Any load, if you like, can move over.

 

 

 

 

 

Investment or debt is a ‘basic‘ of any company policy (and individual too), and fairly conveyed into Economics. Economic science, infact, since its quite recent birth, could time by time select the most profitable paths beginning from an individual thought getting to satisfaction.

 In other words, Economics became science thanks to any contribution of its best workers : a quite rare case of a cooperative with profit based on a preceeding fruitfulness, and not on scarcity. What still allows to the economic science to capitalize and, immediately after, to reinvest successfully the surplus into so different scientific fields and without unuseful dispersions. 

Freud himself collected in the last years of his very excellent both personal and professional career the promising wails of a newborn-baby science to cultivate as a whole.[1] 

 In his recent, interesting article on ‘Le Monde‘[2] Thomas Piketty, professor at ‘PSE - Paris School of Economics (o EEP - Ecole d'economie de Paris), faces the item of profitability in the difference of positions among partners which turns out to be winner, but which the Countries - European or extra European - have difficulty to acknowledge in their political decisions.

 Well supported by numerical and graphical amounts, Piketty authorizes himself to look at the ‘cost‘ which U.S.A. and Germany, though capable enough of a satisfactory index of productivity still rising them to the peak of the most developed Nations, have to correct downwards their internal wealths. 

In these Nations infact labor policy is technical more than economical, i.e. it disregards the ‘cultural‘ variables which influence any individual productivity restraining or favouring it, so that a greater number of work-hours for person is necessary to produce the same result. 

It is like saying that a person with a limited time available for himself, or herself, comes close to a mere performer though technically competent, but with a lower productivity nationwide too. 

Piketty specifically ascribes a weak economical growth to a scarce educational and cultural offer, or worse driven from outside, which ends up putting only into a political and social cost and doesn’t give rise to investments oriented, as we know, to a profit. I’ve found in what prof. Piketty exposed an interesting link with the difficulty of a normal child but crowded round by his, or her adults requests, without any time to work out his own, or her own capability to answer and consequently to work well, who risks indeed to go toward psychopathology… 

He then could think convenient to work in order to recover his own, or her own economical thought so precocious and productive which, from the fetal darkness and in that scarcity of nourishment, drove him, or her to the satisfaction of birth. 

 

 

                                                        Marina Bilotta Membretti / Cernusco sul Naviglio – January 9, 2017

 

 

 

[1]S.Freud, "La questione economica del masochismo" 1924 – OSF Vol.10 B.Boringhieri

2 Thomas Piketty, "De la productivitè en France et en Allemagne", Le Monde 5 gennaio 2017, @pikettylemonde on Twitter.

3 Piketty indicates the ratio between  Gross Domestic Product and the number of total hours  worked in the Country, also referred to the number of workers employed, as a valid indicato of productivity of the Nation.

[2]