Fiscal Policy - Science topic

considering these Key implications include:

Some believe that central banks, like the Federal Reserve, have complete control over the economy through interest rates and monetary policy. In reality, central banks influence the economy but cannot control it entirely. Fiscal policy, global factors, and market sentiment also play significant roles.

Among the important issues of the efficiency of the tax system's operation is the specific structure of the introduced various direct taxes, including mainly income and property taxes, and indirect taxes, including mainly VAT, excise taxes and tributes related to the import of certain products or services, customs duties and so on. In addition to this, the effectiveness of the tax system, which is determined by the level of tax revenues that feed the system of state public finances, i.e. revenues to the central state budget and revenues to the budgets of local government units, municipalities is the issue of the so-called tightness of the fiscal system, the effectiveness of the institution of the tax office and customs and fiscal control, the efficiency of the procedures for serving taxpayers' citizens by the institution of the tax office, the level of developed remote service to citizens via the Internet, the scale of digitization of the institutions of the tax system, etc. These issues determine the level of the emerging shadow economy, in which some citizens, entrepreneurs do not register their business activities in order to thus avoid the tax system, not to pay taxes. In many countries, receipts to the central state budget and to the local budgets of local government units account for most of the total financial receipts that feed the state's public finance system with money, which is then used by the government and local government authorities to provide citizens with public services and public goods. A larger scale of tax revenues means more money at the state's disposal and higher-quality provision of public services and/or more investment, which also produces durable economic goods within the framework of public goods. Accordingly, the Ministry of Finance should strive to improve procedures, legal norms, organizational systems, etc., so that the institutions of the tax system operate as efficiently as possible and so that as much tax money as possible enters the state's public finance system. However, this does not mean the need for frequent changes in the normatives of the law, frequent changes in the tax system, changes in the structure of taxes, changes in tax scales, their level determined for particular types of taxes imposed on certain types of economic entities. Citizens and entrepreneurs are unlikely to prefer frequently changing regulations of the tax system, tax law, tax accounting methods, etc. Frequent changes are burdensome for citizens and business entities. On the other hand, the technological advances taking place, the emerging new ICT and Industry 4.0/5.0 technologies are being implemented into information systems for remote data transfer and tax settlements carried out online. Such processes of digitization and Internetization of fiscal system institutions have been developing for many years. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the aforementioned digitization and internetization processes accelerated in some countries. At times, the digitization and Internetization of tax system institutions and information systems that enable remote transfer of tax data and online accounting also make it possible to increase the sealing of the tax system and reduce the level of the shadow economy. On the other hand, the increase in the scale of digitization and Internetization of the tax system, i.e. the increase in the scale of remote transfer of tax data and online tax settlement, also increases the risk of cyber-attacks on online tax settlement platforms. For several years now, cybercriminals have been constantly creating new cybercrime techniques, new types of viruses, including, for example, ransomware viruses spread in fake e-mails imitating the e-mail correspondence of tax authority institutions, new phishing techniques, etc. with the aim of stealing money or extorting ransom payments from a company successfully attacked by cybercriminals. In this regard, it is also necessary to increase spending on the permanent improvement of the information systems of tax system institutions. In terms of the generic structure of taxes, the tax scales applied, the level of tax assessments established against certain types of economic entities, it is the state's over-maximization of these issues that can lead to an increase in the shadow economy. According to the Philips curve, once a certain high level of established tax levels is exceeded, tax revenues, rather than increasing, will decrease due to an increase in the scale of the shadow economy. In such a situation, the tax system does not work efficiently. In addition, tax receipts feeding into the state's public finance system from year to year can change significantly regardless of the tax system itself, i.e. even when nothing is changed in this system. The reason for such changes in the level of tax revenues to the state budget is the issue of cyclicality of economic processes on a multi-year scale, the occurrence of business cycles, within which there can be significant differences in the rate of economic growth, the level of activity of economic processes, the economic activity of companies and enterprises, the level of entrepreneurship, and so on. On a multi-year scale, cyclical changes in the rate of economic growth are usually strongly correlated with changes in the level of entrepreneurship, production, offering of services, income, investment, spending, consumption, savings and also the situation in labor markets, i.e. the level of employment and unemployment. As some sectors of the economy are particularly cyclical, i.e. changes in the level of economic activity of companies and enterprises of a particular sector or branch of the economy are strongly correlated with changes in the rate of economic growth of the economy as a whole, so how the generic structure of taxes with which the aforementioned economic entities are burdened is designed is also important in determining cyclical changes in the level of tax revenues to the state's public finance system derived from changes in the rate of economic growth, changes in the level of Gross Domestic Product, multi-year business cycles. However, in the situation of taking into account all of the above-mentioned factors when designing certain new taxes and/or improving the tax system, i.e. in the situation of striving to create a financially efficient fiscal system, considerations also arise on the issue of social justice relating to the tax system. These considerations often include the search for possible correlations between the efficiency of the tax system and something that could be described as a socially just tax system. In my opinion, the question of the efficiency of the tax system can correlate to a significant degree with the question of a socially just tax system. However, this correlation need not always occur and not always in the same scale and dependence. The question of the scale and dependence of this correlation is determined by what is considered social justice in relation to the tax system, how a socially just tax system can be defined, and whether such social issues are taken into account at all when reconstructing the tax system.

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

I have researched and described specific economic and social aspects relating to the tax system in the following article on the plan to introduce a banking tax in Poland:

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

Recent reports have shown a trend of central banks across various economies reporting significant losses. This development raises several questions that touch on the core of monetary policy, fiscal stability, and the broader economic impact. These losses can be attributed to a multitude of factors, including but not limited to currency devaluation, fluctuating gold prices, and shifts in the bond market. Moreover, the unconventional monetary policies adopted during crises, such as quantitative easing, may also play a role.

This discussion invites economists, financial analysts, policymakers, and the informed public to share their insights on a few probing questions:

The perspectives and analyses shared here will contribute to an upcoming post on my blog, https://veridelisi.substack.com/p/why-are-central-banks-reporting-losses-fed-ecb , where we can continue the conversation and explore the broader implications together.

Join the discussion, share your expertise, or simply express your concerns. Your input is valuable in understanding the breadth and depth of central bank losses and their relevance to our daily lives.

