Waste, Negligence & Cronyism: Inside UK’s Pandemic Spending - The New York Times
I see the US has picked up the UK Pandemic spending scandal whilst our Gov claims there’s nothing to see @JolyonMaugham @DamianHastie @allthecitizens
But 1 in 10 contracts that went through the Government’s VIP Crony lane were awarded compared to 1 in 100 through the ordinary lane.
More from Economy
Thread on eminent people supporting farm laws:
Dr. Gita Gopinath, Chief Economist at IMF says "Farm bills are in right
Dr. Surjit Bhalla, executive director at IMF support farm
Godrej Agrovet Chairman Nadir Godrej tells Bloomberg that agriculture reforms are important for
Prof Ashok Gulati supports new farm
Vice-Chairman of Bharti Enterprises Rajan Bharti Mittal supports the new farm
Dr. Gita Gopinath, Chief Economist at IMF says "Farm bills are in right
Dr. Surjit Bhalla, executive director at IMF support farm
Godrej Agrovet Chairman Nadir Godrej tells Bloomberg that agriculture reforms are important for
Godrej Agrovet Chairman Nadir Godrej tells Bloomberg that agriculture reforms are important for India. pic.twitter.com/N6rnelLn0E
— BloombergQuint (@BloombergQuint) December 11, 2020
Prof Ashok Gulati supports new farm
Vice-Chairman of Bharti Enterprises Rajan Bharti Mittal supports the new farm
The argument for deficits & debt raising interest rates in the US is not increased credit risk, it is that interest rates are a function of economic fundamentals, flows & policy. Deficits/debt change those.
I can't tell if I'm agreeing or disagreeing with @jc_econ.
Increasing government spending or reducing taxes increases demand (or reduces saving). This raises the price of loanable funds or the interest rate.
In a dynamic context, more demand means a stronger economy, the central bank raises interest rates sooner, and long rates rise.
(As an aside, we are not close to the United States needing to worry about credit risk and the risks are more overstated than understated in most other advanced economies too. But credit risk is not always & everywhere irrelevant, just look at the UK in 1976 or Canada in 1994.)
Interest rates have fallen over the last 20 yrs while debt has risen. This does not necessarily mean that debt rising causes interest rates to fall. It could also mean that other things have happened at he same time that pushed down interest rates more than debt pushed them up.
The suspects for these "other things" include slower productivity growth, slower popln growth, higher inequality, less investment, etc. All of which either increase the supply of saving or reduce the demand for investment, reducing the equilibrium interest rate.
I can't tell if I'm agreeing or disagreeing with @jc_econ.
There is no relationship b/w deficits & interest rates in the US & many other advanced economies. Centuries of dynamic institution building underpin our reserve currency status that allows rates to be a function of economic fundamentals, flows & policy not credit risk 1/3
— Dr. Julia Coronado (@jc_econ) January 26, 2021
Increasing government spending or reducing taxes increases demand (or reduces saving). This raises the price of loanable funds or the interest rate.
In a dynamic context, more demand means a stronger economy, the central bank raises interest rates sooner, and long rates rise.
(As an aside, we are not close to the United States needing to worry about credit risk and the risks are more overstated than understated in most other advanced economies too. But credit risk is not always & everywhere irrelevant, just look at the UK in 1976 or Canada in 1994.)
Interest rates have fallen over the last 20 yrs while debt has risen. This does not necessarily mean that debt rising causes interest rates to fall. It could also mean that other things have happened at he same time that pushed down interest rates more than debt pushed them up.
The suspects for these "other things" include slower productivity growth, slower popln growth, higher inequality, less investment, etc. All of which either increase the supply of saving or reduce the demand for investment, reducing the equilibrium interest rate.
It's always been detached, and it's always made the real economy worse.
[THREAD] 1/10
What is profit? It's excess labor.
You and your coworkers make a chair. Your boss sells that chair for more than he pays for the production of that chair and pockets the extra money.
So he pays you less than what he should and calls the unpaid labor he took "profit." 2/10
Well, the stock market adds a layer to that.
So now, when you work, it isn't just your boss that is siphoning off your excess labor but it is also all the shareholders.
There's a whole class of people who now rely on you to produce those chairs without fair compensation. 3/10
And in order to support these people, you and your coworkers need to up your productivity. More hours etc.
But Wall Street demands endless growth in order to keep the game going, so that's not enough.
So as your productivity increases, your relative wages suffer. 4/10
Not because the goods don't have value or because your labor is worth less. Often it's actually worth more because you've had to become incredibly productive in order to keep your job.
No, your wages suffer because there are so many people who need to profit from your work. 5/10
[THREAD] 1/10
I know people think this is fun but -- why do we have a stock market? So productive firms can raise capital to do useful things. Detaching stock price from fundamental value (Gamestop is now worth almost as much as Best Buy) makes the markets serve the real economy worse.
— Josh Barro (@jbarro) January 27, 2021
What is profit? It's excess labor.
You and your coworkers make a chair. Your boss sells that chair for more than he pays for the production of that chair and pockets the extra money.
So he pays you less than what he should and calls the unpaid labor he took "profit." 2/10
Well, the stock market adds a layer to that.
So now, when you work, it isn't just your boss that is siphoning off your excess labor but it is also all the shareholders.
There's a whole class of people who now rely on you to produce those chairs without fair compensation. 3/10
And in order to support these people, you and your coworkers need to up your productivity. More hours etc.
But Wall Street demands endless growth in order to keep the game going, so that's not enough.
So as your productivity increases, your relative wages suffer. 4/10
Not because the goods don't have value or because your labor is worth less. Often it's actually worth more because you've had to become incredibly productive in order to keep your job.
No, your wages suffer because there are so many people who need to profit from your work. 5/10
