Macroeconomics - Science topic

To be able to deal head on with the social and environmental sustainability failures linked to NON-CIRCULAR TRADITIONAL ECONOMY thinking the Brundtland Commission in 1987(WCED) led us away from that type of thinking by recommending sustainable development tools....The WCED did not recommend then to go CIRCULAR TRADITIONAL ECONOMY THINKING to solve the social and environmental problems created by traditional economic thinking as in both economies you are not accounting for the social and environmental costs of doing business.

To be able to deal head on with the environmental sustainability failures linked to NON-CIRCULAR TRADITIONAL ECONOMY thinking the United Nations Commission on Sustainabiled development in 2012(UNCSD) was leading ust the way of circular green markets through green markets, green growth and green economies, away from business as usual.....The UNCSD did not recommend then to go CIRCULAR TRADITIONAL ECONOMY THINKING to solve the environmental problems created by traditional economic thinking as in both economies you are not accounting for the environmental costs of doing business.

In other words, the WCED was trying to fix a social and environmental sustainability problem by using sustainable development means to leave traditional thinking behind; and the UNCSD was trying to fix an environmental sustainability problem using green market thinking.

If the circular economy thinking has the same problems as the non-circular economic thinking of Adam Smith in social and/or environmental terms, how can circular economy thinking be presented today as the solution to the problem that the circular economy is also contributing to?

And this raises the question, Does CIRCULAR ECONOMY THINKING means a WORLD living under permanent social and environmental market failure?

What do you think? If you think No, why do you think so? If you think Yes, Why do you think so?

Hello,

What are the potential consequences and challenges that arise if the macroeconomic data provided by institutions like the World Bank and IMF is found to be inaccurate or unreliable, and how can such issues be mitigated!?

Thank you

F Chellai

A lot seems to be coming out in publications about the circular economy or sustainable development and the circular economy or circular economy and sustainability or circular economy, sustainable development and global warming...and so on.

All researchers and publications seems to have the same theme of directly or indirectly indicating that the broken circularity traditional market economy can be made circular by non-green market means; and hence, they advocate circularity without indicating where the circularity problem came from or comes from; hence, without indicating whether they are fixing a broken circularity problem or patching that broken circularity problem plus their circularity thoughts seem to be disconnected from the need to one day transition away from the pollution production based economies to the pollution free economies....

They seem to start with addressing the consequences of the broken circularity problem without any regards with respect to fixing the root cause of the broken circularity problem.

And this raises the question, Can you have a circular green economy without green markets? If No, why No? If Yes, why yes?

The flipping from traditional perfect market thinking to imperfect dwarf green market thinking instead of shifting to perfect green market thinking in 2012 RIO + 20 transformed the role governments play when dealing with market failures and the way they would react when facing democratic and huma rights protest in response to the market failure,....

Which raises the currently important question:Did 2012 Rio +20 transform all governments in the Paris agreement from environmental externality policy correctors and enforcers INTO environmental externality cleaners and enforcers?. If Yes, why? If not, Why?

What do you think?

Under perfect green markets if there is a market failure, should governments be expected to act as market failure correctors and enforcers in the face of social pressure?

I think yes, what do you think?

The Brundtland Commission knew or should have known in 1987 they were dealing with a sustainability problem when they concluded that we needed to go beyond business as usual to solve the social and environmental crisis associated with business as usual since 1876, they knew or should have not that this needed a sustainability fix not a sustainable development patch.

If they would not have mixed up a sustainability problem with a sustainable development problem they would have had 3 choices: a) to recommend going red markets if they were giving priority to the social sustainability problem they documented; b) ) to recommend going green markets if they were giving priority to the environmental sustainability problem they documented; and c) ) to recommend going sustainability markets if they were giving priority to the socio-environmental sustainability problem they documented. Instead, they recommended sustainable development, a patch to the issues, that does not take us neither close to the beyond business as usual model they asks us to go.

Then, the Rio + 20 process came along settling the sustainable development discourse by prioritizing the environmental issue and hence, deciding to go green economies, green growth, and green markets.

And this raises the question, Will the period 1987 to 2012 be known in the history of economic thought as a great sustainability thinking failure period?

What do you think?

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

When there is fiscal constraint on the governemnet it has to create the fiscal space without comprimising macroeconomic stability and fiscal sustaibility. How it should do ?

Is it possible to model earthquakes and their impact on the macroeconomy for Syria, Morocco, and Turkey?

After compromising on fiscal constraint many countries governments are creating fiscal spaces for the desired level of activities that they want to carry with devoted resource but it has impacts on fiscal sustanability and Macroeconomic stability also.

The sustainable development discourse released by the Brundtland Commission in 1987 ended in 2012 RIO +20 with the agreement to go green markets, green growth and green economies, WHICH MEANS that the sustainable development model that won the competition was the win-win eco-economic model.

Yet since then, people do not longer talk about the circular green economy or the still broken circular dwarf green economy as ways of fixing or patching respectively the environmental pollution problem we are supposed to be trying to address.

