Tv Prices After Superbowl

ECONOMY AND MORAL

I - ECONOMIC AND MORAL

Economic science is taught today in relation to man and the fulfillment of its needs.

We are told that the economy studies the man and his ability to solve their problems using the fundamental factors. The economy (as is understood today) traditionally takes into account the so-called "homo economicus " a special category or the human being as it is?

What is homo economicus? In fact, the simplest answer is that it identifies with the man in his simple search for viable solutions to the problems of his life.

But in reality is an abstraction, being the man in his life in very different conditions from those assumed.

Take a mother who, because of the need to nurture a child is forced to give up work outside the home. Economic choice, of course.

Take a young man, looking for any jobs, desperately seeking a recommendation for a place that offers some security.

Or a judge, who prepares a sentence.

O a priest who prepares his sermon.

Or a gambler who played the football pools.

In all these cases we are faced homo economicus, in conjunction with certain other requirements.

This digression I need to introduce the discourse that leads to a reflection on the relationship between economics and morality.

In all cases reported and, generally, in our lives, we can not regardless of our relationship with morality.

Well, the fact that it teaches that economics studies human behavior as a whole could lead us to hypothesize a relationship between economics and morality.

A report will even be there, because if homo economicus is an abstraction designed not completely out of reality, then I do not know what it is used so much interest in economic science, which is limited to cases unreal.

At this point you might say, the economy and studies the economic phenomena can neither be confused nor closely connected with morality, without any consideration on the variability of morality.

But a theorem is a well constructed mathematical discourse that does not take much account of the reality. And if you look at reality, we are faced man, with his individual and social problems, which involve a choice, in which individual morality and moral rules have a crucial value.

So, what is this moral? Something you can easily make at least, set aside, or is something essential to man because they may live, to make choices?

In general, today is little talk of moral: You have put a lot into question the existence of morality itself.

Let's define it: The moral is that set of rules (commandments) that are taught because the individual in his individual and social life he can make decisions beneficial to themselves and others. Morality gives the person a chance to live in harmony with oneself, with others, and with the world.

can not be easily put into question the moral.

course, everything is questionable and the fascinating theory of the good man of course and the negative effects of any kind of obligation has had and has a large following. But you can not explain the social phenomenon, nor to search for an inner joy, without taking into account the need for moral choices dictated by a good intention to live in respect and in finding a balance, harmony, between self and other.

No man is an island. It can not be regarded only as an individual man.

course, the moral is always discussed, such as education can be discussed, as the tradition can be discussed, so can be discussed as the future hope.

Everything can be discussed, everything can be judged by some vain and useless or harmful.

The same thinking can be challenged, and who knows how much pleasure can do many know that one day she was taken out of all freedom of thought.

But after this digression, I would start from a specific account: for the whole of humanity, morality exists and has a crucial role in life, although there are many men who deny its importance.

in family relationships, social relationships, work, in his inner life, the man starts with an assessment morale.

So, being convinced of this, I find it hard to think of a man seen outside of morality.

Business is business. Everyone thinks his own advantage. Then there is the moral? In the name of business you can truly erase any hesitation?

This question is highly relevant in a world beset by scandals and restless for the immoral excesses of many public figures.

But back to the reflection of departure. You can really think of a person acting for its own advantage, specifically outside of moral rules and that this is a rule to teach? Because in the end, with the theory of homo economicus, economics gives a lesson, a straight. To get the best result with the least amount of energy the so-called homo economicus is considered by abstract moral rules. The economics certainly can not do too many reflections on human behavior.

But perhaps this is a misconception.

Classical economists have tried to develop a science from a hypothetical behavior of a hypothetical person, regardless of the legal and moral influences. From this effort of many scholars is, unequivocally, have reached a result that was not the intention of the scholars and thinkers of the economy. The isolation from the moral economy does not necessarily follow that behavior economically profitable to not depend on morality. This is a conclusion of convenience for many people, as an affirmation of convenience is that business is business.

But if a deal must steal, or kill, you do not see how there is a relationship between economic and moral evaluations. In conclusion, the assertion of a separation between economics and morality can be made for theoretical, speculative, to study a hypothetical human behavior is not affected even by morality, but should not lead to gross misunderstandings.

In every choice, every moment of our lives, we are all related to assessments that can not be separated from our morale. On the other

also common economic choices are made in most cases in view of future goods, or to improve our life or the lives of people dear to us.

economic choices away from any moral evaluation of situations lead to unclear and not very human.

What is pure speculation to buy? Who needs it? Who will ever benefit?

In truth, many centuries ago, Aristotle made a distinction between economics and chrematistics and the second is precisely the set of studies on how to accumulate wealth.