Engin YILMAZ (@veridelisi)

During the recent economic and financial crises in many countries in the framework of anti-crisis measures and stimulating the rate of economic growth, in the framework of the monetary policy pursued, the formation of the money supply, the change of interest rates formally and/or informally cooperate with the government, which also in the framework of the anti-crisis programs undertaken, instruments for the activation of economic activity of companies and enterprises, the activation of consumption and investment carries out fiscal, social, budgetary, housing, etc. policies. If coordinated mild fiscal policy and mild monetary policy are appropriately synergistically applied within the framework of interventionist anti-crisis and pro-development measures, then stimulating the economic activity of firms and enterprises, stimulating consumption and investment development, reducing the development of the economic crisis can work more effectively. However, the scale of the applied anti-crisis and pro-development measures should be precisely adjusted to the sectoral and industry structure of the economy and the specifics of the macroeconomic processes being implemented, and thus should not lead to a significant and sustained increase in the indebtedness of the state's public finance system, too high a level of creditization of economic processes, too high levels of acceptable credit risk by commercial banks, a strong increase in inflation, a decline in the value of the national currency, a decline in the interest of foreign financial institutions in securities issued by the state treasury and capital companies of the country, etc. Unfortunately, during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic, first the government in Poland applied anti-pandemic, interventionist measures, including lockdowns imposed on selected sectors of the economy thus causing a deep recession of the economy and then through further interventionist measures highly costly for the state's public finance system, financial subsidies coming from the state's public finance system limited the growth of unemployment. Another negative effect of the applied interventionist measures of the government was the rapid increase in inflation, which began as early as the 2nd quarter of 2021. This was an example of erroneously applied interventionist actions of the government on too large a scale, actions involving the application of selected instruments of state interventionism, instruments of synergistically conducted extremely mild both monetary and fiscal policies, which, as a consequence of their synergistic application, negatively affected the economic processes taking place in the Polish economy. On the other hand, some of the interventionist instruments used, due to the specially created mechanism of their operation and their high scale, may have violated the norms set forth in the Basic Law, i.e. the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. This type of interventionist measure applied on an exceptionally large scale in Poland was the purchase of Treasury bonds by the National Bank of Poland to generate additional, printed money, which was then introduced extra-budgetarily into the economy mainly in the form of non-refundable financial subsidies transferred to many companies and enterprises operating in various sectors of the economy in order to limit the growth of unemployment in a situation of deep economic crisis and economic recession generated by lockdowns. However, the government's main concern was that the unemployment rates shown by the Central Statistical Office did not change significantly despite the real decline in the level of employment, entrepreneurs changing the terms and conditions of employment of employees by, for example, reducing the duration and scale of employment of the same employees, a decline in the economic activity of companies and enterprises, a reduction in the scale of activities carried out by business entities, a reduction in the development opportunities of business entities affected by lockdowns, etc. The state interventionism thus applied during the pandemic consisted of actions and instruments of an also informally coordinated, politically politically ultra-mild monetary policy through an interventionist reduction of interest rates by the central bank and an ultra-mild fiscal policy based on the application of historically large-scale financial, non-refundable state aid. Synergistically and in a coordinated manner, the aforementioned mild monetary policy and fiscal policy applied effectively first limited the development of the economic crisis to then generate further economic problems in the economy. It is estimated that in Poland, since the 1st wave of the coronavirus pandemic, the central bank has created and transferred money to the government with a total value of almost 400 billion zlotys. On the other hand, in the framework of the economic policy unjustifiably described in the media by the government as an economic policy pursuing sustainable economic development, the opportunities that arose during the pandemic have not been used to accelerate the processes of green transformation of the economy, and this despite the fact that opportunities for this have arisen.

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 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

In the country where I operate in terms of socio-economic policy, the PIS government in 2016 introduced the Family 500 Plus programme, i.e. a social programme of financial support for raising children provided to parents or other legal guardians of the children being raised. Similar social programmes of financial support for the upbringing of children operate in highly developed countries in Europe. Thanks to the election promises, which also included the announcement of the introduction of this programme, the PIS party won the parliamentary elections in 2015 and then later also the next parliamentary elections in 2019. I researched this issue at the time and in the articles published at the time I pointed out the key issues that should be taken into account by the government in the introduction of this Family 500 Plus programme so that it is a key element of a real pro-social, pro-family and pro-development social and economic policy and not a populist pseudo-economic policy, including that the key strategic objectives should be achieved. Well, the key strategic objective of the introduction of this programme of social financial support for families bringing up children was to reduce the scale and slow down the progressive change in the demographic structure of society consisting in the successive and exceptionally rapid ageing of the population since the beginning of the 21st century. The effect of this programme was to be a significant increase in the fertility rate.

Unfortunately, this strategic goal has not been realised. In 2021-2022, the birth rate in Poland was the lowest since the end of the mid-20th century. Unfortunately, the Family 500 Plus programme was not implemented reliably, the government did not take into account the results of research conducted by independent economists in designing this programme and in its implementation. What I wrote about several years ago in the aforementioned articles was ignored. Unfortunately, instead of improving this programme, correcting the mistakes made, in May 2023, the government announced the continuation of this programme in the following years without any amendments, but with an increase in the amount paid per child per month from the existing and functioning for 7 years of the same amount of PLN 500 to PLN 800 from January 2024. On the other hand, the next parliamentary elections are to be held in October 2023, which the ruling PIS party is also planning to join. Therefore, in the opinion of citizens, it is obvious that this Family 500 Plus programme has become a programme of mainly populist pseudo-economic policy.

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

What is your opinion on this issue?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

I will write more on this subject in my book, which I am currently writing. In this monograph, I will include the results of my ongoing research on this issue. I invite you to join me in scientific cooperation on this issue.

Counting on your opinions, on getting to know your personal opinion, on an honest approach to discussions in scientific problems, and not on ready-made answers generated in ChatGPT, I deliberately used the phrase "in your opinion" in the question.

The above text is entirely my own work written by me on the basis of my research.

I have not used other sources or automatic text generation systems such as ChatGPT in writing this text.

Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

What do you think?

