ECONOMICS
Not fully comprehensive at present, and in need of organization of the
layout.
Economics
should serve us, not vice-versa. For example, instead of presuming
"growth-is-good", and people serving this mantra, the BBC, media, and
everyone should question this presumption (as I do below; Rupert Read
calls it "growthism" as opposed to "ecologism"). There is a third way
beyond neoliberalism and the Keynesianism it supplanted in the
mainstream media.
Economics is (or should be) about resource distribution, and
mechanisms to enable this. Economics to be optimal should enable
both equitable and sustainable distribution of resources, and is failing
if it increases inequality in income, wealth and opportunities above the
unacceptable state it is in now. Economics must work for the long-term
interests of all of us, not just the short-term interests of "The 1%".
(And "trickle down" does not work!). And especially this century - it
must recognize and be compatible with the fact that many natural
resources are limited not infinite: that's what I mean by sustainable.
This piece by Richard Lawson summarizes well some of my views
on the coalition's "economic" policy:
'Four Tory Lies and Myths about the economy'
26jun13 - Mabinogogiblog - Richard Lawson (opposite views to Nigel
Lawson. I presume unrelated!).
www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/why-the-governments-austerity-story-is-so-powerful-and-how-we-can-defeat-it
This
pdf I wrote attempts to summarize UK's economic scenario, how we can
improve it and baulks to progress to be demythed/debunked or demolished:
MyCommentsInPieria26-27jun13belowFrancesCoppolaPiece.pdf -
Scroll
down on present web-page to read my summary of Pieria. Strangely -
no-one picked out my almost deliberate mistake - of belittling the
yearly cost to the UK taxpayer of paying interest on national debt
(because the impacts of its size have been so blinkerdly exaggerated by
the coalition government in its flawed propaganda to justify austerity;
in reality it is a significant amount [c.7% of gov expenditure] but not
as relatively big a problem as made out by coalition government and the
media, with their "deficit obsession". Independent economists regard
reducing the annual deficit as NOT being the top priority for the UK
economy, and want it reduced sensibly in due course, not rapidly
immediately).
In 2015 April-May-June I wrote this pdf article on "The
austerity con, austerity delusion" subtitled: "There
is a strong economic case against austerity – that has been hidden
from the electorate" www.bit.ly/austeritycon2
or http://www.dragonfly1.plus.com/TheAusterityCon2.pdf
It's collates some of the many useful references on this subject. The
first paragraph needs re-writing as it compresses too much into one
paragraph. And the green alternative to the neo-Keynesian v neoliberal
needs explaining more.
Background for
economics: the broader context must be borne in mind (economics
must sit within a broader context or framing of values for the benefit of
all of us, otherwise it can, and is, misused by e.g. neoliberalism. It's a
tool not an end in itself).
Politics is inevitably connected
to economics as politicians play a big part in deciding which economic
rationale is to be applied by government to affect 1. the regulatory
"playing field" in which economic activity happens, and 2. the use of
fiscal and monetary tools available to government and Bank of England
respectively (in the case of UK). [Fiscal:
government tax and expenditure for example; monetary:
BofE interest rates and money supply tools ("printing money" e.g.
Quantitative Easing - buying and selling of government bonds, or the sadly
avoided 'helicopter money' aka "QE for the people" as opposed to for the
banks). Note that the BofE cannot further stimulate economic activity by
lowering interest rates when the latter are near to zero - what economists
call the Zero Lower Bound]. Unfortunately the coalition's choice of
austerity cuts in government expenditure is a prime example of where
political ideology has supplanted economic sense.
GROWTH
- Is it an economic necessity?
"Infinite growth on a finite
planet?" All of the major political Parties support the neoliberal
model for sustained (though not 'sustainable') economic growth, except for
The Green Party. A number of economists ignored by the pro-growth media
say that we need an economic system that works for all of us even if there
is no growth. Also, some state that zero-growth is even essential
for mankind and the environment in a world in which many resources are
finite and in which carbon emissions are associated with consumption of
resources. The environmental journalist George Monbiot urges that the
fossil-fuel-driven economic growth model is heading us towards
disaster: 'It's
simple. If we can't change our economic system, our number's up'
"It's the great taboo of our age – and the inability to discuss the
pursuit of perpetual growth will prove humanity's undoing" George Monbiot,
27may14 The Guardian. Our climate and our essential natural resources and
biodiversity are at stake - and us too. Relevant here is Prof Tim
Jackson's acclaimed book "Prosperity without growth".
The Green Party's Rupert Read
writes this: 'Green
economics versus growth economics - The case of Thomas Piketty' in
Radical Philosophy - which I've yet to read but must soon. Andy
Dobson, Politics Professor, Keele University: 'The
Politics of Post-Growth' (pdf) GreenHouse thinktank Andy Dobson
wrote manifesto(s) for the Green Party.
It is an absurd irony how graphs from official statistics show that the
coalition's ideologically-based austerity policies have reduced GDP and
growth below what they'd otherwise been, despite Osborne's push for
"economic growth" and reducing the deficit as priorities above all else!
[graphs e.g. in Prof. Simon Wren-Lewis's articles]. Oh well - at least
that's meant we've avoided the extra consumption of resources and extra
carbon emissions we'd have had if austerity hadn't been implemented!
Nonetheless austerity is socially unacceptable as well as having an
inadequate economic rationale and has resulted in wastage of labour
resources, as SW-L also shows.
The application of economics to the
environment and ecosystems: (e.g. to aid their
exploitation for profit)
Video of George Monbiot brilliantly speaking on “The
Pricing of Everything” [including nature] SPERI - Sheffield
Political Economy Research Institute, The University of Sheffield.
Includes section on Framing and Values, Intrinsic values and Extrinsic
values (Refer to: George Lakoff framing values), and many other aspects.
49mins: peoples values & changing them. Reminds me of 'citizens' v
'consumers' framing by labelling/memes.
On
AUSTERITY and CUTS, and the
deficit:
"the austerity con"
1. AUSTERITY CUTS don't just reduce expenditure but
also reduce tax revenue, such that the deficit is not reduced at the
rate hoped for [annual deficit = tax revenue - expenditure]. This is
because austerity cuts reduce economic activity - and thus tax
revenue, and also delay economic recovery from a recession.
2. The deficit anyhow is not the most important factor
limiting the UK economy that the government should prioritize (though
it shouldn't be ignored).
