tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19440028023535803782024-02-23T18:03:45.429-08:00The Ethical EconomistAndrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.comBlogger245125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-39481058311587746022023-12-13T13:48:00.000-08:002023-12-13T13:48:03.878-08:00Innovation, numérique et RSE - Andrea Mairate - 13/11/2023<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://youtube.com/embed/nRltx5Apsps?si=6CGsTcxPYGNi7Tsf" frameborder="0"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-10096127056644062382023-06-28T12:27:00.001-07:002023-06-28T12:27:36.978-07:00Lecture by Frans Timmermans: The external dimension of the “Green Deal”:...<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://youtube.com/embed/bkuAeszVad0" frameborder="0"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-1044605790334254642022-05-03T04:17:00.000-07:002022-05-03T04:17:03.663-07:00Europe's big lie about Ukraine, w Stephen Fry<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://youtube.com/embed/MB-eYj3Eh2M" frameborder="0"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-81185478766228285902021-08-11T14:09:00.000-07:002021-08-11T14:09:02.052-07:00The Solutions to the Climate Crisis No One is Talking About | Robert Reich<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://youtube.com/embed/wuXURo0FUjM" frameborder="0"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-787525583150547882020-11-11T09:52:00.001-08:002020-11-11T09:52:37.402-08:00Nobel Laureate Sir Angus Deaton - Inequality and the future of capitalis...<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_MhSt2whSaA" frameborder="0"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-91441695852767482432019-12-16T08:13:00.001-08:002019-12-16T08:13:08.621-08:00Shoshana Zuboff: Surveillance Capitalism and Our Democracy<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uJwf6oLvc2Q" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-50045428776237705062019-08-07T13:33:00.001-07:002019-08-07T13:33:30.689-07:00Robert Reich: Everything You Need to Know About the New Economy<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fMmH_2EYohQ" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-4464344863068516762019-05-23T07:43:00.000-07:002019-05-25T10:06:53.013-07:00Market radicalism<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"> </span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;">In the wake of the financial crisis which led the global economy to the brink of the abyss, tenants of capitalism and economic liberalism have struggled to respond to criticism. Proponents of market fundamentalism inspired by ideas of friedman, Hayek and Stigler were more concerned about defending the liberal order rather than addressing market failures. By contrast, many critics who blame today's economic inequality, stagnation and political instability on the free market think that economic liberalism has run its course because of its inability to respond to current problems of the society. </span>
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;">In their book “<a href="https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11222.html">Radical Markets. Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society”</a>, <span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; display: inline; float: none; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"> Posner and Weyl (2018) offer a different perspective on markets. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; display: inline; float: none; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">They propose some revolutiona</span>ry ideas on how to use markets to bring about fairness and prosperity for all. Radical Markets turns this thinking—and most of all conventional thinking about markets, both for and against—on its head. </span><span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;">The book reveals bold ideas to organize markets for the good of everyone. It shows how genuinely open, free, and competitive markets can reawaken the dormant nineteenth-century spirit of liberal reformism and lead to greater equality, prosperity, and cooperation. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;">Eric Posner and Glen Weyl demonstrate why private property is inherently monopolistic, and how we would all be better off if private ownership were converted into a public auction for public benefit. Their solution is a new wealth tax - every individual would put a value on each item (s)he owned and would be taxed on total declared wealth. The tax would enable property to be put to its most profitable use, while raising revenue, perhaps to fund a universal basic income. because rich people own the most, it would be drastically redistributive. Most important, people would see property as rented from society, rather than conferring exclusive ownership. Radical collectivism would replace property ownership in democracy. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;">They also show how the principle of one person, one vote inhibits democracy, suggesting instead an ingenious way for voters to effectively influence the issues that matter most to them. They argue that every citizen of a host country should benefit from immigration—not just migrants and their capitalist employers. They propose leveraging antitrust laws to liberate markets from the grip of institutional investors and creating a data labor movement to force digital monopolies to compensate people for their electronic data.” </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms";"><br /></span>
