Category Archives: Regulations

Why Inequality Matters

By Thorvaldur Gylfason – Since the early 1970s, the share of national income paid to workers in advanced economies has fallen from 55 to 40 percent. A declining labor share goes along with increased inequality in the distribution of income and wealth as well as health. Medical researchers report that the wealthiest one percent of American men live 15 years longer than the poorest one percent and that the wealthiest one percent of American women can expect to live ten years longer than their poorer counterparts. The gap is widening.

Concerns about inequality have recently been thrust to the forefront of political discourse around the world. An important part of the explanation for the surprise victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 US presidential election is that he did well among those voters who felt they had been left behind with stagnant real wages for decades while CEO compensation rose from 20 times the typical worker’s compensation in 1965 to 270 in 2008.

What could workers do?

As film maker Michael Moore puts it, they could throw Molotov cocktails at the powers that be. Trump was their Molotov. Similarly, in the 2016 referendum in the UK, those who felt left behind tended to vote for Brexit. more>

Updates from Chicago Booth

Why we’re all impact investors now
By Chana R. Schoenberger – Laurence “Larry” Fink, the founder and CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, which has more than $6 trillion in assets under management, issued an open letter to CEOs this past January—and reportedly sent many of them into a tizzy.

Fink’s letter said society is demanding that companies, public and private, need to “serve a social purpose,” benefiting not just shareholders but also employees, customers, and neighbors. And, he explained, from that point forward, BlackRock would be “eager to participate in discussions about long-term value creation and work to build a better framework for serving all your stakeholders.”

Executives, he wrote, should be able to answer their questions about the company’s actions. For example, what role does the company play in the community? How is it managing its impact on the environment? Is it working to create a diverse workforce?

“The time has come for a new model of shareholder engagement,” he wrote.

For nearly 50 years, many have been guided by the idea, laid out most famously by Milton Friedman, that the most appropriate way to create social change is to give profits to investors, and taxes to the government, and use that money to make an impact. more>

Related>

Why Brexit Won’t Cure Britain’s Broken Economic Model

By Simon Deakin – The critical thing with Brexit is to think about trade and regulation as being two sides of the same coin. When we talk about international trade we are really asking, which regulatory regime do we want to sign up to?

Inside the single market there is high degree of harmonization and convergence of rules, or what is sometimes called alignment. Regulatory alignment is the condition of frictionless trade in the European single market. It is a uniquely deep international trading arrangement because of the high degree of regulatory compliance that goes with EU membership.

We can’t achieve regulatory autonomy post-Brexit without giving up frictionless trade. So UK policy makers have to think about the consequences of moving away from the single market.

The first impact will be felt in those industries which rely upon regulatory alignment in order to function. For the car industry, and large manufacturers like Airbus, European supply chains will be very negatively affected by regulatory divergence.

That is why it is not surprising to hear that the car companies are going to put their production on hold if there is a prospect of a hard Brexit. They have said that they will pause their production lines for a while to see how their new supply chain arrangements can work. That will have a very serious impact on jobs.

Restrictions on migration from the EU after the transition period ends will not result in more jobs for British workers. The British government is likely to extend bespoke arrangements to allow firms in sectors such as agriculture, hospitality and construction to employ foreign workers outside the scope of British labor laws.

In some sectors, employers faced with rising wage costs are likely to respond by investing in labor-saving technologies, but that while this will improve productivity, it will not lead to net job creation. more>

Platform Work – Breaking Barriers Or Breaking Bad?

By Irene Mandl – In the abstract, platform work is the matching of supply and demand for paid work through an online platform. In practice, most people are likely to have encountered it through big online platforms such as Uber, Deliveroo or Amazon Mechanical Turk. This is a new form employment that began to emerge in Europe about a decade ago. And while it is still small in scale – estimates of the percentage of workers employed by platforms are in single digits – it is growing relentlessly.

New platforms are constantly starting up, changing their business models and sinking into obscurity. But some have gained a solid foothold and look likely to be around for some time to come.