What is your opinion on the subject?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

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,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

It has happened on more than one occasion that attempts to significantly increase the scale of "manual control" of the economy, economic state interventionism, expansion of public sectors, the system of central institutions, government-controlled public institutions and enterprises operating as state-owned companies, etc., have ended in the occurrence of another economic and/or financial crisis, larger than the previous ones. Economic crises, including raw material crises, were more than once initiated by the unexpected occurrence of certain external factors such as a sudden and rapid increase in the price of raw materials and/or also other production factors. This happened during the raw material crises of the 1970s. The government, in the situation of the development of a raw material crisis, in an attempt to limit the scale of this crisis and the scale of the also developing economic crisis, the increasing level of unemployment and the decrease in economic activity of companies and enterprises, changes its economic policy by introducing certain additional, interventionist, anti-crisis solutions and instruments of fiscal, monetary policy, etc.

The scale of the state's influence in the economy has been growing in Poland in recent years. An increase in the scale of the so-called anti-crisis economic state interventionism; an increase in the scale of the introduction by the government into the economy of additional money not bound by the parity of produced economic goods as an element of interventionist shaping of economic processes; an increase in the scale of the participation of the state treasury in the shareholding of companies and enterprises of some, including strategic sectors of the economy; an increase in the scale of monopolisation of markets by sectors in which corporations dominated by the state treasury operate; the creation by people working in the government of new institutions, agencies, foundations, institutes, etc., which pursue the combined interests of decision-makers, political parties and sometimes also informally linked to business. pursuing the combined interests of decision-makers with the objectives of political party functioning and sometimes also informally linked to business; the increasing scale of the use of central banking monetary policy instruments and fiscal policy instruments in government economic programmes pursuing specific objectives in the increased scale of state influence in economic processes; the increasing scale of the state's system of public finances in the context of the overall finances realised in the economy; the increasing scale of indebtedness of the state's system of public finances without an analogous scale of the increase in investments realised within the framework of the public and commercial sectors of the economy are only some of the key aspects of the increase in the scale of economic state interventionism that has taken place in recent 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

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

In the context of the specific measures, instruments and programmes of economic state interventionism applied during the recent financial and economic crises, there are still debates concerning the assessment of their effectiveness and the resolution of whether these interventionist measures actually help economies and reduce the scale of the development of crises or rather generate these crises. One of the key, fundamental currents in the history of economic thought, i.e. classical economics, points to the need to limit the government's influence on the economic process as much as possible, leaving all processes in the economy to the market mechanism. In the 20th century, economic, financial, social, technological, political, etc. realities changed, which determined the development of various concepts, forms and aspects of economic state interventionism, including the successively increasing influence of the state on economic and financial processes. On the other hand, the 1970s saw the development of neoclassical currents, which, on the one hand, referring to classical economics, updated the question of the importance of the dominant categories of production factors, including categories of production factors of increasing importance, i.e. technology, information, entrepreneurship, innovation, etc. The growing importance of these categories of production factors was due to the third technological revolution taking place at the time, determined by the development of ICT information technology, structurally changing economies with a growing service sector, the increasing scale of deregulation of financial markets as a result of the commodity crises of the 1970s. In addition, it happened that the symptoms of a developing economic crisis were misinterpreted and, in order to limit the level of investment credit, central banks raised interest rates, causing an increase in the cost of borrowing money, a decrease in the availability of credit, a decrease in the level of liquidity in many economic entities and, consequently, an aggravation of the economic crisis. This kind of situation occurred at the end of the 1920s and led to the then greatest economic crisis known as the Great Depression of the period 1929-1933 in the USA and up to 1934 in Europe. Also in terms of the government's formulation of budgetary and fiscal policy, signals from the financial markets and the economy were often misinterpreted, which then resulted in the inappropriate use of interventionist economic, budgetary or fiscal policy instruments. For example, the introduction of a historically large amount of additional money into the economy during the coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19) in 2020 became one of the key factors in the rise in inflation in 2021 - 2023. The tightened anti-inflationary monetary policy of central banking caused a significant downturn in the economy. In view of the above, the frequently misinterpreted symptoms of changes in the economic situation in the economy determined the inappropriate application of anti-crisis economic policy instruments, which led to the occurrence of another crisis or aggravation of the scale of the already developing economic crisis. In view of the above, an important research thesis can be added to our considerations concerning the importance of the role and significance of state interventionism not only in the context of anti-crisis economic policy but also in generating economic, financial, debt, etc. crises. I therefore address the following question: Do you agree with my following thesis that honestly and fairly towards the citizens, fully realistically pro-social, without corruption and respecting the legal norms in force, state interventionism conducted within the framework of economic policy usually solves economic problems, reduces the scale of economic crises, etc.? On the other hand, state interventionism conducted within the framework of economic policy, but conducted unreliably unfairly towards citizens, unethically, with acceptance of corruption, usually leads to economic, financial, debt and other crises and generates various economic, social and other problems. In view of the above, considerations concerning the evaluation of the effectiveness of measures, instruments and systems applied by the government within the framework of economic state interventionism, the resolution of whether these interventionist measures actually help economies and reduce the scale of the development of crises or rather generate these crises, should also include the determination of the scale and legitimacy of the application of keys economics in the context of the fluctuation of economic processes within the framework of multi-year business cycles, the growing indebtedness of the system of state finances and the unaccounted for negative effects within the framework of social, climatic and environmental external costs, i.e. environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, etc.

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

What is your opinion on this topic?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

In a situation of developing economic downturn, the importance of interventionist activation of entrepreneurship, supporting business entities in order to reduce the scale of the increase in unemployment and the decline in incomes, increases. In a situation of rising inflation and economic downturn, the activation of economic processes through anti-crisis public financial aid programmes may be difficult. Rising inflation can exacerbate uncertainty and economic risks, and can hinder the planning and implementation of new investment projects, new business ventures by companies and enterprises. Central banks are raising interest rates in an attempt to curb rising inflation. Credit is becoming more expensive. Loans offered by commercial banks are becoming more difficult to access. Investment levels are falling. Businesses are carrying out fewer new investment projects. The activity of economic processes is declining and the prosperity of the economy is worsening. The deepening downturn may lead to an increase in unemployment. As a result, it is possible that at the end of 2022 or in 2023, many countries will see a deep economic downturn, a recession of the economy, possibly also stagflation. In order to limit the downturn of the economy, it is necessary for the government to apply anti-crisis programmes for financial support of economic entities and activation of entrepreneurship. Such anti-crisis public financial assistance programmes were recently applied on a large scale during the economic crisis and recession of the economy in 2020 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19) and the introduced lockdowns imposed on selected, mainly service sectors of the economy. The scale of the applied financial public assistance implemented as part of the anti-crisis injection of additional money into the economy in the form of subsidies and workers' wage subsidies granted to companies and enterprises contributed to the increase in inflation, which already started to rise almost from the beginning of 2021. In view of the above, on the one hand, anti-crisis business activation programmes are necessary in order to limit the scale of the rise in unemployment, which is likely to appear in 2023 when the economy is in recession. On the other hand, however, in view of the currently rising, double-digit inflation, the possibility of applying further anti-crisis state aid programmes is limited.

