Podcast appearances and mentions of Hyman Minsky

Quelli seri scriverebbero che è una trilogia: ho scritto tre post sull'attenzione e su come averla al minor prezzo possibile, che è uno dei modi più semplice per descrivere la P di promozione del marketing. Dopo il FantaSanremo e il sistemone di engagement e loyalty (come TIM Party), oggi tocca al marketing fuori dal duopolio. E dall'influencer marketing.Grazie a Ecommerce School – prima scuola di formazione e agenzia ecommerce in Italia – per il supporto a questa edizione. Sei tra le circa 25.000 persone iscritte tra qui, LinkedIn, Telegram e WhatsApp: grazie, spero che le 3,8 ore per scriverla ti siano state utili. A proposito, che ne dici di presentare il tuo brand nella newsletter come ha fatto oggi Ecommerce School? Dai un'occhiata per sponsorizzare nel 2025. Il quiz della settimanaNeinver, uno dei principali operatori di outlet in Europa, ha fatto segnare uno scontrino medio per visitatore nel 2024 di: Risposta in fondo.(Ehi, ti chiedo un attimo di attenzione per lo sponsor!)A che punto è il tuo e-commerce?Che tu stia cercando di lanciarne uno nuovo o voglia scalare verso nuovi mercati, capire il livello di maturità digitale della tua azienda è fondamentale, per non sprecare tempo e risorse.Per questo ecco un Test di Maturità Digitale che ti posizionerà in uno di questi quattro profili:* Hai un brand forte ma il canale e-commerce è ancora da costruire* L' e-commerce esiste ma fatica a crescere* Il tuo canale digitale funziona ma vuoi aumentare significativamente il ROI* Hai un e-commerce maturo e cerchi strategie di scalingScoprirai quali sono i tuoi punti di forza e le azioni per il tuo livello di sviluppo.Per chi legge [mini]marketing è disponibile una consulenza gratuita con un tutor: un'occasione per valutare l'evoluzione digitale della tua azienda e le sue specifiche esigenze.E per chi vuole accelerare davvero, Ecommerce School propone il Master Executive in Ecommerce Management: parte il 14 marzo 2025. È un percorso con focus su strategia, tecnologia, processi, marketing, growth e scaling.Fare marketing fuori dalla bollaQuanto spendiamo fuori dalle piattaforme come Meta e Google e dall'influencer marketing? A parte quella manciata di brand che va in TV e radio con regolarità, o quelli che fanno i grandi concorsoni, o un'altra parte di brand che spende in costi di vendita verso Amazon, probabilmente meno del 10%. Prendetela come mia stima a braccio. Oggi l'ottanta per cento va in quello che possiamo misurare facilmente (ROAS, sei tu). O che (spesso) ci cura dalla FOMO (influencer marketing), nostra o di chi ci sta sopra. L'allocazione di budget verso social ads/influencer spesso risponde a pressioni dell'effetto gregge (herd mentality) anziché a una strategia data-driven.La storia economica funziona per bolle (la mia speranza è che anche la politica segua il trend). L'economista Hyman Minsky ha descritto il ciclo delle crisi finanziarie con la teoria della Financial Instability Hypothesis, che identifica le fasi della speculazione: dal displacement (un'innovazione che attira l'attenzione degli investitori), alla boom phase (quando i prezzi salgono esponenzialmente e il pubblico entra in massa), fino alla euforia irrazionale data dal cosiddetto “denaro gratis”, quei continui aumenti di valore dei titoli acquistati che a loro volta fanno reinvestire ancora più soldi, e al successivo crash, quando qualcuno fa “profit-taking”, che precede il panic stage e il crash finale, in cui qualcuno rimane con il cerino in mano.La storia dell'advertising non fa (molta) differenza, salvo che tra bitcoin e pubblicità io investirò sempre in pubblicità, che è un umile e immortale scarafaggio, si sa. Le piattaforme digitali e gli influencer tradizionali mostrano secondo molti (e un mio vecchio post) segni di sopravvalutazione analoga alle bolle finanziarie, con costi crescenti che ne abbattono il ROI effettivo anno dopo