T<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms";">he authors say their book is intended to provide fresh ideas for a renewed liberalism. But their intrinsic philsophy is utilitaianism - pursuing the common good maximises happiness. One criticsim would be that they feel relatively unconcerned with individual and social rights. At the end of the book they suggest that the logical extension of their property tax would be to apply it to human capital ie, to require citizens to declare a wage at which they would work, tax them on the basis of that number and force them to accept any job offers. In another chapter, they argue that every citizen should be given a chance to sell a visa directly to an immigrant, whom they would house and help find work. The economic gains to all would offset the social costs of inequality and power imabalnce this would produce. On voting, they calculate that their proposed electoral reforms could boost GDP by 20% (!) as if that, rather than a fair allocation of power is what really matters in electoral systems.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms";"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms";">'Radical markets' is ceratinly refreshing in its willingness to question conventional wisdom. But the proposals would do little to respond to the fundamental criticism that capitalism has neglected human needs beyond economic progress and that market principles would undermine institutions such as property rights and elections that confer dignity on individuals. Posner and Weil may be viewed in the way radicals ar often perceived, as somewhat eccentric. Still, liberals must find some convincing antidote to populism and nationalism. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms";"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "trebuchet ms";"><br /></span></div>
</div>
Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-27741702006656264672019-03-14T00:57:00.001-07:002019-03-14T00:57:41.389-07:00Robert Reich: What is Inequality of Place?<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qvlz_f8TtJE" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-31349444137733791362018-12-13T06:38:00.001-08:002018-12-13T06:38:45.765-08:00Paul M. Romer: Lecture in Economic Sciences 2018<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vZmgZGIZtiM" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-67924909631180529102018-09-05T06:57:00.001-07:002018-09-05T06:57:14.770-07:00Michael Sandel: What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GvDpYHyBlgc" width="480"></iframe><br />Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-34894540239919943422018-03-16T03:35:00.001-07:002018-03-16T03:35:33.863-07:00Robert Reich, "The Common Good"<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/J2XFfh6BDv8" width="480"></iframe><br />Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-16399117742488519082018-02-11T05:44:00.001-08:002018-02-11T05:44:25.890-08:00Why I Am Not a Christian by Bertrand Russell<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0F6J8o7AAe8" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-54003698924021753152018-01-02T06:18:00.001-08:002018-01-02T06:18:07.156-08:00Nick Bostrom - The Ethics of The Artificial Intelligence Revolution<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FXMNYcQ5tJg" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-86651350187953005062017-12-12T08:13:00.001-08:002017-12-12T08:13:17.797-08:00Branko Milanovic On Globalisation, Migration, Rising Inequality And Popu...<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eZfJwUjHljg" width="480"></iframe><br />Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-23870861581088963402017-09-23T12:54:00.001-07:002017-09-23T12:54:44.175-07:00Noam Chomsky (September 01, 2017) - Racing To The Precipice<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rrPmvMqwt3k" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-85718253679587131992017-08-20T09:21:00.001-07:002017-08-20T09:21:36.721-07:00How to Create a Good Society: Economic Growth, Education, Health, Enviro...<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ib3MZGKhpcY" width="459"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-60949662215420390932017-07-25T10:12:00.002-07:002017-08-01T08:39:41.988-07:00When Keynes imagined capitalism in 2030<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">In his famous essay '</span><a href="http://www.econ.yale.edu/smith/econ116a/keynes1.pdf"><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> Economic possibilities for our grand-children'</span></a><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"> , Keynes projected himself a century later to imagine the society of the future. In reading it, growth would have supplanted misery. We would live in a society of abundance in which we would work few hours: " It will be time for the humanity to learn how to devote its energy to other ends than economic ones". </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">This text has been analysed in many ways and at length but its interest in our view resides in the rupture with capitalism that Keynes foresees. It unveils a 'radical' vision of society than in most Keynes' writings. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Since the end of the 20s, Keynes predicted that the economic activity would be four to eight times higher after a century. Yet, today, in constant terms, the outpur of developed nations is already more than four times higher than it was in 1930. This prediction is remarkable as it was made in troubled times with the crisis of 1929 and statistics at that time were relatively scarce. To measure the audacity, we should think about the difficulties that a contemporary economist would face today in predicting the level of development in a hundred years!