Can People Rely on the Government to Achieve Economic Prosperity?

Avatar photo
Kishou · 1월 22, 2025
When it comes to economic regulation and reducing the wealth gap, many people tend to place the responsibility on the government. As the central entity of macroeconomic control, the government certainly plays a crucial role in promoting economic balance through a series of policies and measures. However, is this reliance enough? Can it truly lead […]

When it comes to economic regulation and reducing the wealth gap, many people tend to place the responsibility on the government. As the central entity of macroeconomic control, the government certainly plays a crucial role in promoting economic balance through a series of policies and measures. However, is this reliance enough? Can it truly lead to long-term economic prosperity? This is a question worth delving into.


The Current State and Challenges of Government Regulation

Governments around the world have long sought to regulate the economy through tax, fiscal policies, and legal regulations. For instance, Japan’s corporate tax is a direct tax measure that targets the profitability of businesses, aiming to extract resources from prosperous enterprises and redistribute them to areas of society in need of support. Likewise, the United States employs a progressive income tax system, requiring higher-income groups to shoulder a greater tax burden in order to provide more public services for the lower socioeconomic strata.

While these policies may seem well-designed in theory, they face numerous challenges in actual implementation:

  1. Efficiency of tax redistribution
    The tax revenue collected ultimately needs to be invested back into society, but how the government allocates these resources is often questioned. For example, in Japan, some local government funds have been used for large-scale infrastructure projects, but the direct impact on improving the lives of ordinary citizens is limited, and these projects have even become symbols of “useless investments.” Similarly, the U.S. government has also faced criticism for its massive military spending and certain inefficient social security programs.
  2. Flexibility and Fairness of Policies
    Policy-making often struggles to fully account for the diversity of individuals and industries. For example, Japan’s consumption tax, while theoretically applied equally to all consumer behaviors, disproportionately burdens low-income groups and small businesses in practice. For low-income individuals, the consumption tax represents a larger percentage of their income, increasing their financial strain. Small businesses face greater difficulties when passing on the tax, especially when competing with large chain stores, where maintaining a price advantage becomes challenging. While the policy aims to be fair, the lack of targeted support may unintentionally widen the disparity in burdens across different groups.

Inefficiency and Waste: The Limits of Government Capabilities

The problem is not just about the efficiency of tax redistribution, but also the growing concern over the government’s poor performance in economic regulation.

  • Japan’s Inefficient Infrastructure: The Japanese government has spent huge sums to build numerous local airports and high-speed rail stations, but many of these projects have been criticized as “symbolic engineering” due to low utilization rates. These projects have consumed massive fiscal resources without effectively promoting regional economic development.
  • The Welfare Crisis in Europe: In the 1970s, the expansive welfare state models adopted by many European countries fell into crisis. Government fiscal deficits ballooned, as public service systems struggled to be maintained due to excessive burdens. For instance, the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has grappled with issues in resource allocation, resulting in shortages of medical resources. The government has long been criticized for mismanaging this critical public health system.

Besides, the large-scale quantitative easing policies implemented by the United States after the 2008 financial crisis, while stabilizing the economy in the short term, have also been criticized for driving up asset prices and exacerbating wealth inequality.


The Limitations of Government Capabilities: Lessons from Japan and the West

Throughout history, the shortcomings of government economic intervention have been repeatedly exposed. The Japanese experience provides a cautionary tale – the signing of the Plaza Accord led to a rapid appreciation of the yen, triggering the formation and bursting of an economic bubble. The subsequent “Lost Decades” demonstrated the limitations of overly relying on government control.

Similar challenges have played out in Europe and the US as well. Following the 2008 financial crisis, some Eurozone countries were forced to implement harsh fiscal austerity measures to address the sovereign debt crisis. While this government intervention brought short-term stability, it also contributed to prolonged economic stagnation, as seen in the persistently high unemployment rates in countries like Greece and Spain.


Seeking New Approaches for Economic Prosperity

Given the limitations inherent in government-led economic management, we need to revisit a fundamental question: is economic prosperity necessarily dependent on the government alone? Our view is that the answer is no. While government policymaking remains important, it is far from the sole or even the primary driver of lasting economic vitality.

The path to future prosperity requires the collaborative participation of the government, enterprises, individuals, and social organizations. This diversified model entails several key elements:

  1. Proactive Participation of Individuals, Groups, and Enterprises
    Individuals and enterprises should not merely be passive recipients of government policies, but active participants in economic regulation. For example, as enterprises fulfill their corporate social responsibility (CSR), they can proactively contribute to regional economic development. Individuals can also influence the direction of the economy through selective consumption or investment.
  2. Gradual Decentralization of Government Functions
    The gradual decentralization of government functions to individuals, groups, and enterprises does not weaken the government’s authority, but can actually improve the overall efficiency of social operations. For example, the subdivision of administrative units can reduce resource waste and avoid the inefficiency caused by excessive centralized government management. The decentralization of administration not only makes policy implementation more flexible, but also allows for more precise responses to the needs of different regions or fields.