Today it seems that this difference, so clear for the great greek philosopher, is well evident for us that we are continually confused by concepts that are being proposed for economic, but that should not be considered such.

The so-called moral issue is very upsetting at this time of our public life.

The present and future challenges arising from corruption and the difficulties of addressing its spread when it seems too late, are well known to each of us.

Yet despite this, we continue to give lessons on a so-called market economy, where the law is the law of the stronger or better than the richest, and where corruption is easily one of the mechanisms used to achieve its purposes.

As we can now find the guidelines in this so-called moral issue, when we know from the outset that everything can be distorted by the interests of more powerful and all moral rule can easily be trampled?

Can man as such not be crushed, along with everything else, by the laws of so-called market?

Yet, it is necessary that some voice rises, so that the market does not completely dominates the lives of men!

Today especially, the end of the twentieth century, which confused many voices are raised to mark the triumph of a hypothetical economy "market" compared to the collapsed (?) Utopias of Marxism, or rather, as they say, than the collapse of real communication. In this chorus of hosannas hypothetical triumph, dusting off age-old talk of a "good market" that can best ensure the development of society, and maybe those old speeches are made in the middle of a newscast in which you move from a report a civil war on corruption cases and one by one on a contract for a murder, all in a sequence without comment.

So, this "good market"? Maybe all these reports do not discuss the effects are not part of this "good market" that should eventually make all better off? Of course, we must hope that does not put all mankind in place so-called horizontal before the rising of a voice of protest.

seems more necessary than ever for you to discuss and review the concepts of the relationship between economics and morality, and to put an end to the problem of relations between so-called laws of the market and the most serious problems that now afflict humanity , if you do not want you to destroy not only civilization but also the hope of a civilized life. The

helplessly, in this show everyday world, disasters that destroy entire seas, a loss of entire populations wiped out by wars, apocalyptic visions of an increasingly impossible in the city between humans and the environment; be drunk from these shows and feel repeat ad nauseum that there is a "good market" that can positively affect our lives and I think that this indifference jets most of us, makes us increasingly close in on ourselves and we take away hope.

it is important that you regain some speech on the economy, and the need for a discussion on the relationship between economic and moral choices. Age-old debate be reopened without hesitation, and it seems to me that today is still denied the right to discuss and debate. This is not the subject of a round table of those which we see constantly, full of empty words, for which the participants themselves do not show great interest. This question basically touches every person in a more or less pungent, and everyone asks, I must resign myself to adapt and helpless, or I can rebel, shake off the yoke?

If it is true that the donkey must be tied where the master pulls, is not it also true that many men do not feel so like an ass, or at least claim that the owner throws in a direction different from that of the precipice
?

II - ECONOMICS, FINANCE, ECONOMIC POLICY: confusion in terms.

We share the ass. The donkey, animal humble and obedient, but it is so stubborn as we have learned to define it as a silly animal. The famous donkey with long ears. Resemble a donkey attracts men, and especially the students, and perhaps will be the long ears that are so afraid, or whatever.

If the donkey is disappearing from Western societies, in which the camera sweeps around, this may regret not only to ecologists but also to many other people.

But the comparison of man with the donkey is too fascinating and difficult disappear, maybe the donkey will continue to survive in literature and cinema, perhaps the old man's speech that is afraid of becoming an ass.

Yet the donkey does not go where it easily pulls the master. The owner needs the stick and if he refuses to take the ass one way, all his reasons, beaten to force him down, by hook or by crook.

The donkey, however, rebelled at times. And modern man today?

The rumor that the donkey wants to be tied where the master is not very encouraging and leads us to think about a return of a thin slavery, a form of slavery that we invest in intelligence and leads us to behave according to patterns that are leading to phenomena that make us a lot of fears.

when some fear passes and look a little 'reality better, we realize that slavery is not only reappeared (but had never gone?) But also is returning pretty well as well as integration of many in society.

This digression on slavery can be used to open a critical discourse: the ease with which today confuse the terms. Ease of talking about fireflies instead of lanterns. The confusion especially in these economic speeches that fill the pages of many newspapers and mistakes that can lead to mass.

Confusing the terms may be a manifestation of ignorance, but can also prove to be a choice of lack of communication that allows you to operate the opinions very easily. And in the big world of economic journalism, I find an easy confusion is widespread among business and finance. Many newspapers

divide the two terms, they share many others in a particular way, and the confusion in language is to show a lot of confusion in the writer.

course, the expert economist can not but look also to the financial problems and its impact on early, but the terms are already very common in speech.

