BC ECONOMY
Saved by @jay_millerjay

I’m beginning to think that the left has been too obsessed with GDP as a broken economic metric governing the global shitshow, when inflation is more insidious. Deflation may be a more radical demand than degrowth. Burst bubbles. Deflate the price of fossil fuel infrastructure.

 It’s amazing just how much political economy is still determined by the threat of stagflation. This has created a weird metonymy in which as long as you’re fight inflation (preserving the interests of (older) savers) you’re also fighting stagnation (supporting (younger) earners).
To some extent the residual fear of deflationary spirals lies behind this, waiting in the wings for any suggestion that stagnation must be fought with deflation. This is entirely understandable, as uncontrolled deflation hits the poorest hardest.
The assumption that conjoins these fears into an engine of unbridled economic stagnation is that there’s a unitary market effectively mediating between the markets in different sectors, be this unity micro-economic or macro-economic in flavour. But this just isn’t how it works.
There is so much more logistic friction in the price system than the popular story of just in time production suggests, not least in the concrete details of differentiated trade between economic actors from local businesses to nation states.
The conditions that enable relative stability of prices between sectors are *extremely* political, and far more complicated than Hayek’s vision of the price system suggests. These conditions constitute the parameters of the tacit social contract underpinning liberal democracies.
Outside of niche markets in consumer goods, prices are incredibly sticky, and the reason they’re sticky is that the stability of power depends on their stickiness. Libertarians are fond of this as a critique of state intervention, but you don’t need a state to exert power.
The price system is not just smooth supply-demand negotiation, but power broking between finance, industrial cartels, and other interest groups, only partially mediated by states and state blocks. Anti-trust is a joke. The market is built from bonds of anti-competitive trust.
It’s not so much that prices are sticky as that purchasing power is sticky, the more you’ve got the easier it is to maintain it and the less you’ve got the harder it is to grow. It’s shifts in concrete industrial relations between sectors that have the potential to destroy power.
This is where the real lie of ‘disruptive’ investment comes to the fore. Such innovations are far likelier to disrupt labour power than anything else in an era where the institutions articulating this power are degraded or tame.
Moreover, the consolidation of purchasing power synergises with broken investment systems that divert resources away from genuinely disruptive technologies and into safe competition over consumer goods. Jet packs conflict with high street based business models
This isn’t to say that change doesn’t happen, just that its effects are felt in ways peculiar to the pace at which they take place. Micro-economically we’re good at relative value estimation in the short term (local), but bad at absolute value in the long term (global).
Consumers are boiled like frogs by slow but steady differential price inflation, and captains of industry push each other off cliffs like lemmings unable to see the industrial future rising up to greet them. New titans rise slow enough for common sense to mask it until too late.
Everyone is complicit in changing the industrial base as little as possible to preserve the current set of scams encoded in the relative purchasing power within and between political blocks, geographic and otherwise. The main risks taken are the precisely the wrong ones.
The grand cognitive potential of humanity and its technological prostheses is harnessed by the stubborn incompetence of the global market system and turned to tasks that waste it in egregiously efficient, rather than gloriously excessive ways.
It might just be time to reconfigure and reroute this potential around the complex knots of power and ignorance still holding together the last liberal compromise in political economy. To trade slow burn immoderation for destructive creation. There’s destruction aplenty already.
So I say to my fellow millennials, and the zoomers who are often confused for us, reach for your avocados and your smartphones: our work is not yet done. we’ve whole industries to destroy. 🖖
P.S. The fact my smartphone predictive text corrects ‘immiseration’ to ‘immoderation’ is the most bleakly poetic representative fact I’ve seen in quite some time.

More from pete wolfendale

pete wolfendale
pete wolfendale
@deontologistics
So, here’s a way of reframing this question: which societies enabled coexistence and collaboration between people with divergent social styles, rather than imposing a dominant social style? Such social pluralism is very important indeed.


I suspect that the vast majority of the answers to the original question will fall foul of the tendency to project ideal social arrangements that reflect our own style of social understanding and engagement, and that this will lead them to talk past one another.

