Today's crisis has highlighted the Economics users' predisposition to neglect the signalling formulas which are specific to the fundamentals. In fact, as it stands the crisis is the result of these signals not being taken into consideration. The most serious offense was the ignoring of correlations and proportionalities. It is known that the correlative grid between the elements located deeper in the generic substrate of economicity is built on the tensed binomial of the human condition and of human nature. Their fields of competence are found in a structural conjunction, conditioning each other in accordance with the specific patterns of the complex systems wherein learning is a self-corrective function. Particularly, the crisis is the distinct consequence of failing the lessons of past evolutions.

Functionality in the space of economic rationality is possible when the dimensions, the intensity and the duration of the specific vectors of engagement for the factors and agents, which can be found in the extent and the consistency of the economic processes and phenomena, take well determined correlative values. We could call them prevalent constants of size and rhythm, mathematical ratios occurring at intervals with invariable limits, a genetic distribution of effects or a priority order of the impulses according to rational motivation.

Without a doubt, the equation is the formalized expression of the representation of correlations. All correlations, including the ones without a result, even though they belong to the space of intersubjectivity which is interested in utility - in randamental terms, have as a direct expression the actional harmony and the equilibrium of the benefit. From input to output, in quantitative guise, and from intention to consequence, in qualitative guise, there are drawn out the relations of size, prevalence and pre-eminence, speed, volume, terms and level. Economic thinking asserts, calculates, tests and corrects proportions, equilibriums, disparities, deficits or dynamic conditionalities regarding sustainability, durability, participation, cohesion, convergence, development and modernisation.

In sui-generis guise, Economics doesn't think any different than Physics when it dissects the structure and evolution of the universe. Economics is interested in the relationships between its fundamental elements. These elements are of a subjective and objective nature in the complex context of the dimensioning of the utility. This is why the science makes use of correlative parameters of a positive nature between the various processes of growth, or uses rules of conduct, such as the limits between the consequences of the various phases of the economic circuit, with the most used example being "let's consume less than we produce".

The diversity of the parameters is reducible to two alignments: the first, with two levels: one for targeting the correlation between the main economic factors -work and capital, and the other for dealing with the correlative aspects between effort and effect; the second alignment is represented by the control panel of Macroeconomics. The focusing in the first level is realized by the correlation between the increase in productivity and revenues, in a manner which extends to the specific areas of contribution of each factor - and not just regarding salary. The level of efficiency contains the key to the social finality of the economic processes and the foundation of economic power. The macroeconomic panel establishes performance, certifies the value of economic governance and insures the potential for progress.

For an economy to function it needs to keep fair relationships between size and rhythm for each component between the two alignments, the micro-level generic rule being the expansion of the business cycle (revenues greater than expenses) and the macro-level rule being the participative economic growth (effects of wealth and of development). Functioning by respecting the correlations gives satisfaction to the reasons for the existence of the economy, which are situated in the structure of the human condition, and they pertain to work, labour and action.

For an economy to perform though, it needs a much finer tuning, to the level of the profound substrate of the weave determined by the human nature. Here the adjustments are in accordance with the ineffable elements of the nature of motivations, the imponderable behaviours stemming from hopes and expecta-tions, the identity-dimensioned projective ambitions, the emotional solutions, the subjective calculations or the irrational beliefs, the egotistic drives or the excessive risk-taking. The range of elements multiplies according to context. It must be pointed out that Economics is shy in the cognition of this part of its fundamental area.

The most important aspect in need of solving is something entirely delicate, which almost defies the rational propensity of the economic approach; in any way, it is hardly perceived and completely ignored by theorists, regardless of their doctrinary inclination. It is the need to include the sentiment of proportions into the understanding of the problems and into the validation of solutions. Its real sense springs from the claiming of rights, the interior impulse which attests the existence of the conscious participation to the economic process of those who shape and give content to the input and the output, to the effort and to the effect. The fine tuning means the validation of the recompense, the symmetrical perception of the obligations not between the abstracts of work and capital, but between the possessing subjects.

By and large, the participative symmetry - to both the effort and to the effect - of the factors and agents is not an ideological pretence, but the primary condition of the natural purpose of economicity. The correct consequence of economicity remains an illusion when the symmetric engagement of roles and statuses is not respected, or it could be at most a result obtained by forcing the imbalance between rights and obligations. Success comes from the balanced distribution of the rights, where the postmodern obsession for the equality of chances is to break through the wall which obscures from sight the sensitive symmetry.

The long line of positive discrimination practices in favour of entrepreneurship, starting with the limited responsibility and culminating with the staying of bankruptcy on the grounds that the business is too large, demonstrates the absence of symmetrical vision in establishing the paths toward comfort and cohesion. Without internalizing the intensionality of the symmetries in the configuration of economic reality, the theorists stumble through the black hole of formal knowledge and occasionally escape from it by masquerading as the horsemen of the apocalypse.

Ignorance does not excuse, it accuses!