anno. C'è nel prezzo a CPM un sovrapprezzo di duopolio (Meta e Google fingono di competere), c'è un sovrapprezzo di filiera (il 50% degli investimenti in ads programmatici viene assorbito dai costi degli intermediari, con tracciabilità spesso limitata e frequenti problemi di qualità del placement). Famigerata la storia di eBay, in cui al taglio di venti milioni di dollari di ads sulla keyword “eBay” non è corrisposto una riduzione né di traffico, né di conversioni, o quella di JP Morgan, che tagliò 5.000 siti su 12.000 nei quali finiva la pubblicità per problemi di reputazione di questi. Non aiutano le regolamentazioni sulla privacy (es. GDPR) che stanno dalla parte del cookie-paurosizzato abitante europeo (che probabilmente dovrebbe avere più paura di Putin), e l'ad-blocking sta erodendo l'efficacia residuale degli ads tradizionali, e quello che funziona, appunto, costerà.C'è un disclaimer da fare: chi ha vissuto la bolla dot-com del 2000 è un po' troppo predisposto a vederne altre: una specie di venuta messianica al contrario. E io forse sono tra questi. Detto questo, oggi è ora di uscire dalla bolla.Sì, ci sono tanti svantaggi nel farlo. La bolla è confortevole: puoi dare la colpa alla AI se qualcosa non funziona nel targeting, produce risultati costosi ma misurabili (e – lo dico sempre – il marketing aborre l'incertezza proprio perché tratta della cosa più incerta esistente: le persone) e ci rende uguali agli altri. Nessuno viene licenziato perché è uguale agli altri. Almeno nel 99,99% dei casi. Solo il nostro famigerato Elon licenziò l'intero ufficio marketing di Tesla dopo qualche mese perché, sostenne, la pubblicità prodotta era uguale a quella degli altri. Ogni tanto anche l'orologio rotto, ecc. ecc.C'è il problema principale: fuori dalla bolla niente è scalabile. Siamo in quattro gatti è la frase che ho ascoltato e pronunciato più spesso nella mia storia professionale. Non so, magari la dice anche chi lavora in amministrazione, ma credo che nel marketing italiano sia particolarmente pressante come problema. E del resto in pochi Paesi come in Italia ci si rivolge così tanto alle agenzie per fare qualunque cosa.Ci sono solo l'unicità e l'antifragilità in palio.Quindi, a vostro rischio e pericolo, da dove partire in questa ricerca di vita fuori dalla bolla? Non dalle agenzie (scusate agenzie), almeno non da subito. Il rischio è la guerriglia sull'asfalto, che può essere un'idea finale, ma non la partenza. Io userei alcuni sentieri di esplorazione.* vita quotidiana del nostro target fuori dal brand (la gente ci pensa molto meno di quanto pensiamo, e il customer journey e il targeting fatto strategicamente servono ancora eccome, anche al tempo di Performance Max ecc.).* valore da offrire che abbiamo dimenticato a magazzino (o di cui abbiamo materie prime disponibili a basso costo). Come quando Vodafone offre le colonnine di ricarica del cellulare in aeroporto, come concetto.* vita delle comunità locali in cui le persone abitano (e oggi secondo me è più urgente fare piani Diversity-Equity-Inclusion di plastica, almeno in Italia).* spazi (vuoti) di altri brand nella stessa cliente-sfera: retail media de' noantri, insomma. Shopify ha una lista interessante.* contenuti di chi non li produce per soldi e basta. Non solo roba glamour, può essere una radio locale low-cost (anche se spesso costano un occhio, lo so) o una fanzine (non lo scrivevo da un po') o una newsletter di nicchia.Campi di skateboard fatti di cemento low-cost? Campetti di basket da sponsorizzare al costo della vernice? Sono comunità molto più coese del calcio, e meno problematiche nell'associare il brand. Content marketing vero? Cioè pagando gente che ne sa davvero per insegnare cose alla vostra audience, oppure offrire template, calcolatori, ecc.? Gli sponsor di questa newsletter con i migliori risultati di clic hanno usato questi strumenti. Un laboratorio di ceramica solidale da regalare ai vostri clienti in bundle al posto del solito concorso scemo? Arredamenti sponsorizzati di locali di comunità o locali frequentati? Cacce al tesoro ma sensate, come sponsorizzare-organizzare bonifiche di giardini pubblici o simili? Pagare street art partecipate dalla comunità in muri e zone “brutte”? Pagare l'albero di Natale, non solo in piazza Duomo, ma anche a Corvetto?Il problema, l'avete già in mente prima di me, è “come giustifico?” e “come misuro?”