Researchers and institutions as seen in research shared in Researchgate have decided to use a general term that means nothing and everything at the same time, THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY without indicating what they are trying to fix as they should know what the root cause of the traditional market broken circularity is or at least saying they are still talking about saving the traditional economy that was left behind in 2012 Rio +20, the one the Brundtland commission said in 1987 we should go beyond from as it had not worked.

Keep in mind, there is fully broken circularity, there is partially broken circularity, and there is true circularity, but this is found within the green market paradigm shift knowledge gap that was created when shifting from perfect traditional market thinking to perfect green market thinking.

And this raises the question, Can you go from fully broken circularity to unbroken circularity in any market, including in the case of perfect traditional market and the environmental problem, without internalizing the externality costs associated with production?. What do you think?

If you think Yes, then why you think so?

If the answer is NO, are then the CIRCULAR ECONOMY thoughts being advance more often now in and outside Researchgate as a good sustainable development or sustainability or climate change tool based on alternative academic facts?

What do you think?

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

Someone can help me !! I’m looking for this article: "Macroeconomic fundamentals, order flow and exchange rate dynamics: case of the Euro-Dollar" by Aymen Ben Romdhane Hajri Link: https://www.theses.fr/2018AIXM0353

How macroeconomic will be on the forth coming future, and how will be dominated by either better or worse condition

Can economic growth occur in the short term? If the answer is no, what is the reason behind economic growth not occurring in the short term and occurring only in the long term?

I do not see other way out of this inmense crisis within the European Union. Neither MEDE, nor Eurobonds. From an overlapping generations perspective, with children and young people (who have probability quasi-zero of being infected) being forced to stop their lives and careers, we mid-age and mature people are the ones who must bear the cost of the COVID-crisis. And this means inflation (never debt). Therefore, direct monetization of aid for the shock and partial debt relief. And then, a re-europeization of the investment flows (yes, protectionism) with a strong industrial policy direction in mind.

I am conscious of the asymetric international effects of the shock within the european partners. But, either we together, and in the current generation, bear the whole cost in the form of inflation, or our legacy for future generations (within an already highly leveraged framework) is conmdemned to a Euro-collapse in 15 years. What do you think?

In a social market economy, is the concentration of capital and monopolization of markets through the development of large multinational corporations that take over most of the markets for the sale of their product or service offerings the result of objectively operating processes of a highly liberalized system that allows the market mechanism to operate, or is it rather a manifestation of the imperfection of realistically existing markets?

The basis for this question is the changing relationship in many countries over the past few decades between the numerous economic entities that make up the SME sector and the few large corporations that increasingly monopolize markets and displace the many smaller companies and enterprises that make up the SME sector.

And what is your opinion on this topic?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Hello, I am building a VAR modell in order to discover how (WTI) oil price shocks (changes in the WTI price) and 3 macroeconomic control variables (gdp_growth, Log-Interest rate, Log-exchange rate) influence core and headline inflation in the USA. I use semiannual data from 1986 to 2022. All variables are non-stationary (in case of gdp_g and inflation variables adf.test p-value between 0.06 and 0.1 very close to being stationary at levels) but stationary in first differences - so they are all I(1). So I thought the requirements for applying VECM are given. Then I did the model selection and filtered for AIC and SC/BIC information criteria which give me weird results. When I set lag.max to 8,10,12,etc AIC is always at 8,10,12; SC is either at 1 or also at the max (8,10,12,etc). Furthermore, the results for those high lags are not even given - it is written -Inf. (infinity) or NaN. (the results in lag selection are attached down here). I have a mix of seasonally adjusted and unadjusted variables.

I have these results with all variations of the variables and even with other variables that I add and replace. I think I am doing something fundamentally wrong. I think maybe that the discrepancy between the nearly stationary variables at levels and the clearly non-stationary variables at levels has something to do with it. Can you help me please? What am I doing potentially wrong? Does it mean the model can not be applied and I should consider an ARDL approach? It is my first reserach I am doing on VECM models. Thanks a lot in advance!

This is my code in R:

#loading data and analyse via ADF test

HINF <- read_excel("XR_%semiannualHEADLINE.xls")

View(HINF)

ts_HINF <- ts(HINF, start = c(1986,1,1),end = c(2022,1,1), frequency = 2)

ts_HINF

autoplot(ts_HINF)

adf.test(ts_HINF)

#Differencing

DHINF <- diff(ts_HINF)

ts_DHINF <- ts(DHINF, start = c(1986,1,1),end = c(2022,1,1), frequency = 2)

ts_DHINF

autoplot(ts_DHINF)

adf.test(ts_DHINF)

#...doing this with all variables

#then creating the model for Core Inflation

XR_ALL_CORE <- data.frame(ts_CINF,ts_INTR,ts_RGDP,ts_LEXR,ts_LWTI)

colnames(XR_ALL_CORE) <- c("CINF","INTR","GDP","LEXR","LWTI")

#lag selection

var_aic <- VAR(XR_ALL_CORE, type = "const", lag.max = 8, ic = "AIC")

var_aic

# Lag ordggested by AIC

var_aic$p

#Choosing optimal number of lags

lagselect <- VARselect(XR_ALL_CORE,lag.max = 15,type = "const")

lagselect$criteria

lagselect$selection

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

What were the key priorities and effects of using state financial aid programs under the so-called anti-crisis interventionist activities financed with additional extra-budgetary money introduced into the economy through covid programs and earmarked funds?