Consider the perspective of someone far away from you on in the neurological map, who doesn’t overlap with your socially calibrated genetic resources for social intelligence: the social heaven of an autist introvert may be the social hell of a bipolar extrovert, and vice versa.

I’ve had many good conversations about this with people in different parts of the map who overlap with me in different ways (h/t @tjohnlinward, @dynamic_proxy, @maradydd, @mojozozoe, @UnclePhobic) whose personal heavens I would like to visit, but maybe not live in full time.

We get to see glimpses of these heavens not merely in the past, but in the present, and abstract their geometries, both in spatial/architectural terms (https://t.co/aTcRgtJOVJ) and in temporal/dynamic terms (). The physical/computational platforms around us configure our agency.
SOCIETY
pete wolfendale
pete wolfendale
@deontologistics
I think one way of looking at the economic pathologies of our society, without using words like 'capitalism' and 'rentiership', is to talk about inequities in the distribution of risk. Some have more taste for risk than others, sure, but risk is not distributed on this basis.

In the UK, so much of our political troubles come from the growth in the landlord class, who if nothing else, wield disproportionate power relative to their social worth: at one and the same time claim to be martyrs to the risk of investment, and demand these risks be minimised.

Of course, it's possible to make claims like this: e.g., nurses have every right to claim that they shoulder not merely more risk than most, but far more risk than is strictly necessary. The pandemic has made this brutally obvious to anyone who has been paying attention.

However one chooses to tally up compensation for this social role, be it financial, social, or some other privilege, it's pretty obvious that every last 'essential worker' is shouldering more societal risk than most non-essential workers compensated far better than they.

The way this trade off gets (implicitly) articulated as 'pay vs. purpose' is one of the enduring insights of @davidgraeber's Bullshit Jobs. Yet there are many essential workers who don't even get the illusion of purpose in compensation for personal risk (e.g., warehouse staff).
ECONOMY
Advertisement
pete wolfendale
pete wolfendale
@deontologistics
My morning thought. I think what's most incompatible about the way I think and the journal article format as a means of capturing and validating thought is that I have a completely different sense of the relation between tentativeness, rigor, and informatic compression.

The characteristic Pete thought is: wait a minute, this whole area is dominated by an assumption that no one seems to be questioning, and I've got two options to express that: i) outline the logic of the issue in a quick and compressed way, ii) write a small book with references.

The discipline seems to want something in between these poles every single time, and this makes me extremely anxious because I feel (with good reason) like any partially referential engagement with the issue will get instantly torpedoed by anyone outside its referential remit.

To repeat something I've said before: I'm actually quite good at being *concise*, I just find it very hard to be *brief*, because most of the thoughts I have don't permit brevity. Consider what your (referential) reactions are to this brief piece:

One of the main genres of publication I've actually excelled in over the years is dictionary articles, which I take a lot of joy in writing, and include some of the pieces of which I'm most proud. Consider this one on the crux of Meillassoux's project:
FOR LATER READ
pete wolfendale
pete wolfendale
@deontologistics
@paulkreinerhere @schulzb589 I accept that I haven't given a proof of this impossibility, but I believe the concerns I've laid out could probably be formalised in a way that would lead to one, though it'd involve something like a combinatoric diagonalisation similar to Russell's paradox.

@schulzb589 To state my issue in a more philosophical way, I think the desire to combinatorially totalise mathematical syntax is an effect of something like a transcendental illusion, what I sometimes call the Mythos of Logos.

@schulzb589 It's the Leibnizian desire to obviate creative dialogical interaction (dialectical reason) by providing a deductive system (monological reason) that would allow us to simply 'shut up and calculate'; the desire to obviate the pragmatic autonomy of discovery by automating it.

@schulzb589 It doesn't matter how many times this desire is betrayed by its own formal tools: Russell, Godel, Turing, Chaitin, etc.; it doesn't matter that these betrayals are what drive the externalisation of thought by producing new tools to automate computation. It always comes back.