. Di sicuro posso misurare il costo a contatto, ma poi con cosa lo confronto, con la visualizzazione di TikTok e Instagram da (forse) un millesimo di secondo? Io consiglio di raccogliere email (o cell o WhatsApp consent) come KPI intermedio, solitamente. E poi vedere quanti si trasformano in clienti nel medio periodo. Si possono fare anche interviste, per capire il sentiment e l'intenzione verso il brand di almeno un campione di persone, e poi estrapolare l'impatto sul numero di contatti.Capisco, capisco, calma! Troppo sbatti. Lo sappiamo, lo so. Però per un 10% di budget (almeno come test) fuori dalla solita bolla del duopolio non è mai morto nessuno. Magari possiamo trovare esterne che ci diano una mano professionale (richiamate l'agenzia, a questo punto, e dite “no guerrilla prefabbricata”) per confrontarsi con le occasioni fuori dalla bolla, che spesso sono gestite da (professionalmente) scappati di casa.Fatemi sapere. Dopo il 60% vs 40% (brand+influ vs performance) di Binet & Field (che mi bullo di aver importato in Italia), potremmo fare 50/40/10, dove 10 è la riga “fuori dalla bolla del budget”.Il marketing insegnato dai negoziantiAdoro il display in tempo reale, come a Wall Street.ilmarketinginsegnatodainegozianti.info è un progetto gonzo-collettivo a cui puoi contribuire senza pietà. No screenshot o inoltri dai social, solo foto vostre. Segnalazioni * La scorsa settimana ho parlato dei megaprogrammi fedeltà ed engagement, come TIM Party, e dei loro pro e contro.* Marta Impedovo de Il Post mi ha chiesto alcune cose sulla mania di fare (o non fare) le code, in questo mondo sottosopra di motivazioni di consumo. Un articolo particolareggiato.* È uscito il mio editoriale per Tendenze: parlo della fine dell'età dell'oro (per l'ecommerce).* Con Giuseppe Stigliano commentiamo il marketing contemporaneo usando come scusa il libro di Seth Godin, Questa è strategia, in un free webinar live su Zoom il 4 marzo alle 16:00. Ci si registra qui.That's all folks!Se ti è piaciuta, inoltrala o stampala sulla stampante condivisa dell'ufficio, qualcuno la raccoglierà. Ah, se stai pensando di supportare questa newsletter, clicca qui. Grazie ancora a Ecommerce School. Se stai pensando a un workshop nella tua azienda o a uno speech al tuo evento, rispondi alla mail.Ci leggiamo venerdì prossimo, gluca Grazie a Daniela Bollini per la paziente correzione e a Cristina Portolano per i separatori.Quiz: a) circa 25 euro (fonte). This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit lettera.minimarketing.it

This is the third and final episode in a miniseries on heterodox economists—people who embrace completely different approaches to economics than those of the standard thinkers. Adam and Cameron discuss Hyman Minsky, an American economist who wrote widely on financial crises but whose work received broad attention only around the collapse of 2008—more than a decade after his death. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Yields important again - rising and worrisome. Hedge Fund titans getting nervous - talking bout a Minsky Moment. End of month - October is about to be in the books. PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter DONATIONS ? OHHH - the new shirt design is coming along... SHHHHH- Leaking some of my own news... eNVESTOLOGY moving to $25,000 minimum in 2025. Currently at $10,000 so if you want to get in to that investment management program with us for the current minimum - now is the time. Warm-Up - Yields important again - all of a sudden - Hedge Fund titans getting nervous - talking bout a Minsky Moment - End of month - October is about to be in the books Markets - Earnings season - Tech is about to bombard us - Gold near highs as China and India buying - Election Direction - putting money where mouth is... - Consumers are happier - UMICH - NAZ 100 - ATH? Yields - On the Move   Yields On The Move Auto Divergence - GM puts out some good numbers for recent quarter. -- GM now expects full-year adjusted EBIT of between $14 billion and $15 billion, or $10 and $10.50 a share, up from between $13 billion and $15 billion, or $9.50 and $10.50. - This marks the third time this year that GM has updated its guidance after beating Wall Street's top- and bottom-line expectations, led by the automaker's North American operations. -  Ford put out okay numbers, nothing exciting at this point - stock stuck in sideways action - Big differential with stock performance over past year GM/FORD YTD GM/Ford Longer New Threshold for Capital Gains - Starting in 2025, single filers will qualify for the 0% long-term capital gains rate with taxable income of $48,350 or less and married couples filing jointly are eligible with $96,700 or less. - Here is an idea  - for low basis stock - possibly gift to non-dependents that have low income and they can sell at lower capital gains rate --- Cannot do for dependents as their unearned income above $1,300 is the threshold. Consumer Sentiment - October Univ. of Michigan Consumer Sentiment - Final 70.5 vs. 68.9 Briefing.com consensus; October prelim was 68.9 - Markets reacted positively last Friday on this news. ---  Trivia: The University of Michigan (UMich) stopped releasing early versions of its Consumer Sentiment Index (MCSI) in 2013 as part of an agreement with the New York Attorney General's office. The university had previously received around $1 million a year from Thomson Reuters for this information. Hedge fund big boys - Getting nervous - Paul Tudor Jones - The founder and chief investment officer of Tudor Investment said he was worried that government spending could cause a big sell-off in the bond market, spiking interest rates higher. - Debt unsustainable and people just overlooking it - "Will we have a Minsky moment where all of a sudden there's a point of recognition that what they're talking about is fiscally impossible, financially impossible?” Jones said." - Commented how both candidates are spenders so that is not good - however, hard pressed to think that many of their spending promises will actually go through. Minsky Moment Defined - A Minsky moment is a sudden, catastrophic collapse of asset prices after a period of growth and stability. It's named after American economist Hyman Minsky (1911 to 1996), who believed that markets are inherently unstable and long periods of good markets eventually end in larger crises. - A Minsky moment occurs when excessive debt accumulation becomes unsustainable. Borrowers can no longer meet their debt obligations using their income, leading to a sudden decline in asset prices and a financial crisis.  Housing Market

What should we keep in mind as we venture into this new AI era? Reid Hoffman delivers a speech, entitled Humanity's Hegelian Golden Braid, to address this question. The speech offers six guiding maxims related to AI, humanity, and technology—and weaves through Hegel and Hofstadter, cathedrals and griffins, T.S. Elliot and Hyman Minsky, and more. This speech was originally given by Reid Hoffman in English on May 24, 2024 after accepting an honorary doctorate from the University of Perugia. It's also been translated and delivered by REID AI (an AI version of Reid Hoffman) in nine different languages. For videos of those translated speeches delivered by REID AI, a transcript of the speech in English, and more, please visit: https://www.reidhoffman.org/perugia-speech.