What were the different purposes of financing specific anti-crisis measures that were identified as priorities during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic?

What anti-crisis economic processes were activated by the extra-budgetary introduction of a large amount of additional money into the economy, which resulted, among others, in a significant increase in inflation (from 2021) and an increase in the hidden debt of the state's public finance system (from 2020)? What are the economic effects if the extra money finances mainly an increase in consumption compared to an increase in investment?

He hereby proposes a discussion on the issue of extra-budgetary introduction of additional money into the economy as part of government covid programs and funds, financing specific goals recognized as priorities of anti-crisis measures and the level of debt of the state's public finance system. In the country where I operate under the so-called covid funds, well over PLN 200 billion of additional money was introduced into the economy off-budget, which did not have parity in the goods and services produced. This was no exception to the anti-crisis measures of economic state interventionism used during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic. As part of these anti-crisis measures of economic state interventionism, various financial support programs were used in individual countries, differing in their functionality and impact on the macroeconomics of the national economy. In some countries, such as Poland, the effects were mainly pro-inflationary and generated mainly by an increase in consumption. In Poland, the simplest solutions of this kind have generated a particularly high level of core inflation and a high level of loss of purchasing power of money that citizens receive in salaries, even taking into account the wage increases for employed employees applied by entrepreneurs. The anti-crisis measures of state economic interventionism implemented in Poland during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic in the formula of mainly government programs, the so-called Anti-Crisis Shields consisting mainly in the transfer of public financial aid to commercially operating business entities, under which the largest amount of money from the public finance system was allocated by the government to non-repayable subsidies transferred to companies and enterprises in the form of subsidies to employees' salaries and refinancing fixed costs of business activity. The purpose of this type of the simplest and most primitive anti-crisis solution was to limit the scale of employment reduction and the scale of bankruptcy of business entities caused by scientifically unjustified, large-scale lockdowns imposed on selected sectors of the economy and the so-called. national quarantines. Unfortunately, the real level of unemployment was still growing during the pandemic, despite the fact that the statistics of the Central Statistical Office did not show it, because a significant part of entrepreneurs, in order to receive the aforementioned non-repayable subsidies, reduced the employment of employees from e.g. full-time to part-time. In addition, this type of anti-crisis measures of economic state intervention, applied in the simplest and most primitive formula, did not motivate companies and enterprises to implement pro-development investments. However, in some other countries, the mechanism of the applied anti-crisis actions of state economic interventionism was much more investment and pro-development, and even pro-climate and pro-environmental. For example, in the most economically and technologically developed countries of Europe, such as in Germany, the anti-crisis measures of economic state interventionism used during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic had to a large extent precisely this type of investment, pro-development, pro-climate and pro-environmental character . In Poland, this extra money was only unproductively consumed and generated a restoration of consumption to pre-coronavirus levels and an increase in inflation from 2021. In Germany, additional money was allocated to investments, in addition to green investments, i.e. the implementation of the key anti-crisis assumption, Keynesian state interventionism, taking into account the issue of achieving sustainable development goals, accelerating the processes of green transformation of the economy, i.e. pragmatic, pro-social and at the same time pro-climate and pro-environmental measures were applied approach in the field of anti-crisis and pro-development activities. In Poland, however, the additional, printed, anti-crisis money introduced into the economy as part of off-budget Covid funds was consumed, generated another wave of economic downturn resulting from growing inflation, and contributed to an increase in the real debt of the public finance system, although hidden from the above-mentioned prudential indicators. In addition, due to the government slowing down the process of green transformation of the energy sector in recent years, more than 3/4 of electricity and heat in Poland is still generated from dirty combustion power generation based on the combustion of hard coal and lignite, which resulted in a crisis that was particularly costly for Polish citizens energy in 2022. Therefore, the anti-crisis socio-economic policy programs applied in individual countries during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic were significantly diversified in many respects, including issues recognized by governments as priorities and key investment objectives financed with additional anti-crisis extra-budgetary money introduced into economy. In some countries, it was noticed that during the pandemic there is a possibility of accelerating the processes of pro-environmental, pro-climate, green transformation of the economy and this opportunity was taken advantage of. On the other hand, unfortunately, there are still countries, including EU Member States, such as Poland, in which the priorities of the anti-crisis, monetarist, historically large-scale economic state interventionism completely ignored the issue of emerging opportunities, including the financial possibilities of accelerating the processes pro-environmental, pro-climate, green transformation of the economy.

