Can People Rely on the Government to Achieve Economic Prosperity?

Avatar photo
Kishou · Jan 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

なぜ「チーム意識」がますます人格抑圧の口実になっているのか

なぜ「チーム意識」がますます人格抑圧の口実になっているのか

Daohe · Jun 17, 2025

――誤解されたチーム意識:集団暴政から文明的協働へ はじめに 「チーム意識」――長年にわたり乱用・曲解・歪曲されてきた言葉だ。 数え切れないほどの職場・組織・企業・行政機関・プロジェクトチームで、この五文字は個人の人格を抑え、独立した判断を奪い、集団暴政を覆い隠す布切れとして用いられてきた。チーム意識や集合意識は本来、人類社会が協働し文明を推し進めるしるしであったはずが、いつしか抑圧の道具へと成り下がり、異論を嘲り、個を排斥し、独立した人格を抹殺する暴力手段へと化したのである。 本稿では、広く深く次の点を明らかにする。 Ⅰ.チーム意識の原初的意義――文明的協働の価値論理 人類が原始部族から文明社会へと移行する過程で、チーム協働は生存の必須条件であった。個人は猛獣や過酷な環境に単独で立ち向かえず、狩猟隊・警護隊・生産共同体が生まれた。初期のチームスピリットは次の三本柱で構成されていた。 チーム意識とは、共通目標の下で個々が自発的に協働し、分業・連携する精神規範であった。 古代ローマ軍団、日本の戦国武士団、近代の工業企業――優れたチームは概して次の三要素を備えている。 真に成熟したチーム意識は、個人の意志を奪うものではなく、むしろ参加意識と責任感を呼び覚ますものである。 Ⅱ.誤解されたチーム意識――乱用と変質の五つの現れ 近代社会に入ると、権力機構・企業・組織・官僚体系は効率と統制を追い求めるあまり、「チーム意識」を次のように歪曲し始めた。 こうしてチーム意識は、個の自由を縛り、上層部の支配を維持し、組織責任を回避する道具へと堕した。私たちはチーム内で次のようなフレーズを耳にする。 これはチーム意識ではなく、集団暴政である。歴史上、そして現在においても、それがもたらした害悪は計り知れない。 Ⅲ.チーム意識乱用の歴史的惨禍 乱用されたチーム意識は、しばしば次のような結果を招く。 歴史的典型例 これらの悲劇は、誤解されたチーム意識が増幅し、悪化した産物にほかならない。 Ⅳ.健全なチーム意識──宗旨を核に、個を不可欠の一部に 真のチームスピリットは、次の三原則に従うべきである。 1. 個人の権力ではなく、チームの宗旨を中心に据える チームの核心は目標と宗旨であり、あらゆる意思決定と協働はこの価値基準を中心に行われる。 2. 個人はチームに不可欠な一部である 「私はチームに属している」ではなく「私はチームを構成する唯一無二の一員」である 3.チーム精神は個の潜在力を引き出すものであり、個性を消すものではない 優れたチームとは、多様な個性と多角的な見解を巧みに融合し、メンバーが宗旨に共感したうえでそれぞれの強みを発揮できる場を整えるものであって、抑圧・沈黙の強要・人格的な辱めによって表面的な一致を保とうとするものではない。 Ⅴ.現代文明におけるチーム精神の6大基準 文明的・健全・公正なチームは、少なくとも次の六つを備える。 結語──チーム意識を文明の本義へ取り戻す チーム意識は本来、文明的協働・集団的責任・価値目標の共有を支える精神である。個人を抑圧し、権力暴政を正当化する道具に堕してはならない。 健全で文明的なチームには、次の“清算”が欠かせない。 もし私たちが“誤解されたチーム意識”を黙認し続けるなら、チームは権力操作下の集団暴政に過ぎず、文明社会は真の自由・尊厳・責任・正義を備えた組織を持てないだろう。 本当に信頼でき、持続し、尊重されるチーム――それは共通の宗旨を羅針盤とし、個々の人格を礎とし、責任と信頼を絆とし、異論の権利を安全柵とする、そんな健全な協働共同体にこそ属している。  

