In a market economy and the latter who should regulate the activities. At the time that the State intervenes in support for effect or defect in a sector condemns this same area.
Living protected, apart from being easier to survive, creates a false sense of success. The problem, and that this is not the result of forces but an artificially created around favourable and is intended to end one day or another.
There is a need for direct aid to a company in particular, it must be a sector because the national leader to whom you want to protect can survive. Implementing so, the State, the only one who does and posporne death. It postpones death, because during this time the company does not accomete structural changes which is expected to meet, because something must change if the company and in crisis and had to help the sector.
This intervention instead of leaving that market conditions had left accelerate the pace of change, causing this false illusion that everything will now be better and better forever with the same structure and the same strategy. No more distant, perhaps one that will accelerate and deepen and death since this aid will end. Accelererà death not only because the company will continue to be unsuited to new market conditions, but because the management has been asleep, has worked to get the best during this period of protection, has continued with its strategy loser and will no longer be dynamic, fast thinking to move up a gear and find other strategies in these new conditions.
These aids are normally addressed to maintain the structure, keep the jobs, for this same reason the government can not allow one part that is giving aid and the other will involve a restructuring involving reductions of staff. But inevitably must be. So instead of moving over time a crisis and better business deal soon to be better prepared in the future.
The economy and made by cycles, each one higher than the previous year, so in some form shock of the previous year. If we accept this principle we should give the necessary flexibility so companies can adapt to these cycles accompanying the not sinking them.
Not accommetere these adaptations at the time that a company compares to the difficulty of Market and ordered to medium term. Not to do so because there is an intervention by the state and even worse.
That the state pressure to keep a foot organization preventing its restructuring can not do is encourage death. Keep always under assisted respiration is not possible, both for costs that generates the rest of the system, both because ultimately governments have mandates of four or five years.
This welfarism generates two other perverse effects: first, they can not help a company but a sector, and not said that it is the leading company that benefits more, it may be that the entire industry grow and instead in terms of the share 'Company helped supostamente is maintaining or even lose it. It this happens, and clearly that the situation is not so derived from the market as a failure adequacy of the new situation. The second perverse effect, less visible and less perceptible, and the decrease of image helped in that area. Not an immediate effect, but this aid is extended in time and in some form someone must be paying them, and can not be more than the community of citizens, sowing a refusal to this company and its Marche. This refusal was not deliberately generated, but on the contrary, what was claimed to protect jobs and effect dannino more collateral. The most dannino because the soundness of a company is low in its image and that of its products. It is this feeling prevails that the only thing that you and help a company rather than harmful to society and for the continuity of that company. Having lost the image or having built its image as a negative trato what was aided and helped by everyone, but we have got a result for all, increases the aversion to products and clearly favors the descent of shares Market.
In addition produces two other factors: first, how and so imperceptible and difficult to surface in the investigation, what does and accentrarsi in other aspects of the image and not acting on the root, and this expulsion between the company and consumers. The second factor and that this refusal generating and thanks to aid the industry, these consumers have easier access to other products of other competitors in the market, favoring an increase in demand, but let me say that not desired. Client lost in many cases definitively production in the country lost forever. Why so doing has also strengthened the presence of these competitors in the best possible situation helped the company have strengthened in that market without the need to devote considerable strain because the state and those who are enduring for all, but also by improving their competitiveness in other markets because those resources originally intended for that market may be destined for other markets on which to improve their positions to the detriment of the same company helped.
There best regulator that the market, both in the case of aid to a sector because it wants to help a particular or simply want to help a single sector. We analysed the effects in the first case that are harmful to the company who wanted to help. In the second case and an entire industry, which is fixed, not innovation, not restructuring, not adapts to the changes and finally ends for all arrastrare when that aid is finished.
Living permanently under any form of assisted breathing can not be good, just that the company does not address the changes he must do and act on the areas identified as those that led to that critical situation. And hard to say that, but there other forms known to act.
Many times we hear the argument when we have to help someone or some country in hunger that we should not give the money to eat or directly from the eating, that what we do and teach him to fish, to cultivate to produce, so to teach him to be after independent and grow from their own resources. This that and said governments of every political symbol, because it is from the domestic market, a sector in crisis or a company in crisis is forgotten. What we must do governments and create the conditions for overall growth of a country where every citizen encounters them the chance to flourish, is already individually is already in the form of company. The Government must create the mark where you can play an individual, must create the best teaching adapted to a changing world, the best medical facilities to prevent and treat its citizens, ensure a marco legal ensure the conditions of citizenship and security, create the infrastructure that will enable the development of trade, mobility of people, a fair tax structure that no brakes development, etc, etc.. But in any case it must intervene sull'evolgerse of the economy, must leave that companies may emerge, produce, die, rinascano in various forms, will turn ... that would be the chimney virtuous for which you can create wealth.
Once one can ask what does that make this chapter more general policy in Manualetto to send a puttane a company. Did you understand, move in terms of protectionism ago that the Management has overshadowed those for immediate results and not accometa changes or changes needed to adapt to after aid. Worse and when these aids are institutionalized over time.
The Management knowing that can always count on them to act in two forms: first, not doing nothing and letting death arrivals slowly having at least locamente lived during that period more or less long; second, divert that profit generated for other activities not focusing on real problems and / or errors made in the company and cause death faster, even with the same battery of aid.
I is sometimes thought that a possibility would be that the State, the Government, helps the sector but requires the restructuring of the same. Apart from the difficulty of entering into a company to decide what are or are not the reforms, changes or choices to make. Apart from the problem of having double the people to do it, their knowledge of persons in order to act. Apart from the impossibility to act throughout the sector also because companies are not intervening only the national ones. Introdurrebbe just another factor uguagliatore governor and which could not help but impoverish the system. Indeed, the liberal system and based on differentiation, in the opportunities generated for this differentiation.
Never forget that the bread for today may be the hunger for tomorrow. In cases of areas in crisis, aid mechanisms more or less permanent, with attention to laying the foundations for a new strategy.
