Jamie Smith

4.6K posts

Jamie Smith banner
Jamie Smith

Jamie Smith

@JGS952

30, Physicist, Engineer, amateur economist. Constantly in a superposition of disappointment and pride with the world.

Hampshire, UK शामिल हुए Ekim 2011
2.1K फ़ॉलोइंग265 फ़ॉलोवर्स
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@BenRamanauskas How can fiscal contraction (relative to a control path) induce higher firm investment and productivity? Firms boost output only when expected demand is strong and stable, sufficient to induce investment in new capital. Since the state isn't investing in this scenario, no growth
English
0
0
0
2
Ben Ramanauskas
Ben Ramanauskas@BenRamanauskas·
Austerity can work (bring about growth while reducing the deficit and National Debt). However, this is if you ONLY have spending cuts rather than what the UK did (cuts here and there AND tax rises). Cameron and Osborne massively fumbled the bag.
Oli Dugmore@OliDugmore

On the idiocy of austerity, and so much more. I’ve spent the last few months, when I wasn’t looking after my newborn daughter (!), profiling economist Mariana Mazzucato. Her ideas influence how millions of people are governed: Starmer’s Missions, Biden’s CHIPS Act, Trump’s stake in Intel. It’s all Mazzonomics. For nearly two decades the Western centre left has existed in an oddly depleted intellectual condition. The old neoliberal settlement lost legitimacy after the 2008 financial crisis, but no consensus ever fully arrived to replace it. A politics once organised around redistribution increasingly found itself reduced to management: fiscal rules, institutions, process. This, in part, explains Mazzucato’s rise. She offers something contemporary centre left politics badly craves - not just policies, but a story about what governments are for. She offers a theory of capitalism that is moral, managerial, and patriotic. Radical enough to sound transformative, pragmatic enough to sit comfortably within state institutions. Whether that synthesis can survive contact with increasingly volatile politics, a worsening economy, and human self-interest is an open question. She also fed me wine at 11am. Listen to our conversation on The Exchange now, link below.

English
11
7
64
10.8K
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@Mario_Macis Is it very different? Or is it a further matter of degree? Their belief is market liberalism in its current mixed form is too destructive given current and expected material throughput. Hence states must more actively shape direction and composition of production this century.
English
0
0
0
33
Mario Macis
Mario Macis@Mario_Macis·
I'm not the extremist you're making me out to be, and there's no contradiction in what I wrote. Our societies already run on a mix of markets and government, and people can reasonably disagree on whether we need more or less government in different parts of the economy. That's a normal, healthy debate. But what this proposal does is something very different, and I've stated my objections to that.
English
1
0
2
60
Mario Macis
Mario Macis@Mario_Macis·
My 2 cents: I find none of these responses convincing, particularly on points 1 and 3. The agenda is based on a drastic degrowth program, which I find deeply problematic because, to be achieved, it would need to violate fundamental liberties and suppress important traits of human nature. And not only that, it's exactly the opposite of what's needed to achieve the proposal's purported goals. Far from utopian , the proposal feels highly dystopian to me: a technocratic attempt by an elite to impose its preferences on people, and that is the opposite of what expanding democracy should do. We absolutely should be doing more to invest in health and education in low-income countries. Many of us, across disciplines, are already working on this. But this proposal is unconvincing and problematic on many levels. I don't think it should ever be on the table.
Thomas Piketty@PikettyWIL

One week after the launch of the #GlobalJusticeReport, we've received a wide range of reactions. We're grateful for the many comments, critiques, and questions we've received so far, and we hope the discussions continue in the weeks ahead. We see the report as a contribution to a broader public debate. Here are three common criticisms we'd like to address: 1) “The report proposes a radical de-growth agenda” 2) "The report uses an unrealistically pessimistic 4.5°C warming scenario." 3) "The report is a utopian dream." 🧵

