To have or to be? Should a modern state in the 21st century be a significant owner of companies and other resources in the economy in order to optimally fulfill its roles in relation to citizens? Experience from history and other economies shows that the state is not a particularly economically effective supervisor and it is much worse at playing the market game. On the other hand, the modern state has a strong regulatory function which, if used properly, can easily protect the interests of citizens and market relations in the economy. The state should also not have nothing, but then the question arises about the limits of this state of ownership and how to exercise supervision over this property.
What kind of country do we want? What should be the role of the state in the economy? What should be the extent of state ownership? How to stop the expansion of the state in the economy and limit its ownership role? How should the state ownership supervision be carried out in companies that should remain in the hands of the Treasury?