For 2022-01-03 Tu: “Stopping China’s economic growth” would seem to be a key piece of “maintaining as large of a lead as possible in foundational technologies”, would it not? So I am unhappy. But. I find this from Biden’s National Security Advisor yet hard to dispute...
Johnson: reducing DEMAND for fossil fuels, yes, preferably with taxes on net co2 emissions, but whatever is cost effective. This seldom i ever means discouraging the production and transport of fossil furl supply. Main coronary: More nuclear and fracking in Europe.
Hamada: ‘The conventional wisdom, particularly in liberal circles, [should be] that the arc of history always [can be bent] toward peace, tolerance, equality, justice, and democracy.
Whatever we do vis a vis Chinese technological development, I would hope the main focus would be on promoting US growth: freer trade (x some possible strategic Chinses focused restrictions) attraction of world talent to work invent in the US, Fiscal policy focused in increasing investment and reducing deficits. A tax on net emissions of CO2 would fit well into this framework,
Yeah, war just isn't what it used to be. It's interesting that Russia's attempts at mass mobilization have - so far - been counterproductive.
I was sorry that I cold not could not get the substack login to work yesterday, and so couldn't join the chat yesterday. The Harrodian pedigree of your model intrigued me - only his his warranted, natural, and actual rates were all "apples" (growth rates of the economy), where your rates were not. I got a nice contour with a saddle point when I graphed your "effective wage demand" function (I set inflation from zero to 0.1, and real wage from -.05 to .05 - but it would be nice to know what kind of number you see the "real wage" as being in a model like this where everything else seems to be a rate.)
I did think your "effective wage demand" or "effective required wage increase" notion closed a gap between Blanchard's model and, say, a conflict model approach where capital and labor are simply fighting over shares of revenue. If there is a level of wage increase that workers can effectively require, then management's inability to push back gets translated into attempts to raise prices. The start of the spiral gets pinned to a number that represents one side winning something.
Snyder has observed that the maritime empires won WWI and he land empires lost - regardless of which side they fought on. He describes the two conceptions of the end of history as the politics of inevitability (neoliberalism) and the politics of eternity (authoritarianism); and notes how unfortunate it is that we tend to oscillate between the two.
Looks like the true end of history is an authoritarian neoliberal state (say, Singapore). Given the neoliberal penchant for authoritarian enforcement of neoliberalism, that would be an obvious candidate. At least until it collapses into crony capitalism or fascism.
We're gonna need a new Euler diagram. Croatia is now on the Euro and in the Schengen Area.
Maritime/landmass empires. Will Indian development be based on Mumbai and Bangalore or Delhi?
My bet: Mumbai and Bangalore...
Johnson: reducing DEMAND for fossil fuels, yes, preferably with taxes on net co2 emissions, but whatever is cost effective. This seldom i ever means discouraging the production and transport of fossil furl supply. Main coronary: More nuclear and fracking in Europe.
Hamada: ‘The conventional wisdom, particularly in liberal circles, [should be] that the arc of history always [can be bent] toward peace, tolerance, equality, justice, and democracy.
Whatever we do vis a vis Chinese technological development, I would hope the main focus would be on promoting US growth: freer trade (x some possible strategic Chinses focused restrictions) attraction of world talent to work invent in the US, Fiscal policy focused in increasing investment and reducing deficits. A tax on net emissions of CO2 would fit well into this framework,
Yeah, war just isn't what it used to be. It's interesting that Russia's attempts at mass mobilization have - so far - been counterproductive.
I was sorry that I cold not could not get the substack login to work yesterday, and so couldn't join the chat yesterday. The Harrodian pedigree of your model intrigued me - only his his warranted, natural, and actual rates were all "apples" (growth rates of the economy), where your rates were not. I got a nice contour with a saddle point when I graphed your "effective wage demand" function (I set inflation from zero to 0.1, and real wage from -.05 to .05 - but it would be nice to know what kind of number you see the "real wage" as being in a model like this where everything else seems to be a rate.)
. There is no consensus and a little evidence on the wage-behavior piece of that little model...
I did think your "effective wage demand" or "effective required wage increase" notion closed a gap between Blanchard's model and, say, a conflict model approach where capital and labor are simply fighting over shares of revenue. If there is a level of wage increase that workers can effectively require, then management's inability to push back gets translated into attempts to raise prices. The start of the spiral gets pinned to a number that represents one side winning something.
Thx much. I agree…
Brad
Snyder has observed that the maritime empires won WWI and he land empires lost - regardless of which side they fought on. He describes the two conceptions of the end of history as the politics of inevitability (neoliberalism) and the politics of eternity (authoritarianism); and notes how unfortunate it is that we tend to oscillate between the two.
Looks like the true end of history is an authoritarian neoliberal state (say, Singapore). Given the neoliberal penchant for authoritarian enforcement of neoliberalism, that would be an obvious candidate. At least until it collapses into crony capitalism or fascism.
How does Türkiye fit into this schema?
He counts it as one of the losing land empires. Correctly, in my opinion.