Austerity has been shown to be a con by independent
academic economists (including Nobel laureate economists), and Oxford
University's macro-economist Professor Simon Wren-Lewis explains this in
words accessible to non-economists here: 'The
Austerity Con' [I
summarize it on Fb here and scroll below - to where I've pasted that
text] (SW-L often writes against austerity in his blog 'mainly macro' - I
link to that below). SW-L explains that deficit-reduction is not
the number one priority action for the UK economy, and the news-media are
wrong to accept this coalition myth uncritically (so too Labour are wrong
to go along with it for fear of the media and false public perception that
the media have created). Also read e.g. Ripped-off Britons On election, Cameron said the cuts were temporary, and
not ideological. Now he’s saying they’re permanent, and ideological
Monbiot refers to Naomi Klein's book 'The Shock Doctrine' and says the
whole purpose of austerity is to change society to shift us from intrinsic
values to extrinsic neoliberal values. I might add that it's yet another
cloak for shifting power and money from lower income to higher income
people and "shrinking the state".
Who holds the financial (and thus sadly political) power over economies:
'Who's
in control – nation states or global corporations?' "Around the
world, calls for national autonomy have grown. Minorities are blamed but
the real culprit is neoliberalism" Gary Younge 2jun14 Comment is
free The Guardian @garyyounge I added this comment: "And with
the "major" UK Parties ConLibLab - all neoliberal and sucking up to
corporate power, and the neoliberal #BBCbias giving underproportional
airtime to the Green Party (the only main non neolib, non-corp-controlled
Party), the big transnational corporate interests are now doing a major
global power grab to lock in their control yet further, with the EU-US
free trade and investment agreement TTIP (and e.g. CETA, TPP...). Please
try and stop this: try my template to MPs: www.bit.ly/FTAemailMP".
'Savage
capitalism is back – and it will not tame itself' "Capitalists
spread prosperity only when threatened by global rivalry, radical
movements and the risk of uprisings at home" David Graeber 30may14
Comment is free The Guardian. In my tweet with link to this
article I wrote: "Omits tht ConLibLab now ALLwork 1st4bigbiz not us" -
referring partly to Blair's New labour shifting Labour to the right and
being over-chummy with bigbiz, then later - Labour following advice from
big bankers.
LINKS to: 1. My notes on economics, 2.
articles and old news re ECONOMICS: http://www.dragonfly1.plus.com/EconomicsLINKS-2013.html and for pre-2013: http://www.dragonfly1.plus.com/LINKS.pdf - a big file! 3. Also may be economics links in my page of unsorted refs/links (all
subjects mixed up but in approx chronological order): http://www.dragonfly1.plus.com/UnsortedLINKS-2013.html
These classify links into
categories e.g. : As yet unclassified economics items
including INEQUALITY & the living wage, The
OCCUPY movement and
Uncut movement (no austerity cuts, instead no tax-dodging
& no tax haven secrecy etc.), Robin
Hood
Tax , Progressive
economics that work for all of us even if zero
growth,
and zero growth economics, Tax dodging by the rich and by
corporations (especially multi-nationals) & TAX HAVENS & City of
London.
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction - my
personal view from the outside, as an ecologist (maybe
needs re-wording to make the points clearer)
The UK and the world are facing
increasingly huge
challenges
such as increasing climate change and its destructive extreme weather
events, environmental degradation, habitat loss, biodiversity loss,
failing governance of food and water resources, income inequality, social
injustice, the suppression and extinction of ironically sustainably-living
indigenous tribes, etc, etc. Economics is about mechanisms for resource
distribution, and the impossibility of infinite growth on a planet with
finite resources has already been mentioned above. These problems or
challenges are all affected greatly by the power of money and who
controls, uses (and abuses) it. Increasing income inequality together with
globalization - have hugely magnified the power of big money as used by
the relatively few people (less than 1%) who have increasingly more of the
whole "pie". [Oxfam found that the c.85 wealthiest people in the world
have more than 50% of the entire world's wealth, and now that figure has
been revised to less than 70 people]
Anyone who wants to prevent these national and global problems from
getting worse needs to understand the variety of types of economics and
pseudo-economics-ideology that are in contention, and also how money is
created, banks became parasites instead of servicing our needs, etc, etc.
Whether you
"like it or loathe it" (i.e. find the "can of worms" distasteful) - you
have to have a very critical understanding of the main variations within
economics, and especially their associated flaws, if you want to
understand the underlying drivers for these major world problems,
because politicians and their corporate masters chose which school of
thought in economics best provides an ostensible basis to "justify"
their policies. And politicians in turn use the latter to try and
adjust the "playing field" on which companies interact and how wealth and
essential resources for life become distributed. The spectrum of economics
goes way beyond the orthodox textbook type - which progressive
economists show to be partly to even mostly flawed - as well as having
major omissions (e.g. how money is created).
Economics is currently, put simply (and maybe too simply? as it's of
course more complex), a fascinating "David versus Goliath" battle of
different schools of thought:
"Goliath" is
the now-orthodox (to the media & public perception) economic
presumption holding political sway now - and not just in the UK: It comprises the
numerous neoliberal and neo-classical 'economists' working for city
interests and think-tanks who support the "free-market" ideology favoured
by the super-rich 1% and big business who they work for. The latter groups
favour neo-liberalism as it provides a (pseudo-)academic
justification for the greed-satisfying ideology of corporations -
though in reality the latter is a 'market-failure' end-point of
neo-liberalism which is more oligarchic, with a distorted 'playing field'
that suppresses smaller enterprises and more fully locks-in increasing
income inequality. We are unfortunately in the grip of a distorted form of
market fundamentalism (distorted as it cherry-picks from the latter, as to
what suits the oligopoly of the big players) - the ideology that the
market "knows best" on how to solve almost every problem - despite its
blinkered dodging of inconvenient evidence, its almost religious-like
dogma, its lack of ethics, morals, and of a long-term broad vision of what
we need to be thinking now to combat such major problems as the best use
of finite resources, and preventing adverse climate change (listen to John
Ashton speech re latter - link on my climate change page). Neoliberalism
favours privatisation of public services ("private is better than public"
myth), the austerity myth, and many other myths that much of the media
(even BBC) has accepted uncritically as presumptions, as if there is no
alternative.
