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

Growth Mindset: Why It Matters and How to Develop It

Growth Mindset: Why It Matters and How to Develop It

Daohe · Mar 25, 2025

Two Roads for One Pair of Legs: Choosing Between Fixed and Growth Mindsets The way people perceive the world shapes their growth and life path, especially when they encounter difficulties, failures, and challenges. Different mindsets lead to distinct outcomes. No matter where you start or how talented you are, having a growth mindset keeps you […]

思维决定人生成败:成长性思维VS固化思维

Daohe · Mar 25, 2025

一双腿的两种行径 人们对世界的认知方式很大程度影响了他们的成长轨迹和人生道路,尤其是当人们面对困难、失败与挑战的时候,不同思维导向的道路截然不同。 哪怕一个人天资平平,起点不高,只要他拥有成长性思维,他就总是在思考和进取,走在成功的道路上。反之,固化思维带来的结果则可能是灾难性的,对于个人的成长和社会的进步毫无帮助,是我们需要摒弃的一种思维。 一、什么是成长性思维? 成长性思维(Growth Mindset)是一种相信能力和智慧可以通过努力、学习和坚持不断提升的思维方式。拥有这种思维的人会积极面对挑战,将失败视为成长的机会,并不断寻求自我突破。 不仅如此,拥有成长性思维的人往往会选择开放与包容,更倾向于信任与合作。这是为什么呢? 成长性思维的根本来源是互爱和开放精神。真正的成长需要包容、多元化的视角和对他人的理解,而这些特质都建立在互爱的基础上。 当人们关心彼此,他们会创造一个自由交流思想的环境,在这个环境里,错误不是失败,而是学习的契机,个体也会更愿意冒险尝试。互爱促使人们尊重不同观点、倾听他人意见,并保持持续学习的心态,这些都是成长性思维的核心。 另外,基于现实的乐观精神也是成长性思维的重要组成部分。在保持积极态度的同时,客观看待现实,避免盲目高估自己。能做到这一点,人们就更有可能通过努力、策略、专注和坚持去应对挑战,变得更加坚韧。 二、成长性思维 VS 固化思维 有固化思维(Fixed Mindset)的人则是认为智力和能力是有限的,无法通过努力显著提升。面对挑战时,他们往往感到沮丧,比如认为自己“能力差”或者“愚蠢”,因此更倾向于逃避或者放弃。 他们害怕失去,不敢尝试,抗拒反馈。他们倾向于并将失败视为自身能力不足的证明,而非成长的机会。 固化思维的本质来源于恐惧与傲慢。恐惧让人们害怕失败,担心失败会暴露自己的弱点,因此他们往往选择待在舒适区,不敢尝试新的挑战。 与此同时,傲慢让人们认为自己天生优越,因此不愿意承认错误,也不愿意接受新知识。如果一个人坚信自己已经比别人更优秀,他们就会拒绝改变,因为改变意味着他们需要重新审视自己,甚至可能推翻过去的认知。 恐惧和傲慢的结合,会让人停滞不前。有人害怕被证明是错的,所以拒绝接受新观点;有人自视甚高,不愿接受批评,也不愿意承认自己需要成长。久而久之,这种思维不仅会让个体失去进步的机会,也会阻碍他们在社会和职业中的长远发展。 成长性思维与固化思维的区别在于: 三、成长性思维为什么重要? 成长性思维对学习、事业成功和心理健康都有深远影响。 心理学家卡罗尔·德韦克(Carol Dweck)的研究表明,拥有成长性思维的学生更愿意接受挑战,在困难面前更具韧性,并最终取得更好的学术成绩。此外,神经科学的研究也证实了大脑的可塑性——人的智能和技能是可以持续发展的。 在教育之外,成长性思维还能增强适应能力和抗压能力。在不断变化的世界里,那些愿意接受挑战,并把挫折当作学习机会的人,更能适应不确定性。 此外,成长性思维还可以降低焦虑和抑郁的风险,因为它让人们不再把自己定义为“失败者”,而是专注于如何从失败中成长。 成长性思维和固化思维不止存在于个体身上,同样的逻辑也适用于地区和社会的发展。不难发现,越是排外的地方,人们的思想更偏向于固化和落后。而大城市往往是包容之地,不同群体的加入、不同观点的碰撞让一切更加欣欣向荣。 三、如何培养成长性思维? 很少有人天生具有成长性思维,主要来自于后天的环境引导和自我反思——这意味着每个人都能培养出成长性思维。 那么应该从何开始呢? 我们可以从觉察自己的思维模式开始: 如果你在以上的问题中,都选择了前者,说明你正在受固化思维的影响。 好消息是,你也可以通过觉察与训练,逐步让自己打破思维的局限性,而主动调整和重新选择自己的方向。 觉察到了自己的思维模式,你会意识到,自己可以做出更好的选择。对过去的反思将成为持续成长的肥料。 这需要长期的努力。最重要的是,每个人都应该拥抱自己内心的爱,让积极和热爱驱动自身能力与事业的成长。 假如你是一个教育工作者,你应该如何培养学生的成长性思维呢? 教师的语言和给予学生的表扬方式对学生有潜移默化的影响。直至今天,我依然常常听到不当的指导语言,这些话在伤害孩子的思维发展和感情,很多老师对此却缺乏明确的认识。 以下是一些培养学生成长性思维的教学策略: 培养成长性思维是一个长期的过程。成长型思维原则应当融入所有科目和课程,帮助学生在各个层面鼓励积极的自我对话和基于努力的表扬。 通过培养成长性思维,人们可以在学习、事业和生活中实现更大的突破,并获得更充实的体验。互爱、开放、勇于尝试和坚持学习的态度,能帮助我们真正解锁自身潜力,让人生走向更广阔的未来。

read more

Related Content

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 […]
What is the Social Economy? Explore the Economic System for the Next Era
What is the Social Economy? Explore the Economic System for the Next Era
Avatar photo
Kishou · Jun 11, 2024
Since humanity entered the capitalist society about five hundred years ago, capitalism has greatly improved human life through the Industrial Revolution and the rapid development afterwards. It has also revealed challenges, including the widening gap between the rich and the poor.
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 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 […]
View All Content