Painting Fakes

 In my last post I reviewed Mark Considine's assessment of the results of neoliberal policy reform in Australia's social services.  In each case, the results have been bad for service users and governments, who get poorer quality, more expensive services.  However, they have been very good for the entrepreneurs who get into this market, who have been able to get rich on government money. This is pretty much the story of the whole neoliberal project.  Ordinary punters are promised that if we reduce workers rights, the rights of indigenous people and pesky environmental regulations and provide government 'incentives' to business, this will turbo-charge economic growth and everyone will benefit.  Turns out that this isn't true.  Rich people keep on getting richer, while the rest of us stay about the same or even get poorer.  Meanwhile, we are crossing various ecological boundaries, threatening our futures in the name of 'economic growth' now. One answer ...

Over the past four decades the world's wealthy nations, including Australia, have been undertaking a vast social and economic experiment.  Whether you think this experiment has been a success, or a colossal failure, depends on how rich you are. This experiment is generally called 'neoliberalism' by progressive people like me.  More conservative people are more likely to call it 'free market economics' or the more fuzzy 'economic reform'.  The core idea that drives this experiment is that markets are the most potent and efficient way of organising production and consumption of both good and services. This has several implications for the way governments should act. They shouldn't compete with private sector entities, and should sell any government entities that do so.  Hence the wave of privatisations around the globe. They should keep their regulation of market activity to a minimum, as this interferes with the 'free' operation of markets. They s...

In my recent post on Kate Raworth's Doughnut Economics I promised you a review of Mariana Mazzucato's Mission Economy .  I got to the top of the library queue for it this week and I know you're all sitting on the edge of your seats waiting for it, so here it is.... Mariana Mazzucato is a serious economist, and an influential one.  She was born in Italy, raised and educated in the US and now lives in the UK.  She teaches at University College in London and sits on a dizzying array of advisory boards for the English, Scottish and Italian governments and the EU.  In her previous writings  she's talked about how the role of government as a creator of value is greatly underestimated, while we place great store on activities like finance which add little or no value to our economies or our lives. Mission Economy: A Moonshot Guide to Changing Capitalism  was published just this year.  In reviewing her previous book I wished she would get more specific about...

Recently Kate Raworth posted a triptych on twitter of herself, Stephanie Kelton and Mariana Mazzucato holding up each others' most recent books, with the comment: 'Doughnut  + Mission + MMT = Let's transform economics. Here's to the synergy of ideas.'  This trio form a neat little group of subversive women economists who challenge mainstream thinking - and don't we need that challenge right now! I've yet to read Mazzucato's latest book (coming up soon) but from what I've read so far, all three women push the envelope of economic thinking in an attempt to move it towards a more just and sustainable discipline.  Of the three, Raworth's Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st Century Economist is the most comprehensive, and the most radical. Raworth is an English economist who has worked for much of her life in the development field.  Her gigs include doing fieldwork in Zanzibar, working on the UN Human Development Program, and worki...

Here's a different kind of stretch of the imagination .  One of the perennial political debates around the world is the question of budget deficits.  In every election we see politicians vying to present themselves as the more financially responsible alternative, meaning that they will balance the budget, that government spending will match government income and extra borrowing will not be required. Although this appears to be a partisan debate, it is based on assumptions which all mainstream politicians share - that government money is limited and that they can't perpetually spend beyond their means, that the money governments borrow needs to be paid back with interest in the future.  The partisan debate then focuses on how to do that.  Progressive politicians will favour increased taxes on the rich to pay for more generous social programs, conservative politicians will favour budget cuts and if possible tax cuts.  In budget terms they have the same aim - to ba...

One of the things I've been doing over the past few months is reading some of the books that have been sitting untouched on my shelves for a long time. A while ago, a friend passed on a copy of a book called Wealth and Poverty: Four Christian Views on Economics,  published by the evangelical publishing house Inter-Varsity Press back in 1984.  It had been sitting on her shelf for a long time, and has been sitting on mine for the past year or two.   Back on the 1980s IVP published a number of 'four views' titles, designed to present readers with some alternative Christian views on contentious subjects.  This one is edited by Robert G. Clouse, with contributions by Gary North, William E Deihl, Art Gish and John Gladwin.  Each contributor contributes a lead essay outlining their viewpoint on the topic - these are around 30 pages each - and then provides a brief response to the other three.  North is touted as representing 'Free Market Capitalism' , Deihl's...

It would be hard to find someone who was more of a climate policy insider than Ross Garnaut.  After a varied career in government and academia including a stint as economic advisor to Prime Minister Bob Hawke, Garnaut was asked by the Rudd Government to review climate policy soon after the 2007 election.  The result, completed in 2008, was the report which laid the groundwork for Rudd's emissions trading scheme which came within a whisker of being legislated before it was scuppered by Tony Abbott.  He was asked to revise and update this work in 2011 and this update provided the groundwork for the Clean Energy Futures Package which was legislated in 2012 and included a price on carbon. Last year Garnaut released a book,  Super-Power: Australia's low carbon opportunity,  which further updates his analysis and simplifies it a little for readers like me. You might think that after seeing his careful policy work trashed by fossil fuel industry stooges, Garnaut w...