In 1939, a few days before the outbreak of World War II, Joseph Schumpeter, an Austrian economist exiled at Harvard, published "Economic cycles", dedicated to the various phases of development which he breaks down into different moments (expansion, recession, depression, recovery), linked to the various waves raised by the epochal innovations matured thanks to the "creative destruction”, the selective process through which many companies disappear, others are born, some are strengthened.
Almost prophetic words to describe the process which, thanks to the pandemic, has created a deeper fracture than the San José fault between the economy as it was understood before the digital revolution and the New World, pilloried in the US Congress for the social damage that accompanies the revolution, but capable of celebrating its triumph on the day in which the numbers of the pandemic confirm the gravity of the deepest recession in history.
Compared to the drop in US GDP by almost ten percentage points in a single quarter, figure the uncertainty of economic policy, divided on subsidies for millions of unemployed a few hours after the expiry of the previous measures, and politics tout court, turned upside down by Donald Trump's indecent proposal to postpone the elections.
But the other side of the coin tells of blatant growth, so violent with respect to the ambaxes of the crisis, as to convince the same Jeff Bezos, now the richest man on the planet as well as the first private employer in the US, to try to hide the enormous profits by saying that the costs of social distancing would lead Amazon in red. Lie with very short legs, as emerged from the accounts.
The king of e-commerce closed the quarter with $5,2 billion in profit, equal to $10,3 per share, double the result of a year earlier and seven times above expectations: to provide Bezos with the money necessary for his space adventures is the undisputed leadership in the increasingly numerous products which, in order to have access to e-commerce, must go through the giant that manages the channels of access to consumption. A bit for everything, even for diapers, as emerged in the Congressional hearing.
A similar situation also emerged for the other Bigs: A, faced with the decline in online advertising, has been able to make up for it on the access networks by dictating its conditions to small and large providers as well as to the universe of companies fed by the advertisements that pass through the search engine.
The products enjoy outrageously good health Apple , to the delight of the shareholders gratified by the split of the shares which will translate into new earnings. And what about the brazen luck of Facebook? Accusations about fake news are growing, advertisers are threatening to boycott the social network that doesn't choose between good and bad. The result? The doubling of profits compared to last year to $5,2 billion. Monthly active users rose to 2,7 billion. All metrics beat analyst expectations. The newspapers are satisfied with the lentil dishes offered by Zuckerberg.
The verdict is without appeal. The EU strategy of applying heavy tax tolls to compensate for the lost revenues of the various states has been thwarted by the EU ruling in favor of Apple. The appointment of an Irishman to lead the EU Council is the signal that, in exchange for the Recovery Fund, the 28 governments have given up to an iron mirage which, given the strength of the Big Four (30 billion profits in a single quarter on 200 billion dollars in revenues) seems unequal.
Unless the strategy recently adopted by some countries, starting with Germany, proves to be more fruitful. The aim is to ensure equal treatment on the web for independent products compared to those promoted, for various reasons, by web monopolists. Will it go like this? Maybe, but in the meantime the new Attilas they will also devastate the publishing, music industry and all other sectors (including wine) now on the Net.
Unless Schumpeter's prophecy is fulfilled, in the large capitalist enterprise the role of the entrepreneur, creative and focused on innovation, tends to be replaced by bureaucratic mentality and managers tending towards immobilism, therefore values contrary to capitalist development will assert themselves over time. Stabilization, claims the economist, takes fifty years: time will tell.