Increasing numbers of workers are attracted to working this way – for some, out of necessity as they have no alternative employment opportunities; for others, it’s an easier way to get work than looking for a standard job. Some use it as a way to earn extra income on the side – perhaps to pay for a holiday or buy a new car. And some do it simply because they enjoy it – like the designers who use it to showcase their creativity online.

Many try it once and never do it again, others do it regularly but not intensively, and a small proportion of Europeans do platform work as their main income source.

It is growing thanks in part to the ever-expanding variety of tasks being mediated through platforms. At one end are the online micro-tasks – click-work – that do not require particular skills, such as tagging photos. At the other are larger projects commissioned from highly skilled professionals.

The tendency of platform work to encroach on existing areas of business has sparked debate in many EU member states and attracted media attention – the backlash of food-delivery riders against platforms like Deliveroo or Foodora or of traditional taxi companies against Uber have been widely reported.

Platform work does not fit into traditional economic and labour market structures, and is challenging the institutions and legislation built around them. Courts in various countries have been asked to decide whether or not this business model creates unfair competition for traditional operators and whether it circumvents labor law. more>

The Finnish Basic Income Experiment – Correcting The Narrative

By Jurgen De Wispelaere, Antti Halmetoja and Ville-Veikko Pulkka – The Finnish government’s refusal to extend or expand the experiment may not come as much of a surprise once the budgetary implications are taken into account but it nevertheless amounts to one more disappointment amongst those closely watching how the experiment is progressing. And disappointments have been plentiful with this project.

After a promising start, the first blow came when the Sipilä government ignored most of the suggestions and recommendations of the research consortium led by Kela (the Social Insurance Institution of Finland) and charged with preparing the experimental design — incidentally, appointed by the very same Juha Sipilä.

The design now being rolled out is much more limited than many had hoped for. Repeated requests for additional budget or postponing the starting date were ignored. Much-needed coordination between the different ministries involved was not forthcoming. The government also delayed appointing the team charged with evaluating the result until the experiment was well into its second year – with detrimental effects for any attempt to gain a more comprehensive insight into the experiment’s wellbeing effects. more>

Self-Driving Vehicles: What Will Happen to Truck Drivers?

By Andrew Yang – You would have to have been asleep these past years not to have noticed that manufacturing jobs have been disappearing in large numbers. In 2000 there were still 17.5 million manufacturing workers in the U.S. Then, the numbers fell off a cliff, plummeting to less than 12 million before rebounding slightly starting in 2011.

More than 5 million manufacturing workers lost their jobs after 2000. More than eighty percent of the jobs lost – or 4 million jobs – were due to automation. Men make up 73% of manufacturing workers, so this hit working class men particularly hard. About one in six working-age men in America is now out of the workforce, one of the highest rates among developed countries.

What happened to these 5 million workers? A rosy economist might imagine that they found new manufacturing jobs, or were retrained and reskilled for different jobs, or maybe they moved to another state for greener pastures.

In reality, many of them left the workforce. One Department of Labor survey in 2012 found that 41 percent of displaced manufacturing workers between 2009 and 2011 were either still unemployed or dropped out of the labor market between within three years of losing their jobs.

This is a good indicator of what will occur when truck drivers lose their jobs. Truck drivers’ average age is 49, 94% are male, and they are typically high school graduates. Driving a truck is the most popular job in 29 states – there are 3.5 million truck drivers nationwide. more>

Is The Monetary System Facing The Risk Of Recession?

By Francesc Raventós – The International Monetary Fund, other economic institutions, politicians, experts, and a good number of indicators predict a new economic downturn. The causes will be diverse but the significant one is that debt worldwide has grown at an exaggerated rate.

According to the report of the International Finance Institute, IIF, global debt is $247-plus trillion, 318% of GDP.

In the 2000s or noughties an expansive fiscal and monetary policy with low interest rates generated significant public deficits, a strong increase in borrowing and created a stock market and real estate bubble that erupted in 2007, forcing central banks to push for a huge monetary expansion – Quantitative Easing – to get out of the crisis eventually.

With a lot of financial liquidity in the market at a cost close to zero, the economy has regained growth and, for now, inflation is under control. But the economic cycle cannot be considered closed until central banks’ debt and interest rates return to normal. Trust in the International Monetary System, and the main currencies remains, but if some day trust in one important currency is lost, the situation would be very delicate.