</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">However, Keynes imagined a society of abundance, which contrasts with one of the basic principles of capitalism, the scarcity of resources. He focuses on absolute needs (nutrition, housing, etc;) rather than relative needs (the desire to acquire a higher status), but this is rather consistent with his analysis. In an abundant society, these needs do not have any reason to exist since once materiual needs would be fully satisfied, we would be free to be human and to develop an authentic way of living. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">What appears incongruent is that a liberal economist conceives capitalism as a provisional phase of the development of mankind, where liberals think of it as the definitive and unsurmountable form of the economic order. But it is also the antagonism between true human values and the values of capitalism such as the love of money " which will be recognised for what it is, a somewhat disgusting morbidity".. In his vision, capitalism constitutes a sort of dark age during which men are constrained by the scarcity of resources. True values will only prevail when we will get out from an economy centered on work and subsistance. Keynes imagines a society where the 'old Adam' (our deep nature) would still feel the need to work three hours a day. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">What makes this text debatable is the questioning of the logic of capitalism, which consists in producing continuingly more goods and serices. For Keynes, capitalism is conceivable only if we can break up with it to build a society of sobriety. Today, we face a similar economic problem on a much larger scale because the 'productivist' model has reached its limits, due to the limitation of resources and the ecological equilibrium. This again contrasts with Keynes' traditional view on growth and innovation as palliatives to resolve our economic problems.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">From an ethical perspective, he opposed the 'Benthamian' tradition which assimilates the good to the useful. Instead, 'once out of the tunnel of economic necessity (...) we shall prefer the good' as opposed to 'avarice' and 'usury'. But his conception of the good is of a different nature and identifies with 'delightful people' and ' direct enjoyment in things', which presumably owes to </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._E._Moore"><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">George Edward Moore</span></a><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">, a philosophy professor at Cambridge and his 'Principia Ethica". </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">Interestingly, Keynes concluded that we should "<em>not overestimate the importance of the economic problem, or sacrifice to its supposed necessities other matters of greater and more permanent significance. It should be a matter of specialists - like dentistry. If economists could manage to get themselves though of as humble, competent people on a level with dentists, that would be splendid"</em> . </span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: "georgia" , "times new roman" , serif;">His conception of the economy is not about
entrepreneurship and innovation and he identified capitalism not with the
spirit of enterprise but the desire of money. In his 'General Theory',
consumption plays a central role, and saving a secondary role. His rejection of
accumulation of money is at the heart of his economic doctrine. His vision of
capitalism is not about finance and he imagines without any hesitation 'the
euthanasia of rentiers' due to the necessary fall of the rate of interest. For
Keynes, the two vices of the economic world are unemployment and inequality of
wealth and income. In this sense, his liberal ideas are inseparable from social
justice and the search for a better world.</span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: xx-small;"></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">
</span></span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-size: x-small;"> </span></div>
<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-size: x-small;">
</span><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
</div>
Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-49770127696898768702017-07-15T09:21:00.001-07:002017-07-15T09:21:42.128-07:00Noam Chomsky July 2017 - The Emerging World Order<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lL4J0T7pQkQ" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-39415676868486114072017-07-01T13:01:00.001-07:002017-07-01T13:01:34.933-07:00Varoufakis - Why the Universal Basic Income is a Necessity - by the Gott...