In view of the above, I am addressing the Honorable Community of scientists and researchers with the following question: What were the different purposes of financing specific anti-crisis measures that were identified as priorities during the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic? What anti-crisis economic processes were activated by the extra-budgetary introduction of a large amount of additional money into the economy, which resulted, among others, in a significant increase in inflation (from 2021) and an increase in the hidden debt of the state's public finance system (from 2020)? What are the economic effects if the extra money finances mainly an increase in consumption compared to an increase in investment? What were the key priorities and effects of applying public financial aid programs under the so-called anti-crisis interventionist activities financed with additional extra-budgetary money introduced into the economy through covid programs and earmarked funds? What were the various investment objectives financed by the additional off-budget money introduced into the economy since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic?

What is your opinion on this topic?

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please reply,

I invite everyone to the discussion,

Thank you very much,

The above text is fully my original work written by me on the basis of my research. In writing this text, I did not use any other sources or automatic text generation systems, such as ChatGPT. Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz

best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

In Poland, property prices have been rising continuously for many years. Even in the years of economic crises, such as the pandemic economic crisis of 2020, real estate prices, including flats in cities, increased on average by around 20 per cent. This has led to a situation where real estate prices are so high that a citizen with an average level of income from work in most commercial banks is not creditworthy enough to purchase his or her first flat with a mortgage. A serious housing shortage gap has emerged for citizens, including working middle-class citizens, including young people after graduation and families starting their working lives. The government's "Housing Plus" ("Mieszkanie Plus") programme, which was introduced in 2026, has unfortunately not been implemented. Only a few per cent of housing units were built under this programme relative to plan. Municipal housing was also not developed. The government did not develop and finance the construction of municipal housing on a larger scale so as to significantly reduce the scale of the housing shortage gap. And yet for many other purposes, which were not of an investment, developmental, pro-social nature, etc., it was the government that created additional money in recent years on the basis of additional issues of state bonds. These additional issues of treasury bonds were bought directly by the central bank and in this way, extra-budgetary, through special purpose funds created and managed by institutions of government agencies, this additional money was introduced into the economy on a large scale and financed mostly non-investment purposes, purposes not justified by economic and social issues. In this way, using a kind of creative accounting within the state's public finance system, the debt of the state's public finance system was significantly increased, but this was done in such a way that the prudential indicators of the debt of the state's public finance system and the standards for reporting this issue to the bodies of the European Union did not include all of the said debt. In 2023, in connection with the approaching parliamentary elections to be held in October 2023, which are also planned to be won for the third time by the PIS political option in power for the previous eight years, a new programme has been drawn up to revive the economic situation, which has been weakening in recent quarters, in the area of purchase-sale transactions performed on real estate and to activate investment processes in the construction of housing estates by commercially operating development companies. this programme is to be based on government subsidies for mortgage loans taken out by citizens. In this way, the main beneficiaries will be the banks selling the loans, the developers carrying out investments in housing construction and the government, which will boast in the meanstream media controlled by it before the elections as part of the election campaign that it has launched a programme that has revitalised the housing construction sector and increased the possibility for citizens to buy their first home on credit, in addition to still expensive credit, as interest rates are still high. And property prices will continue to rise and council housing will continue to be in short supply. In this situation, there are still good conditions for the development of pat-development applied multifacetedly and to a large extent by a significant proportion of commercially operating property developers building blocks of flats, houses and flats. Examples of pat-development in offers for sale of flats in Poland:

In terms of the offers presented on the Internet for the sale of new flats, there are numerous cases of misleading potential buyers, customers, citizens interested in purchasing a flat. There are cases of specifying in the advertisements that e.g. the flat is cosy, i.e. it means that it is cramped. Presented graphic visualisations of flats on developers' websites present, for example, a scale plan of the flat where the furniture is drawn smaller than in the scale plan of the flat. Green names are used for green areas in the computer visualisation of the final image of the development plan for the surroundings of a block of flats that is under construction. In the computer visualisation of the final image of the development plan for the surroundings of a block of flats that is under construction, large green areas are drawn, while in reality concrete car parks, additional roads and further blocks of flats etc. are often built in these areas.

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 subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Counting on your opinions, on getting to know your personal opinion, on an honest approach to the discussion of scientific issues 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

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

At present, ChatGPT is not yet taken fully seriously in many applications as a completely infallible and professional tool that can replace humans in many professions requiring creative word processing etc. This is related to the aforementioned high level of factual errors and the creation of 'fictitious facts' in the texts that ChatGPT creates in its answers to the questions people ask. In addition to this, it examines the data and information on the basis of which it provides answers from 2021, so it is no longer fully up to date in terms of many areas of knowledge. For example, it has happened on more than one occasion that when ChatGPT was asked about an event that was recently supposed to have happened ChatGPT would give an answer that a particular event, incident, etc. happened recently in 2023, give the exact date and details of the event, when in fact this event described by ChatGPT never happened and the knowledge base it uses ends temporally in 2021. The issue of the technological progress taking place dynamically in this field in various circles of citizens acting as employees in various companies, enterprises and institutions, as well as in discussions in scientific spheres and in the media, generates a lot of controversy. On the one hand, the technological progress, development of artificial intelligence and its applications are presented in many discussions and publications, press and scientific articles mainly in positive aspects in the context of ever faster economic and social processes, structural changes in the industry and sectoral structure of the economy, including the emergence of new branches of services, new types of technological products, development of technological sectors, emergence of new professions and occupations in the context of developing information technologies ICT and Industry 4. 0. On the other hand, there are critical and pessimistic opinions concerning the potential effects of the dynamic development of artificial intelligence and its applications, which will lead to the replacement of work done by humans with the same work done by artificial intelligence. It is already estimated, on the basis of ongoing research in this field, that by the end of this decade, artificial intelligence could take away jobs from at least 300 million people globally. So it is certain that the implementation of certain different technological solutions of artificial intelligence into the various spheres of activity of companies, enterprises and institutions will change labour markets to a large extent in the next few years.