Who is a financier? If we take vocabulary we realize that 1) is a member of the financial police, 2) is a person who deals with finance. What

study finance?

E 'the set of studies aimed to see how a State may procure the means necessary to cover its expenses. Finance is responsible for collection of taxes and public spending and government budget. This is the most just sense that you can give to the term finance, which studies the science of finance, as a study of the ways in which the state would provide the economic means to meet their needs.

The term finance is also used with another meaning, referring to the legal person: Finance is the term to designate all financial resources available to it a person or a family.

In this second meaning is intended for the attention of the business press, in the pages of economics and finance, which seek to stimulate interest is how the individual or family can better use its resources with interest-bearing investments . Of course this is also the subject of the economy, so the discussion on the confusion of terms may seem superfluous and not influential, but it seems to me that a view exclusively or mainly aimed at financial watching the movements of the speculators and the best investment opportunities, not can not induce to neglect to look at the economic reality as a whole and lead to a simplistic examination of economic phenomena.

Today more than ever, in a world where we talk about "global village" and where communication is rapid means of spreading news, there is a danger primarily to assess some aspects of reality and absolutely not to notice other problems instead relate to most people.

This seems pretty obvious that compared to very little space is given to the negative effects of speculation, the lack of interest in relation to specific problems such as the growing impoverishment of the majority of the population, even in countries more developed.

The sad fact that you realize very, very late, that billions of people starve to death is not perhaps also in relation to the way we are being proposed by the business media?

This confused way, which throws up some very interesting characters, which suggests fruitful ways of investing, which wants to inspire a general confidence in the good ways to gain a bit 'of happiness (read money), does not overlook perhaps a bit' too inform us on so many desperate situations lack the minimum resources to survive than they appear rather suddenly in evidence on many occasions?

Is it not true that this desire to confuse economics and finance can mean to put a positive emphasis on free market and its positive effects, wanting to hold on to power from a vision of the economy that today more than ever need new visions and new research?

For if one part of the fall of real socialism systems has led to emphatic shouts of triumph of capitalism, a few years later you can begin to glimpse some difficulty with the first triumphalist statements. The very difficult problems facing the economies of open market economic views of war that can make many victims. The momentum towards the new markets can open dangerous gaps in countries where capital finds some obstacle (tax, labor costs) is too simplistic.

On the other hand, the fact that we can confuse both the words and their true meaning, both in ideas is demonstrated by the manner in which the pages of the CD business newspapers give space to economic policy.

What economic policy? E 'the set of actions that the State is in the economic field. Included in this field changes in the discount rate, the so-called incomes policy, actions to promote employment, assistance in some sectors of particular interest to the public, and all actions aimed at influencing the economy in the direction of objectives improve the situation of the community.

This set of interventions should be designed, in a greater whole, to achieve a better life fighting the address above inflation and unemployment, trying to encourage savings to favor investment.

The set of state intervention has however created, especially in recent years, a system that leads to a serious decline, which is above that of state interventions designed to support the system created.

In particular, the economic policy has become a set of measures to plug the enormous costs that previous action has resulted, and the reader newspapers acquired this meaning slowly to economic policy, the set of interventions -buffer that the state is to reduce a budget deficit growing concern.

If this is a real phenomenon, can not but worry about, but maybe we should worry more when, in this permanent state of emergency, one realizes that some measures are very dangerous for the economy. For example you can not not to notice that the disaster was determined dall'abusivismo building and do not realize how this has affected the famous building amnesty law. Decision that has upset a situation that well or evil based on a building and land planning.

And we can not worry about the consequences of these measures buffer.

Economic policy must be revisited to see and bring out the need for state intervention in the economy especially to help or encourage the development of better production. There need not be smuggled to economic policy and a series of unrelated argument only to dab a deficit still heavier. At the same time we need to regain some meaning to the word programming. State interventions in the economy should tend the implementation of a program designed to rebalance the situations that can be created from a free market too.

In this sense, the need to give the right meaning to the economic policy may be the right way to present a critique of economics and finance today is the most popular.

In this sense we can speak of a confusion of terms and ideas. Confusion that sometimes gets the impression it is well intended, created and developed. But the confusion of languages \u200b\u200bleads to misunderstanding, like the tower of Babel, the biblical account that you can not finish because of the lack of understanding of different languages.

III - ECONOMIC there is a science?

Issues that meets today's economy are very attached to this general confusion of language, but due to many other phenomena.

The economy is not something to himself, isolated from human life. It is nothing, if we consider the applied economics to the reality that a way to apply a human science (pure economics) in people's lives.

economic phenomena on the other hand are not the facts that occur in a scientific laboratory research, but manifestations of human life are not isolated or easily separable from everything that we see the lives of men, is considered the 'individual and the society in which he lives. So

economic phenomena can not be taken as stand alone, without considering all phenomena that affect our lives.