Now the economic recovery has been achieved, it is time to gradually restore debt and interest rates to reasonable levels (aka tapering). The US Federal Reserve (Fed) has already increased its interest rate and announced that it will continue to do so.

The consequences have been immediate, with the withdrawal of investments from emerging countries, such as Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, India or Turkey, to invest in American bonds. The European Central Bank (ECB) has also announced that by the end of 2018 it will stop buying debt and that interest rates will rise as the economy improves (but not before the summer of 2019).

What will be the consequences of tapering?

Will it destabilize the economy?

What are the risks of entering a new recession?

Will the current monetary system resist?

How will the governments that are highly indebted deal with recession? more>

Climatic changes and political shifts

By Laurenţiu Rebega – The elections in Bavaria were just the latest episode in a series that began with the Brexit referendum and continued with the elections in France, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden, and so on. A series will not end any time soon.

It is not difficult to notice that the traditional center parties from all over the place – affiliated, at the European level, to the EPP or PES- registered significant backslides. At the same time, the so-called “extremists” or “populists” registered top scores that allowed them, in some cases, to adhere to power.

I believe the European electoral experiences in the last period can be analyzed from four points of view. One: Transforming politics in governance. For some decades now, not years, the functions of power shifted away from the political options, which involves making decisions according to a humanist vision, towards increasingly technical management options.

This means that the citizens’ wishes or opinions are second to mathematical arguments (in economy, transportation, communications and even human resources management). The philosophical consequence that few people have the courage to say out loud, is that a better world for all can be built on mathematical models in which the political factor is nothing but the root cause for perturbations, mistakes, and corruption. At the level in discussion, this phenomenon is reflected in the decrease of people’s interest in politics as a fundamental discipline of society. more>

The Wounds Won’t Heal

By David French – We usually place outsized emphasis on elections that define our politics and too little emphasis on the values that define our culture.

But it was the nomination of Kavanaugh and the wrenching debate about core cultural and constitutional values that dominated American discourse these past few weeks. It’s a debate that illustrated the fundamentally different ways in which conservatives and progressives view the world, and it unlocked not just an intellectual response but an emotional response that has radicalized otherwise reasonable and temperamentally moderate individuals into believing that the other side hates even the good people in their own tribe.

And so when Ford came forward, it’s as if her allegations landed in two different countries. The good-faith residents of Redworld were skeptical and said, “Prove it.” The good-faith residents of Blueworld believed Ford and said, “Finally, she has a chance for justice.” The presumptions were diametrically opposite, and everything that followed turned on those different presumptions. more>

The Collapse Of European Social Democracy, Part 2

By Paul Sweeney – The privatisation of state assets in Europe has added little value and was a costly distraction from the proper management of public services and development of a strong public sector ethos, delivering excellent services. Despite the privatisation of hundreds of billions of asssets, the outsourcing of public services, and fresh privatised ways of funding public services, spending in the modern state has not shrunk, though the value of state assets has been reduced.

The public sphere, open spaces, public ideas and the scientific commons which are open to all are coming under threat of being fenced off, privatised by extensions and enforcement of Intellectual Property, trademarks, copyright laws etc.. This needs to be curbed. The state has been remiss in protecting its own assets from privatisation over the past four decades and, simultaneously, it has given away substantial parts of this public sphere to private interests. It has done this by being over-zealous in protecting the “rights” of major corporations, drug companies, tech and data companies and rich individuals through extended patent rights, and the like.

Patents serve the useful purpose of protection for inventors whose ideas should be rewarded in order to encourage further innovation. But the balance has shifted from protecting innovation to blocking it. It is the state which provides this protection through internationally agreed laws and through enforcement. The growth in patents, trademarks, copyrights and industrial designs has been very high. The state is now agreeing to renewing patents and granting extensions to the likes of branded drugs, thanks to lobbying. Many patents are acquired to build a monopoly and to act as a deterrent against rival innovations.

Some MNCs now troll and hoover-up patents and others exist to build major patent portfolios with the purpose of blocking others’ innovations, moving upstream to protect broad future possible inventions. more>