"David" comprises a variety of those
progressive economists and economists in academia who expose the
myths that Goliath uses or the flaws Goliath ignores, and present
alternative economics that provide an evidence-based academic rationale
that can support progression towards a better world for all of us not
just the most wealthy. Examples of economists working for the benefit of
all of us not the few are those in the nef - the New
Economics Foundation, and Positive Money
(who have produced a joint report) [scroll down if you want links to
these two]. Some economists go stages further - in insisting that
zero-growth economics is essential for the long-term future as
consumption is linked to resource depletion and mostly to fossil fuel
extraction and use, and hence carbon emissions and climate change. [Relevant here is Prof Tim
Jackson's acclaimed book "Prosperity without growth".
Linked to below]. Returning to "mainstream" economists:
macro-economist Professor Simon Wren-Lewis considers himself part of the
academic mainstream and is continually debunking the austerity myth, but
the tv news media appear to ignore his critiques and those of
independent academic economists and prefer City economists or
free-market thinktanks who have vested links. (We must not forget that
some academic economists who teach graduates for City jobs may be
influenced by "where the money comes from" and some have been criticized
by students for selectively omitting topics that might expose neoliberal
myths that City employers might prefer kept hidden).
Naturally with my scientific background, combined with an ethical
value system, I favour the thinking of the more independent academic
economists - and the 2007/8 financial crisis has exposed to anyone
with a critical mind the flaws and myths of the neo-liberal mindset, and
the propaganda used to try and hide these flaws and myths. It is
depressing how such propaganda appears to have succeeded
in maintaining the very flawed neoliberal thinking that brought about
the financial crisis. This is no doubt because it has been
assisted not just by such right-wing papers as the Daily Mail, but also by
the false balance and indeed right-imbalanced economics put across by the
BBC (there is research evidence for the latter: BBC more often defers to
neoliberal City economists and their think-tanks who have vested corporate
interests, than independent academic economists or "left-leaning"
think-tanks). Blame must also go to BBC and other news media for allowing
to go unchallenged the frequent repetition by both coalition party MPs in
government of the "mess that Labour left the economy in" - which aimed to
create a myth in public perception that the crash and recession was
brought about by "Labour profligacy" not by the banks de-regulated in
accordance with neoliberal free-market dogma.
This "shock doctrine" propaganda [sensu
Naomi Klein: in which crisis aftermath is exploited by the bad
guys] has unfortunately been successful so far, as it exploits the
post-traumatic psychology of mind-closure in response to fear amongst the
less intelligent or less rational or more conservative (little 'c')
populace who are suffering the most (and those who are not suffering, i.e.
the more wealthy - are turning a blind eye or accepting the false
justification)). Victims can be blind or myopic to who their real enemy is
- and thus become vulnerable to the divisive divide-and-rule propaganda
shown very clearly recently by the "scroungers versus ...." and the
"skivers versus strivers" hate-propaganda (reminds me of propaganda used
by the Nazis against the Jews). This diversionary propaganda has
helped the neoliberal ideology to remain in power despite it's having
caused the financial crisis and aftermath.
A Rowntree Foundation's recent report shows how much this propaganda
has succeeded. But much more dismaying, indeed sickening, is the response
to it by Labour's Tory-collaborating Frank Field who recently
showed he has decided that the [neoliberal and tarnished-]"New"
Labour should adjust their policies to the right to go with
these myths and flaws as if they are true - instead of trying to debunk
them. This will have serious consequences unless it is exposed and
stopped. Labour allowed the Tories to engrain these myths into the public
psyche by repetition - just after the election they lost - when they were
over-distracted inwardly while choosing a new leader. [Blairism/New Labour
is also neoliberal].
The teaching of economics: Since writing this text the following
refreshing news has appeared:
'BBC
Radio 4 - Teaching Economics After the Crash'
'Economics students aim to tear up free-market syllabus' (24oct13 Phillip Inman, Guardian). I hope
they succeed in ending the neoliberal capture of economics! and:
'Economics lecturers accused of clinging to pre-crash
fallacies' Phillip Inman Nov13 - Economics Correspondent - Business
- The Guardian
'Teaching evidence-based economics' Michael Joffe of
Imperial College - Royal Economic Society
NB:
please read this: 'Orthodox economists have failed their own market test'
Seumas Milne 20nov13 "Students
are
demanding alternatives to a free-market dogma with a disastrous record.
That's something we all need"
Comment is free The Guardian - via Gwen tweet.
NEOLIBERALISM: what is
it? Here is the New Economics Foundation's 'Beginner's
Neoliberalism' (6 part podcast audio) 2015 https://soundcloud.com/neoliberalism
Neoliberal economics >>> neoliberal politics: Part way
down my website 'hub' page there is a section headed: Why is our present government a big
threat to the environment, and to our future quality of life? (&
even our existence) -
this
summarizes
some political aspects of neoliberalism and how it threatens our
environment, and also gives a 'taster' of its historical background etc.
AUSTERITY [continued] - On Prof Simon Wren-Lewis's article 'The
Austerity Con' [my
text below is copied from where I summarize it on Fb here]
I've now completely read
this article and strongly recommend it. It gives a history of UK and
EU economies since the crash in easy to understand words for
non-economists to easily understand.
Here's
my summary: It shows how the media have deceived the public just as City
interests and Osborne would like, into falsely portraying deficit
reduction as no.1 priority for economic recovery (opposite to the truth),
and austerity as a necessary means of achieving it (again opposite from
the truth). It also reveals how this media deceit and ignorance (for it is
partly as much ignorance as intended deceit), has enabled Osborne to hide
from the public (though not from macro-economists such as SWL and those
that follow them [eg me]), that Osborne latterly eased off on austerity to
enable some recovery - then to deceitfully claim the recovery as
validating his claim for austerity! Furthermore - he is deceiving again as
he wishes to resume austerity if re-elected as if it's now proven a valid
tool for recovery - the opposite of the truth. His real motive all along
was to minimize the state and favour increased inequality (reducing the
deficit was a pretence all along - which the media swallowed and
regurgitated without any critical assessment [because they listened to
City economists with vested interests, not the academic macro-economists
such as SWL]. But the worst thing I save until last, because I suspected
Osborne's deceit all along - no surprise there! It is how the LibDems were
complicit (and/or economically illiterate or ignorant) in Osborne's
deceit, and thereby showing treachery to those who'd voted for them to
avoid Osborne and Cameron and the very things such as
false-deficit-obsession and evil austerity that they'd inflict on us. And
then claim a pat on the back for pushing for sticking-plaster for such
evil - in the form of a raised personal tax allowance.
