Europe. this programme was introduced in Poland in 2016. It is now already 2023. In 2022, the level of child births in Poland was the lowest in more than half a century, so clearly this programme is completely failing to meet the strategic goals that were set out when this programme was introduced. These strategic objectives, in addition to reducing the scale of poverty among families with many children in Poland, were to significantly increase the fertility rate in society and thus counteract the progressive ageing of the population. This programme has been implemented by the PIS government in Poland for almost eight years. In connection with the fact that, according to political scientists, the introduction of this social policy programme helped the PIS political party to win the parliamentary elections in 2015 and 2019 and the formation of the government by this party, so for years there have been considerations as to whether the introduction of this social policy programme, i.e. the programme of financial support for families in Poland, was related not to the issue of long-term shaping of social and economic policy in Poland but to the issue of winning the parliamentary elections. In view of the above, the current goals of the Family 500 Plus Programme have been achieved, while the strategic goals, unfortunately, have not.

In view of the above, I would like to address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

What do you think about this topic?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

When a new risk factor emerges that threatens the efficient development of the economy, it can cause serious perturbations on financial markets, including capital markets. When the WHO declared a pandemic on 11 March 2020, uncertainty prevailed on the capital markets, with a strong stock market crash. The heavy discounting and panic selling of shares was only halted by significant, interventionist interest rate cuts by central banks, and this despite the low interest rates already in place at the time. Additional interest rate cuts were possible because inflation was low in many countries in 2020. Subsequently, lockdowns imposed on selected sectors of the economy and temporary national quarantines were introduced in some countries to slow down the transmission of the coronavirus. In order to limit the economic crisis and increase unemployment, governments introduced new anti-crisis programmes called, for example, Anti-Crisis Shields consisting of subsidies to workers' salaries, subsidies to companies, refinancing of fixed costs, temporary tax cuts, etc. In this way, additional funds were injected into the economy. In this way, large amounts of additional money were injected into the economy. The now familiar mechanism of interventionist, anti-crisis measures, which had previously been applied in the USA during the 2008 global financial crisis to commercial and investment banks and some companies in the non-financial sectors, was applied. In this way, a huge amount of additional money was injected into the economy. When, thanks to the coronavirus vaccines, the state of uncertainty in the financial markets and in the economy was significantly reduced in 2021, economies were rapidly recovering from the pandemic recession of the 2020 economy. From 2021 onwards, commodity prices and other categories of inputs began to rise. Consumption and inflation were also rising. In 2022, some central banks embarking on a plan to curb the scale of rising inflation began to raise interest rates, a process that continued until the first quarter of 2023, as inflation levels in many countries had already been in double digits for several months and continued to rise. The increase in interest rates by central banks resulted in an increase in the cost of borrowed money, bank loan instalments increased, and the availability of credit decreased. commercial banks, perceiving symptoms of the risk of another economic crisis looming on the horizon, tightened their credit policies, further restricting access to credit. The level of investment already started to decline from around mid-2022. Earlier, as economic growth started to decline as early as the beginning of 2022. In the second half of 2022, the beginning of a decline in citizens' real incomes was already noticeable in some countries, despite wage increases. This resulted in a decline in consumption levels, which deepened in the first half of 2023. From March 2023, inflation began to fall in some countries and the decline in economic growth reached its minimum. This seemed to be the beginning of the end of a weak economy exacerbated by the 2022 energy crisis. However, all of a sudden, in March 2023, financial institutions start to fail. In mid-March 2023, the sizable US banks Silicon Valey Bank and Signature Bank, which had been investing in securities as part of investment banking, go bankrupt. Paradoxically, they lost liquidity by investing in securities classified as those generating low investment risk, i.e. government bonds. But even these widely regarded as the safest financial instruments in a situation of misguided investment banking policy can lead to a serious crisis, insolvency and, consequently, bank failure. In such a situation, central banks find themselves at a kind of crossroads in terms of deciding whether to continue tightening monetary policy by continuing to raise interest rates or to change their strategy from hawkish to dovish, i.e. to a more benign one by ending interest rate hikes despite still elevated inflation. The decision on the aforementioned change of strategy could be interpreted by financial market participants as the start of a period of monetary easing. This would probably also have an impact on developments in financial markets. Therefore, the key issue is to decide what could deepen the economic downturn and cause more negative economic effects, i.e. the continuation of interest rate increases, which could increase the scale of bankruptcies of economic entities, or the end of interest rate hikes, which would slow down and prolong the rate of inflation decrease in subsequent quarters and possibly years.

In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:

And what is your opinion on this?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

We are currently conducting our undergraduate research proposal about the impact of monetary and fiscal policy on the economic growth of the Philippines. We used real GDP as a measure of econ growth. Our problem is that for our theoretical framework, we adopted the monetarism and keynesian theory as based on the empirical studies we reviewed. However quantity theory of money talked about how it influences nominal income. Though it has an effect on real income but only short-run. During our consultation our professor said it might be difficult to use QTM as a framework for our study. Is there any way we can still use it or what are other theory that can be used as framework in terms of the effect of montery policy on the econ growth of a country? (We've sorted things out on the side of fiscal policy though). We are very new in this field and don't have adequate knowledge with regards to this yet (don't know though why we conducted this study lol). Thankyou in advance.

What do you think, who is behind the "Unstoppable Sustainable Economic Growth of China"? Is it for President Xi Jinping or his new era of socialist economic thought?

Ref:

Let's know your valued opinions.

This is probably a naive question for economists, but I am a lawyer with limited understanging of econ and thus I am not confident about how to answer this question. Assume we have an agricultural production function with contstant return to scale. One factor contributing to production is water. Now climate change hits and hits the elasticity of water (but does not impact elasticity of other factors) then I would say, depending on which direction the elasticity of water heads, the return to scale will change to increasing or decresing. Does this make sense given the assumptions?

Has anyone done a study or analysis on the impact of climate change on tourism? If yes, what methodology have you used?

Seasonality at tourism destinations is a problematic issue as during the low months, resources aren't used and destinations cannot generate enough revenue. How can this be combatted in order to develop a more sustainable future for destinations who face this problem?