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 subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Counting on your opinions, on getting to know your personal opinion, on an honest approach to discussing scientific issues and not ChatGPT-generated ready-made answers, 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

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

I am looking for the source (online) of these indicators, like St. Louis FED & Kansas FED, with complex & mixed data from macroeconomy and finance. I am interested particularly to Fin. Stress Indicators of the main commercial banks. Thanks in advance. SalVi.

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, in March 2020, following the WHO's declaration of a global epidemic or pandemic, there was a panic sell-off of investment assets on the capital markets and the risk of a deep, double-digit recession of the economy emerged, central banks cut interest rates and the governments of some countries launched financial assistance programmes on a record scale, consisting of non-refundable financial subsidies for commercially operating companies and enterprises in various sectors of the economy, refinancing of fixed costs of economic activity, deferral of payments of contributions to the social security system, tax reductions, etc., the state's financial resources for these large assistance programmes will be used to finance the crisis. The state drew its financial resources for these large financial aid programmes from additional issues of treasury bonds, which were purchased by commercial banks, investment banks, enterprises, citizens and in some countries, such as Poland, mainly by the central bank. Additional, huge amounts of money introduced into the economy without being covered by manufactured products and services, as predicted in mid-2020, generated a strong increase in inflation on the basis of an increase in the prices of raw materials, products and services, which began almost at the beginning of 2021. Additional large amounts of money without coverage in economic goods in some countries such as Poland were introduced into the economy outside the budget, i.e. by transferring this additional money to special purpose funds created for this purpose functioning in institutional government agencies bypassing the state budget. These institutions distributed this money in the form of mainly non-refundable subsidies to companies and enterprises, some of which did not function because they were temporarily in lockdowns introduced by the government. During the 2020 pandemic economic crisis, therefore, interventionist, historically large bailout programmes based on so-called Crisis Shields were applied, and in some countries mainly on the basis of issuing and selling to commercial banks, companies and citizens additional Treasury bond issues. Many banks purchased these treasury bonds in large quantities when, prior to the pandemic, inflation and interest rates were much lower than in the 2021 - 2023 period. During the 2020 pandemic, central banks further reduced interest rates to interventionist low levels. Some commercial and investment banks, with the economic downturn and recession deepening during the pandemic, bought government bonds treating these instruments as safe assets during the economic crisis and as they reduced the scale of their lending and/or investments in securities generating higher levels of investment and credit risk such as shares issued by listed companies due to the recession of the economy. However, when central banks started a cycle of interest rate increases from 2021 and 2022 onwards, then the prices of previously issued government bonds with lower interest rates on stock exchanges began to fall, as these securities lost their previous attractiveness. At that point, rating agencies began to downgrade the ratings of banks that had previously purchased large volumes of previously issued sovereign bonds with significantly lower interest rates, in view of the average market interest rate levels already prevailing from 2022 onwards, then the problem was recognised. This problem was the potential insolvency and large financial losses of these banks. However, when analysed on a macroeconomic level, the problem is now much broader. Well, public debts have increased strongly in many countries after the pandemic economic crisis of 2020. The increase in inflation already predicted from mid-2020, which started to materialise from 2021, caused central banks to raise interest rates. On the one hand, some investment banks like Silicon Valey Bank and Signature Bank, which had invested a large part of their funds in government bonds just before the cornovirus pandemic at several times lower oproc. levels for these financial instruments, generated large financial losses and collapsed. On the other hand, thanks to high inflation, the real value of public debt in many countries is falling.

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 subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

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

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

In many countries, specific housing programmes have been designed and implemented or attempted to be implemented with varying results, which consisted of activating and subsidising, within the framework of government financial support programmes, investments in the construction of flats, housing estates, houses, etc. The aim of such programmes is primarily to reduce the scale of the housing gap in society by increasing the number of flats and residential houses in the country, increasing to a large extent the availability of housing for citizens, including young people starting families. Besides, in connection with the fact that the construction sector is one of the key cyclical sectors in the economy, so among the key objectives of introducing such programmes within the framework of the government's housing policy is also the activation of economic processes through the creation of an additional economic growth activator, which can also be an important anti-crisis factor in the economy during the forecasted and ongoing economic downturn caused, for example, by international factors, the global economic crisis affecting the open economy. Unfortunately, not all such housing policies have worked effectively. For example, in the country where I operate such a housing policy programme, whose official strategic goal was to counteract the high housing deficit in the country in the face of social needs, was to be the Housing Plus Programme, the implementation of which was started by the PIS government from 2016, i.e. immediately after winning the parliamentary elections. This programme, alongside the social programme Family 500 Plus, was one of the key election slogans before the parliamentary elections held in autumn 2015, which the organised PIS political group won and thanks to which the PIS government, which has been in power for almost 8 years, was formed. Unfortunately, despite the passage of two parliamentary terms and the governments in power, the housing programme announced in the 2015 election campaign has not been implemented on the announced scale. In view of the above, the social and housing current goals of the Housing Plus Programme have only been realised by a few per cent relative to the original plan, the strategic goal of significantly reducing the housing deficit gap has not been realised. In fact, only the political objective of this housing policy programme, i.e. winning the parliamentary elections in 2015 and the local elections held in the following years, has been fully realised.

