So what happened to Milton Friedman?

Think of it this way: Friedman was an avid free-market advocate, who insisted that the market, left to itself, could solve almost any problem. Yet he was also a macroeconomic realist, who recognized that the market definitely did not solve the problem of recessions and depressions. So he tried to wall off macroeconomics from everything else, and make it as inoffensive to laissez-faire sensibilities as possible. Yes, he in effect admitted, we do need stabilization policy — but we can minimize the government’s role by relying only on monetary policy, none of that nasty fiscal stuff, and then not even allowing the monetary authority any discretion. Nadaljujte z branjem→

The top 1 percent income share has more than doubled in the United States over the last 30 years, drawing much public attention in recent years. While other English-speaking countries have also experienced sharp increases in the top 1 percent income share, many high-income countries such as Japan, France, or Germany have seen much less increase in top income shares. Hence, the explanation cannot rely solely on forces common to advanced countries, such as the impact of new technologies and globalization on the supply and demand for skills. Moreover, the explanations have to accommodate the falls in top income shares earlier in the twentieth century experienced in virtually all high-income countries. Nadaljujte z branjem→

Imagine a society with perfect economic equality. Then, one day, this egalitarian utopia is disturbed by an entrepreneur with an idea for a new product. Think of the entrepreneur as Steve Jobs as he develops the iPod, J. K. Rowling as she writes her Harry Potter books, or Steven Spielberg as he directs his blockbuster movies. The new product makes the entrepreneur much richer than everyone else. How should the entrepreneurial disturbance in this formerly egalitarian outcome alter public policy? Should public policy remain the same, because the situation was initially acceptable and the entrepreneur improved it for everyone? Or should government policymakers deplore the resulting inequality and use their powers to tax and transfer to spread the gains more equally? In my view, this thought experiment captures, in an extreme and stylized way, what has happened to US society over the past several decades. Since the 1970s, average incomes have grown, but the growth has not been uniform across the income distribution. The incomes at the top, especially in the top 1 percent, have grown much faster than average. These high earners have made significant economic contributions, but they have also reaped large gains. The question for public policy is what, if anything, to do about it. Nadaljujte z branjem→

We have become two Americas — literally, the 99% and the 1%. We have what a Citigroup investment brochure called the most eye-popping concentration of wealth in a great power since 16th century Spain. The numbers are staggering. From 1979 to 2011, 84% of the nation’s increase in income has gone to the wealthiest 1%, according to Alan Krueger, a Princeton economist who now chairs the White House Council of Economic Advisers. Nadaljujte z branjem→

Economist ugotavlja, da je Estonija v dveh desetletjih po neodvisnosti postala vodilna v Evropi po uporabi tehnologije v vsakdanjem življenju – od bančnega poslovanja, vlaganja e-dohodninskih napovedi, plačevanja prek mobilnih telefonov, do e-volitev in in e-vlade. In več kot to, estonski računalničarji so napisali kodo za Skype in Kazaa ter mnoge druge spletne aplikacije. Estonija ima najbolj preprosto in prijazno poslovno okolje v Evropi, zato tam nastaja daleč največ startupov (novih podjetij) na prebivalca. Je pa seveda res, da ima Estonija res tržno in odprto gospodarstvo, ki – brez milosti – niha v eno ali drugo smer. V dobrih časih raste po dvomestnih cifrah, v slabih časih pa prav tako uplahne v dvomestnih cifrah. Povsem neprimerno in nezaželeno za slovenske razmere, kjer si želimo predvsem stabilnosti. Seveda gre to na škodo razvoja. Nadaljujte z branjem→

Afera s prisluškovanjem NSA komunikaciji širom Evrope, najbolj pa v Nemčiji, ter sodelovanje Googla v tej raboti je v mnoga nemška podjetja vnesla nervozo ter veliko dozo previdnosti. Zadeve gredo tako daleč, da pametni telefoni, razen Blackberryjev, več nimajo vstopa na interne sestanke ali da se pomembna notranja komunikacija ne odvija več po elektronski poti, pač pa se prenaša ročno. Problem je v tem, kot sem pisal zadnjič, da nihče več ni prepričan, da elektronska komunikacija prek Googlovih strežnikov (gmail, Android) ne bo prišla v roke ne samo NSA, pač pa zasebnim podjetjem, katerim NSA outsourca obdelavo podatkov (data mining). Nadaljujte z branjem→

Tiskani mediji se z vzponom digitalnih tehnologij, predvsem interneta, ter z usihanjem oglaševalskih prihodkov otepajo velikih težav in so v podobnem položaju kot svečarji ob izumu električne energije in žarnice. Niso povsem pred izumrtjem, pač pa se bo njihov obseg prodaje tiskanih izvodov v naslednjih letih skrčil le na desetino ali manj. Toda svečarjem je bilo bistveno težje spremeniti poslovni model kot pa je medijem. Mediji veliko lažje preidejo na nove tehnologije in začnejo ponujati obstoječe in nove vsebine v digitalni obliki, kot pa so se (objektivno) bili svečarji sposobni preleviti v industrijske obrate za proizvodnjo žarnic. Ena izmed lekcij, ki so jo okosteneli tiskani mediji dobili v zadnjem času, je nakup Washington Posta s strani Jeffa Bezosa, ustanovitelja Amazona. Nadaljujte z branjem→

Odgovor na naslovno vprašanje je lažji od odgovora na vprašanje ali obstaja življenje po smrti. Čeprav se z odgovorom prebivalci Irske, Grčije, Španije in Portugalske ter večina ministrov njihovih vlad ne bi strinjali. Seveda po ostri vladni politiki varčevanja (oziroma fiskalni konsolidaciji, kot se temu uradno reče) obstaja lepši jutri. … le prvih pet let je hudo težkih. Nato pa se vse začne od začetka, podobno kot po vojni. * Nadaljujte z branjem→

Pri nas se javnost mnogokrat zgraža nad komuniciranjem med ekonomisti glede aktualnih tem ekonomske politike. No v tujini ni nič drugače.  Komunikacija glede pravilnosti politike varčevanja med nemškimi ekonomisti ali med ameriškimi ekonomisti ni potekala nič bolj v rokavicah kot pri nas. Kvečjemu manj. Podobno se dogaja glede tega, kdo bo imenovan za naslednjega predsednika ameriške centralne banke Fed, kjer se odvija zanimiva besedna bitka med podporniki in privrženci glavnih dveh kandidatov. Nekaj linkov in citatov na aktualna mnenja najbolj vplivnih kolumnistov, ekonomistov in blogerjev. Za razumevanje ozadja pa prej preberite še Bitka za naslednika Bernankeja na čelu FED. Nadaljujte z branjem→