We can not consider the economy without thinking such as the profound influence that it exercises on the policy choices and the domestic and foreign policy of a nation. Or even the international political relations.

While this may seem like common ground, we must reflect on the influences that have all developments on the economy of human life, because the economic facts must necessarily be adapted to various situations.

a particular reflection may relate to the influence of politics.

The collapse of the Berlin Wall, which I have already mentioned, has triggered a series of unpredictable events. The sudden release or opening of Eastern Europe and Russia has created a whole series of phenomena whose magnitude is unknown. It also created the need to new balances, and it is undeniable that the new reality in international politics is determining the economic effects, or impacts on economic phenomena, which are unlikely to be able to understand and predict at this time. Why a new international political situation, no longer the status quo of a balance between two great powers, there is unprepared and unable to forecast developments of the same. I believe that we will seize equally unprepared to predict what might be the development of new economic phenomena that are beginning to appear.

This reflection may lead us to consider the extent of the influence of political situations on the economy. Reflection supported immediate influence, that we are told every day that the stock market have made political.

then have great influence in general all the news and the way they are revealed. The rapid spread of news and the relationship between mass communication and economic phenomena is a subject of extensive research, but can not unless you give us a profound truth: the growing influence of mass media in many fields and the fact that The communications sector is closely linked to powerful economic and political through their domain which can control and direct the effects of news.

This ability to influence the economic phenomena of the media leads us to reflect on the enormous impact that the speculation.

If these can be seen as an economic phenomenon and regarded as such, but from another point of view we can consider the large speculative facts, which, particularly in recent periods, in the wake of mysterious flows, have resulted in crisis monetary and desperate attempts by governments to deal with maneuvers groped for serious economic crisis triggered by such speculation. This enormous influence of speculation can make us think about how mysterious are the realities of today's open economies, which may affect or influence events from afar, and impotence of the mechanisms that may be adopted by states to control the effects of unforeseen and unforeseeable events, and As is always more difficult to assess today the so-called market economy, considering the possible influences that can mess market balances, without a prediction of the magnitude of possible effects of such imbalances.

Nor can we underestimate the effect of the way certain information is communicated. The mode can be such as to minimize or amplify the maximum the effects of news, and we know it daily, as some information may have been deliberately taken almost in silence, in the background, to minimize the effect they may have on the economy.

If we take into account how economic phenomena can be influenced by various factors, we can see clearly now realize how difficult to make even simple considerations of applied economics.

The absence of a real economic policy can be explained by the difficulty of the political class to face in a simple way the effects of various facts on the economy and the unpredictable developments of their effects. Even religion can

be seen in his relations with economic facts. If we consider the Catholic religion, recently, Pope John Paul II has tried to give a message to try to say something about the current economic confused. And this after more than one hundred years from another famous encyclical, the end of the XIX century by Pope Leo XIII, the "Rerum Novarum." The Catholic Church has sought to intervene, giving messages indicative, especially for the faithful, but addressed to the whole world to have its say on the economy.

And 'certainly a difficult position today that the Catholic Church, given the hostility and conviction with which he has always been considered every manifestation of communism. But it must be said that the encyclical Centesimus Annus the Catholic Church has shown they want to distance themselves even from a certain type of capitalism.

And as is inevitable interference between religion and economics, one can not talk about other great events of this century. The so-called crisis of values, with the closing of man toward individualism increasingly close to the threshold inability to communicate with a search for pleasure dictated from the outside in a desperate loneliness is often no clear contact with the outside world. This individualism has exacerbated the phenomenon known as consumerism, and it can not be dwell here on these phenomena, if not to reflect that all are related to economic phenomena.

The problems of the family can not be forgotten in this context. As well as the increase in life expectancy and the problems of a society composed largely of older people.

Although these phenomena are unique to that part of the world, but is one that serves as a model for developing countries.

Given all these factors, you can not look to the economy without thinking about them and maintaining positions which are now dwarfed by the facts.

The influence of politics, communications, speculation, religions, and many other factors, the economic facts can lead us to conclude that there is an enormous difficulty of even very simple economic evaluations, and forcefully rejected the despicable simplistic exaltation of triumph of market economy, volubly by the media, when you do not understand where it is absolutely the market is determined by what and how much they're worth today old theories that refer to a natural balance.

Rather, we must ask ourselves what is the price of this type of economic model that is claimed to be a market economy. We must ask ourselves if there really this type of economy today and if the painful degradation of certain systems rather than being the manifestation of such dominance by certain circles is not in any way to stifle freedom of the market, reducing to impotence the weaker competitors and trying by every means, lawful or unlawful that is to maintain its position of privilege.