During the last big financial crisis there was a lot of talk about the work of Hyman Minsky. Even Janet Yellen, at the time the chair of the San Francisco Fed, said there were a lot of lessons in his work for central bankers. What did she mean? Or, as Steve Keen asks, has she actually read any of his work? This week Phil asks Steve what was the thinking behind Minsky's Financial Instability Hypothesis. And what was a Minsky moment, and why are we so far from one right now? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr. Davidson is a leader in the post-Keynesian school of thought. Initially, he did not begin his career as an economist, earning a bachelor's degree from Brooklyn College in chemistry and biology. He began graduate school as a biochemistry major but switched to economics. Dr. Davidson finished his master's at the City University of New York, and his Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania, both in economics. He has held numerous high positions within academia, think tanks, as well as the private sector, and currently holds the Holly Chair of Excellence in Political Economy, Emeritus, at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Dr. Davidson offers a depth of knowledge on subjects such as monetary policy, macroeconomics, global payment systems, and income inequality. He is the founder of the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, and the author of 22 books including "Who's Afraid of John Maynard Keynes?", "Financial Markets, Money, and the Real World," and many more. Together, we discussed why economists didn't see the 2007 financial crisis coming, why Hyman Minsky's theory of boom and bust may have been exaggerated, and the role that savings and investment play within the economy. To check out more of our content, including our research, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Daniel Needham, CFA, stops by The Business Brew for a wide ranging discussion. Daniel is a wealth of knowledge. He is president of Morningstar’s Wealth Management Solutions, which includes software and aggregation capabilities from Morningstar Office and ByAllAccounts, and the individual investor experience across Morningstar.com, and Morningstar Investment Management.After the recent acquisition, he also oversees the U.K. and international business of Praemium and their core products, which were re-branded to Morningstar Wealth Platform and Wealthcraft, a Morningstar company.Prior to his current role, Needham served as president and global chief investment officer since 2015 for Morningstar’s Investment Management group, a unit of Morningstar, Inc., that provides managed portfolio services, retirement, and investment advisory for financial institutions, plan sponsors, and advisors through investment management entities around the world.In 2013, Needham stepped into the global chief investment officer role for the Investment Management group, and he also assumed responsibility for Morningstar’s investment management operations in Europe. Previously, Needham was chief investment officer and managing director for Investment Management in Asia-Pacific, including Ibbotson Associates Australia, where he led the group’s business and investment activities in the region.Needham joined Morningstar in 2009 through the company’s acquisition of Intech Pty Ltd., where he served as chief investment officer. He also held other investment roles including analyst, portfolio manager, and head of multi-strategy. Before joining Intech in 2002, Needham worked for Zurich Financial Services in Sydney. Needham holds a bachelor’s degree in commerce from the University of Sydney, where he majored in finance and economics.He also holds the Chartered Financial Analyst® designation and is an interested trustee for the Morningstar Funds Trust.Supplemental Information -Following the podcast recording, Mr. Needham sent the following information to Bill (shared with permission):Here are some useful books to learn more about MMT and Post-Keynesian economics. It pays to tread carefully with all this stuff given the political leaning of the respective economic schools of thought.Soft Currency Economics – Warren Mosler – provides a lens to why the system is different for certain governments post the gold standardJohn Maynard Keynes – Hyman Minsky – one of the best early critiques of the modern economic consensus that dominates central banks and government treasuries

Speculation excesses are referred too as mania and revulsion from these excesses take the form of crisis, crashes, or panic which are historically common. The excess speculation builds as investor seize new opportunities for profits and are overdone. Hyman Minsky describes these new opportunities as the result of displacement. Displacement are events leading up to a crisis, such as, outbreak or end of war, bumper harvest or crop failure, widespread adoption of an invention, or some political event. Displacement must be a significant size. Displacement brings opportunities for profit and increased demand causes price to rise. Banks artificially increase supply without proportional increases in demand by expanding the money supply that demand would have generated. The money supply expansion is notoriously unstable. Feedback fuels Euphoria for price increase; the Euphoria turns investment from really valuable products to delusional ones. Boom is characterized as rising interest rates, as Banks threaten discredit and hedge against the speculation by raising rates; trading velocity increases and the velocity of circulation and turnover ratios rise; and stock prices increases. Boom is fed by expansion caused by bank credit; credit increases the money supply and destabilizes the investment. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/david-nishimoto/message