<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/22eQ9iLBfY4" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-16594658935662869582016-12-10T08:57:00.001-08:002016-12-10T08:57:55.124-08:00Tax Experiment<iframe width="480" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1KKCXJ6WesU" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen=""></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-38929743123422569392016-11-13T09:07:00.002-08:002016-11-14T12:38:10.529-08:00Keynes and the Universal Basic Income<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the most famous Keynes' predictions is that people could afford to work less hours and have more spare time for leisure. His Essay <a href="https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/files/content/upload/Intro_Session1.pdf">'Economic Possibilities for our grand-children</a>" was written before the Great Depression and published in 1930. But his point seems to be misinterpreted bymainstream economists. His prediction was that, in the long term, say a hundred years, living standards in 'progressive countries' would be between four and eight times as high. The main arugment is that the society would be more productive with technological progress and resulting increased productivity. Hence "mankind would have resolved its economic problem". </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A <a href="http://www.excellentfuture.ca/sites/default/files/Revisting%20Keynes.pdf">book</a> published eight years ago by some of the world's leading economists explores the reasons Keynes was mistaken about a new era of leisure. One argument is Keynes' forgetfulness about distribution. The trend in recent years, though, has been towards more income inequality, between and within groups. The gap between the top 1% of earners and the rest has widened, but so has the gap among all other sub-groups of society. The rich spend more as they get richer, which leads to others wanting to spend more as well. Not all of them can afford to maintain the spending habits of those better-off , and as a result they borrow. The result, contrary to what Keynes may have imagined, has been a collapse in savings ratios in the US and Britain, and a rise in debt levels and bankruptcies. The other main argument is about working hours. There is no country that conforms to Keynes's ideal of a 15-hour working week. However, France has introduced the 35 hour week that right wing governments wanted to scrap and ask people to work longer. Recently, Sweden has voted for a six hour working day for all workers. The question is why with sustained technological progress, people still work longhours, in the US 30% more than in Europe. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Over the last 50 years, living standards in developed western economies have seen rapid growth; by 2030 it is likely that they will have risen at least eightfold if there is a strong recovery from the financial crisis. But rising living standards have not seen people deciding to satisfy their material needs. People with low wages have no choice but to work long hours. In his essay in 'Revisiting Keynes" , Richard Freeman notes that more Americans than Europeans say that they want to increase hours worked than to decrease at given wage rates, and that's probably a function of a lower minimum wage and stagnant real incomes for all but the highest earners. Furthermore, widening gap in earnings may create an incentive to work longer hours. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Keynes's failure might be to recognise that distribution matters. The economic problem will not be solved while a quarter of the world lives in abject poverty, nor while a good slice of those living in developed countries are not sharing in economic prosperity or feel they need to spend longer and longer on the workplace.<br />
<br />
Keynes' view might be ethnocentric but his argument referred to progressive societies such as France or Sweden. It had to be put in context, bearing in mind the accumulation of capital and the wide variety of goods that technological progress offers. What he had in mind is the '<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/55267.The_Good_Society"> good society'</a> that Galbraith attempted to lay out twenty years ago. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
In our unequal societies, a greater degree of income equality would indeed help to improve the welfare of low earners. The new frontier is the introduction of a universal basic income (UBI)whatever the form it takes. <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/basic-income-funded-by-capital-income-by-yanis-varoufakis-2016-10">Y. Varoufakis</a> made convincingly this point : "<i>A universal basic income allows for new understandings of liberty and equality that bridge hitherto irreconcilable political blocs, while stabilizing society and reinvigorating the notion of shared prosperity in the face of otherwise destabilizing technological innovation". </i>His proposal is to fund UBI not with taxation but from returns on capital, i.e.. profits. This could be an important step up towards a more equal society. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br /></div>
Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-42695395457116533852016-10-23T01:49:00.001-07:002016-10-23T01:51:10.838-07:00 Neoliberalism and austerity<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2016/10/neoliberalism-and-austerity.html?spref=bl">mainly macro: Neoliberalism and austerity</a>: I like to treat neoliberalism not as some kind of coherent political philosophy, but more as a set of interconnected ideas that have becom...</div>
Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-49114592148845647152016-10-02T01:13:00.001-07:002016-10-02T01:13:22.560-07:00Universal Basic Income<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UqESogRgrYw" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1944002802353580378.post-62524673930579910192016-09-13T22:43:00.001-07:002016-09-13T22:43:38.701-07:00Corporate Tax Desertion<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="270" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/26QQSjCw-Kc" width="480"></iframe>Andrea Mairatehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12535736857863598552noreply@blogger.com0