@schulzb589 The desire to brute force reality, be it mathematical or empirical, is always lying in wait, whispering seemingly 'reasonable' lies about what is and isn't rationally possible. This is as close as I come to endorsing Heidegger and Adorno's worries about technoscience.
FOR LATER READ
pete wolfendale
pete wolfendale
@deontologistics
This is what happens when you train neural networks largely on tone and its stylistic relics. They pick up formal features of arguments (not so much fallacies as tics) that have almost nothing to do with semantic content (focus on connotation over implication).


This is a secular problem in the discipline. It's got nothing to do with the Analytic/Continental split in the anglophone world. They've both got the same ramifying signal/noise problem, it's just that the styles (tics and connotations) are different in each pedagogical context.

And this is before we start talking about tone policing and topic policing, which are both rife and essentially make the peer review journal system completely unfit for purpose, populated as it is by a random sampling of pedants selecting for syntactic noise over semantic signal.

We've allowed a system of self-reinforcing and ratcheting filters to evolve that effectively *fuzzes* our contribution to the growth of human knowledge (https://t.co/VmW15pGt7J), because it selects for properties only loosely related to those we claim to want. Let that sink in.

This is literally the opposite of what a filter is supposed to do: extract signal from noise, syntactic compression that preserves semantic content. Instead we are awash in syntactic artifacts optimised for minimal criticisable content and maximal pedantic posturing.
FOR LATER READ

More from Economy

Pavlina R Tcherneva
Pavlina R Tcherneva
@ptcherneva
$600/wk Unemployment Insurance cannot deliver the benefits of a $600/wk Job Guarantee. From the outset, I should say JG is not a replacement for UI, no matter what you may have heard. I’ll get to this later, but read this long 🧶 w/ that in mind.


Automatic stabilization: Both $600/wk UI and JG will provide counter cyclical spending. But UI will be weaker. Counter-cyclical stabilization is not just about the absence of income. It is also about the transmission and structure of economy

Firms don't like to hire the unemployed. Mass and long-term unemployment make the problem worse. JG would recover labor markets much faster than a UI of the same amount, both b/c of the higher direct, induced & tertiary employment effects & b/c of private firm hiring preferences.

JG stabilizes spending patterns better. Uncertain job prospects may mean more cautious spending from the unemployed compared to those w/ guaranteed jobs.
UI is temporary, which makes matters worse. Even if it were permanent, it still won't resolve the problem of job scarcity.

Nations who once achieved tight full employment through active labor market policies demonstrate that unemployment does NOT fluctuate the same way it does w/o them. Direct employment, ELR type policies diminish drastically/even eliminate these amplitudes (eg postwar Japan/Sweden)
ECONOMY
Robin Wigglesworth
Robin Wigglesworth
@RobinWigg
A thread on an interesting report by Goldman Sachs' Peter Oppenheimer, the bank's chief global equity strategist. He points out that Goldman's "Bear Market Risk Indicator" is looking ominous.


There are three factors that suggest that the recent stability could evaporate and that equities are "about to enter a sustained bear market", Oppenheimer says.

First is the fact that growth, inflation and interest rate outlook is unfriendly for equities.


Second is that greater volatility, such as multiple corrections and new peaks (which we've seen in 2018) tend to presage a full bear market.


Here is Goldman's data showing how falls and bounces tend to come ahead of "the dramatic final fall".
ECONOMY
Advertisement
Ndegwa Power
Ndegwa Power
@ndegwapower
Thread: Why Kenya and other countries are introducing Digital Taxes? Why now?

Now,the current tax laws & international tax framework (which dates back to the 1920s) was designed at a time when businesses were largely brick-and-mortar (physical stores).Then, it was unimagineable for a biz to operate in another country without some form of physical presence

Thus, in most countries, for a business to be pay corporate tax it has to have some form of nexus there (e.g. Kenya). Either it's registered here, or it's managed from here or it has what we call a permanent establishment (also implies some form of physical presence)

Fast forward to today, there are numerous companies that are able to operate in multiple countries without having any physical presence in those countries. Consider social media platforms or streaming services, with a device, connection & subscription you can access their service

...and they don't have to have any physical office or employees etc in Kenya for them to deliver the service to you. I mentioned above that to be subject to corporate tax here, a company would have to have some form of nexus here in Kenya, these companies, don't.
ECONOMY
Goldy
Goldy
@GoldyHA
1/ To add a little texture to @NickHanauer's thread, it's important to recognize that there's a good reason why orthodox economists (& economic cosplayers) so vehemently oppose a $15 min wage:

The min wage is a wedge that threatens to undermine all of orthodox economic theory.