English
5
11
90
13.5K
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@joseph_gellman Why does the debate never ever question the sustainability of private pension income? Why don't we start by curtailing consumption facilitated by private retirement wealth?
English
0
0
2
43
Joseph Gellman
Joseph Gellman@joseph_gellman·
If we were a serious country, scrapping the triple lock on pensions would be a consensus position and there would be a serious discussion about means testing the state pension And Labour backbenchers wouldn’t oppose any and all welfare reform
English
9
6
52
3K
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@joachim_voth I completely reject that the "latter has worked" though. This might be the issue. Climate breakdown and multiple planetary boundaries breached is not "working". Billions still impoverished and development goals suffering. Only China has had wild success cutting destitution.
English
3
0
4
290
Joachim Voth
Joachim Voth@joachim_voth·
@JGS952 Yes. It can continue. And yes i have preferences and so does everyone else. The key q here is - do i get to impose mine? Does stiglitz? Or do we let people all express theirs thru purchases, work, prices? The latter has worked. Nothing else has.
English
2
2
47
1.9K
Joachim Voth
Joachim Voth@joachim_voth·
Found it. All u need to know to think about the Piketty, Stiglitz et al. proposals:
Joachim Voth tweet media
English
16
144
810
44K
Jamie Smith रीट्वीट किया
Thomas Piketty
Thomas Piketty@PikettyWIL·
One week after the launch of the #GlobalJusticeReport, we've received a wide range of reactions. We're grateful for the many comments, critiques, and questions we've received so far, and we hope the discussions continue in the weeks ahead. We see the report as a contribution to a broader public debate. Here are three common criticisms we'd like to address: 1) “The report proposes a radical de-growth agenda” 2) "The report uses an unrealistically pessimistic 4.5°C warming scenario." 3) "The report is a utopian dream." 🧵
Thomas Piketty tweet media
English
27
77
298
51.9K
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Yes, *anchored*, not fixed or centrally controlled. Buffer stocks help stabilise the price of the commodity. For a JG, that's labour. And prices are heavily influenced by the price of labour as a cost+ mark up. Doesn't solve everything (e.g. supply side) but better than today.
English
0
0
0
11
Resolution Foundation
Resolution Foundation@resfoundation·
The Government should call time on the Triple Lock. The policy has been far too expensive, failed to reduce poverty, and is unhelpfully arbitrary. Read the full report here➡️ buff.ly/FY93tV6
Resolution Foundation tweet media
English
30
23
95
46.3K
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation That's just not inherently true though. Especially when it's fully implemented and wages and prices are continuously anchored by the JG fixed wage. The long run real cost of unemployment is unbelievably large, you're simply ignoring the savings.
English
1
0
0
14
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Boosting supply requires investment, both public and private, in productivity-enhancing capital. And hiring 1m currently unemployed people across the country to devote ~1.5bn collective work-hours a year to support care, education, health, flood defence, community food is good.
English
1
0
0
14
privatize social security
@JGS952 @Odin2001iom @resfoundation socially useful output will just cause higher inflation and paying more people to worn doesn't boost the supply side boosting the supply side means labor market reforms, welfare reforms, changing licensing, etc... of al which will have some trade offs
English
1
0
0
12
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation You wouldn't at all. Direct and indirect lifting of the supply side would occur via direct socially useful output and its knock on effects as well as indirect boost from a structurally more resilient labour market and demand levels providing certainty and boost for firms
English
1
0
0
8
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Nope, you misunderstand. The NAIRU is replaced by a NAIBER (.. buffer employment ratio) under a JG. Rather than the level of employment changing over the cycle both endogenously and induced by CB policy to guard against inflation, the *composition* of employment changes.
English
1
0
0
9
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Which are equally real costs my friend. But even if we just take that £38bn direct lost output. £30bn to hire them to improve local communities and increase resilience in care, environment, and anything else socially useful is still a no brainer.
English
0
0
0
4
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation I agree that consumption of non-working population should fall, but I want to compress private pension income not more progressive state pension income.
English
1
0
0
12
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation There is an extremely real and lasting cost to high youth unemployment actually. We could solve it tomorrow if we had a JG. 1m 16-24 hired at total comp of £30k is only £30bn a year. Subtract additional output and saving as a result and it quickly becomes a huge net benefit
English
1
0
0
8
privatize social security
@JGS952 @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Youth unemployment will go down in a few years the only cost is politics of waiting. Both a JG and investment would be inflationary lest you reinvent slavery. Besides I'm not talking about investment via deficit spending I'm talking about it via replacing the triple lock
English
2
0
0
15
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Even gov's own report costs current youth unemployment at £125bn a year... what's the *net* cost/benefit? I think overall it's far better than the status quo. And you do both JG and investment. Investment alone will eventually be inflationary or you have to keep NAIRU.
English
1
0
0
12
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Or adopt a Job Guarantee as a flexible labour buffer stock, achieving price stable full employment. Far better structural starting point to then deploy needed state investment
English
1
0
0
17
Jamie Smith
Jamie Smith@JGS952·
@MakeUSAVAT @Odin2001iom @resfoundation Output gap is defined by consensus frameworks that treat NAIRU as unavoidable. You can't use that measure to critique heterodox ideas that reject NAIRU. You either have to robustly defend NAIRU and provide reasons why capacity utilisation can't be sustainably higher or not.
English
1
0
0
6