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?

What is your opinion on this subject?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Hello,

I want to examine the following topic:

The Causality between Macroeconomic variables and U.S. Stock Market (Returns) – A Vector Autoregressive model approach

First I do not know whether it makes sense to use level data for the macroeconomic variables and - per definition - changes of stock markets (stationary I(0)) in one model? Thus I thought using the stock market index (which has the same order of integration) as such as target variable just because it has the same order of integration - I fear that I need to apply a ARDL model in this case?!

Secondly, in case using stock market index as suitable variable, I would build a VAR modell in differences since there is no cointegration and no stationarity at levels? Is such a model meaningful? I mean one would lose maybe too much information such as the trend. Or would you prefer an ARDL with stock market returns as I(0) and the rest as I(1)? I mean I do not want to manipulate the data to fit my model but the other way around - OF COURSE!

In the VAR model I use the logs of S&P500 index as target variable, and the logs of the interest rates, the core CPI, the Industrial Production Index, the Money supply and exchange rate.

Thank you very much!!

Some stock market investors, citizens and business entities, investment fund managers, investment banks operating in the capital markets use both technical analysis and fundamental analysis in their analysis and investment activities. The use of both of these analyses is usually based on the assumption that these two significantly different analyses can complement each other. Fundamental analysis consists of, among other things, several analytical segments on specific spheres of the economy, impact factors and risks acting on the operation of certain business entities, internal and external impact factors. In the environment of the company and the enterprise, the closer environment is analyzed, e.g. the competitive environment, relations with key competitors, with business counterparties, customers, with recipients of product and service offerings, with suppliers of raw materials, prefabricated components, subassemblies and other production factors necessary for business operations, with cooperators, with financial counterparties, lenders, etc. Strategic analysis, including, for example, SWOT analysis, marketing analysis, technical-economic analysis, organization analysis, financial analysis, including ratio analysis based on financial indicators based on quantitative data contained in financial statements, also plays an important role in fundamental analysis.

Technical analysis, on the other hand, involves analyzing changes in the rates and trading volumes of securities, currencies or commodities. This analysis is concerned with studying and interpreting the shapes of charts to forecast future prices (rates) based on an analysis of past price formation. Unlike fundamental analysis of a company, which takes into account both information about the global, macroeconomic, regional and industry environment in which it operates, as well as reports announced by the company itself, in the case of technical analysis these are not taken into account in the investment decision-making process. All the information needed for technical analysis is read directly from charts showing the historical price changes of the security, currency or raw material under analysis. Technical analysis assumes that stock market phenomena precede economic phenomena in time, and that the market is a mechanism for discounting the future. Technical analysts prefer to analyze the trend of the market instead of statistical data. Technical analysis is based on three basic rules: 1. Changes in supply and demand on the stock market are reflected in stock prices, 2. Changes in stock prices are subject to trends that persist over a long period of time, 3. Processes occurring on the stock market are repeated.

In view of the above, combining both analyses, i.e. fundamental and technical analysis, can give a kind of analytical added value. Accordingly, some stock market investors use both fundamental and technical analysis.

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,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Why is Keynesian theory not considered as a theory of economic growth? Although it simply suggests that income, which Keynesian theory assumes equals output, can be changed by increasing effective aggregate demand, it all takes the case from the demand side rather than from the supply side.

Hello,

I want to estimate the effect of some macroeconomic variables: CPI, exchange Rate, 10yrs Bond yield, M3 supply, Industrial Production Index on the Stock Market in the USA. I transformed the S&P500 MONTHLY time series in log scale and the other variables remained as they are in the original form (m1 2000 --> m4 2019).

No I do not know whether I have a misspecification or not since my ECT terms (see attachment docx-document) for SNP500 are highly positive with one exception (this enlarge the disequilibrium in the model as I interpret it). Can you give me an idea of what could be wrong in the model? Or are the ECTs ok and I just misinterpreted the results?

Secondly:

Would you use the stock return, thus using the differenced Log SNP500 instead of logSNP500?

Actually I want to estimate the effect of the macroeconomic variables on stock returns, but as the latter are stationary I(0), I could not apply any model since ARDL also needs the dependent variable to be non-stationary and only the indepoendent variables can be of mixed order.