2/ Orthodox economics is grounded in two fundamental models: a systems model that describes the market as a closed equilibrium system, and a behavioral model that describes humans as rational, self-interested utility-maximizers. The modern min wage debate undermines both models.

3/ The assertion that a min wage kills jobs is so central to orthodox economics that it is often used as the textbook example of the Supply/Demand curve. Raise the cost of labor and businesses will buy less of it. It's literally Econ 101!


4/ Econ 101 insists that markets automatically set an efficient "equilibrium price" for labor & everything else. Mess with this price and bad things happen. Yet decades of empirical research has persuaded a majority of economists that this just isn't

5/ How can this be? Well, either the market is not a closed equilibrium system in which if you raise the price of labor employers automatically purchase less of it... OR the market is not automatically setting an efficient and fair equilibrium wage. Or maybe both. #FAIL
ECONOMY
Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham
Paul Goldsmith-Pinkham
@paulgp
My friend @itsafronomics wanted to know the breakdown of student debt by income, so I pulled data from the SCF.

Student debt is more concentrated amongst high earners, but disproportionately amongst Black borrowers. The plot below plots the average within Income Quartiles.
1/n


But those are the averages. What's the share that's above 10k? (This is the Biden current cutoff for debt forgiveness, so a useful benchmark).

For comparison, 20% of white Americans have student debt, and 31% of Black Americans.


Let's contrast that with say, above 20k. I was surprised at how high the share remains.


When we get to 50k of student debt, or more, we see it's only about 5% of the US, and around 8% of Black Americans. Strikingly, it's a huge share of high income Black Americans (this is a known fact in the education literature, I believe).


So what does this look like put together? Overall, we see a higher share of Americans with debt above 10k, and 20k. We would cover a decent amount with 10k, but miss Black Americans especially.
ECONOMY

You May Also Like

Anshul Pandey
Anshul Pandey
@Anshulspiritual
TYPES OF SINS(PAAP) AS PER SKAND PURAN.

There are three types of Adharma- Sthool, Sukshma and Ati Sukshma. The group of Sins in the Sthul section carries you to Narak. These sins are committed through your thoughts, words and deeds.


It is of four types.

1)First is the sin committed by your mental state-
Thinking about woman other then your spouse.

A)Resolution to amass wealth from others.

B)Thinking ill about others.

C)Thinking of doing a forbidden or unworthy deed.

2)Second is the sin that you commit through your words :-

A)Talking irrelevant things.

B)Telling a lie.

C)Speaking harshly.

D)Talking ill about others.

3)Third type of sin is committed through your body actions-

A)Eating food not prescribed to you or forbidden.

B)Violence.

C)Eating fancier food.

D)Acquiring other's wealth.

So these twelve types of sins.

There are six types of sinners or Mahapatak

1)One not bowing his head in front of a temple.

2)Never praise Shiva.

3)People who behave untowardly way in front of Ishwar.

4)People who do not show respect to Ishwar, guru or one who are undignified.

5)One who do not behave properly.

6)One who is jealous of other bhakts.

Below is the list of sins which people may commit.

1)One who does not help a needy person or a person in pain,
RELIGION
Jaya_Upadhyaya
Jaya_Upadhyaya
@Jayalko1
SRI LALITHAMBIGAI, THIRUMEYACHUR (TN)
#bharatmandir #navratri2021

Kshetram where Shiva is worshipped as Meghanatha and his consort is Lalithambigai seen in Abhay mudra.
Once, a demon Pandasura was harassing the Devas who went to Devi Parashakti for protection. 
@GunduHuDuGa


Devi rose from a Yaga Gunda, mounted on the Sri Chakra Rath with the name Lalithambika, waged a war against Pandasura and destroyed him.  When her fury did not subside, Shiva asked her to go to Earth, assume the name Manonmani, perform penance and shed her fury.