Future additions when I have time:
- summarize meaning of neoliberalism, market fundamentalism and
distorted form of it being adopted which maintains a non-level playing
field favouring the big guys not the SMEs nor the 99%.
- neolib > crisis - thus strange how neolib accepted not rejected
after crisis. esp the "need for austerity" myth and the myth that the
deficit and national debt brought about the crisis and/or is the highest
priority post-crisis to be resolved - distracting from fact that
the private debt is what brought about the crisis and yet to be
resolved. Also refer to the Reinhart-Rogoff errors and discussion in
follow-up to this e.g. Kevin Drum 30may13 on Miles
Kimball
and Yichuan Wang of the University of Michigan 's response in http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/05/debt-doesnt-cause-low-growth-low-growth-causes-low-growth?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed
After
crunching Reinhart and Rogoff’s data, we’ve concluded that high debt
does not slow growth - Quartz 29may13 http://qz.com/88781/after-crunching-reinhart-and-rogoffs-data-weve-concluded-that-high-debt-does-not-cause-low-growth/
- explain how neoliberalism damages the environment
- explain how growth or un-selective growth threatens our natural
resources and encourages carbon emissions
- explain how bubble-money creation by banks intrinsically demands
and accelerates "hollow growth" and bubble creation, until the bubble
bursts
- is it possible to have growth that is not environmentally destructive?
If not - would it have to be zero growth, or even de-growth?
- "economic growth" is Osborne's banner yet he wants to stifle the
sector that is showing good growth - almost 4% - the green sector.
- following from previous: are the Keynesian and post-Keynesian models
compatible with not being environmentally destrcutive or depletionary of
natural resources?
I've appended (in same colour text as this here) more of my thoughts on
economics, and also economics-related quotations.
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
GLOSSARY links
- with thanks to
Sophie Cade for finding these links & emailing them to me.
Degrowth: 'Degrow or die?' - Red
Pepper - http://www.redpepper.org.uk/degrow-or-die/
Inflation: 'On the Origin and Evolution of the Word Inflation' -
http://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/commentary/1997/1015.pdf
QE - Quantitative Easing -
definition from Financial Times Lexicon - http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=quantitative-easing
And see notes below on QE
and "helicopter money" (="QE for the people").
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
Interesting websites and
lecturers, authors etc:
PRIME ECONOMICS http://www.primeeconomics.org/ @PrimeEconomics - for ‘Policy
research on macro-economics’, ‘PRIME is an economic think-tank that
promotes understanding of the nature of credit, and its role in
determining macroeconomic outcomes. Fundamental to our approach is an
implicit and explicit restoration of ethics in relation to money and
credit.’ - Includes pieces by Ann
Pettifor (worth following on
twitter [see below]) - who predicted the 2007/8 fin.crisis. Great stuff,
ditto nef, Positive Money, Tax Justice Network, ... PRIME
ECONOMICS
help expose the debunking of Osborne’s Reinhart & Rogoff
economic pillar of sand
Positive Money http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/
'Positive
Money
is a not-for-profit research and campaign group. We work to raise
awareness of the connections between our current monetary and banking
system and some of the biggest social, economic and environmental
challenges that we face today.
Positive Money believes that a major cause of many of our current social,
economic and environmental problems lies in the way that we allow money to
be created. We work to make the confusing world of money and banking much
easier to understand.'
Transforming
Finance http://transformingfinance.org.uk/ @tranfin Campaigning for a new
finance system that serves society, the environment and the wider economy.
transformingfinance.org.uk
nef - The New Economics Foundation
– economics as if people and the planet mattered http://www.neweconomics.org/ Positive Money - http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/
Their joint submission to ICB pdf is
worth reading (at least the beginning of it)
NEF-Southampton-Positive-Money-ICB-Submission - download it from eg nef or
Positive Money
nef
@theneweconomics
nef
is
an independent think-and-do tank that inspires and demonstrates real
economic well-being. London,
UK · http://www.neweconomics.org
eg: http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/2012/12/05/dash-for-gas-will-worsen-fuel-poverty
'Cancel the Apocalypse'
book by
Andrew Simms Guardian
bookshop http://www.guardianbookshop.co.uk/BerteShopWeb/viewProduct.do?ISBN=9781408702369
nef
Mythbusters: e.g. “Britain is broke - we can't
afford to invest” - Stephen Reid - the new economics foundation http://www.neweconomics.org/mythbusters-britain-is-broke
More myth-busting - Guardian's Ripped-off
Britons Liebrary e.g. Do income
tax cuts for the rich make us all richer See
the dismal evidence to the contrary 11mar12 http://www.blog.rippedoffbritons.com/2012/03/do-income-tax-cuts-for-rich-make-us-all.html
'Four Tory Lies and Myths about the economy' 26jun13
- Mabinogogiblog - by Richard Lawson (opposite views to Nigel Lawson. I
presume unrelated).
NB: very useful
data: UK welfare spending how much does each benefit
really cost Visualised theguardian.com. It's a myth that
most of welfare spending is on JSA and ESA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
+ www.thisismoney.co.uk
p2p ZOPA
http://wheredoesmymoneygo.org/dailybread.html
- Showing you where your taxes get spent
Prof Richard Werner of Southampton
Uni. - Banking & The Economy - YouTube
30mar11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDHSUgA29Ls "Banks
have
a pivotal function in the economy, they are the main creators
of the money supply. In granting or issuing so called 'loans'
to their customers they create the money that is essential to
make the modern economy work. In fact says Prof Werner: 'there
is no such thing as a bank loan' he says what happens is
credit creation, when banks make the money (credit ) needed
out of nothing. He explains how
the system works, whereby, from a miniscule deposit of funds a
huge amount of money is created.”
**
Richard
Werner:
Debt Free & Interest Free Money
- YouTube 26may11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIkk7AfYymg Dr Werner
discloses facts about money creation that are at the core of every
modern economy. About how the creation of the essential money that is
needed to sustain growth is founded on debt. This suits banks, of
course. Governments have huge debts, to banks, and few people realise
that it does not have to be like this. Taxes are needed for paying for
decades of past interest on government borrowing. Banking is an
extracting mechanism. It extracts resources from the economy, through
interest payments and the taxation needed to cover the debt burden of
the government. Why borrow from banks and pay interest when there is an
alternative way of money creation and allocation? Governments could
create the money and allocate it into circulation through its spending
programmes.
