This is a caption

This is a caption.
Dr. Fariborz Raeisdana

The responsible for the deadly pollution in Tehran is completely dependent on government-owned businesses and their main partners in the private sector. Government ownership is not an abstract and unrealistic term. It is true that capitalism is defined by the spirit of private ownership, but just as private ownership takes various forms such as individual, family, corporate, special joint-stock companies, and public joint-stock companies, it can also be defined in government ownership. In a way that the government behaves with its capital in an exploitative, profit-seeking, accumulative, and private manner, and is not a representative of the workforce or a factor in social accumulation. Perhaps due to the overlapping responsibilities of the government, it is not possible to provide a precise definition in this regard. However, in general, the direction of the government can be distinguished from the performance of private ownership and the government’s performance in collective and welfare accumulation or socialist bias.

A government that behaves with its own resources as if it were a private company and sees its main goal as maximizing profit through its managers, in fact has a capitalist approach. These types of governments usually bring along and partner with a group of managers, experts, engineers, graduates, and even technicians and specialists. It is not surprising that these governments turn into hard-working, strict, and ruthless agents for profit, standing against the rights and job security of workers and taking advantage of the system, stealing the lead from all private sectors.

It is necessary to mention that government investment is different from bureaucratic investment. In the latter, bureaucrats and technocrats, relying on their political and managerial positions, become owners of capital and in private activities, they gain extraordinary material profits by using government privileges and rents, or they eliminate competitors from managers. However, in government investment, although technocrats and bureaucrats can be partners in interests, this nature belongs to the government system, institutions, and companies created by the “government” that engage in capitalist activities or do so in important and determining cases. Government investment, according to the necessity and structure of the political economy, can make government agents and technicians, private sector companies and capitalists, as well as key political and ideological figures, independent of the government, as its partners.

The example of car manufacturing in Iran is a prominent example of government work and investment.

• Automobile manufacturing is primarily under the control of state capitalism.

• A portion of ownership and shares of car manufacturing companies has been transferred to the private sector and this share is increasing, without being reduced by government control.

• The structure and management of car manufacturing, technology organization, capital supply, pricing, marketing, and important environmental and ancillary policies that affect production and pricing are carried out by the government and its main partners.

• The network of component manufacturing, foreign trade, intermediation, banking and financial services, in relation to automotive industry, mainly operates in the private sector.

• Although car manufacturers used to set their price increases at a slower pace than the average price level (inflation) in previous years (and actually before 2012), they have always enjoyed exceptional and extraordinary profits. After 2012, they also raised prices at the same level or higher than the average price level.

• A portion of the profits of car manufacturers, and essentially the entire cost table (production cost) and various profits and taxes in the automotive industry are missing. Independent experts and researchers do not have access to it. In simpler terms, it is not clear where a portion of the profits (equivalent to about 10 or 25 percent of the market price) goes.

• Despite the fact that the government allows or prohibits the import of cars and regardless of the amount of customs tariffs, car manufacturers make profits; why? Because they have a monopolistic position in the market (perhaps in terms of competitive aspects). They take advantage of the needs of people, who are in various job categories and do not have full and effective access to public transportation services for commuting to work and for urban needs, which can be considered a form of social exploitation.

• However, car manufacturers also profit from low-quality production methods. In recent years, despite the diversity in domestic production (which is itself an economic and industrial disease; as it increases the average production), the quality has significantly decreased. Poor quality imported parts or domestically produced and repaired parts have been used in new cars, leading to a reduction in essential features and causing an increase in dissatisfaction.

• The wave of dissatisfaction and negative reaction towards purchasing domestic cars was, of course, based on the inability of the purchasing power, but this inability became evident when faced with a sharp decline in the quality of domestically produced cars (and even imported ones with the removal of some features).

• In the year 1389, which was the peak year of domestic car production (in terms of passenger cars), approximately 1.42 million cars were produced. This number decreased in the following years. The estimate for the year 1394 was around 650,000 to 700,000 cars. The government’s anti-recession policies included supporting the car industry, as it was a profitable state-owned industry and a source of income for its affiliates. Therefore, loans were provided to car buyers. However, the number of loans given did not exceed 100,000. Why? The reasons were as follows: the government’s financial resources were limited, the central bank faced difficulties, some of those who had registered for loans cancelled their pre-purchase registrations, the loan conditions were actually usurious (and part of the government’s financial capitalism), and those who were desperate to obtain millions of dollars and buy a car at three times its original price realized that they were being taken advantage of and

• The contradiction here is that car manufacturers have profited, but some of them have either gone bankrupt or are potentially bankrupt. They do not have the courage to declare bankruptcy. Both the Ahmadinejad and Rouhani governments have helped bankrupt car manufacturers from the budget and income that should have been spent on the people. No one has asked where the profits of car manufacturers are escaping to. Why is the quality of cars not improving and why is their goal to put pressure on people, impose high prices, impose poor quality and create annoying and even deadly traffic congestion. Our workers and employees in Tehran spend an average of 2 hours and sometimes up to 4 hours in traffic. Old cars, which are necessary to save people from death caused by pollution, are not being replaced or transferred to other areas besides Tehran and major cities. Government investment is only concerned with profit. No one is thinking about the flowers.

Other expert opinions can also be mentioned in this regard, but what I have said is sufficient for the result I want to achieve.

The pollution in Tehran and other major cities, which has become similar to deadly chemical spraying, is caused by the pressure of personal vehicles that have been imposed on society through the profit-driven methods of government, private partners, and their bureaucratic counterparts. In total, there are about 16 million passenger cars moving in the country. The number of cars in Tehran, excluding so-called guest cars, is around 4 million. There is no public transportation. Poor quality gasoline, both imported and domestically produced (which is heavily controlled by private intermediaries), on one hand, and the poor quality of cars on the other, have led to air pollution and its deadly consequences. Traffic is very heavy and takes a toll on people’s lives. Public transportation is not cost-effective for the bourgeoisie’s combination of car manufacturing.

As I mentioned, old cars are purchased from the profits of domestic car manufacturers and foreign partners, or from the budget (for the welfare of the people) or from oil revenues (which used to be abundant). These foreign car manufacturers, who have entered the Iranian market in groups after the “JCPOA” agreement, have hopes for low-paid but experienced workers and the domestic market, but it is deadly. No one wants them to commit to exports or buying old cars. Iran, for political, technical, and economic reasons, could not become an exporter of cars, even to Southeast Asia, Central Asia, and Africa, and still cannot. The monopolistic production situation has made them take advantage of the market’s needs, extraordinary profits, lack of accountability, and failure to transfer profits to improve quality and enter foreign markets. There are hands at play that do not even allow superficial market rationality to work, let alone collective and strategic economic rationality.

In this complicated situation, no government is taking any strategic measures and cannot do so. The oppressive structure of the automotive industry, which employs approximately 750,000 workers in factories and upper and lower levels, has become complex. The main owners of power do not change their ways of doing business, but there is a solution: a serious reaction from the people in not buying, protesting against pollution, transforming the management structure of the automotive industry, and supporting the workers in this field.