Best regards,

Philipp

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

Imaging Adam Smith stating the theory of the perfect green market in 1776 instead of the theory of the perfect traditional market. This has current development implications in terms of current social, environmental and population issues. And this leads to the question: What are the main current negative implications of Adam Smith’s legacy? Why it turned out this way?

What do you think?

Please share your own ideas.

Anyone here who is interested to do a project about the impact of macroeconomics variables on bank performance

I think No, what do you think?.

It can be said the perfect green market thinking is the one that comes from correcting the knowledge base of the perfect traditional market so as to be able to correct environmentally distorted traditional market prices to transform them in green market prices.

This is the perfect market thinking behind the ideas of green economy and green growth and green markets that were supposed to be advanced since 2012 RIO +20(UNCSD) to address environmental issues head on, but the world went the way of dwarf green markets instead.

Hence, instead of going to a perfect market(Green market) to address the environmental concerns distorting the traditional market pricing mechanism, we moved to an imperfect market(Dwarf green market) to deal with environmental issues since 2012.

In other words, instead of going the way of environmental pollution reduction markets we went the way of environmental pollution management markets.

And this raises the question, What is a dwarf green market ?

Any ideas?

Feel free to share your own views on the answer

Greetings respectable community of ResearchGate. I encountered some issues while gathering data from the World Bank Database, hence I would like to know if there are alternatives or other websites like the World Bank Database in which we can gather raw data.

The website can contain whatever form of indicators such as (developments, governance, competitiveness, economics, financial sector, etc.….) Thank you in advance for your assistance.

It can be said that all perfect markets once in place will tend to produce at the lowest price possible to maximize profits, but the link between pollution dynamics and profit making is different.

Which raises the question, can you see the difference between the way perfect traditional markets make money as compared to how other perfect markets like the perfect red market or perfect green market or perfect sustainability market do it in terms of pollution dynamics?.

Any ideas?

Please, share your own views!

Prior to the Great Depression known as the Great Depression of the 1930s, the Federal Reserve Bank raised interest rates. When commercial and investment banks also raised interest rates at that time, the result was a significant decline in borrowers' creditworthiness. There was a crash in bank lending in the form of loans. There was a decline in investment, income, consumption, production, income growth, etc. Unemployment increased. There was a stock market crash on the New York Stock Exchange, which became a symptom and an additional factor in the development of a deep economic crisis. The result was a strong increase in unemployment and the pauperization of societies in many countries, including developed countries. The Great Depression of the time may also have been a significant factor in the emergence of negative public sentiment, a change in policy in Europe and the outbreak of World War II. The negative effects were many, and it was only the anti-crisis, Keynsian economic program based on activating demand through new publicly funded investments that pulled economies out of the crisis lasting several years. Years later, it was recognized that raising interest rates by the central bank in a situation flowing from the economy with symptoms of an impending crisis, instead of helping the economy it exacerbated the impending economic crisis. The prevailing opinion among economists at the time was that the central bank had misread those first symptoms of an impending economic crisis.

In contrast, prior to the global financial crisis of 2007-2009, the Federal Reserve Bank kept interest rates low for several years. Loans offered by commercial banks became cheaper. In addition, a system was created to provide systemic protection against banks, a system of government guarantees for any increase in systemic credit risk. The result was an increase in the sale of mortgages based on funds raised from subprime bonds for citizens who were not creditworthy. Rating agencies attached to investment banks issued the highest AAA recommendations for those investment financial instruments that contained already defaulted loans, i.e. bad loans. This led to the appearance of symptoms of the economic and financial crisis already in mid-2007. Real estate prices, instead of continuing to rise, began to fall, unemployment began to rise, and a significant portion of mortgages stopped being repaid. When the world's fourth-largest bank Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy in mid-September 2008, there was another wave of stock market repricing. This date was symbolically considered the beginning of the global financial crisis, the biggest financial crisis in the world's economic history. As part of the anti-crisis measures, a large amount of additional money was pumped into the banking system to limit the scale of the decline in commercial bank lending, in order to maintain liquidity in the banking sector. As a result, it was possible to limit the scale of the developing financial crisis.

In view of the above, sound monetary policy-making by the central bank is an important anti-crisis or pro-crisis factor in the economy. I investigated the sources of the global financial crisis through the prism of the credit risk management process in commercial banks and in the context of central banks' monetary policies. I have posted the conclusions of my research in publications on this issue, which, after publication, I also posted on my profile of this Research Gate portal. I invite you to join me in scientific cooperation on this issue.

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

What is your opinion on this issue?

Please answer,

I invite everyone to join the discussion,

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

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

Are the inflationary increases of mid-2022, among other things, the result of a developing price-wage spiral realised objectively in the commercial sectors of the economy or rather the result of an income-price spiral generated by subsidies, handouts, subsidies, etc. realised by interventionist government programmes of populist social policy and soft fiscal policy, carried out by public sector institutions of socio-economic policy programmes realised using the state's public finances?

If there are significant differences between countries on the above issue, what are these differences determined by? Are the sectoral/industrial structure of the economy and the extent of state interventionism applied by the government among the key determinants of the aforementioned differences?

What is your opinion on this topic?

