Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the mentality of humanity in present times, the structure of human life nowadays and tries to prove that under these it is impossible to solve the problem of getting humankind out of an environmental crisis.

The paper investigates the ingredients of human life today, i.e. social political and economic aspects, combined all together.

Our civilization leads deterministically to an environmental deadlock. It follows that one needs to clearly understand that preventing the environmental catastrophe of humankind is impossible. The task of saving humankind altogether is unrealistic.

The only reversal to the present situation is social cohesion, which however is incompatible with the mentality of our civilization. Culture, depended upon the cohesion of the society (community or state), is a outdoing and not a mean average.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the mentality of our civilization, the structure of human life nowadays and to attempt to prove that under these the continual and progressive environmental deterioration is inevitable.

The paper investigates the ingredients of human life today, i.e. social political and economic aspects, combined all together.

Our civilization leads deterministically to an environmental deadlock.

The only reversal to the present situation is compulsory humanistic/classical education, which however is incompatible with the mentality of our civilization; the later heavily depended on technological progress.

The purpose of this paper is to show that nowadays individuals feel helpless to live and to determine how to spend their free time without the existence of money.

The predominant meaning of free time in the days depends upon the vaccination of society with dictated forged needs. The main target is the maintenance of high levels of mass consumption (using even lending if income becomes insufficient), in order high levels of mass production can be preserved.

This type of free time, that the society serves, conceals the low level of the civilization. In real terms, free time means will for education‐learning, creation, and sociability.

If there are no money, there will be no lack of purchasing power for consumption in their free time, and hence forged needs are collapsing in such conditions. However, in order to confront such situations, people should be educated in the creative use of their free time.

The blame, that people cannot even imagine their lives without the use of money, goes to the formal and obligatory educational system that creates brainless individuals.

Greek social security system has a provision, under which women who have children are entitled to exit the labour force and claim pension benefits after completing 20 years of work and at a fully productive age. The critical issue arising from this regime is that it seems that mothers are rewarded for their nature of being able to give birth to children, which is unfair for the rest of working people. This paper aims to address these issues.

The reward of maternity should be given at the proper time, i.e. by subsidizing mothers to stay at home and breeding their children. For this purpose we set up a cost‐benefit analysis in an overlapping generation model in order to compare the present provision with an alternative, under which mothers are subsidized and abstain from the labour market for 15 years. However, this policy could be applied to either gender.

In the model we develop (as alternative) we show that this kind of provision, under certain parameters' values could be to the benefit of the social security system in pure financial terms, beyond the other positive qualitative externalities for the society.

This alternative policy could be proved more efficient in financial and economic terms for the social security system, but it could also influence family programming and increase birth rate.

The most valuable result is that children breeding and the occupation of one parent with this task are not deterministically inefficient, or waste of resources, for the economy and the social security system, as many economists (and other social scientists) insist. And on the other hand, breeding of children by their parents is precious for the society since it strengthens family and, through that, social bonds.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the view that economic science is invented to support political regimes and not to find solutions to the economic problems of the society.

Without virtue and the sense of justice, science does not serve wisdom, and scientists are not intellectuals but mere professionals who serve their employers, unknown sometimes.

Scientists and the political regimes acting in common construct the social conscience and ethical values in their society and era.

Science does not serve the mankind. Economic science serves capitalism and globalization, economists are calculating the size of economic growth but nobody is responsible for declining welfare and deterioration of environmental conditions.

Humanistic education is the only that can provide an ethical code to the society and bring science to the status of wisdom and scientists spiritual leaders of the society.

The purpose of this paper is to show that the assignment of right between the principal and the agent, under which the latter have the management of the assets that the former own, is similar to that between citizens and politicians in representative democracy, and it could, in both cases, turn in to a state of being a voluntary hostage for the principal.

Those who take decisions either in the economy or in society/politics, actually through their continuous presence and acting, set the frame under which decisions will be made, i.e. which behaviour is acceptable, rules of the games, codes and terminology, values and hierarchy among participants.

Since principals abstain from the everyday decision making either in economics or in politics, they lose the ability to influence the frame and the practices on how decisions are made, and therefore decisions are evaluated with the criteria established by agents and they are not those which principals would possibly have.

A part of the management of the assets of principals in the economy or the “asset of vote” of citizens, especially in the long run, actually is conducted by the agents (managers‐politicians) to favour their own pursuits and not those of principals.

Under these circumstances the principal‐agent problem, either in economics or in politics, has two alternative solutions: either principal should take over the management of his assets, or accept the state of being voluntary a hostage of his servants‐agents (managers‐politicians).

The purpose of this paper is to show that the crisis of social security and state pension systems in the ageing industrial societies is actually a crisis of the model of social and economic organization.

The present economic model of industrial countries counts human beings only as contributors in production and consumption, and not as members of a society.

The paper shows that with another hierarchical order of values, the views of human beings are different.

If the state cares for the citizen and not the worker, then it is responsible to provide health care and pensions to all citizens and not just to workers and to workers‐attached persons.

The paper paints the picture of another society, and not of the present one where the homo‐economicus dominates.