This week, Harvey J. Kaye and Alan Minsky stop by the Macro N Cheese clubhouse to talk to Steve about the 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights. Kaye, a historian, brings stories of FDR's four freedoms and the impetus for what he called the 2nd Bill of Rights – an Economic Bill of Rights. Minsky brings his experience in progressive politics, both as a journalist and with Progressive Democrats of America. Of course, the Minsky name holds a special place in our MMT hearts – our own Randy Wray studied under Alan's dad, Hyman. When listening to Alan, one might suspect he's also related to friend-of-the-podcast Robert Hockett, who coined the term “metabolic optimism.” Whether or not we share Alan's optimism, we agree with his insistence that “our winning political hand is our economic message.” The economy is central to everyone's life and should be central to our agenda. He believes the 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights is the avenue to achieve that centrality in the left progressive program. As Harvey takes us through it, he adds historical details; many of these points can be traced back to FDR. 1. The right to a useful job that pays a living wage. 2. The right to a voice in the workplace through a union and collective bargaining. 3. The right to comprehensive quality health care. 4. The right to a complete, cost-free public education and access to broadband Internet. 5. The right to decent, safe, affordable housing. 6. The right to a clean environment and a healthy planet. 7. The right to a meaningful endowment of resources at birth and a secure retirement. 8. The right to sound banking and financial services. 9. The right to an equitable and economically fair justice system. 10. The right to recreation and participation in civic and democratic life. Roosevelt believed the American promise of “the pursuit of happiness” is not possible without economic security. FDR's agenda lived on after his presidency – though without much success. Harvey names Jimmy Carter as the president who dealt the death blow to the New Deal: “Let me make it clear, ever since the 1970's the Democratic Party has not simply turned its back on the FDR legacy – the Jimmy Carter presidency was the launching pad of neoliberalism in the United States. People like to talk about Reagan. They like to talk about Clinton in the 1990s. Jimmy Carter was the first neoliberal president. The deregulation of finance, the deregulation of transportation, it all stems from Carter's determination ... It's Carter who first used the term austerity to promote the neoliberal agenda.” Alan adds: “the truth is, as every listener to Macro N Cheese certainly knows, that one party has been willing to run up deficits, the other party generally has not.” Democrats have wrapped themselves in a mantle of fiscal austerity and would sooner lose elections than change. This episode gives you history, it gives you economics, it gives you policy, and it engages in ever-popular political speculation. Did we mention Bernie? Yeah, his name comes up a few times. Harvey J. Kaye is Professor Emeritus of Democracy and Justice Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay and the author of the newly published "The Fight for the Four Freedoms: What Made FDR and the Greatest Generation Truly Great," "Take Hold of Our History: Make America Radical Again," and "FDR on Democracy." Alan Minsky is the Executive Director of Progressive Democrats of America. Alan worked as a progressive journalist for the fifteen years before joining PDA. He was the Program Director at KPFK Radio in Los Angeles, and the coordinator of Pacifica Radio's national broadcasts. He was the creator and original producer for the Ralph Nader Radio Hour, as well as the political podcasts for The Nation and Jacobin Magazine. His many articles can be found at Common Dreams, The Nation, Truthdig and other platforms. Alan is the son of the late economist Hyman Minsky....

In this latest installment, world-famous venture capital investor Bill Janeway joins me to discuss the unicorn bubble and the innovation economy, as well as recount stories from his VC experience. Be sure check out Bill's book, "Doing Capitalism in the Innovation Economy" at the link below!https://www.amazon.com/Doing-Capitalism-Innovation-Economy-Reconfiguring/dp/110847127700:00 - Intro02:26 - Bill's journey in venture capital + funny stories10:25 -  Challenges in VC investing20:05 - Ancillary value that VC investors provide to firms27:09 - Unicorn bubble of the 2010's: what makes it different from the previous decade? 35:24 - Will strong private funding continue in tech?37:52 - Breaking down investing in the innovation economy45:51 - The government's role in driving the innovation economy"William H. Janeway has lived a double life of 'theorist-practitioner,' according to the legendary economist Hyman Minsky, who first applied that term to him twenty-five years ago. In his role as 'practitioner,' Bill Janeway has been an active growth equity investor for more than 40 years. He is a senior advisor and managing director of Warburg Pincus, where he has been responsible for building the information technology investment practice, as well as a director of Magnet Systems and O'Reilly Media. As a 'theorist,' he is an affiliated member of the Faculty of Economics of Cambridge University, a member of the board of directors of the Social Science Research Council and the Fields Institute for Research in the Mathematical Sciences, and of the Advisory Board of the Princeton Bendheim Center for Finance. He is a co-founder and member of the Governing Board of the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), and a member of the Board of Managers of the Cambridge Endowment for Research in Finance (CERF). Following publication in November 2012, his book Doing Capitalism in the Innovation Economy: Markets Speculation and the State (Cambridge University Press) became a classic. The fully revised and updated second edition, Doing Capitalism in the Innovation Economy: Reconfiguring the Three-Player Game between Markets, Speculators and the State was published in May 2018." (billjaneway.com)

durée : 00:04:00 - Le Pourquoi du comment : économie et social - par : Laurence Scialom - Connaissez-vous l'économiste américain d'origine russe, Hyman Minsky (1919-1996) ?

