“A plan for growth in Europe” is the title, as suggestive as it is demanding, of the letter (the drafting of which was suggested by President Monti) which on February 20, twelve European prime ministers sent to van Rompuy, president of the European Council, and to Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission. It is a letter whose indications for economic growth, including in Italy, should be given priority consideration by President Monti when he were to reveal to the social partners the existence (if any) and the quantum of treasure accumulated as a result of the fight against tax evasion.
In order to avoid any attempt at gasping "reservation", President Monti has done right for now in not committing himself to dedicating the treasury to tax reductions or to pursuing other ends of a social or corporate nature, which likewise to tax reductions would involve a very vast multitude of subjects: who consequently would benefit from per capita necessarily modest.
Certainly the social consensus would be vast since, in practice, it would be almost impossible to select the few who benefited from the new providence; and even the singular tussle between the social parties would be almost certain so that none of their representatives would be excluded. It would inevitably follow the dispersion of resources. A pinch of fairness and some positive effects on household consumption demand would not be excluded, but almost nothing would boost the growth of the Italian economy: today the most painful and most invoked point
The aforementioned letter legitimizes the adoption of what chess players call the "horse move", in case you want to use, if there will be, the treasure chest in order to avoid its dispersion among many goals. It would therefore be better for the Monti government to keep firmly in place the old rule of economic and budgetary policy, a single instrument for a single objective; never one tool for multiple goals.
In point four of the letter the twelve signatories reaffirm their commitment to act decisively to improve investment opportunities for the most innovative start-ups and for companies capable of growing rapidly. It is known that Italy is among the last places in these challenges for the growth and development of the young people who could face them. Pursuing the commitment recommended in the letter would reduce the gap between Italy and the rest of the world.
What better opportunity to counter the most widespread and conditioning expectations, to concentrate (rather than disperse) the firepower of the hoped-for, but eventual, little treasure on the sole objective of creating new (possibly young and creative) entrepreneurs and their new businesses? An opportunity also favored by the liberalization process which should leave room for new entries in the liberalized sectors.
This would also be the best way to give concrete content to the Small Business Innovation Research scheme, also recommended in the same point four of the letter from the twelve prime ministers. To this end, consider that since the Italian economy joined the single currency (a good ten years ago) the always hoped-for devaluation of the lira has also taken place, which allowed entrepreneurs to replace the shortcomings of their lack of internal company innovations and restructurings. Some sort of "investment strike" (above all in new technologies) by Italian entrepreneurship, which, too often enclosed and aged within the perimeters of more or less extended families, is accompanied by an all too modest capitalization of their businesses (rich families, poor businesses, one said time). Businesses are born, grow, but die if the entrepreneur gives up investing in product and process innovations.
The potential hoard could instead lead to birth of new entrepreneurs (possibly young) with the clear will to grow and create jobs. The effect of the "horse move" together with something analogous to the European Med "appel aux idées" program would be remarkable above all on the new generations due to the attention given to them this time and due to the challenges they are called to face, but which older generations do not seem to want to face. This would make a contribution to rejuvenating the country's ruling class.
In the Monti government, technical skills and imagination are certainly not lacking “to support innovative and high tech businesses” (as is the commitment in the letter of the twelve prime ministers). So why not try it in favor of those who, even in the case of using the potential treasury risk not being represented, dedicating exclusively to them this patrimony to be made fruitful for the benefit of the entire economy? If the unrepresented are to bear part of the public debt burden in the future, they deserve today to have the best opportunities to better repay our debts.
