Bhutan
There will be
principles of social economic policy in a constitutional monarchy. This monarchy is an institution of national
assembly. It is a minority cultural and
largely racial group. They govern the
reins on national policy. The King is
head of state, he expresses certain visions for the state, everyone refers to
the King's visions, public servants in positions of power share the same family
names. Those who differ, stay quiet.
The monarchy
also governs a predominantly agricultural society. A cement factory. Timber and forest products. Tourism.
Electricity. All really export
driven. Demand and other market
mechanisms are largely absent from the domestic economy. There is tithing, barter, redistribution, among
other non‑liberal economic mechanisms: religious festivals, child granting to
the monastic community, family transfers and marriage of power, ethnic
cleansing.
There are two
economic principles to propose in a constitutional monarchy. One, a micro‑economic principle, is that each
individual will invest themselves according to the perceived benefits of a
given activity. For example, farmers in
Bhutan, despite a context of consensual decision making and deference to
authority, remain highly independent in working the land. Conversely, where they have little or no
independence they are tenant farmers or sharecroppers. The principle remains the same: farmers put
into their work according to what they get out of it. It is next to impossible to convince a tenant
farmer to try a new technology ; any rewards of such go to the owner.
In this context,
the success of public investment in the agricultural sector depends on the
perceptions of individual farmers. There
are several reasons to emphasize this dependence. One is that, on the whole, farmers are
farmers in such a monarchy because they were born into the class of those who
work the land. This means that for the
majority of farmers, farming is not an occupation. An occupation is a choice. These farmers had no choice. However, the farmers’ enthusiasm in their
daily routine correlate fairly strongly with their degree of choice in the
matter. The success of public
investments in the agricultural sector probably have an enthusiasm multiplier.
There are then
those farmers who work the land for someone else. Tenant, chattel, slave. As you wish.
This translates to low enthusiasm at the field level and, judging from
the general abhorrence to hand labour among the educated and owning classes, a
high degree of ignorance among decision makers.
Public investment is hampered.
A second
principle, a macro‑economic principle, less commonly recognized, is that in a
stratified society it is not how much people are taxed but rather how much is
left in their hands which determines satisfaction of the public with national
socio‑economic policy. Expectations and
standards in the form and quality of life play a key role in this
principle. Think of satisfaction with
the status quo. Similar to the first
principle, there is an individual concern for benefit here, perhaps in their
own pocket or through the public coffer.
It does not really matter how benefit is perceived, so long as it is
felt and adequate satisfaction is attained.
The peculiar
characteristic of the second principle revolves around the classic economic
principle of scarcity. A person who
concerns themselves with investments and returns (benefits), juggles scarce
resources. This is the liberal
economist. The person who concerns
themselves with maintaining the status quo (how much they are left with judged
by popular or traditional standards) is making decisions in a system of
abundance / surplus. This is the
monarchist.
A monarchist is
an individual who is more or less subject to the decisions of higher
authorities who concern themselves with relative surplus production in
society. There are no opportunity costs
comparisons. The individual is not a
classic consumer. They are a status quo
enhancer.
In a
constitutional monarchy, all is swell with surplus. All is swell with constraint.
You just need a
few above, a whole bunch below.
And no questions
asked when someone disappears if they get in the way of the equation.
No comments:
Post a Comment