Debunking Economics - the podcast

The UK’s unemployment rate is 4.1%, the inflation rate is growing at 3.1% and the economy is growing at 0.6% quarter on quarter. That’s how the economy is doing, what more do we need to know?Well, it would be useful to know whether the unemployed are predominantly in certain income groups, or that income growth was greater in particular parts of the economy Like, more for capitalists and less for workers?As Steve and Phil discuss this week, economists are building business models built on aggregates.  Breaking down aggregate data into functions in society, or income, will add a lot of extra complexity to models, but they would do a much better job of showing us what’s going on. For example, central bank policy right now aims to restrict spending and wage growth to tame inflation. But, even if that was the cause of inflation, what if those creating inflation by spending more on services, are distinct from those facing the consequences of central bank policy, losing jobs and paying higher mortgages?Steve points out that as the economy slows – and it has to because of climate change -  knowing the distribution of income and consumption becomes vitally important. Unless we are prepared to see the rich grow richer at the expense of everyone else.Economic models are built on aggregates of key variables.  Those aggregates hide distribution impacts. That makes it easier for central banks to pursue monetary policy without worrying about the consequences.

A couple of years ago, when warning of the need to fight inflation, Jerome Powell, Governor of the US Federal Reserve says interest rate would rise and jobs might disappear. Yet, interest rates have risen, and unemployment hasn’t fallen anywhere near as much as expected. So, what’s going on? Does it mean, thankfully, that monetary policy isn’t working as well as expected? Now the talk is of a soft landing, where jobs have been protected and inflation has come down. The work of fine tuning by the central bank, or just a coincidence. Phil Dobbie and Steve Keen talk about the interplay between jobs, wages, inflation and central bank policy.

Some call it the silver tsunami. The wave of old people putting pressure on government budgets. And, as baby boomers retire and young people produce less and less children, western populations will continue to age. That means less productive capacity and more people dependent on welfare. On today’s podcasts Phil & Steve talk through the three options open to governments: flood the country with younger migrants to pay more tax, pay less and create a cohort of elderly poor, or rethink the idea that budgets have to balance. The last one is always quickly dismissed.

The last time interest rates were this high they came down rather fast. This time central bankers are determined to manage a slow unwind and deliver a return to growth without wreaking havoc on the economy. Will they be successful? This week Steve Keen argues the high interest rates are inflicting damage without treating the problem. Inflation is being caused by businesses increasing their mark-ups. But, Phil asks, surely they are only able to do that because demand is outstripping supply. And what should interest rates return to? Central bakers call it the R* - is there a danger if they assume it’s too high we could drive ourselves towards debt deflation?

Complex systems don’t have to be complicated to provided deep insights into the real world. That’s the view of Doyne Farmer, special guest on this week’s podcast. It’s an approach he shares to economics with Steve Keen. Steve develops systems from the top-down, whereas Doyne’s work focuses on agent-driven bottom-up modelling. But they arrive at similar conclusions. Phil Dobbie talks to them both about how we could arrive at a more accurate understanding of the economy and financial systems, which could result in better regulatory and planning behaviour by central banks and governments. Doyne also describes how he started down the road of complex modelling, using science to beat the casino tables in Vegas. Or more, get a copy of Doyne’s new book: Making Sense of Chaos– A Better Economics for a Better World.

It’s curious isn’t it how we talk about household savings, rather than net debt. Many people do have money squirreled away in savings accounts, for a rainy day. That rainy day comes when hey lose a job and need that cash to pay their mortgage. So we are saving to help pay off an existing debt at a later date. How cockeyed it that? A lot of that money tied up in savings, including funds we’ve put away for our pension, ultimately become the source for investment. That’s supposedly a good thing. More money for investment means businesses can borrow more, and the bigger the availability of funds the lower the interest that will be charged to these businesses. But the more we save the less money we spend, therefore the less demand businesses will have and the less the appetite for borrowing for investment. Phil discusses all of this with Steve Keen, who challenges a lot of the conventional logic around savings, debt and investments. 

So, if economics is all about the allocation of scarce resources, isn’t energy the most scarce resource? And yet its not really included in any economic models. We look at labour and capital as the drivers of growth, but energy is just a contributor to those factors, not a key factor in itself. Yet without energy humans wouldn’t survive and machines would lie dormant. This week Phil talks to Steve about the need to give energy the dominant position it deserves in economic models. As you’ll discover, it doesn’t have to be that complicated. Then, once we have a clear model we can use them to ensure that we deliver economic growth without destroying the planet. Simples.

We are obsessed with the need to own things, not least, our homes. But for younger people that is increasingly becoming a pipedream, unless they are lucky enough to gain a healthy inheritance. Even then it’s going to come later in life. In the meantime, we save like crazy, and even when we do get a house, we spend decades paying it off though a hefty loan form the bank. The finance sector are the big winners. But should we do away with this unhealthy obsession and rent our homes. A d should the government be the landlord most of us turn to, rather than a private property owner borrowing from their bank?