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

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Have central banks started a race to raise interest rates? The attempt to fight inflation results in a slowdown in economic growth and a depreciation of the national currency. During the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic, some central banks raced to add money and inject as much added money as possible into the economy treated as anti-decessionary, anti-recessionary money for a situation of exceptional economic crisis caused indirectly by the pandemic and more directly by interventionist type measures. The crash in the financial, capital, stock and commodity markets that occurred in March 2020 and triggered a deep recession in many countries was, among other things, the result of a new crisis factor, a new concept, a new term rapidly disseminated by the media and formally established by the World Health Organisation. This new factor was the establishment of the pandemic condition as a new economic crisis factor, which generated a high level of uncertainty. As a consequence of the interventionist measures applied on a record high scale, large amounts of printed money were pumped into the economies of many countries in 2020. In this way, the economies of many countries were thrown out of relative equilibrium and put on a path of rising inflation, which occurred in 2021 and was exacerbated in 2022 by the energy crisis initiated by the war in Ukraine. For smaller economies and less economically developed economies, raising interest rates will lead to deep economic crises. In 2022, on the other hand, many central banks are successively raising interest rates, commercial banks are so far over-liquid, on the other hand credit is becoming more difficult to access, companies are holding back on new investments, wage growth is slowing, rising unemployment is imminent and possibly stagflation in 2023. This puts the economies even more out of balance, as it will be an economic crisis of 2023 that lasts much longer than the Covidian one of 2020 and is more difficult to control with government interventionist measures, as these measures are exhausting themselves in their existing formulas. Is the so-called anti-crisis economic interventionism from the covid trap now falling into the trap of rising interest rates raised by central banks? To date, interventionist measures by central banks have been treated as the 'last resort' of anti-crisis measures. Perhaps indirectly, this issue has also been highlighted by the Nobel Committee, which awarded the 2022 Nobel Prize in Economics precisely for achievements in research on the genesis of emerging banking crises and their resolution by strengthening systemic security solutions for the banking system. But this time, do the hitherto anti-inflationary measures of central banking cease to work when other factors of economic policy, including the mild fiscal policy that activates economic processes, are activated and carried out by the government as part of the so-called policy mix? Should the central bank raise interest rates faster? When applied in parallel with a tightening monetary policy, does an easing fiscal policy result in a limited anti-inflationary effect of raising interest rates by the central bank? Or are commercial banks showing excess liquidity too slow in raising deposit and deposit rates despite the fact that they are raising lending rates? Or are there other reasons for this situation?

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

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,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

According to the saying "the glass is half full or half empty", the description of certain economic processes in the government-controlled media as part of the pro-government information policy is presented in a certain way according to the needs arising from the goals of political marketing. Besides, according to the proverb and the question at the same time: "what comes first the egg or the chicken?" then the following research question can be formulated: Is it first the sluggish economic growth, the downturn in the economy within the framework of business cycles that generates the demand for the development of new strategies for the country's socio-economic development, within which certain interventionist anti-crisis instruments for stimulating economic growth are applied, including, first and foremost, the instruments of soft fiscal policy and dovish monetary policy? Or is it rather the reverse order, i.e., first a specific anti-crisis and/or pro-development, expansionary, pro-investment economic policy is applied and then a recovery in the economy occurs and sometimes an economic crisis also occurs, triggered by a misapplied, specific socio-economic development strategy of the country? Or do one and the other formula of the aforementioned causal sequences also work only alternately, i.e. usually in other periods, other consecutive years, phases of business cycles? In conducting discussions and debates on this issue, there may be different opinions, different theses and claims formulated by economists representing different camps of views on specific areas of economic policy and the legitimacy of the application and effectiveness of specific, individual instruments of fiscal, sectoral, social, etc. policies conducted by the government, as well as monetary policy conducted by the central bank. An election cycle of several years may be correlated with the country's socio-economic development strategy, anti-crisis and pro-development policies planned for several years, and perhaps also with the business cycle of several years of changes in the rate of economic growth, etc. The issue of the interventionist application of anti-crisis and pro-development economic policy instruments based on the Keynsian model of stimulating the economy through new state-funded investment and/or Milton Friedman's monetarist model proved particularly relevant during the various economic crises that occurred in the past. However, when, instead of new investments, most of the funds within the state's public finances are used for current purposes, social programs with increasing levels of debt in the system of state finances then this kind of economic policy in a few years' perspective can, after a short period of recovery of economic processes, lead to an even deeper crisis. In addition, when many new government programs of subsidies, benefits, subsidies, pensions, etc. are financed with printed money without coverage the result can be an increase in inflation and then a recession in the economy. Such a situation is currently occurring in some countries resulting in a significant decline in economic growth and an increase in unemployment in 2023. The change in public sentiment, levels of spending, consumption and labor force participation may also be influenced by citizens' awareness of the situation in the economy shaped by economic news reported in the meanstream media, which may be controlled by the government pursuing a specific economic policy and a specific information policy through political marketing and pro-government propaganda in the media. The psychology of citizens' consumer behavior influencing the decisions of entrepreneurs to change the scale of their business activities may change under the influence of government information policy shaped in the media. Analysis of current public sentiment is carried out on behalf of government agencies and the Prime Minister's Office usually through surveys and analysis of the sentiment of citizens' opinions expressed on various topics on social media websites and various discussion forums, and analyzed using analytics based on ICT information technology and Big Data Analytcs.