Positive Money
Useful
ref
re
97% - much of which is secured lending for esp house mortgages http://www.positivemoney.org/how-banks-create-money/how-much-money-have-banks-created/ Full-Reserve-Banking-in-Plain-English1 (1)
2010-aug2012 by Positive Money http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Full-Reserve-Banking-in-Plain-English1.pdf
Positive Money » How the BBC is
misleading the public about the financial crisis 7aug12 http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/2012/08/how-the-bbc-is-misleading-the-public-about-the-financial-crisis/
Full-Reserve-Banking-in-Plain-English1 http://www.positivemoney.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Full-Reserve-Banking-in-Plain-English1.pdf
How to reduce debt and
unemployment Positive News 5mar12 Ben Dyson http://positivenews.org.uk/2012/blogs/positive_money/6247/reduce-debt-unemployment/
Guardian Transforming finance - how do we fund the green economy
(video) » Positive Money 17may13 http://www.positivemoney.org/2013/05/guardian-transforming-finance-how-do-we-fund-the-green-economy-video/
QE
& alternatives: 'How
to waste £375 billion (The Failure of Quantitative Easing)'
(YouTube) - video by Positive Money <<<<
well worth watching.
Pieria - Online Magazine - http://www.pieria.co.uk/
- shows 'Hot Topics'. Associate Editor: Frances
Coppola, Director: Jonathan Portes. About us: http://www.pieria.co.uk/p/about_us
"We
are
a social-network of experts and an online magazine.
We bring together experts from industry and academia to
discuss some of the biggest issues facing our economy today.
Connecting policy makers, investors, senior executives,
postgraduates and the intellectually curious with recognized
thought-leaders from world renowned institutions.
We provide readers with the latest thinking on critical
issues through an engaging mix of in-depth commentary, interviews,
recommended reading, and our daily 'Hot Topic' reports. Pieria is
a must read for anyone who needs to know; and for experts who want their
work to be more widely known. HOW
TO
USE PIERIA Pieria
is
like going to your favourite cafe, if your favourite cafe is frequented
by some of the brightest people in their field; discussing and debating
the big issues of the day, a melting pot of ideas, disciplines and
points of view. It’s an ongoing conversation and we’ve designed the site
to reflect this."
I dared to add some comments here: http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/financial_dislocation
I must read this some time >> Economics: the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on
the world?
NB:
Jonathan Portes is a
well-respected economist who is known for having examined UK population
statistics and economics data wrt immigration and concluded there are net
economic advantages to immigration [<
maybe at least in the short term, and bear in mind that economic
benefits are just one part of all effects, of which others could be both
positive and negative - my comments]. He is "Director, National
Institute of Economic and Social Research. Previously, Chief Economist at
the UK Cabinet Office. Regular commentator on UK macro and microeconomic
policy.".
Prof Simon Wren-Lewis - "an
economics
professor at Oxford University, and a fellow of Merton College. This
blog is written for both economists and non-economists." -
I
subscribe to his blog 'mainly
macro' - http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/
on MACROECONOMICS. I like the way he criticizes Osborne's austerity
policy. E.g. mainly macro Why no public fury over austerity?
19nov13 Prof Simon Wren-Lewis argues that the coalition
government's "need" for austerity is fundamentally flawed.
Martin Wolf (FT):
In
the
Financial Times, Martin
Wolf writes: "The
essence
of the contemporary monetary system is creation of money, out of
nothing, by private banks' often foolish lending." He has recently
(c.May 2014)
Disarm our doomsday machine "A crisis-prone
system calls for measures to minimise the damage in the event of
the inevitable" Martin
Wolf - FT.com "re financial crises an inevitable feature of
capitalism? Must the government rescue the system when huge crises
occur? In his book Stress Test, Timothy
Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New
York and US Treasury secretary during the 2007-09 crisis, answers
“yes” to both questions. Yet these answers also harm the
legitimacy of a market economy. It is bad enough if capitalism is
crisis-prone. It is worse still if the state feels obliged to
rescue those whose folly or criminality caused the damage, to
protect the innocent. ...."
Tim
Jackson @ProfTimJackson
Author of »Prosperity Without Growth«
and Director of the Sustainable Lifestyles Research Group at the
University of Surrey. UK
prosperitas.org.uk
Video: 'Prosperity
for a Finite Planet'.
Prof Jem Bendell Now at
Ambleside He is interested in the advantages of creating
alternative or local currencies, and thus is also interested in how
currencies such as Sterling fail.
TEDxTransmedia 2011 – Prof Jem Bendell - The Money Myth – YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5uGLbV5zVo
from
October
2012 I will be Professor of Sustainability Leadership at the University
of Cumbria http://jembendell.wordpress.com/about/
Renegade Economist – vg Economic
Discussion & Critical Review http://www.renegadeeconomist.com/
- Versus creation of
money by privately-owned banks, rent-seeking..., vs neo-classical
economics. Film: Four Horsemen
Green
Economy Coalition http://greeneconomycoalition.org/about
Green Economics - founded by
Miriam Kennet - http://www.greeneconomics.org.uk/ - I haven't examined this yet
BlueandgreenTomorrow
- http://blueandgreentomorrow.com - I've yet to examine this site;
Looks interesting at first glance. 'The Guide to Sustainable
Banking' 12oct12 - Blue and Green Tomorrow - http://blueandgreentomorrow.com/reports/the-guide-to-sustainable-banking-2012/
FEASTA - http://www.feasta.org/about/background-2/ "Feasta
was
launched in Dublin in October 1998 to explore the economic, cultural and
environmental characteristics of a truly sustainable society, and to
disseminate the results of this exploration to the widest relevant
audience.".... "For
example,
the economic system demands continual growth if it is not to collapse
into a catastrophic depression, and this leaves politicians with little
alternative but to pursue short-term economic growth more-or-less
regardless of the damage that that pursuit might be doing to longer-term
environmental and social sustainability. Feasta
has spent a lot of time examining the reasons for this growth compulsion
to see if an economic system can be devised without it."
Prof. Steve
Keen (Australian) -
highlights the big role of private debt
in an economy - also uses mathematical models re this.
Scriptonite
writes:
"Steve Keen ‘Debunking Economics’ – want to understand why our
economic model doesn’t work, and what alternatives are available? Read
this." http://www.zedbooks.co.uk/node/12181
[my comments:
neoliberal politicians and right-wing think-tank 'economists' can often
ignore private debt & instead focus (as a distraction?) on public debt
- which with the debunking of Reinhart & Rogoff's paper is now shown
to be much much less significant (maybe even insignificant!) than as made
out by neoliberal politicians who focus on it - probably as a
distraction?]
