A budget surplus arises in a country when the total revenue earnings surpass expenditures in a particular financial year. Having a budget surplus is very important in the sense that it brings about a decrease in the net public debt, while the public debt is increased in the event of a budget deficit. Both budget deficits and budget surpluses also exert indirect influences on taxpayers. Normally, it is not essential on the part of the government to maintain a budget surplus, though it needs to be very careful when running a budget deficit to have the proper buffer. � ; Od kilkunastu lat polityka fiskalna Chile jest oparta na koncepcji równowagi budżetowej. W przeciwieństwie do równowagi efektywnej, która pokazuje aktualną sytuację fiskalną, ta pierwsza odzwierciedla średnioterminową perspektywę budżetu. Nadrzędną zasadą systemu jest szacowanie wpływu netto z podatków w określonym średnim okresie. Wydatki muszą być przy tym równe wpływom. W praktyce oznacza to oszczędzanie podczas wzrostu gospodarczego oraz wydawanie uzyskanej nadwyżki w okresie, kiedy wpływy z podatków są mniejsze.
A budget surplus arises in a country when the total revenue earnings surpass expenditures in a particular financial year. Having a budget surplus is very important in the sense that it brings about a decrease in the net public debt, while the public debt is increased in the event of a budget deficit. Both budget deficits and budget surpluses also exert indirect influences on taxpayers. Normally, it is not essential on the part of the government to maintain a budget surplus, though it needs to be very careful when running a budget deficit to have the proper buffer. ; Od kilkunastu lat polityka fiskalna Chile jest oparta na koncepcji równowagi budżetowej. W przeciwieństwie do równowagi efektywnej, która pokazuje aktualną sytuację fiskalną, ta pierwsza odzwierciedla średnioterminową perspektywę budżetu. Nadrzędną zasadą systemu jest szacowanie wpływu netto z podatków w określonym średnim okresie. Wydatki muszą być przy tym równe wpływom. W praktyce oznacza to oszczędzanie podczas wzrostu gospodarczego oraz wydawanie uzyskanej nadwyżki w okresie, kiedy wpływy z podatków są mniejsze.
The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on business, government, and society is getting more attention. The leading AI sectors have higher productivity but a lower share of GDP than those lagging in digitization and AI. There is a technological gap, with still unknown consequences concerning the social contract, the expected new digital welfare profile, as well as the business strategy about globalization. The hypothesis is that while digitization was already in motion (2000-2005), capital outflow from the US to MHGEs (market high-growth economies) in Asia negatively affected its productivity outcome. Additionally, it is expected that AI will give more market power to multinationals, reshaping the social contract. Thus, the current western social contract will no longer be able to cope with the consequences of the weakness of the nation-state, its policymakers, or the powerful profit-driven multinationals to deal with the overall effect of AI. We aim to look at the impact of this new state of technology on the social contract, focusing on the proper actions of government and business to deal with it. We used a descriptive approach based on desk research concerning productivity data, European government policies, trade model analysis, and business approach to AI. We expect to demonstrate the dynamic interaction of the K/L ratio within the prevailing status of global resources mobility, and the dangers unregulated AI represents to labor. Policy actions are needed concerning the legal status of AI and how to avert the collapse of the social contract and the rise of oligarchic cyber-autocracies. Our general conclusion is as follows: While capital investments, which would have contributed to improved total factor productivity (TFP) in the USA, went to MHGEs, increasing their GDP growth in less than a decade, the broad use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) will reverse massive offshoring, and new types of manufacturing processes will emerge in developed countries.