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

And what is your opinion on this subject?

What do you think about this topic?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

I ask because this kind of financing of various government social and economic programs has prevailed since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic in the country where I operate. On the other hand, the indebtedness of the country's public finance system has been growing successively for many years, both in absolute terms and in relative terms expressed in terms of the ratio of budget deficit and public debt to GDP (for several years now). The country's possibility of direct purchase by the national central bank, i.e. the National Bank of Poland, of Treasury-issued government bonds and rollover Treasury bonds during the global financial crisis of 2008. At that time, monetary policy also changed regarding Poland's possible adoption of the euro single currency. Since the adoption of the euro single currency would have entailed the loss of the National Bank of Poland's key functions as a national central bank, i.e. first and foremost the functions of the state bank and the issuing bank, which functions of national monetary policy would have migrated to the European Central Bank. If this were to happen then the government would lose the key instrument of anti-crisis measures it has been using on a historically large scale since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) Coronavirus pandemic, which is the ability to add domestic money and introduce this additional money (without coverage in manufactured products and services) into the economy through the above-mentioned mechanism of direct purchase of Treasury bonds by the central bank, i.e. the National Bank of Poland. Most of this additional money is introduced into the economy extra-budgetarily (it is not included in the annual state budget) through government-controlled public institutions, i.e. Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego and the Polish Development Fund. Special purpose funds are created in these institutions to finance specific government anti-crisis, pro-development, social and investment programs. When, at the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) Coronavirus pandemic, the government decided to use this anti-crisis mechanism then economists independent of the government signaled that the result would be a large increase in inflation which then occurred almost from the beginning of 2021. On the other hand, the state of the country's public finances is taken into account in the development situation at the supranational rating agencies and investment banks. Recently, the cost of servicing public debt began to rise strongly in Poland. At the end of October 2022, the yield on domestic Treasury bonds offered to foreign investors rose to as high as 8-9 percent.

This means raising the financial risks associated with the fiscal policy pursued in recent years and the growing indebtedness of the state finance system.

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

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

If so, how should such an economic policy be structured? And if not, how to reconcile some mutually contradictory instruments for activating economic processes and curbing inflation? How can a tightened monetary policy (anti-inflationary interest rate hikes) and a soft (social) fiscal policy (subsidies, handouts, allowances) be effectively conducted so as to limit the scale of the development of a downturn and at the same time curb the growth of inflation? How should these two policies be conducted so that they do not cancel each other out? How to rationally conduct a policy mix consisting of tightening monetary policy and mild fiscal policy?

What is your opinion on this?

What do you think about this topic?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

All of these crises can be interconnected. Inflation has been rising since 2021. In many countries, inflation has already hit double-digit levels in early 2022 and continues to rise (late 2022). In many countries, the escalation of the energy crisis and economic recession will occur at the end of 2022 and perhaps in 2023 both crises in specific configurations. The deepening of these crises could lead to stagflation in 2023. At present, different decisions are made in individual countries and different interventionist solutions are implemented. In many countries, governments today make difficult decisions about choosing to use specific anti-crisis state intervention instruments. The choice concerns, among others deciding which crisis should be mitigated to a greater extent: rising double-digit inflation, energy crisis or economic recession. On the one hand, central banks are raising interest rates as part of tightened monetary policy. However, commercial banks only slightly increase interest rates on deposits and deposits, arguing their strategy with excess liquidity in their finances. On the other hand, they are rapidly increasing interest rates on bank loans. Credits become more expensive and less accessible. For example, in Poland, sales of mortgage loans in August 2022 compared to August 2021 fell by as much as 3/4. During this period, the installments paid to banks by borrowers who took out long-term bank loans (mortgage or investment) in 2021 after record low interest rates and even before the start of interest rate increases by the central bank in Poland, i.e. the National Bank of Poland, increased, which began with October 2021. The scale of new investment projects launched by entrepreneurs operating in various production sectors and in the construction industry is also currently falling rapidly. More and more companies and enterprises limit the scale of new employment and consider the possibility of reducing employment in the coming quarters. More and more employees are afraid of dismissal. Therefore, there are more and more macroeconomic forecasts suggesting the possibility of a recession in the Polish economy at the end of 2022 or at the beginning of 2023. In view of the above, the central bank raises interest rates in order to curb the rise in inflation. The increase in inflation continues and the rising interest rates on bank loans are cooling down the economic processes and, consequently, may cause a deep downturn in the economy in the coming quarters. On the other hand, as part of a soft fiscal policy, the government, in view of the upcoming parliamentary elections (to be held in autumn 2023), continues to create, on the basis of constantly printed money, new support programs for citizens, subsidies, subsidies to rising fuel and energy prices, etc. Paradoxically, financial aid programs public policy implemented as part of the fiscal and budgetary policy of the state, which are becoming pro-inflationary factors, the government describes as the so-called Anti-Inflation Shields. Moreover, it is not appropriate to define these government financial support programs as implemented within the framework of budgetary policy, because they are carried out on the basis of printed money, which is introduced into the economy outside the budget through special purpose funds established and managed by Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego and the Polish Development Fund. Thus, it is a mechanism of extra-budgetary introduction to the economy of additional, uncovered overprinted money, which is mainly used to finance current and investment goals. Due to this mechanism, the key debt ratios of the state finance system look much more attractive than they really are. Depending on which economic policy solutions will be applied to a greater extent under the Polish mix (tightened monetary policy and easy fiscal policy), the economic effects will differ and individual crises may develop to a different extent in the coming quarters. Therefore, depending on which anti-crisis instruments of economic and monetary policy will be used and to what extent it will either be greater inflation, or a more severe energy crisis for citizens and economic entities, or a deeper economic crisis, deeper economic recession, higher unemployment, higher negative various social effects, etc.

In view of the above, I would like to address the following question to the Distinguished Community of Researchers and Scientists:

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply,

I invite everyone to the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

What can a populist social and fiscal policy based on subsidies and handouts lead to with the money of the public finance system in a situation of economic downturn, falling state budget revenues and growing indebtedness of the public finance system?

What can the ever-increasing subsidy- and welfare-based populist social policy and the soft fiscal policy with money from the state's financial system lead to through increased public debt and the printing of national money?