Prof
Steve
Keen debunks neoclassical economics: Ignoring the role of private
debt in an economy is like driving without accounting for
your blind-spot. British Politics
and Policy at LSE 14mar12 http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/2012/03/14/ignoring-the-role-of-private-debt-in-an-economy-is-like-driving-without-accounting-for-your-blind-spot/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+BritishPoliticsAndPolicyAtLse+(British+politics+and+policy+at+LSE) Steve
Keen is
Professor
of
Economics & Finance at the University of Western Sydney, and author
of the popular book Debunking Economics, a second edition of which has
just been published (Zed Books UK, 2011; www.debunkingeconomics.com).
He
will be delivering a public
lecture
at the LSE on
3
April 2012. Steve blogs at http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/ and
is
on Twitter: @ProfSteveKeen.
Steve
Keen
@ProfSteveKeen
Economics
Prof,
Neoclassical Economics critic, Debunking Economics author, Debwatch
blogger Sydney,
Aus · http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs
Andrew Lainton https://twitter.com/AndrewLainton - a "keen" UK associate s.l. with
Steve Keen is polymath planning consultant and mathematical economist
Andrew Lainton (I follow him on twitter as he criticized the draft NPPF)
nef @theneweconomics
Reconciling Krugman and Keen using nef's model http://bit.ly/MHT2Zk @NYTimeskrugman @ProfSteveKeen
Steve
Keen
BBC Radio 4 - Analysis, Steve
Keen 'Why Economics
Is Bunk' Sun.10jun12 BBCR4 30mins http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01j5h51
-
via
Sophie Cade & Gwen's Mum on Tue.14may13 (Gwen's mum Daphne had
heard it on the radio)
“Newsnight
Economics
Editor Paul Mason interviews the
controversial economist Steve Keen before an audience at the London School
of Economics. Keen was one of a small number of economists who predicted
there would be a major financial crisis before the 2008 crash. He argues
that if we keep the "parasitic banking
sector" alive the economy dies, and says that conventional
economics provides an unwitting cover for "the
greatest ponzi schemes in history". Producer:
Kavita
Puri.”
Emanuele
Campiglio
- Reconciling [Paul] Krugman and
Keen using nef's model the new
economics foundation http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/2012/07/25/reconciling-krugman-and-keen-using-nefs-model
Paul Krugman and Stiglitz are not too far apart in thinking, and are
worth following. Both are very critical of austerity ideology.
Economists:
John Maynard Keynes vs
free-market economists such as Friedrich
Hayek (eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19706272) & Milton
Friedman (much of Thatcherism
& neoliberalism comes from Milton Friedman). Hayek is more of a purist
market economist than Friedman - as Friedman allows a little state
intervention - though only a tiny amount as compared with Keynes.
Joseph Rowntree Foundation http://www.jrf.org.uk/
- “Poverty, place and ageing society”
PREDISTRIBUTION
PRE-DISTRIBUTION
acc to Wikipedia is
a neologism[4] coined
by Yale
University Professor Jacob
Hacker is
the
idea that the state should try to prevent inequalities occurring in the
first place rather than ameliorating inequalities through the tax and
benefits system once they have occurred as occurs under
"redistribution". In addition, the term 'predistribution' has been used
(in the same sense as indicated above) by authors James Robertson and
Joseph Huber in the book, 'Creating New Money' (New Economics
Foundation, London, UK) nef
Policy Network eg http://www.policy-network.net/pno_detail.aspx?ID=4245&title=Waiting-for-growth
The
Liberal Politics - The Neo-Liberal Democrats
by Simon Kovar AUG2010 http://www.theliberal.co.uk/libdems/neo-liberal-democrats.html
The Orange Book neoliberalism - A useful read as it distinguishes
the neo-liberal Liberal Democrats from the social Liberal Democrats, i.e.
right of centre vs left of centre.
Fiscal
Multipliers,
the IMF & the OBR ToUChstone blog A public policy blog from the TUC 10oct12 http://touchstoneblog.org.uk/2012/10/fiscal-multipliers-the-imf-the-obr/
In economics,
the fiscal
multiplier is
the
ratio
of a change in national
incometo
the
change in government spending that causes it.
FILM:
Inside Job 2010 http://www.filmsforaction.org/watch/inside_job_2010/
The Corporation: The Pathological
Pursuit of Profit and Power by Joel Bakan
INCOME
INEQUALITY in relation to growth etc: UNCTAD - Trade and
Development Report 2012 United Nations - ‘Policies for inclusive and
balanced growth - Report by the secretariat of the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development’ http://www.scribd.com/doc/108746707/UNCTAD-Trade-and-Development-Report-2012 also covers eg: The
interaction between unemployment and the wage share: 1. The traditional
approach: employment creation through wage restraint 2. The alternative
approach: wage growth as the key determinant of demand growth. “Higher
wages and lower inequality can stimulate demand and output growth …” +
read Conclusions pp166-7 -
versus austerity & neoliberalism! - via tweet to Monbiot by writer
for www.energyroyd.org.uk - and here’s Monbiot’s related piece:
George
Monbiot‘If you think we're done with neoliberalism, think
again’ George Monbiot
Comment is free The Guardian
14jan12 http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/14/neoliberal-theory-economic-failure
The World's Richest 8% Earn Half of All
Planetary Income & The
top
1 per cent has seen its real income rise by more than 60 per cent over
those two decades.
Alternet 28may13 http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/worlds-richest-8-earn-half-all-planetary-income
LIVING
WAGE: Paying the Living Wage benefits business as well
as employees 4nov13 new economics foundation.
The OECD
on inequality: www.oecd.org/inequality.htm
NB: OECD study report (2014?) found that increasing
inequality reduces GDP. Because Austerity increases
inequality, and GDP has an effect on total tax revenue, this implies
that austerity - claimed by neoliberals/right-wing as a means of
decreasing the deficit - is a factor that pushes the deficit upwards
by reducing the total tax revenue via the route of increasing
inequality and reducing GDP.
>>>>>
More on INEQUALITY
<< my web-page on this subject - but only just started in
April 2014.
