In Best Hour. I Do I Do!

The introductory notes are based on the book entitled "Economy of the Common Good" by Jean Tirole - updated version (Nobel Prize in Economics).

Market economies and market societies

Contemporary societies obey market economies and societies are living in market economies. Civil societies living in market economies, there are weaknesses that they pointed out e.g. weaknesses on interpersonal relationships.

In modern and in ultra modern market economies they try to adjust traditional models to adhere on new mechanisms that can bring impulses in social relations. Internet giants, from Uber, since eBay to Booking, sites/apps of cruising dates and of dates, of fun and for flirting are created new rating systems and shared interesting experiences with all users. By the more traditional models the author writes that the great virtues of interpersonal relationships can suffocating and limiting making- decisions.

The author writes an example: (a village peasant who spent his whole life eating greedy by the way to not complain and disrespect the village baker.)

In modern and ultra-modern market economies through the mechanisms of digital devices applied to interactions within circles and global as said Montesquieu and I quote the author of the book the existence of a (smooth mercantilism.) The market teaches us to interact with strangers across borders, and outsiders which are enriching for personal and interpersonal development. In ultra-modern market economies with the application of digital platforms, these gradually allow us to ascertain in a more positive sense our degree of confidence and trust which give us a great empowerment to have more truth of knowledge. In addition we can say that since prehistory it was the social vocation of our human nature that allowed us to globalize with the socio-economic functioning with commercial exchanges.

Market societies in market economies present in the action models of homo-economicus. One of the flaws in these models and the gap in some traditional contemporary societies this gap is procrastination.

Too much and too many decisions taking into account the present moment in the immediate realization of the most personal and public interests leads to procrastination. Abandoning the most unpleasant and unpopular decisions in the present day which may impose more personalized and public sacrifices and to stop investing in tomorrow in the medium and long terms, even knowing the uncertainty of tomorrow. It is a type of procrastination and a phenomenon studied by researchers in the fields of business sciences and economy. Such phenomenon has consequences for socio-economic policies.

Our most personal and immediate-day desires, our most immediate-day pleasant (s), the immediate-day that of our "self-Ego" is seeking and is demanding us for immediate-day actions of personal satisfaction/desires and from our subconscious-mind, may result in medium and long terms, costs that will be more difficult to pay off. We don't want to sacrifice ourselves in the present but we are allowing to sacrifice ourselves in future.

For the domain of public power, this is faced with the dilemma between respect for freedom of individual choices and the so-called nanny-state. State power considered to be nanny cannot and should not interfere with individual freedom of choices. On the part of the public power even without being nanny, even in the state power of liberal-capitalist ideology there is a certain attitude of procrastination.

We have as an example a contemporary subject of the Coronavirus and COVID-19 pandemics. The decisions of the public power represented by the state power involve making drastic decisions-measures, and very well by these measures, trying to stop the pandemic in the medium term. Most severe measures fall within the sphere of individual freedom, such as warning measures to avoid personal relationships.

The public power can face procrastination on its decisions - situations trying to eliminate the pandemic in the medium and even in the short terms.

* - The word "reward"constitutes a set of material and immaterial compensations, visible and non-visible compensations

Microeconomics-an approach in world of small, family and medium-sized companies and large companies

Capitalist management is a kind of management that is more comprehensive and with greater expansion across the businesses and businesses world. In the structure of capitalist management there is a fourfold model by decision-making model.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FourFold Model:

WORK ---------------CAPITAL

EMPLOYEES -------------INVESTORS/CAPITALISTS

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Within the traditional models of capitalist management throughout the ages with the fourfold model always in action, conflicts between four parties were very accentuated and serious, leading to several businesses crises.

In the fourfold model, workers with their own interests to safeguard jobs, well-being at workplaces and benefits from jobs and their remuneration as well,

side capitalists/investors with the interests of safeguarding the sustainability of invested capital, the sustainability of the company and the return in the form of profits from invested capital.

We can always find procrastination of making-decisions in the two parts that make up the fourfold model, because the tendency are the interests and the best of both parties in the fourfold model.

In modern and ultra-modern market economies companies with the experience of historical business crises try to align in a more understandable and harmonious ways agreements and there will be no conflicts of decisions and interests in the model.

Contemporary capitalist management always wins and overlaps cooperative management!

__________________________________________________________________________

Companies with capitalist management in the social context for social welfare

Philanthropy of the capitalist company is based on the twofold model of Philanthropy,

1- philanthropy of the company - sacrificing its own profits;

2- delegated philanthropy without interfering with profits

Many capitalists are unwilling to sacrifice company profits for the welfare of the welfare people/societies.

What has happened is the government itself even in liberal and capitalist states trying to safeguard the social state, either with the increase of global taxes or with tax benefits to companies with philanthropic objectives.

What we have been able to ascertain over time, the results are not effective, at all.

There is procrastination in philanthropic decisions.

I agree the current companies with capitalist management are able to practice philanthropy without resorting to monetary means more through other immaterial resources. In market societies within market economies, I believe capitalist companies will replace the nanny-state. The state must promote, help and develop sustainability for capitalist management companies.

_________________________________________________________________________

José Maria Dias de Oliveira -

Member number: 34472 of OCC (Portuguese Chartered Accountants Association) - The Order of Certified Accountants

Member number: 20738 of APOTEC - The Portuguese Association of Accountants