Hyperbola Economics Towards A Utopian Economy

The HEU geometrically holds in the two dimensional (2D) planes using topology for the 1st and the 3rd and, 2nd and 4th quadrants. The EES (2013, and the 2nd edition, 2014) algebraically holds also in the two dimensional planes but, consistently with hundred thousands of equations and each calculation or measurement. In the mean time, all the HEU data and all the EES data are always and wholly consistent with each other, since both data sets commonly use the same KEWT (Kamiryo Endogenous World Table) series of databases; currently KEWT 9.15 (the 9th, 1960-2015). Basic character of the mechanics commonly to the EES and the HEU comes from the hyperbola system under the market principles. The system results in instant, dynamic, and steady balances, in the 2D planes, with no exception nor probability, where theories=practices=forecasted values. The market principles are an assumption, since the market principles vertically holds by goods, services, and software however are reinforced by the hyperbola system. The hyperbola system, as a whole system, reinforces the market principles horizontally and reciprocally. Further, basic character of the mechanics above is such a fact that the macro level is the first and the micro level is the second; adversely from the common sense in the literature. A true reason/cause comes just from the income difference in tax redistribution between before and after tax redistribution in GDP. Functionally, the EES and the HEU are policy-oriented while the reinforcements by the market principles are strategy-oriented. Similarly, equality is divided into macro and micro functions. At the macro level, a country has its own individuality: culture, civilization, history and tradition. Thus, macro-equality accepts specified individuality by country. At the micro level, households are tied up with real wages and enterprises with the profit maximization. Shortly in another way, whole policies are reinforced by variety of strategies in micro economies. Concretely in detail: (1) pages 4, 5, and 6 in the HEU yearly show essential structures of GDP; (2) page 205 sums up the stream to geometric from algebraic using fundamental equations; (3) page 249 clarifies Paul Krugman¥¯s basic idea or the differences between US, Canada, Japan, China, and UK; and (4) Appendix 3, pages 430-496 illustrates G20 and G7 as a whole system. In the above illustrations by country and by item, the author realizes, Japan uniquely differs from other countries in the world. The item is the ratio of taxes to GDP, 1960-2015. The ratio in Japan has been continuously decreasing while those in all the other countries show an increasing trend, robustly or fluctuating, decreasing temporarily or in a specific year(s), or moving in a cyclical trend, normally and differently. What does this mean for future economic decision-making by government? Is there any regrettable result in maintaining consumption and national economy? Which is efficient and effective for a country to take, the market principles or government policies? Can national policies conquer any discrepancy or mistaking results? What is the true reason/cause? The literature cannot explain the reason pertinently at all, Prof. Kamiryo perceives. The above questions are all solved by the following illustrations on pages 435, 441, 453, 459, 465, 471, 477, 481, 483, and 489, in Appendix 3. In particular, the difference between actual and endogenous data tells us everything; such ratios as profit, net investment after economic depreciation, taxes, and the rate of return. These pages are respectively 453, 459, 465, and 471. Plainly speaking, Japanese government cannot increase consumption or commodity tax rate. A true reason is the accumulation of deficits and debts, regardless of bonds or Bank of Japan printing papers. Which is taken, default or compulsive inflation-policy? Financial fund managers watch the timing for the US to execute a tight-money policy in order to avoid bubbles-burst open. The current situation always balances between no-individual policy (inflated spending in unnecessary investments) and individual-oriented policy (towards no inflation/deflation). No inflation or minus inflation is wholly tied up with full-employment. Or, the rate of employment is a result of whole policies. One results in hopeless decrease in the real wage rate and, the other deflation as a special returns or compensation for individuals. Government cannot stop deflation unless it decreases deficits and debts as a whole. The market principles and the rate of interests are real, while government's trial-and-error policies have no meaning or remain to ease individuals¥¯ mind. China, regardless of democracy or dictatorship, easily solves policy specifying problem by setting the difference between actual and endogenous data, although there is no answer in the literature yet, as proved by G20 meeting, Turkey on 4 Sep 2015. Business and stock prices remain resultant and policy-makers should be away from business and stock prices.