Please reply,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Best 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

What should be done in order to see the rate of economic growth, taking Balance of payment (BOP) as a macro economic parameter. And also how the relationship between economic growth and BOP. What are the variables should be taken in order to see the relationship between economic growth an BOP, if there exist the relationship between these two.

True imperfect market theory suggest that imperfect markets do not exist when there is both market equality and freedom at the same time, which raises the question: Is a market where there is only economic freedom a true perfect economic market?

Think about it, what do you think?

What will become the priority of the pre-election populist economic policy: energy price subsidies and an increase in inflation, or the lack of these subsidies and a decrease in inflation?

In a country where I operate under the government management of state interventionism based on an analysis of public sentiment and pre-election political marketing, a specific economic policy is conducted, known as a real policy mix, consisting of a mild fiscal policy (additional pensions, government subsidies to salaries of employees during a pandemic, subsidies). and benefits for citizens to reduce the effects of rising energy and fossil fuel prices, subsidies for the purchase of coal under the anti-climate and anti-ecological policy, etc.) and the tightening monetary policy of the central bank from October 2021. On the one hand, high inflation, which has been rising almost from the beginning of 2021 and was caused by the record-breaking use of money printing and subsidies to employee wages, to the operating costs of companies and enterprises that were in lockdowns, did not conduct economic activity, were in the economic crisis in 2020. Then, in order to limit the scale of the rapidly growing inflation, the central bank began raising interest rates from October 2021. This increased the cost of money borrowed by commercial banks. Credits have become more expensive, the creditworthiness of citizens and business entities has decreased, and the level of investments in various sectors and sectors of the economy is falling. Additionally, due to negligence of the government and limiting the development of renewable energy sources, the level of security and energy independence of the country is low. The increase in fossil fuel prices caused an energy crisis in the country due to the fact that key energy companies are state-owned companies and do not implement the pro-climate energy transformation, did not invest in the development of renewable and emission-free energy sources, the government has for years supported the development and vegetation of dirty combustion energy based on burning coal. This led to the situation that currently 3/4 of heat and electricity in Poland is generated from the combustion of fossil fuels, the prices of which have recently been rising rapidly. Energy companies operating as state-owned companies raise the prices of their refined petroleum products and electricity prices disproportionately much higher in relation to the increase in raw material prices on commodity exchanges, and even more so in relation to domestic raw material markets, domestic mines, from which they also purchase raw materials in the form of certain categories of fossil fuels. As citizens, through independent media and non-governmental organizations, signal their dissatisfaction with this kind of unreliable, anti-social, anti-climatic, anti-environmental, pro-crisis economic policy, the government ignoring the issue of increasing the debt of the state finance system and preparing for the parliamentary elections to be held in autumn 2023 introduces new subsidy programs for the purchase of fossil fuels. In this way, the government continues its policy of supporting dirty combustion energy, creates further pro-inflationary impulses in the economy and increases the indebtedness of the state's public finance system. In addition, due to the high risk of a deepening of the national energy crisis in the heating season, it allows municipalities to lift the previously introduced anti-smog regulations, and allows the sale of lignite for citizens to burn it in home-type furnaces. As a result, the exceptionally low quality of the air in Poland compared to Europe will worsen further and will have a negative impact on the health of citizens. I wonder why some citizens still support this type of economic policy conducted by the current government in Poland. Clearly there is a high level of relevance to government propaganda driven by government-controlled meanstream media in this regard. The above-mentioned problems may worsen if economic policy is conducted as it has been so far. The problem of the current energy crisis and the prospective climate crisis may worsen in the future. On the other hand, in the short-term, ad hoc perspective, the government is currently considering what should become the priority of the pre-election populist economic policy: subsidies to energy prices and an increase in inflation or the lack of these subsidies and a decrease in inflation?

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?

And what is your opinion on this topic?

What do you think about this topic?

Please respond,

I invite you all to discuss,

Thank you very much,

Warm regards,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Inflation is rising. Central banks are raising interest rates in an attempt to curb rising inflation. Credit is becoming more expensive. Sales of loans offered by commercial banks are falling. Also, the amount of housing loans, mortgages, for construction investments is falling rapidly in 2022 against 2021. As a result, the activity of economic processes is falling, the economy is deteriorating, the amount of new investments is falling, and unemployment may start to rise in the following months and quarters. Perhaps at the end of 2022 or in 2023, many countries will see a deep economic downturn, a recession of the economy, perhaps also stagflation. The construction sector, on the other hand, is classified as a cyclical sector in economies. Therefore, in order to limit the downturn and reduce the scale of future recession, the government, as part of its anti-crisis economic policy, should support the development of the construction sector.

Support programmes for new construction investments should be developed. Perhaps new financial support programmes for the purchase of housing could help in this regard?

If so, how should anti-crisis construction support programmes be structured?

What are the anti-crisis housing support programmes?

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 world of environmentally dirty markets, how we treat the pollution problem determines the nature of each market and its structure, which raises the question: Can you see the similarities and differences between Pollution production markets, Pollution reduction markets, and Pollution management markets?

Think about it, what do you think?