Possibilities of Society-Led Economic Regulation

If social organizations and enterprises gradually participate in economic regulation, we can foresee the following possibilities:

  • Increased Policy Flexibility: Social organizations can closely meet the needs of specific groups and quickly respond to changing economic situations.
  • Reduced Resource Waste: Through decentralized management, it can avoid resource misallocation caused by uniform and standardized policies.
  • Enhanced Social Resilience: A diversified economic system with multiple contributors is more resilient in times of crisis. During the pandemic, for instance, many businesses and individuals took part in material distribution and volunteer efforts, helping to fill the gaps left by government actions.

How can such a transformation be achieved?

Of course, this shift requires long-term exploration and practice. For individuals without substantial capital, how can they avoid being suppressed by the dominance of large corporations? The answer to this may lie in new financial models.

Social Citizen Finance is one of the future economic models proposed by Yicheng Commonweal. In this model, everyone can participate in economic regulation through a decentralized approach, truly benefiting from the prosperity brought by the economy.

If you are interested in this topic, you can read our special article on “Social Citizen Finance”. We will continue to explore this subject, showcasing the potential for economic prosperity in the new era.

 

Share this article:
LEARN MORE

Continue Reading

Previous Article
Next Article
How the Socio-Civic Economy Reconstructs “Employment, Unemployment, and Basic Income Systems”

How the Socio-Civic Economy Reconstructs “Employment, Unemployment, and Basic Income Systems”

Kishou · 2월 5, 2026

Preface: Employment is Not Just a “Livelihood,” but a Basic License for Civic Existence In capitalist ideology, “employment” is brutally reduced to a purely instrumental equation: “Job → Income → Survival.” This logic chains human existence to capital’s hiring whims, systematically equating joblessness with social worthlessness. Unemployment becomes morally weaponized—branded as proof of personal inadequacy, market […]

