The editors of Seznam Zpráv selected for the Readers’ Forum the most interesting opinions from the discussion of an article about a new expert group that should help the government find ways to stimulate the domestic economy.
Martin Provaznik: Entrepreneurship is one of the growth drivers. And it is important for entrepreneurs that the laws that concern them are simple and do not burden them with unnecessary administration. Therefore, it would be a good idea to try to unify these laws and simplify the bureaucracy of entrepreneurs. Just let them see clearly what they are up to.
Yarmila Vrbova: I mainly interact with people. Explain, justify, do not scare. There is a large group of people who are afraid. Entrepreneurs are also afraid of an unpredictable future, investments are stagnating. Systemic mistakes… And these mistakes are used by political entrepreneurs and people like Reichl, who further amplify and work with human fear in the style: “Ukrainians absorb your pleasures, that’s why you are sick…” No expert can be successful unless the government learns to listen, communicate and act systematically.
Yaroslav Murechek: When the United States stagnated in the second half of the 1980s, President Reagan took simple measures – lowered taxes, motivated the business sector, simplified all the processes that could be simplified, and lo and behold, America began to grow unprecedentedly and, in connection with with this, the Soviet Union collapsed. Apparently, the same conditions do not apply in Europe and the European Union today as in the US, but the principles still apply.
Jan Sitek: The future of the country’s economy depends on how much we can invest in every moment and constantly create a better business environment. Not how we can save. Every minute one company comes here, another leaves. If this arrow of the scales deviates towards deviations, a real trouble awaits us – a state can create better or worse conditions for the economy only in competition with other states. But the economy itself is created not by the state, but only by companies and their employees. If the government stops investing in every conceivable infrastructure (transportation, data processing systems, digitalization, energy networks, raw materials extraction, renewable energy, energy storage, artificial intelligence, science and research, etc.) and just raises taxes, what will happen? Foreign and domestic companies will rise up and start moving to where they are building this infrastructure. Result? Decrease in government collections of taxes and VAT, rising spending on the unemployed, rising public debt, a spiral towards collapse. And I’m not even talking about the necessary investments in education, science and research, healthcare, etc. This government has done practically nothing to get out of the crisis. But to be honest, I don’t think we have any other party that could do it. I fear that our political arena is lacking a leader with a clear vision, direction and strength to bring about sufficiently progressive change.
Jan Kavrza: And what did they expect when inflation reduced the incomes of the population, and government inaction, on the contrary, sharply raised prices? People save where possible, they cannot spend. And why? Well, because they can’t achieve what they’re used to. And the driving force behind our economy has always been middle-class consumption. But this is difficult to do when we are still just an assembly plant and warehouse for Western (and even some Eastern and Southeastern) countries. There is a lack of investment and a clear vision, but entrepreneurs and companies have noted this from the very beginning of the current government.
Jiri Kuchera: The government rules at the wrong time, it is not easy for it, but, unfortunately, it makes unnecessary mistakes. Another government will also not be able to create a miracle. However, this government fails to communicate with the common citizen.
The editors of Seznam Zpráv choose the most interesting materials from the readers’ discussions (some of them may be shortened for editorial reasons). We are interested in your opinion on current topics, and we appreciate the debaters who argue politely, to the point and adhere to the SZ discussion code.
Marian Velas: Work with low added value. This is a real problem. Yes, we have long parental leave, but if someone thinks that maternity leave is some kind of payment that will save you, then this is not so. With it, you will not be able to pay for childcare. And without a nanny, it’s hard to go anywhere to work. This can be explained by the fact that most of the vacancies available are minimum wage ancillary jobs, often three shifts. With small children it is simply impossible to work in three shifts. And no, the employer will not adapt to you, because he will have to look for another person for you. This brings us to another issue, namely the expectation of employers that they are completely unwilling to invest anything and in fact behave exactly like some citizens, they only withdraw money without large investments. Simplification of the Labor Code in the EU, going in the opposite direction? Dream on. Despite the fact that the salary does not match.