One of the common problems of government based economies is unhealthy growth of certain sections and lack of growth in other sections.
Thing is, the market is a flawed economic regulator. There's no magical "invisible hand" that will somehow generate virtuous processes and correct flaws.
Example, the catastrophic failure of railway privatization in the UK:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/10/uk-railways-nationalise
Contrast this with France where the railway sector remains in government hands. To those who believe public companies are incapable of innovation, show me a high speed rail more modern and advanced than France's TGV, anywhere in the west. Not only does it hold the world record in terms of speed (574,8 km/h reached in a test run) but on certain regular lines the TGV peaks at some 350 km/h.
Unfettered liberalism brought the world to the brink of ruin in 2009. A Nobel Prize winning economist from the west like Joseph Stiglitz is brave enough to spell it out.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/c...oseph-e-stiglitz-2019-05?barrier=accesspaylog
But somehow in Iran the most extreme current of neo-classical economics, namely monetarism, must reign supreme in the intellectual sphere. Hence the phrase more Catholic than the Pope. What is no longer the unchallenged dominant school of thought in the west, is exerting hegemony in Iran... the irony being that Iranian market enthusiasts are several decades late, even by the standards of their role models.
For example due to government strong intervention in some social issues and building subsidized housing project there would be less demand for natural born houses (combined effects of immigration and adding extra houses in abnormal/urgent manners) at the same time demand for shop/stores and storage facilities will almost remain same.
And when you added these extra places to your city without it's necessary infrastructure then you need to build BRT/Metro line,shopping area and ..... for them.
Rohani's Minister of Roads and Urban Development notoriously declared he takes pride in the fact that not a single Mehr housing project was initiated under his auspices. Well this type of policy didn't exactly fix housing issues in Iran did it.
(Justice issue) if you want to look at it with lenses of justice it raises the question of why some people should get it easily when most of other people got these things in natural/hard way ?
See, even the USA regime is implementing certain welfare programs in the housing sector, namely subsidized housing.
Subsidizing market prices to make housing affordable is a losing strategy. There’s a better way—on display for a century in Vienna.
prospect.org
Is the USA communist?
Social justice is also about ensuring minimal standards of living so long as enough overall wealth is generated in the country. There's no justification for allowing homelessness, no matter if certain individuals think that those affected did not work hard enough to be entitled to the cheapest, most basic roof over their head. What's the bigger
zolm: to provide every Iranian with decent enough housing - notwithstanding the fact that homes inhabited by those who work "twice as hard" as social housing residents, might not be exactly twice as luxurious as said social housing? Or tolerating social-economic disparity as extreme as the contrast between the lifestyles of the average Elahieh mansion occupant on the one hand, and that of people compelled to sleep on streets and to eat out of garbage bins on the other hand? It seems to me that any person endowed with elementary decency would agree that the second option entails greater
zolm (injustice).
Also, how are we to define the "natural/hard way". Is a managerial job "harder" than manual labor in a factory, in the construction sector (with no safety measures) or in the countryside?
I mean, when liberal Iranians take issue with the nominal proportion of state owned companies, which indeed is relatively high, I can understand. But taking aim at social measures destined to facilitate access to housing? Not even the USA regime, known to be at the service of the upper 1%, will dare to completely abolish those.
Although, let's add a quick remark about the state owned companies in question because it's not as if they were always acting like typical state-owned enterprises. When they rely on
peymānkāri contracts for the employment of labor force, it has no longer anything to do with "socialism". It's in fact the exact opposite.
The Islamic Republic used to have one of the most commendable labor laws in the world, implemented right after the Victory of the Islamic Revolution, in line with Islamic Revolutionary ideology of uplifting the living conditions of the downtrodden (
mostaz'afin). With the advent of the moderate and economically liberal administration of Hashemi Rafsanjani this huge achievement was gradually dismantled.
The mindset of economic liberals is best summarized in the following quote:
دولت سازندگی؛ اگر برای توسعه بخشی از مردم زیر چرخ اقتصاد له شوند اشکالی ندارد
اجرای سیاست تعدیل در دوران سازندگی سبب شد سیاست اقتصاد باز در کشور اجرایی شود؛ سیاستی که در آن برای رسیدن به توسعه ناچار شدند بخشی از جامعه را فدا کنند.
snn.ir
"If for the sake of development a portion of the people are crushed under the wheel of the economy, it's not a problem".
At least they were honest, unlike other ultra-capitalists who pretend to be working in the interest of the under-privileged. However this cannot be reconciled with any sound concept of social justice. It's pure cynicism and has no place in a Revolutionary and Islamic nation like Iran.
www.tehrantimes.com
.