Ellen MacArthur Foundation http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ - The
Circular Economy - a
new model for macroeconomics - products re-vamped by manufacturer
recycling materials and reducing energy needs, designing out waste
instead of designing in obsolesence
HELICOPTER
MONEY, Quantitative Easing and Green QE
Firstly, to
compare: the conventional QE that the UK government has implemented:
Frances Coppola explains
that it is primarily QE "for the rich", i.e. wealthy asset-holders (such
as the wealthiest 5%), though the Bank of England states that it does have
an indirect increase in safety for e.g. savers. Coppola concludes by
writing:
"For too long we have turned a blind eye to QE's regressive nature. Surely
the top priority now must be to address the inequality that "QE for the
rich" has helped to cause."
However she doesn't reckon the
time is now right for Corbyn's version of "people's QE" (that comes from
Richard Murphy's ideas), preferring other methods.
Coppola
Comment 18sep15: All
QE is ""people's QE" - just not the right people - http://www.coppolacomment.com/2015/09/all-qe-is-peoples-qe-just-not-right.html
Note - there are various types of "people's QE", some like Corbyn's
version - is considered to have a risky downside of removing Central Bank
independence. This is discussed by Coppola elsewhere and by Simon
Wren-Lewis e.g. in his blog in c.sept.2015. A simple version in contrast -
if demand needs stimulating - is to e.g. give everyone the same amount of
money (that would be progressive).
Richard Murphy and Colin Hines explain
the subject well in
"Green
quantitative easing:
Paying for the economy we need"
http://www.financeforthefuture.com/GreenQuEasing.pdf
Adair Turner & "helicopter
money" Turner defends permanent money printing - FT.com 6apr13 by
Chris Giles, Economics Editor http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/22c5d210-6fbe-11e2-956b-00144feab49a.html#axzz2PdU5jEcs
Print money to fund spending – Turner -
FT.com 6feb13 Adair Turner http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1be21d54-6fb5-11e2-956b-00144feab49a.html#axzz2PgOd7t2u
'DEBT, MONEY AND MEPHISTOPHELES: HOW DO WE GET OUT OF THIS MESS?' -
ADAIR TURNER, CASS BUSINESS SCHOOL 6th February 2013 http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/speeches/0206-at.pdf in
my folder
'Helicopter
money' is where the
central bank injects money into the economy to stimulate it (when demand
is depressed in a recession) without buying e.g. bonds or items to the
similar value as the money it puts in (thus it increases the money in
circulation - and as 'permanent' money unlike QE - Quantitative
Easing). It has to be
done with care because it is has the potential to devalue and increase
inflation, but it has the potential benefit as a means of
re-distributing wealth e.g. if everyone is given the same amount per
person - this will benefit those on low income more than those on high
income, whereas QE does the reverse. This could be stimulatory
because austerity increases income inequality which decreases demand and
so investment to meet demand. But many economists and orthodox
thinkers are scared of it as it has been abused in the past through
history (e.g. by the Weimar Republic after WW1, ?Argentina etc), and an
EU treaty is against it. It would be dangerous in the wrong hands (such
as Osborne: it's unlikely to appeal to his ideology, unless it can
be (mis-)used to increase the wealth of his chums and wreck destroy
habitats (which he regards as an impediment to growth)). Also people are
fearful of making a precedent of using it - even if it succeeds - as it
could later be abused. Prof.
Simon Wren-Lewis here explains helicopter money and why fears of using
it are exaggerated: the "taboo is unrealistic". And
read: 'Can
helicopter money be democratic'
- mainly macro.
QE
differs from 'helicopter money' as although both try to stimulate the
economy by injecting money into it, QE does this by the gov
buying bonds etc from e.g. financial institutions such as banks or
big companies (e.g. re corporate bonds), in an effort to stimulate the
'supply side' rather than the 'demand side' (when the Central Bank
interest rate has reached its minimum of at or near 0% so cannot have
any further stimulatory effect). But the main beneficiaries of QE money
are rich people and bodies who are already wealthy, and the rest of the
populace gain very little from it - as "trickle down" is now considered
to be insignificant or a myth - thus ineffective. Thus QE increases
income inequality, and it's ineffective as it does not help the demand
side (with injection stimulation, both supply and demand side need to be
simultaneously addressed such that they match - in my a
priori opinion). A thank you to Sophie Cade for finding
a good explanation of it (see link to FT Lexicon's excellent explanation
below) - which shows that it involves buying e.g. corporate bonds or gov
bonds. (I had been unclear whether corporate or gov bonds - a big
difference, as the latter would I guess reduce some of the public debt
at the same time; it can be both - but what was the ratio of the two
bought by UK's QE?). QE also means that gov likely to lose money that
the wealthy gain - as re interest, and if the bonds or whatever items
bought lose value - but I am not 100% clear yet on the detail as how
this happens.
QE: ‘What is quantitative easing?’ BBC
News, 7mar13 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15198789
QE - Quantitative Easing -
definition from Financial Times Lexicon - http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=quantitative-easing
via Sophie Cade. V.G. on QE in USA: 'Quantitative Crisis: Bernanke's
"Stimulus" For the 1%' - Occupy.com http://www.occupy.com/article/quantitative-crisis-bernankes-stimulus-1
QE & alternatives: 'How
to waste £375 billion (The Failure of Quantitative Easing)'
(YouTube) - video by Positive Money <<<<
well worth watching.
SMC: Sovereign Money Creation -
(Positive Money) - this is a much better idea: new report by Positive
Money (pdf): Sovereign-Money-Final-Web
Sovereign Money
Creation: Paving the Way for a Sustainable Recovery »
Positive Money Nov2013
Sovereign Money Creation vs Modernising Money »
Positive Money 13nov13
MMT: Debt, Deficits, and Modern Monetary Theory - by Bill
Mitchell
is
the Research Professor in Economics and the Director of the Centre of
Full Employment and Equity at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
The following is an edited transcript of the interview, conducted August
15, 2011. in Harvard International Review 16oct11 http://hir.harvard.edu/debt-deficits-and-modern-monetary-theory
via @wonkmonk
‘Top 484 Influencers’ (twitter urls) http://altwire.utne.com/rt_influencer/economics_v3/network
via @wonkmonk
@wonkmonk - worth following -
Stiglitz recommends we follow her - she provides numerous links of
potential interest
Nobel Prize-winning Stiglitz
is a very likeable amiable economist - in extreme contrast to the neolibs
& neoclassicals
We mustn't forget Ann Pettifor
(of Prime Economics) - who wrote a book predicting the 2007/8 crisis. I
follow her on twitter. @AnnPettifor https://twitter.com/AnnPettifor
Frances
Coppola
https://twitter.com/Frances_Coppola
-
she is well worth following on twitter for her insightful analysis of data
and critical questioning of ... zzz I'm sleepy! need a break. She's
also a singer, and lives in Kent. e.g. http://coppolacomment.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/what-derailed-uk-recovery.html#comment-form
Danny
Axford
@DannyAxford
[keen
tweeter on cycling – and economics! - maybe as a hobby?]