社会市民経済はどのように「雇用・失業・ベーシックインカム制度」を再構築するか

社会市民経済はどのように「雇用・失業・ベーシックインカム制度」を再構築するか

Kishou · 2월 5, 2026

前言:雇用は「生計」ではなく、市民が社会に存在するための「基本的許可」である 資本経済のイデオロギーでは、「雇用」は道具的な定義に乱暴に単純化されています。 「仕事がある→収入がある→収入があって初めて生きていける」 この論理は人の生存権と資本の雇用需要を強固に結びつけ、「仕事がない」ことを「あなたは社会に価値がない」とシステム的に決めつけてしまいます。 「失業」は道徳的な汚名を着せられます。 個人の能力不足、市場競争での脱落、自分の責任による失敗の証拠として扱われ、本人の心の中で自分を責める気持ちを生み出します。 「ベーシックインカム(UBI)」は制度的にタブー視されます。 「怠け者を甘やかすもの」「効率を損なうもの」「神聖な市場の法則に逆らう異端の福祉」として排斥されています。 しかし、社会市民経済(Socio-Civic Economy)の考え方では、恐怖と効率至上主義に基づくこうした認識を根本から変える必要があります。 雇用とは: 市場がたまたま与えてくれる機会ではなく、市民が社会の生産活動やサービス、そして文明の成果を分かち合うことに参加する「基本的な権利」です。 失業とは: 個人の能力の問題ではなく、技術の進歩や産業の変化によって生まれる「構造的なリスク」です。 ベーシックインカムとは: 施しではなく、市民が「社会共同体の一員」として当然受け取るべき、社会の共有財産に対する「最低限の配当」です。 これは、「資本中心の効率的な市場社会」と「人間中心の市民文明社会」との間にある、倫理的かつ制度的な根本の分水嶺です。 一、資本経済下の雇用の本質:「人を活かす」のではなく「価値を搾り取る」 資本が主導する経済では、雇用の根本的な目的は冷酷で単純です。 人の生存や尊厳を守るためではありません。生産コストを下げ、資本の利益を最大化することが目的です。 労働者は、自分で考え行動する社会の一員としてではなく、いつでも取り替えのきく「値段のついた部品」として扱われます。 こうして、システムは冷酷で絶えず最適化される搾取の仕組みを自然に作り出します: 使える人(コスパが良い) → システムに残り、終わりのない競争と成果評価を受け入れる 今は使えない人(コスパが悪い/転職が必要) → システムから捨てられ、安く買い叩かれるのを待つリスクを背負う個人になる もう使えない人(技術の進歩で不要になった) → 文明から見捨てられ、社会保障の重荷となる いわゆる「ギグワーク」「柔軟な働き方」「フリーランス」の多くは、実際には資本による巧妙な搾取です。 安定した保障も社会保険も労働組合もない労働者を利用するための「聞こえの良い言葉」に過ぎません。 資本は、労働者が長期的に安定して暮らし、成長し、老後を過ごせるかどうかには関心がありません。関心があるのは、今この瞬間の「コストと利益が十分に見合うかどうか」だけです。 二、社会市民経済による「雇用」の再定義:ポストではなく「社会参画権」 社会市民経済では、「雇用」の定義を根本から変える必要があります。 狭い意味での「資本に労働力を提供すること」から、「市民が社会の生産活動、公共サービス、統治、ケア、知識創造に参加するための制度的な道筋」へと発展させなければなりません。 これは、価値ある労働がもはや「直接お金を生む労働」だけではないことを意味します。 以下のような労働も含まれます(ただし、これらに限定されません): 公共サービス型雇用(Public Service Jobs): 政府や非営利組織が提供する、全市民向けの基礎的なサービス。 社会ケア型雇用(Social Care): 高齢者、子供、障害を持つ人々へのケアと感情的サポート。 コミュニティ建設・文化型雇用(Community & Cultural): 地域統治、文化継承、芸術創作、非営利的な教育。 生態系修復型雇用(Ecological Restoration): 環境保護、汚染対策、持続可能な発展プロジェクト。 価値認定の原則: あなたの労働が以下の特徴を備えている限り: 社会に対して真実かつ代替不可能な価値(Real Social Value)を持っている。 公共の安全とレジリエンス(強靭性)に対して真実の貢献(Public Resilience Contribution)をしている。 共同体の存続に対して真実の支え(Communal Support)となっている。 そうした労働は正当な仕事として認められ、安定した尊厳ある収入と制度的な保障を受けるべきです。 そうでなければ、社会は必然的におかしな状況に陥ります。本当に価値のあること(介護や基礎研究など)をする人がいなくなり、お金にはなるが価値の低いこと(金融投機や広告の過当競争など)に人が殺到するという構造的な矛盾です。 三、失業の文明的定性:「敗者」ではなく「構造的リスクの引き受け手」 資本経済の道徳観では、失業は個人の失敗という恥です。 努力不足、能力不足、市場への適応力不足として制度的に扱われてきました。この屈辱的な決めつけは、社会の不安定さと個人の精神的な重荷を大幅に増やしています。 しかし社会市民経済では、失業の本当の性質を道徳的な判断から切り離し、客観的に捉え直す必要があります。 失業とは、技術の進歩、産業の移転、世界的な資本の変動、政策の変更などのシステム全体の力によって引き起こされる「構造的な犠牲」なのです。 核心となる論理: 核心となる考え方: […]

read more

Related Content

Mastering the Economy, Shaping the Future
Avatar photo
Kishou · 11월 2, 2024
Civic Economics is an emerging discipline that emphasizes the active participation of citizens in the economic system, pursuing a development model centered on sharing and inclusion. This theory promotes fair wealth distribution and improves social welfare through innovative models such as social enterprises. It also advocates for a sense of global responsibility that transcends national boundaries, fostering sustainable development and civilizational progress.
The Cost of Extending Pension Contribution Periods
The Cost of Extending Pension Contribution Periods
Avatar photo
Kishou · 2월 1, 2026
Introduction: A Global Surrender of Time Amid a profound global demographic reversal, virtually all modern nations are performing the same quiet yet decisive institutional surgery: delaying retirement ages, extending contribution periods, and recalibrating benefit expectations. Technocrats package this transformation as “the necessary response to the aging crisis,” while fiscal departments frame it as “rational adjustments […]
Why systems matter more than tech
Why systems matter more than tech
Avatar photo
Kishou · 6월 13, 2025
This passage emphasizes that the key to civilizational progress lies in systems, not technology. A system defines how social resources are organized and how power is structured. Its flexibility determines whether institutions can improve and whether technology can be used effectively—ultimately shaping the direction of civilization. A healthy system drives prosperity; a rigid one leads to collapse. Technology only serves the system.
How to Change the Fate of Modern Slaves
How to Change the Fate of Modern Slaves
Avatar photo
Yicheng · 2월 3, 2025
Societal problems are problems in life In modern society, workers, as a key force driving economic development, often face challenges such as low wages, long working hours, high pressure, and a lack of opportunities for advancement, which gradually makes them passive “modern slaves.” Their plight not only reflects deep-rooted issues within the social structure but […]
View All Content