The political objective of the socio-economic policies implemented in this way, including social, budgetary and fiscal policies, is the plan to win the next parliamentary elections by the political party currently holding the reins of power. However, the economic consequences and the impact on the state's finances in the years ahead could be seriously negative.

Such socio-economic policies may contribute to continued high levels of inflation in the coming months.

What other negative effects could arise from such socio-economic policies in the future?

What can the ever-increasing populist social policy based on government subsidies and handouts and the soft fiscal policy implemented with the money of the state financial system, which is raised through the increase of public debt and the printing of national money, lead to?

What is your opinion on this topic?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Is it possible to have an effective anti-inflation policy in a situation where the government is pursuing a populist, short-sighted economic policy instead of a forward-looking, reliable policy of sustainable and realistically pro-social economic development?

Can this kind of policy mix based on contradictory goals and incompatible actions lead to an economic crisis under ad hoc state interventionism?

The liberalisation of the functioning of financial markets since the 1970s, the change in international exchange rate standards by moving away from the Bretton Woods monetary system and towards floating exchange rate regimes initiated changes that led to an increase in the scale of volatility and risk in financial markets. On the other hand, the rise of central banking in terms of active monetary policy-making and monetarist liberalism led to the creation of additional unbacked money as instruments for short-term activation of economic processes and interventionist anti-crisis economic policies. According to the Austrian school of economic liberalism, this kind of action can lead to an escalation of destabilising situations in the financial markets and/or to financial and economic crises. This kind of situation occurred at the beginning of the 21st century and became one of the key factors in generating the global financial crisis of 2007-2009. In some countries, a new mechanism is being used to create additional unbacked money and inject it into the economy. This involves the creation of government-controlled public institutions in which new earmarked funds are created for government support and subsidy programmes for the cost of more expensive fuels, energy, etc., subsidy programmes for selected social groups, sectors of the economy, types of economic activity and/or programmes to finance further economic ventures. Money is added by being offered by government agencies who, representing the Treasury, offer government bonds directly to the central bank, which buys them, and in this way additional money is introduced into the economy without being covered by new products and services. This is a key factor in the rise of inflation in countries where, since the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19), this mechanism has been used on a historically large scale. In addition to this, public debt and the risk of destabilisation of the state's public finance system are on the rise, but in the official data provided by the government-controlled Central Statistical Office and other government think tanks, the published financial indicators do not present a complete picture of the state of the state's public finances. It happens that, in the context of a lack of ideas on how to reduce inflation and the prospect of a downturn in the economy in the coming quarters, this mechanism is the main instrument of populist economic policy of the government, for which the priority is first and foremost to win the next parliamentary elections. This is the situation in the country in which I operate and the next parliamentary and local elections are due to be held as early as 2023.

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

What do you think about this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

What kind of anti-crisis socio-economic policy should the government apply in connection with the forecast economic crisis, economic downturn, and possibly also the economic recession and stagfaltation that may appear in 2023?

Rising prices of fossil fuels, rising prices of energy, food products, building materials, etc. are generating a continuing rise in inflation. Rising interest rates loans cause a decrease in the level of economic activity of companies and enterprises. Investment and production levels are falling. International supply and sourcing logistics chains disrupted during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic have yet to fully recover. The increasing scale of international trade wars will reduce economic growth in many countries. The war in Ukraine reduced the export of grains and other agricultural crops from Ukraine and Russia to many other countries and caused an increase in food prices on a global scale. Due to the rising costs of production factors, many companies and enterprises will be forced to restructure or reduce the scale of their economic activity. Consequently, unemployment may increase and an economic recession and stagflation may occur. Therefore, the following question arises: What kind of anti-crisis socio-economic policy should the government apply in connection with the forecast economic crisis, economic downturn, and possibly also the economic recession and stagfaltation that may appear in 2023? How can the state, under state interventionism, activate economic processes? What kinds of investment projects can be inspired, organized, and financed by the state as part of Keynesian anti-crisis socio-economic policy agenda? Should the state in such a situation, similarly to previous economic and financial crises, activate economic growth through the use of specific instruments of the monetary policy of central banking and fiscal, budget, structural, social, housing, etc. policies conducted by the government or specific ministerial ministries? Or rather, in such a situation, the state should focus its interventionist actions on introducing systemic changes, restructuring the socio-economic system, e.g. by increasing the scale of pro-environmental state interventionism, implementing green investments in the energy sector, developing zero-emission energy sources increasing the scale of energy and environmental security?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply,

I invite everyone to the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Kind regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

In a situation of double-digit and rising inflation, should the central bank continue to tighten monetary policy (raise interest rates) and the government also tighten fiscal policy (e.g. raise taxes and reduce non-investment spending) or should these policies be pursued differently?

Should both policies, i.e. monetary and fiscal, be conducted in a coordinated and targeted manner with the same objective, i.e. should they be focused on trying to reduce the level of inflation?

Does it make sense if, in such a situation, the central bank tightens monetary policy (raises interest rates) and the government eases fiscal policy (e.g. offers citizens further subsidies, grants, allowances, compensation, additional pensions by increasing the debt of the state finance system and/or by printing domestic money)?

I ask because this is the situation as of October 2021, in the country in which I operate. This is most likely due to the fact that the next general election is due to take place in a year's time and the current government is acting extremely populist.

What is your opinion on this?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Greetings,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

In your country, does the state support SME entrepreneurs in order to reduce the scale of potential company bankruptcies that are likely to occur in the context of rising energy prices?

There are reports in the media of various governmental, financial support solutions for SME entrepreneurs, subsidy programmes for the purchase costs of more expensive fuel and electricity. Such interventionist measures by the government are being implemented in order to limit the scale of potential company bankruptcy, which will probably occur in connection with rising energy prices. The key objective of this type of anti-crisis, interventionist economic policy is to limit the scale of the economic downturn, increase in unemployment, decrease in production, decrease in tax revenue to the state budget, etc., which will probably appear in the following quarters in connection with the continuing high inflation, growing prices of fuels, electricity and other production factors, which constitute a significant part of the costs of the processes of producing goods and offering services by economic entities. Since such governmental programmes for supporting entrepreneurship are financed from the funds of the state finance system, an important factor limiting the scale of their application is the level of indebtedness of the state finance system, the governmental practices carried out in terms of adding money and introducing additional amounts of uncovered money into the economy, as well as the level of inflation. However, in the context of current policy, the issue of limiting the projected rise in unemployment and the downturn in the economy can be considered a priority.

