Category Archives: The dismal science

Why the Rich Aren’t Job Creators

This is a short talk by venture capitalist Nick Hanauer, who among other things, was the first non-family investor in Amazon. Hanauer in very simple and effective terms debunks the “rich are job creators” myth. Even though the video is going viral (now at over 1 million views on YouTube, it is important enough that I wanted to make sure NC readers saw it and circulated it.

Hanauer’s remarks illustrates the degree to which propaganda has overcome commercial common sense.

Randy Wray: Modern Monetary Theory – The Basics

How economists that are otherwise sympathetic to modern monetary theory nevertheless misconstrue some of its fundamental observations. For instance, those like Paul Krugman who are generally of the Keynesian persuasion like MMT’s “deficit owl” approach. Krugman acts as if he would really like to stop worrying about the deficit so that he could advocate an “as much as it takes” approach to government spending. The problem is that he just cannot quite get a handle on the monetary operations that are required. Won’t government run out? What, is government going to create money “out of thin air”? Where will all the money come from?

Why Banks Must Be Allowed to Create Money

Ann Pettifor has penned an effective rebuttal of the Chicago Plan, which has been taken up in the UK as “Positive Money”. Its advocates call for private banks to have their ability to create money taken from them, and put in the hands of a committee, independent of the state, that would decide on the level of money creation. Banks would be restricted to lending money that they already have on deposit.

Pettifor explains how the enthusiasm for the Chicago Plan rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of money and confusion about its relationship to credit. While readers may not like the notion that credit, and therefore money creation, is best left in the hands of banks, the problem is much like the one that Churchill articulated about democracy: it looks like the worst possible system until you consider the alternatives.

Philip Pilkington: ‘Uncertainty’ in Contemporary DSGE Modelling – Not Even Wrong

Yves here. This post might seem a smidge technical for generalist readers, but have faith. Pilkington uses DSGE models, a widely used type of macroeconomic forecasting model, to demonstrate the prevalence of intellectual bankruptcy in economics. As he writes,

The level of scholarship in contemporary economics is absolutely shocking. Contemporary theorists just pick up on buzzwords that they hear in the media and then assume that they have understood them. Then they scramble to build some arcane model or other in which they assure others that they have captured the meaning of the buzzword in question. The mathematics then becomes a cloak hiding the fact that they have never bothered to actually think through the concepts they are using.

This is frighteningly similar to something I wrote:

That was one of the scary things I finally figured out during my last visit to DC. I thought people constructed policy first and then reduced it to soundbites to sell it. I came to realize that most people in DC reason from soundbites (as in their analysis and policy design is constructed from soundbites from the get-go).

More Finance, More Growth? More Finance, More Crises?

Contrary to conventional wisdom in economics, a bigger role for finance, also known as “financial deepening,” has gone well beyond the point of maximum return. It is promoting more crises rather than more growth.

How Oligopolies Undermined Competitiveness and Produced Inequality

The role of lax antitrust enforcement and the resulting rise in oligopolies is sorely neglected in most analyses of the rise of inequality and America’s flagging competitiveness.

J.D. Alt: Piketty, Wealth, and The Sinking of Norfolk

Believing that existing wealth defines and “finances” what we can accomplish as a collective nation going forward, however, makes solutions not just difficult but impossible.

Piketty’s “Second Law of Capitalism” — Is it Fundamental?

Thomas Piketty’s new book has been widely praised for its empirical contribution, but his prediction of rising inequality rests on economic theory. This column argues that Piketty’s pessimistic forecast is based on an extreme – and unrealistic – assumption about households’ saving behaviour. According to standard theory, the wealth–income ratio would increase only modestly as growth falls, so declining growth would not be a powerful force for generating high inequality.

David Cay Johnston on the Perils of Our Growing Inequality

David Cay Johnston is a clear and lively conversationalist, and I anticipate readers will enjoy his discussion of his work over the last 20 years on inequality.