@UnlearningEcon Politics
=
the compromise of unlimited wants and limited resources, Economics =
theoretical routes to theoretical compromise
BankTrack.org
- www.banktrack.org
PCES: Education, Economics and Unlearning - The Report.
Relearning Economics - "The Post-Crash Economics Society (PCES) have
produced a compelling analysis of the failings in economics education and
set out a road map for reform": http://www.post-crasheconomics.com/economics-education-and-unlearning/
Post-Crash Economics Society
Rethinking
Economics Rethinking
Economics
Economics
undergraduates
at the University
of
Manchester have formed thePost-Crash
Economics
Society, ...
In
June
a network of young economics students, thinkers and writers set up Rethinking
Economics,
a campaign group to challenge what they say is the predominant narrative
in the subject. .... from:
Economics students aim to tear up free-market syllabus 24oct13 Phillip Inman
Business The Guardian & below is a good comment by
Chrisk79: http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/28266090
I
spoke with some of the Post Crash group at a Peoples Assembly meeting
recently. It was an eye opener that Universities are teaching only the
neo-liberal model as the core syllabus. This is not education but
indoctrination. Fair play to the group then who were passionate about the
need for change and realise that it is up to them to effect that change.
Good luck to them, I hope that they are successful in re-claiming
education as a means of furthering understanding through questioning
prevailing orthodoxy.
PCES: Education, Economics and Unlearning - The Report.
"Relearning Economics - The Post-Crash Economics Society (PCES) have
produced a compelling analysis of the failings in economics education
and set out a road map for reform": http://www.post-crasheconomics.com/economics-education-and-unlearning/
Mark
Carney 'Bank of England governor: capitalism doomed if ethics vanish'
"Mark Carney issues strong critique of City behaviour and warns of growing
sense that basic social contract is breaking down" Angela Monaghan,
28may14 Business The Guardian
BANKING for
poor people (especially in poor countries):
Google Grameen Bank ("The Grameen
Bank is a Nobel Peace Prize-winning microfinance organization and
community development bank founded in Bangladesh. It makes small loans to
the impoverished without requiring collateral. Wikipedia") - thanks for
that info Daphne.
Grameen Foundation.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
More of my thoughts on economics
Is economics a science?
My first thoughts on this - before reading what other people have
to say on this - i.e. to find out what is 'widely thought':
Economics lies in the grey area whereby you have to first define what you
mean by science or how strictly or broadly you are 'taking it'.
It is not a science in the strict sense of the word (i.e. "an exact
science") in that it tries to understand something that is continually
changing depending on the vagaries of mass human perception (and mass
human confidence) - which is a volatile thing and not as
easily predictable as some finance sector people have thought
(the mathematical modellers) - and have been caught out due to this, when
they've become over-self-confident with a conviction that only works in a
past-to-present scenario. So you can't reliably predict a long way
into the future as circumstances can suddenly change, or - perhaps more
fittingly - the perception
of circumstances, triggered by an event that can be external or internal -
that can burst a bubble. So economics must not forget the frequent
irrationality of human beings - especially as it studies an area involving
dependence on trust - yet involving people with a gambling instinct and/or
'greed-blinkered' or 'one-upmanship' propensities, and liable to being
suddenly swayed by herd-instinct (following "bull" /....) (e.g.
expression
"bull markets" - may be apt , but bear markets? - maybe not so,
as bears don't herd).
Economics thus has a human psychology aspect (fatally ignored by some of
the pre-crash modelling of finance companies).
It is also linked to politics.
In relation to what economics is: (see next section)
The
teaching of economics: Since writing this text the following
refreshing news has appeared:
'Economics students aim to tear up free-market syllabus' (24oct13 Phillip Inman, Guardian). I hope
they succeed in ending the neoliberal capture of economics! and:
'Economics lecturers accused of clinging to pre-crash
fallacies' Phillip Inman Nov13 - Economics Correspondent - Business
- The Guardian
'Teaching evidence-based economics' Michael Joffe of
Imperial College - Royal Economic Society
'Orthodox economists have failed their own market test'
Seumas Milne 20nov13 "Students
are
demanding alternatives to a free-market dogma with a disastrous record.
That's something we all need"
Comment is free The Guardian - via Gwen tweet.
Economics-related quotations
“Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's
greed.” – Mahatma Gandhi
"The price of everything and the value of nothing" - was that Oscar Wilde?
whoever first said this - it fits well to the current market
fundamentalism re trying to put a price on everything, commodification, marketization, ...
Often the best things in life are free (until destroyed by those who don't
appreciate them as they can't easily be priced).
Re paying for the increase in the deficit and national debt, created by
reckless bankers, by making cuts to the poor. In the words of the Governor
of the Bank of England, Mervyn King: "The price of this financial crisis
is being borne by people who absolutely did not cause it…..Now is the
period when the cost is being paid, I'm surprised that the degree of
public anger has not been greater than it has." - Mervyn King, Governor of
the Bank of England, in evidence to the UK Parliament’s Treasury Select
Committee, March 2011. Although greedy bankers and incompetent regulators
crashed the World economy we are told to go easy on them. Although we are
told to forgive the bankers, the 1% (or <1%) of benefits going to
skivers is an excuse to attack all benefits!
Economics-related jokes
I have made and heard "economics jokes": these are just
words to remind me to write them down here when I get time - one re
Keynes versus Friedman and where they end up, and another joke but .....
forgotten it...
My ECONOMICS notes
Glossary
BIS "The
mission
of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is to serve central banks
in their pursuit of monetary and financial stability, to foster
international cooperation in those areas and to act as a bank for central
banks." More:
http://www.bis.org/about/index.htm
Frances criticizes BIS 2013 report in 'Financial
dislocation' - Frances Coppola 26jun13 http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/financial_dislocation Not to be
confused with BIS - the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.
NB: Most of us use BIS to refer to the UK Gov Department of
Business.........Skills
FISCAL - FISCAL POLICY: "In
economics and political science, fiscal policy is the use of government
revenue collection (mainly taxes) and expenditure (spending) to influence
the economy." - wikipedia.