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

How should an anti-inflationary and at the same time pro-development, growth-activating (medium-term) and growth-activating (long-term) economic, anti-crisis, counter-cyclical, pro-development socio-economic policy be constructed?

How should such a multi-faceted socio-economic policy be designed?

In designing such an anti-inflationary and anti-crisis socio-economic policy, how should some mutually contradictory instruments for activating economic processes and curbing inflation be reconciled?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Could the larger-scale use of Central Bank Digital Currency by central banks have an impact on their monetary policies?

With central banks using Central Bank Digital Currency, will the question of the independence of these banks vis-à-vis the fiscal policies of governments increase in importance?

And what is your opinion on the subject?

What do you think?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

How can rising inflation be effectively contained?

On the one hand, the various instruments of monetary policy , fiscal policy, ... that have previously been used to stop the rise of inflation are known. On the other hand, for some reason the various anti-inflationary measures applied in 2021 and 2022 are working to a very limited extent. Therefore, can the rise in inflation get out of hand? Could the rise in inflation, the increase in fuel and energy prices and the projected downturn in the economy lead to the emergence of an economic crisis in the following quarters? Could there be an economic recession and stagflation in 2023?

What do you think on this subject?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Greetings,

Dariusz

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.

Green taxation is one of the tools of fiscal policy that works as a double-edged sword, the first of which is to achieve revenue for the state and the second is to reduce environmental pollution

I am trying to estimate the long run relationship between fiscal policy an economic growth, what is the best way to deal with reverse causality besides finding an IV, in a time series approach (ARDL, ECM, VAR).

In modern economies, various instruments of budgetary and fiscal policy are used, supporting the activities of business entities, and also instruments of socio-economic policy, including housing, etc., aimed at activating economic processes.

In view of the above, does Keynesian state interventionism mainly activate growth or economic development?

Please reply

Dear Friends and Colleagues of RG

The issues of specific programs to improve the economic, financial, material and housing situation of households as key instruments of pro-development state intervention and significant components of the socio-economic policy of the state I described in the publications:

_in_Poland

I invite you to discussion and cooperation.

In 2020, there was an economic crisis caused by the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic and lockdowns imposed on various service industries. In order to mitigate the negative, recessionary effects of the pandemic, the so-called economic programs were used. Anti-crisis shields consisting in the applied large-scale public financial aid to commercial business entities. The issue of activating entrepreneurship as an important element of the anti-crisis socio-economic policy applied during the economic crisis caused by the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic in 2020 was described in my article published at the end of December 2021. I am providing a link to this article:

I invite all those who study this subject to research cooperation.

I invite everyone to the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz

Tanzanian currency loose it's value in the previous three years, without any positive changes to individual economy. This trend brings negative impact between people morality, especially rich people and poor people. I believe we need strong professional guidance and respect in order to rescue the situation. Political command should be set aside on sensitive issues like country economy.

I want to run fiscal multipliers in good and bad times for 15 countries using forecast error to identify the fiscal policy shocks and the local projection method to estimate the impulse response of output to fiscal policy shocks. 

when I read a paper, forecast error is estimated in the following way:

forecasts of government spending are taken from October publications of the IMF’s WEO. Then, the fiscal spending shocks are identified as the forecast errors of government spending. Thus, FEi,t=gi,t(actual)-gi,t(forecast) where gi,t= Gi,t/Yi,t is government spending as a share of GDP. The actual government spending comes from the October WEO of the following year. i-refers to country and t refers to time.

can someone tell me the codes in STATA or eviews how to estimate forecast error and LPM for panel data?

Governments are addressing the COVID crisis by means of a substantial fiscal expansion, often supported also by monetary policy. Even if the crisis is temporary, this will likely result in considerable increases in debt to GDP ratios. In your view, will this entail restrictive policies in the medium term? And will interest rates stay very low even in the longer run?

Dear Colleagues and Friends from RG,

When the SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus pandemic enters the extinction phase, the global economy will begin to recover from a strong decline in economic growth. Increasing data indicate that the global economy will slowly recover from the current crisis for many months. In this regard, the following questions arise:

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply.

I invite you to discussion.

Thank you very much for participating in the discussion.

The issue of activating entrepreneurship as an important element of the anti-crisis socio-economic policy applied during the economic crisis caused by the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic in 2020 was described in my article published at the end of December 2021. I am providing a link to this article:

I invite all those who study this subject to research cooperation.

Best wishes.

Dariusz Prokopowicz

this question is aimed to identify policy options that might be useful for combating the global pandemic.

While Covid-19 spreads its health losses throughout the World, forecasts regarding global economic growth are continuously revised at lower rates. As a reaction, the main international Central Banks, accompanying the FED, have performed a new coordinated cut-off cycle of their basic interest rates. Although some economists regard such a reaction as a powerful tool to counter the downturn of the global output and employment levels, others are asking rather for a fiscal impulse: a type of a new "coordinated and international public spending plan".

And you my colleagues, what are your opinion about this subject?

A major critic when including both developed and developing countries in a sample to estimate a fiscal policy reaction function is that these countries have some structural difference... so I would like to have some arguments to defend the opposite thesis (even if developing and developed countries have structural differences, government react to the same phenomenom)

Fiscal Policy plays an important role on the economic development of a country. The significance of Fiscal Policy has been increasing continuously for attaining rapid economic growth of developing countries like India. An effective Fiscal Policy is composed of policy decisions relating to entire financial structure of the government including tax revenue, public expenditures, loans, transfers, debt management, budgetary deficit, etc. What are the areas where the Fiscal Policy may pose a hindrance in the implementation of Monetary Policy,and vice versa

As from theoretical construct and empirical literature, i have found that tax base is defined as - tax revenue divided by tax rates. if the standard data on tax rates are not readily available, than how we can estimate tax base for central and state level ?? What could be the other suitable proxies for measurement of tax base ??

Are the states/provinces in your country have the autonomy to decide on the conduct of fiscal and monetary policy? Or all are being centralized?