为什么越来越多团队精神,变成了压迫人格的借口

为什么越来越多团队精神,变成了压迫人格的借口

Daohe · Jun 17, 2025

——被误解的团队意识:从群体暴政到文明协作 前言 “团队意识”——一个被滥用、被曲解、被歪化了太久的词。 在无数职场、组织、企业、政务机构、项目集体中,这四个字常常成了压制个体人格、剥夺独立判断、实施群体暴政的遮羞布。团队精神、集体意识,原本是人类社会协作文明进步的标志,却一度沦为压迫工具,甚至变成羞辱异见、排挤个体、抹杀独立人格的暴力手段。 这篇文章,正是要广泛而深入地厘清: 一、 团队意识的原初意义:文明协作的价值逻辑 在人类早期部落到文明社会,团队协作就是生存必需。个体无法单独对抗猛兽、恶劣环境,于是出现了狩猎队、守卫队、生产协作群。早期团队精神是: 团队意识原是基于共同目标下,个体主动协作、分工配合的精神准则。 古罗马军团、日本战国武士、近代工业企业,优秀团队都具备三要素: 真正成熟的团队意识,不是让个体丧失意志,而是激发个体参与感与责任感。 二、被误解的团队意识:滥用与变质的五大表现 进入现代社会,权力机构、企业、组织、官僚体系,为了追求效率与控制,开始将“团队意识”歪曲为: 团队意识沦为绑架个体自由、维护上层统治、规避组织责任的工具。有时候我们会在团队中听到这些话: 这不是团队意识,是群体暴政。在历史与现实中,它带来了极其恶劣的后果。 三、滥用团队意识的历史恶果 被滥用的团队意识,常导致: 历史典型例子: 这些悲剧,都是“被误解的团队意识”放大恶化后的产物。 四、 健康的团队意识:以宗旨为核心,个体为血肉 真正的团队精神,应该遵循三大原则: 1. 围绕团队共同宗旨,而非个人权力 团队的核心是目标与宗旨,所有决策、协作围绕这一价值准则。 2. 个体是团队不可或缺的一部分 每个人不是“我在团队”,而是“我是团队中独特、不可替代的一环”。具体表现为: 3.团队精神是激发个体潜力,不是消灭个体个性 优秀的团队,应善于融合多元个性、多样见解,使个体在认同宗旨下发挥所长,而非靠打压、禁言、人格羞辱维系表面一致。 五、现代文明团队精神的六大标准 一个真正文明、健康、正义的团队,应具备以下六项标准: 结语:让团队意识回归文明本义 团队意识本是文明协作、集体担当、共同追求价值目标的精神支撑,绝不该沦为压迫个体、行使权力暴政的工具。 健康文明团队,必须完成这场清查: 如果我们继续纵容“被误解的团队意识”,那么所谓的团队,只是权力操控下的群体暴政,文明社会也将永无真正自由、尊严、责任、正义的集体组织。 而真正值得信赖、持久、尊重的团队,永远属于那些以共同宗旨为准绳、以个体人格为基础、以责任与信任为纽带、以异见权利为护栏的健康协作共同体。  

read more

Related Content

How the Socio-Civic Economy Reconstructs “Employment, Unemployment, and Basic Income Systems”
How the Socio-Civic Economy Reconstructs “Employment, Unemployment, and Basic Income Systems”
Avatar photo
Kishou · Feb 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 […]
Why systems matter more than tech
Why systems matter more than tech
Avatar photo
Kishou · Jun 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 · Feb 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 […]
The Cost of Extending Pension Contribution Periods
The Cost of Extending Pension Contribution Periods
Avatar photo
Kishou · Feb 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 […]
View All Content