IV - ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT OF MANKIND

The observations carried out so far to bring back a more effective argument.

today is more necessary than ever to grow again a real new economic discourse, based on a thought that takes proper account of the developments of contemporary reality. To neglect this need, a new research, can take further negative consequences.

Over the past 50 years we have learned to live with the nightmare of nuclear war. We have learned to live with the nightmare of a world destroyed by man even than the air we breathe. We saw the Persian Gulf for oil to become black. We have learned, perhaps, to remain indifferent to all the tragedies that slowly we are involving. And that concern us all, even if each of us think that maybe it never will be touched upon. Why

concern us so close? Because everything affects the survival of mankind, about our future, our children.

It can not therefore overlook the need in the face of so many dramatic developments of our lives, we do not consider the need for a renewed interest in the economy.

interest but is not biased, that is not tied exclusively to the maintenance of privileged positions, which one is fake interest touted today.

We can not confuse interest in the economy for the fact that today there are many spaces for the business pages in newspapers, television or what we tell every day on the stock exchange index MIB; this just means that there is some system information (or propaganda?) going for more, and which often must be necessary to adapt.

The system of economic information reflected in the fact that the method is acquired by anyone who enjoys a dominant position and precisely through the information tends to promote stability.

But the man of today can turn of the 20th century to resign themselves to verify that the reality is profound evidence of the so-called dominance theory and not try to direct their thoughts on ideas that nourish some push towards better and more just different addresses ? We can resign

the fact that powerful groups can stifle initiative and determine any effects so devastating in the economic field such as to restrict the free choices of individuals deeply?

If this is the reality in which we live, we groped to open any breach because they seek better solutions, both nationally and internationally.

First, if this is the reality, you should no longer speak falsely market economy, since the market does not open and free.

You should no longer speak of free competition, but competition in a race that has distorted the start of the winners.

should not be more speak of a market in itself capable of organizing the best possible balance of course, but a market that reinforces leaving only a few powerful positions and debilitating effects of the less powerful positions.

So what to do?

V - CRISIS OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT

The only way experts suggest that today's economy so-called free market is to adapt to situations appropriately, suggesting to side with the largest group High time to time. Certainly this

so high formulation of economic thought reflects a profound crisis and an absolute inability to find any solution to the difficult situations that have gone into being.

reflects an inability to understand the thinker, in the forms that economic science has developed over the centuries, today's reality.

The crisis of economic thought is perhaps a matter of great crisis that crosses contemporary culture, bewildered by the very rapid changes of society in this century. Crisis in the dark, in a situation presumed to have discovered the light.

Perhaps the crisis of economic thought is an aspect of the crisis of modern country called civilians, too set on false security and suffocated by the building.

Echoing the speech from which we started, our thoughts on the economy should reflect the new reality and question the relationship between economics and morality.

Reflecting on the new realities to be investigated, the thought can not afford to be without constant distortion of reality: you have to investigate it without starting from false assumptions. We can not continue to talk about free market, when you know very well that there is a fantasy and that the thought of economists over two hundred years ago. Or at least it can not be state that exists today. Nor can we affirm the triumph of capitalism, the reality gives us the triumph of alliances between economic groups, the powers of states and non-state powers. It is not the capital that is victorious, but the power.

And just careful observation can not understand how modern states, gradually expanding their spheres of action, they ensure a position of increasing interference in various fields, being many times less than the basic standards for the tasks assigned them.

The crisis of economic thought is certainly a manifestation of great uncertainty in which today you find yourself facing a new phenomenon.

The development of communications and information technology have made modern man in conditions completely different from those of a few decades ago. The development of a post-industrial society has led to other problems of uncertainty.

The phenomena of large migrations, changes in society, the crisis of the family, are realities that we are unprepared and uncertain.

But if reality is undergoing perhaps too fast, the thought can not get away from it, and especially scholars, who must struggle to understand reality and manifest in the most appropriate to their thinking.

In conclusion, if one side can find some justification for the uncertainty of economic thought in the face of great changes of this century, on the other hand can not be justified a mystification of reality itself, in order to make it appear different.

In this case, the expert that fills the pages of newspapers or TV screens in public and private can easily be compared to the protagonist of a propaganda schect advertising a brand of detergent or coffee.

no longer think that highly qualified and able to play their role effectively, should be reduced to the role of puppets expertly handled.

therefore that they should leave the confusion in which we are immersed. We need a new reflection on the relationship between economics and morality. We need a new definition of economic policy.