From a macroeconomic perspective, the stance of federal fiscal policy can be summarized by movements in the primary deficit as a share of GDP. The primary deficit is the difference between federal government spending, excluding debt interest payments, and revenue. Historically, the deficit has been highly countercyclical, meaning that it rises during economic slowdowns and falls during expansions.

I'm conducting a research about the debt sustainability in the case of Morocco. I intend to compare Morocco with other countries.

Can you please share with us the situation of the public debt in your countries: the debt as a percentage of GDP and if possible, the expected level of the debt in the coming years.

Thank you in advance.

The basic AD-AS model in macroeconomics suggests that an expansionary fiscal policy will lead to an increase in output and price level through a rightward shift of the AD demand curve. Is this not enough to conclude that fiscal policy does have an impact on the price level? How is the fiscal theory of the price level different from this basic AD-AS model (both approaches, at the end, point to the same conclusion)?

What are the data sources (Free) in India which has quarterly or monthly data on macroeconomic indicators (like gdp, per capita gdp, fiscal spending and receipts, inflation, Exchange rates, money supply, employment, tax rates and revenue etc.)???

how to calculate tax rate for overall economy if the tax rates for different heads are not available ?? i have found 2 measures in literarures (1) tax revenue to gdp ratio as avarage tax rate (see Taner Turan et al. 2014, Jayawickrama and Abeysinghe 2013) (2) Empirical works of Rudi Kurniawan (2011), Mesut KARAKAS (2014) etc estimated overall tax rate as central govt tax revenue divided by GDP. Which tax rate is representative one for whole economy? And Why ?? What is the logic to said it as tax rate in Public finance ??

I am currently working on fiscal policy in a developing economy of Nigeria. I have seen many authors proxy fiscal policy with either government expenditure and revenue and public debt. some authors used aggregated data while others used disaggregated data. I am not all that comfortable with these approach since fiscal policy has to with delibrate action of government to influence the economy towards a given direction. Government might decide to spend big or cuts tax, leading to deficit, they may also plan to spend small or raises tax, indicating a surplus. I used dummy variable to separate these two fiscal plans by the government and used their effects to capture the fiscal policy impact on growth. My problem now is how to specify my ARDL models using these dummy variable to capture the fiscal policy? Also will i still need to include any other fiscal variables such as government expenditure, taxation, government debt in this model? And if at all i will need to include any or all of these, how should they enter the ARDL models?

Your expertism will make the current work more informative and scholastic.

I am planning to analyse the impact of two war periods on the development/growth of the country. Three variables (GDP, Capital formation and CPI) are included. Logic behind is simple. fiscal policy results in capital formation and monitory policy is depicted in CPI. Now included two dummy variables indicting each war time. Results are fine at 6 lags. Am I going the right way? what tests needed? Any suggestion to defend lags and theoretical framework? Please ask if you need more explanation.

I really want to know examples of both fiscal and economic costs of corruption(definitions)

Is adopting either contractionary fiscal policy(austerity recommended by neoliberals including Hayekians and neoclassical and new-classical economists)or expansionary fiscal policy (Keynesian stimulus which includes bail out of private banks and deficit spending) during slump a choice by the governments? Economists also have opposing views on what to adopt at times of a bust.  Why do governments of US and EU/Eurozone select either one of such policy and not the other?Upon what criteria such Choice is made? In respect of Great Recession in 2008, the fact is that all States first resorted to stimulus and then to austerity. Why was not it otherwise, or only austerity? Is state intervention either by way of defecit spending or austerity in market during bust inevitable, destined by capitalist crisis and not a policy or political choise of a government?

The response of Roosevelt during Great Depression and Bush/Obama in 2008 are different. Roosevelt did not bailout banks, so budget defecit was not caused by bailouts and so austerity was not necessary.  On the other hand WWII also had significantly raised US arms production and effectively helped end Depression along with stimulus plans of New Deal. In contrast, Obama and European Union countries had to face huge budget deficit caused by bank bailouts and spending on Wars abroad, mainly in Afghanistan and Iraq. Then they resorted to austerity, instead of taxing big business and banks to increase revenue. The governments being agents of market, were to establish market stability. So austerity was mandatory, rather than continuing with deficit spending as some Keynsians(Krugman) even suggested that the stimulus was not sufficient enough.

Which one may not refer to deflation? A. excess supply. B. price falls. C. recession. D.deficient demand E. cyclical unemployment is zero. D. Expansionary fiscal policy in place.

Hello experts, i want to work on the effect of government increasing external debt on financial markets, i want to know if there is existing theory or literature related? Also if there is the need to use an overlapping generation model to determine the payback procedure?

The Washington Consensus is a set of 10 economic policy prescriptions considered to constitute the "standard" reform package promoted for crisis-wracked developing countries by Washington, D.C. The term was first used in 1989 by English economist John Williamson.[2]

That is, if a country is incapable of providing all the required household power supply but the private use of solar and other green energy sources can cover the shortage- any idea what is the link to economic growth? apart from lifting the burden from the state (including the fiscal cost) and what are the potential implications?

Dear Researchers

I have empirical investigated the role of monetary and fiscal policies in the determination of inflation in Pakistan. please what will be the good topic for my paper

As I selected this one:

An empirical analysis in effect of macroeconomic factors on inflation for Pakistan

Either it is good or not. Please suggest the good title.

Dear scholars,

I am working on my Master's thesis on examining the government spending shock on the Papua New Guinea's economy. My baseline variables are government spending; GDP; GDP deflator; private consumption; private investments; 3-months Treasury bill rate. All the variables are in real terms and expressed in log values, except the real interest rate. Moreover, all the series are seasonally adjusted using the X-12 method.

The ADF test for unit roots found all the variables except real interest rate are not stationary at level. Consistent with most of the related literature, I want to use the Structural Vector Autoregression model but the ADF test results deny it. I conducted the Johansen cointegration test and the results found only two long run relationship, which is not as expected. However, when I expressed the variables in annual percentage change, the ADF and Johansen test results meet the criteria of the VAR analysis. But I am not sure if I could use the annual growth rates.

Please help clarify me on this issue. I'd also appreciate suggestions to improve the stationarity of the data at levels for variables in logs.

Thank you,