Sign In Close
A Basic Income would eliminate poverty and reduce inequality, but those are merely side benefits. The main reason we need it is to create demand.
America’s inability to translate its immense firepower into meaningful political effect suggests the $500 billion it spends annually on defence is wasted.
The problem of capitalism is no longer making enough stuff, but rather, finding consumers affluent enough to buy it.
When the private sector wants to save but not invest, government investment is a free lunch.
Why do we want to be rich? So we can buy cool stuff and impress our friends, obviously. But perhaps, more fundamentally, to secure our future...
Lets abandon this fixation with balancing the budget and recognize that only fiscal policy will create jobs, replace deficient private sector demand and give firms a reason to hire and invest.
The Latin American debt crisis remains the best teaching tool we have to explain the workings of the modern financial system.
The tragic thing about the Israeli Palestinian conflict is that we all know the solution...
Our unheard of affluence as consumers, our precarious existence as workers both stem from the same source: inexorable productivity increases.
Eleven years after George Bush declared “mission accomplished”, Isis, a group thrown out of al Qaida for being too extreme has taken Mosul and controls much of the Sunni heartland. Who shall we blame?
Why has reducing the effect of rent regulation had so little consequence on the price of unregulated apartments in New York?
Secular stagnation means that we need unusually low rates if we hope to engender even moderate growth. Higher rates would quickly plunge us back into recession.
Each generation of the middle class seems to have a harder time maintaining its lifestyle. We work harder, for less money and non-existent job security.
It's one thing to attribute the rise of house prices to inflation, interest rate cuts, economic geography, and the hunt for safe assets, but the big question is, will this appreciation continue?
Hobbes was right. Without the government monopoly on violence, life is nasty brutish and short.
Sean McMeekin, author of July 1914: Countdown to War, talks with Tom Streithorst about the origins of World War I.
Today America’s infrastructure is in a shambles, its educational system mediocre, its median wage lower than it was in 1973, its middle class shrinking and insecure. How did it get to this?
Few events are more central to the history of the 20th century than the First World War.
The past thirty years have been bad for workers but good for capitalists. This may be about to change.
A basic income guarantee (also called a negative income tax) will not only reignite the economy and overcome secular stagnation, it will be the salvation of capitalism.
Basic Income is the future. But if you disagree, please come up with a better idea. How else do you suggest we stimulate demand in a world that every year needs fewer and fewer workers?
Basic income may well prove to be the best tool to preserve our capitalist system. But first, progressive politicians need to educate the public that austerity is the problem, not the solution.
We generally think of consumption as indulgent and investment as serious and sober but perhaps in our demand starved world, this is an outdated prejudice.
The current economy needs consumers more than it needs workers, argues Tom Streithorst.
Creative destruction is a key feature of capitalism, and it may eventually create jobs, but it could take a while. So what should we do while we wait?
Our assumption of where power really lies in the global economy may well be out of date.
The Reagan Thatcher political economy paradigm, created thirty years ago, has reached its sell-by-date. But what is to be done?
Easy money and ultra low interest rates haven't brought the economy back up to speed. Inflation might be the only solution.
Economics is a toolkit that enables better understanding of how people live, and how societies work.
Chief Economist7 articles | View profile
RT @azizonomics: "Austerity at this juncture is not just unnecessary: it's downright dangerous." http://t.co/rNaVnPLWdO My latest for @Pie…
Should economists rule? - by @sjwrenlewis http://t.co/N1gJu35Jrl
On The Formation Of A Government With The SNP - by @azizonomics http://t.co/jhkPbTOH8p
RT @went1955: With Britain’s top economists in charge, what policies? — Nice piece (I esp. like idea D. Coyle) @FT — @TimHarford — http://t…
Some unintended consequences of QE - http://t.co/F3KMG3IIt2