ქართ | Eng

ISSN 2449-2396 (ბეჭდური) | E ISSN 2449-2612 (ონლაინ)

THE MODEL OF GEORGIAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND POST CRISES GLOBAL ECONOMY

Author: Nodar Khaduri | Published: 2018-12-28 | Pages: 48-53

Full Text

Abstract

Despite the fact that Georgia has already been an inde- pendent country for 25 years and inculcates the principles of market economy, the issue of choosing the model of country’s economic development has not been resolved up to the pres- ent time. Georgia frequently chooses radical models not only at the theoretical level, but also at the political one and has ambitions of merging them by unique prescription. Unfortu- nately, frequently there are attempts to borrow ideologically inappropriate models without comprehending their essence that causes problems for maintaining achieved successes.

In order to choose a correct model, it is imperative to analyse at least at the theoretical level all those threats and possible successes that can be caused by choosing this or that model and its implementation. It is important that the society achieve consensus on what political philosophy the Georgian state system should be based on, the organic or mechanical theories of state.

According to the first one the state is a natural organism, each individual is a part of this organism, and the state itself is a heart of this organism. According to this ideology; the individual is important as a part of society and his/her well- being should be considered in the context of the well-being of society.

As regards the mechanical theory, it is based on the notion that the state is not an organic part of society and humans devised it to achieve their own goals.

The economic essence of the noted theories is clearly reflected in Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes’s theoreti- cal legacy. Smith was convinced that, if there are free markets and individuals act by their own interests, the whole economy works well. Smith claimed, that in the conditions of market economy the useful action of individuals’ own interests by the principle of “invisible hand” brings about maximization of the general well-being of society. According to Keynes, Smith’s “invisible hand” showed an utter irrelevance to the real devel- opments that became a reason for formulating a new macro- economic theory.

Today our aim is to find that theoretical golden mean, which in case of its implementation, will enable Georgian eco- nomic model to be maximally effective and fair.


Keywords

GEORGIA’S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MODEL, MODEL IMPLEMENTATION


References

  1. საქართველოს­სოციალურ­ეკონომიკური­განვითარების­სტრატეგია­­­საქართველო­2020.­www.mof.ge.
  2. როუზენი­ჰ.ს.,­საჯარო­ფინანსები,­ტ.­1,­თბილისი,­2006.
  3. Blanchard Olivier (ed), Rajan Raghuram, Rogoff Kenneth, and Lawrence H Summers, Progress and Confusion (2016). The State of Macroeconomic Policy. The IMF, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
  4. Blanchard Olivier (ed.), Romer David, Spence Michael, and StiglitzJozeph. In the Wake of the Crisis. Leading Economists Reassess Economic Policy. The IMF, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England 2013;
  5. Furman, Jason,. The Right Question About Inequality and Growth, 2018;
  6. Furman, Jason., Should Policymakers Care Whether Inequality is Helpful or Harmful For Growth?. IMF, Harvard Kennedy School & Peterson Institute for International Economics, 2018;
  7. Greenspan, Alan,. The Map and TheTherritory. Risk, Human Nature, and the Future of Forecasting, The Penguin Press, New York, 2014;
  8. Kaletsky, Anatole., A “Macroeconomic” Revolution?. July 2017. https://www.project-syndicate.org.
  9. KaushikBasu., Inequality in the Twenty-First Century. December 2017. https://www.project-syndicate.org.
  10. Lagarde, Christine, Building a More Resilient and Inclusive Global Economy (A speech), April 12, 2017. www.imf.org;
  11. Laidi, Zaki., Populism’s Second Wind. Feb. 2018. https://www.project-syndicate.org.
  12. Lee Kuan Yew, The Singapore Story: 1965-2000. From third word to first. HarperCollins Publishers, N.Y., USA, 2000;
  13. Mises L., Liberalism in the Classical Tradition, p. 33, 39, 42.
  14. IW Koln, Federal Statistics Office, Institute for Employment Research.
  15. Rogoff, Kenneth., Economists vs. Scientist on Long-Term Growth, march 2018. https://www.project-syndicate.org.
  16. Stiglitz, Jozeph E,. The Great Divide: Unequal Societies and What We can Do About Them, WW. Norton&Company, 2015;
  17. Блауг М., Экономическая мысль в ретроспективе. – М., «Дело Лтд», 1994.
  18. фон Мизес Л., Индивид, рынок и правовое государство. – СПб., «Пневма», 1999, с.40;
  19. Эрхард Л., Благосостояние для всех.,-М.: Начала-пресс, 1991.
  20. www.geostat.ge;
  21. www.mof.ge;
  22. www.worlsbank.org;
  23. www.imf.org;
  24. www.doingbusiness.org;
  25. www.weforum.org;
  26. www.medium.com;
  27. www.project-syndicate.org;

Globalization & Business European University European University European University mes.gov.ge erih plus mes.gov.ge EBSCO index copernicus Google Scholar Open Academic Journals Index Scientific Indexing Services International Scientific Indexing Daugavpils University