As regular readers would know, I have been developing a computer program for building strictly monetary dynamic macroeconomic models. New readers might have seen this article in The Economist:
Reforming macroeconomics: Claudio Borio on the financial cycle
where my work received the following mention:
This week’s post returns to the topic I discussed just two weeks ago (Fiscal cliff lessons from the ’30s, November 26). I wrote that last post after I had given Congressman Dennis Kucinich a presentation on the fiscal cliff, and he asked me to return to Washington to give a public briefing in Congress. Today’s post is the document I spoke to at that briefing, and it’s substantially more detailed than the draft published two weeks ago.
Swags for Homeless, the Australian entrepreneurial charity that has designed a brilliant portable bed for homeless people, has entered a movie “Home” into the Focus Foward short film contest.
Outgoing Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich arranged for me to give a briefing at Congress today on the Fiscal Cliff, and how the downturn of 1937 could be a foretaste of what will happen if the Cliff comes to pass.
My presentation at the Rosa Luxembourg Foundation in Berlin today on how Neoclassical economics misunderstands the role of private debt in a capitalist economy. I show how to use my Minsky program to model both the Neoclassical “Loanable Funds” vision of lending and the empirically-informed Post Keynesian “Endogenous Money” model.
I gave the talk below to the Cambridge Society for Economic Pluralism yesterday. This student-formed society is attempting to open economics to debate–something which, despite the enormous schisms that exist within economics, is in practice sadly lacking.
This is the presentation I gave at the UN ESCAP meeting on the quality of growth today in Bangkok.
The key theme is the need to make energy the basis of the model of production, as argued by Bob Ayres and colleagues.
The older I get, the more cynical I become about government intervention in the economy.
That statement might appear to be either a recantation of everything I’ve ever argued, or a sign of the usual tale of left-wingers moving to the right, and right-wingers to the left, as life experience tempers youthful exuberance. It’s neither (well, okay, maybe it’s a bit of the latter), because my developing position reflects the complexities of a mixed economy.
An IMF working paper has received a lot of attention recently – and not for the usual reasons. Whereas the IMF is usually criticised for being dogmatic about free market economics and effectively beholden to the banks, this paper is being both praised and criticised for wanting to radically reform them.
By Philip Soos
Recently, Australian property analyst Terry Ryder, in an article on Property Observer, voiced complaints about housing bubble advocates. His issue is “waiting for someone who subscribes to the bubble theory to actually define it. So far, nobody has. The term implies that something has been over-inflated and will burst.” Of course, Steve Keen has already done so in his voluminous and critical work reaching back for over a decade.