Shiva blessed Devi to be Shanta nayagi. There is a sculpture here depicting Shiva pacifying Devi. If you observe closely, you can see that from your left hand side there will be a smile on Her face and if you see from your right hand side you can see anger in Her face.


Hayagriva taught the greatness of Lalitha Sahasranama to Rishi Agasthya. Pleased with his devotion, Ma Lalithambikai appeared before Agastya. He is believed to have then sung Lalita Navaratnamala in praise of Devi. He has also composed a hymn named Rahasyanamasahasram.
ALL
Advertisement
Vibhu Vashisth
Vibhu Vashisth
@VIBHU_Tweet
ANCIENT BHARAT WAS CALLED VISHWAGURU, AND IT REALLY DESERVED IT.

India had a well developed education system centuries before the westerners arrived and called us uncivilized. Education was always given a great importance in Indian civilisation since times immemorial.


Ancient India had the Gurukulas and Ashramas as the epicentres of the knowledge and enlightenment. Bigger Gurukulas served as the centres of higher education called universities. Besides these universities, temples also emerged as the major learning centres.

Studying the Holy Scriptures, character building, personality development, responsibilities towards self,family and society,discipline and preservation of the ancient culture and heritage were the key embodiments of education.

This kind of education system made ancient India, a centre of knowledge all over the world. Many foreign students came to India for education and India was called the 'Vishwaguru'.
Takshshila and Nalanda were the two prominent universities of ancient India.


But were these only Universities of ancient India?The answer is 'No'.Let's learn about these gems of our education system that flourished across ancient India & be proud.

NALANDA UNIVERSITY
This was the oldest university of ancient India.Situated in Nalanda distt. of Bihar...
ALL
Khatvaanga
Khatvaanga
@khatvaanga
Sri Gurubhyo Namah.
Some tweets on Adi Shankaracharya and in particular the Guru Parampara of @sringerimath. [I had done this series earlier 5 years ago on account of Shishya Sweekaram].


Adi Shankara established the Sringeri Peetham as the 1st of 4 amnaaya peetams.

The four being
1. Sarada Peetam at Sringeri.
2. Govardhana Peetam at Puri
3. Kalika at Dwaraka
4. Jyothir at Badarikashramam.

He installed his 4 most prominent shishyas as heads of the peetams.

Sureshwaracharya was assigned to Sringeri as its head.

Sringeri is a corruption of Rshyashrunga giri.

Rshyashrunga maharshi [and his father Sri Vibandhaka Maharshi] did their tapas at this place.

It is at Sringeri that Shankara spent 12 of His precious 32 years!!

That gives you and idea how much He loved this place.

Rshyashruga maharshi had a horn on his forehead, a result of being born to a deer. His mere presence was enough to shower rains!!

Rshyashrunga was one who led Putrakamesthi Yaagam of Dasaratha Maharaj and which resulted in Sri Rama's birth!!
ALL
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
Some people really benefit from hearing advice that everyone knows, for the same reason we keep schools open despite every subject in them having been taught before.

In that spirit, here's some quick Things Many People Find Too Obvious To Have Told You Already.

Your idea is not valuable, at all. All value is in the execution. You think you are an exception; you are not. You should not insist on an NDA to talk about it; nobody serious will engage in contract review over an idea, and this will mark you as clueless.

Technologists tend to severely underestimate the difficulty and expense of creating software, especially at companies which do not have fully staffed industry leading engineering teams ("because software is so easy there, amirite guys?")

Charge more. Charge more still. Go on.

The press is a lossy and biased compression of events in the actual world, and is singularly consumed with its own rituals, status games, and incentives. The news necessarily fails to capture almost everything which happened yesterday. What it says is important usually isn't.

Companies find it incredibly hard to reliably staff positions with hard-working generalists who operate autonomously and have high risk tolerances. This is not the modal employee, including at places which are justifiably proud of the skill/diligence/etc of their employees.
TECH