The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on business, government, and society is getting more attention. The leading AI sectors have higher productivity but a lower share of GDP than those lagging in digitization and AI. There is a technological gap, with still unknown consequences concerning the social contract, the expected new digital welfare profile, as well as the business strategy about globalization. The hypothesis is that while digitization was already in motion (2000–2005), capital outflow from the US to MHGEs (market high-growth economies) in Asia negatively affected its productivity outcome. Additionally, it is expected that AI will give more market power to multinationals, reshaping the social contract. Thus, the current western social contract will no longer be able to cope with the consequences of the weakness of the nation-state, its policymakers, or the powerful profit-driven multinationals to deal with the overall effect of AI. We aim to look at the impact of this new state of technology on the social contract, focusing on the proper actions of government and business to deal with it. We used a descriptive approach based on desk research concerning productivity data, European government policies, trade model analysis, and business approach to AI. We expect to demonstrate the dynamic interaction of the K/L ratio within the prevailing status of global resources mobility, and the dangers unregulated AI represents to labor. Policy actions are needed concerning the legal status of AI and how to avert the collapse of the social contract and the rise of oligarchic cyber‑autocracies. Our general conclusion is as follows: While capital investments, which would have contributed to improved total factor productivity (TFP) in the USA, went to MHGEs, increasing their GDP growth in less than a decade, the broad use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) will reverse massive offshoring, and new types of manufacturing processes will emerge in developed countries. ; Sztuczna inteligencja musi być kontrolowana w bardziej skuteczny sposób. Dziś stoimy w obliczu wzrostu populizmu, postaw antyimigracyjnych i rozwoju nieliberalnych demokracji. Dowodzi to tego, że zachodnie umowy społeczne nie jest już w stanie poradzić sobie z konsekwencjami słabości państwa narodowego i rosnącej roli potężnych międzynarodowych korporacji nastawionych na zysk. Te ostatnie są silniejsze od państwa narodowego, podejmują autonomiczne decyzje o alokacji czynników produkcji na arenie światowej, zatrudniają maszyny zamiast ludzi, biorą odpowiedzialność za pracowników lub nie, decydują o zanieczyszczeniu środowiska toksycznymi odpadami czy nie. AI daje międzynarodowym korporacjom jeszcze więcej mocy.
The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on business, government, and society is getting more attention. The leading AI sectors have higher productivity but a lower share of GDP than those lagging in digitization and AI. There is a technological gap, with still unknown consequences concerning the social contract, the expected new digital welfare profile, as well as the business strategy about globalization. The hypothesis is that while digitization was already in motion (2000–2005), capital outflow from the US to MHGEs (market high-growth economies) in Asia negatively affected its productivity outcome. Additionally, it is expected that AI will give more market power to multinationals, reshaping the social contract. Thus, the current western social contract will no longer be able to cope with the consequences of the weakness of the nation-state, its policymakers, or the powerful profit-driven multinationals to deal with the overall effect of AI. We aim to look at the impact of this new state of technology on the social contract, focusing on the proper actions of government and business to deal with it. We used a descriptive approach based on desk research concerning productivity data, European government policies, trade model analysis, and business approach to AI. We expect to demonstrate the dynamic interaction of the K/L ratio within the prevailing status of global resources mobility, and the dangers unregulated AI represents to labor. Policy actions are needed concerning the legal status of AI and how to avert the collapse of the social contract and the rise of oligarchic cyber‑autocracies.Our general conclusion is as follows: While capital investments, which would have contributed to improved total factor productivity (TFP) in the USA, went to MHGEs, increasing their GDP growth in less than a decade, the broad use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) will reverse massive offshoring, and new types of manufacturing processes will emerge in developed countries. ; Sztuczna inteligencja musi być kontrolowana w bardziej skuteczny sposób. Dziś stoimy w obliczu wzrostu populizmu, postaw antyimigracyjnych i rozwoju nieliberalnych demokracji. Dowodzi to tego, że zachodnie umowy społeczne nie jest już w stanie poradzić sobie z konsekwencjami słabości państwa narodowego i rosnącej roli potężnych międzynarodowych korporacji nastawionych na zysk. Te ostatnie są silniejsze od państwa narodowego, podejmują autonomiczne decyzje o alokacji czynników produkcji na arenie światowej, zatrudniają maszyny zamiast ludzi, biorą odpowiedzialność za pracowników lub nie, decydują o zanieczyszczeniu środowiska toksycznymi odpadami czy nie. AI daje międzynarodowym korporacjom jeszcze więcej mocy.