Photo: The Panic of 1873 was a financial crisis that triggered an economic depression in Europe and North America that lasted from 1873 to 1877 or 1879 in France and in Britain. Here:  A bank run on the Fourth National Bank No. 20 Nassau Street, New York City, from Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, 4 October 1873. (Note: this is a Hyman Minsky moment—an economist—not Marvin Minsky, a leading AI scientist.) CBS Eye on the World with John Batchelor CBS Audio Network @Batchelorshow Is Evergrande a 2008 Minsky Moment of global contagion?  @LizPeek @TheHill GLXXG https://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/chinese-property-giant-s-implosion-unsettles-vulnerable-markets-20210921-p58th5.html

'Stability leads to instability. The more stable things become and the longer things are stable, the more unstable they will be when the crisis hits'- Hyman Minsky. So today we discuss about this quote in depth related to the financial income hypothesis.

En gang udvekslede vi naturalier. Jeg gav dig et brød og fik en kylling. På et tidspunkt opfandt vi mønter, der repræsenterede værdi. Så flyttede vi rundt med dem. Og lånte dem til hinanden. Økonomen Hyman Minsky sagde: "Bankvirksomhed er ikke pengeudlån - for at låne penge ud, kræver det at man har penge" - så nu skaber bankerne selv penge. I dag udveksler vi sjældent kontanter men digitale koder, der skifter mellem din og min konto. Vi flytter gæld rundt mellem os. Og finansierer coronakrise. Og med de seneste års rentefald, skal man nu måske betale for at sætte penge i banken og kan tjene på at låne penge. Medvirkende: Christian Bennike ; journalist ved Information. Jonas Jensen ; formand for organisationen, Gode Penge og cand.scient.pol, KU. Carsten Ortmann ; tilrettelægger og vært.

«Stability is destabilizing». In this episode we talk about the American economist Hyman Minsky and particularly his views on the financial system and financial crises. Our guest today is Thorvald Grung Moe, a 30 year veteran of the Norwegian Central bank and also a Minsky expert. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to episode 53 of Activist #MMT. Today is part two of my two-part conversation with one of the original developers of Modern Money Theory, L. Randall Wray. Today we talk briefly about the differences between the words sufficient and necessary, and the concept of desired net savings. (In , Dr. Wray spoke about his personal history before meeting Warren Mosler and Bill Mitchell in the PKT email forums, and then we discussed his November, 2019 Congressional testimony, partially in response to the February, 2019 Republican resolution to denounce MMT. The heart of our conversation today, however, is in two parts. The second half is an overview of MMT from the Kansas City point of view, as documented Dr. Wray's new paper, . [A link to which, along with many other resources, can be found in the show notes for both parts one and two]. The Kansas City version of MMT differs in one important way from the broader version as agreed upon by all its original developers: and that is, the influence and inspiration of Hyman Minsky, and the importance of his concept of financial fragility. His paper and our discussion on it inspired this MMT-reference post: The first part of our conversation, though, focuses on the true meaning of the word productivity. This was in response to strong criticism I received regarding the job guarantee, and more specifically, to the April 2018 Levy paper called ", of which Dr. Wray is a co-author. Before I go on, I want to be clear, these are my own words, not Dr. Wray's or MMT's. It's my best interpretation of what I learned in my preparation for and conversation with Dr. Wray. Although I'm confident I'm much closer than I was before talking with Dr. Wray, I'm not pretending to be an expert or that what I'm about to say is perfect MMT. Just like you, I have more to learn. I'm also obviously taking the knowledge of MMT and applying my own progressive values to it. That said, I'd like to take a step back and start with an analogy: Something cannot be removed from a container until something is first put into that container. A leakage from the economy cannot happen until something is first injected into the economy. The only institutions that can make injections are commercial banks and the central government. Savings therefore cannot cause bank lending, and taxes cannot finance (federal) government spending. Regarding productivity and the job guarantee, in a similar way, jobs can create skills but skills cannot create jobs. As Dr. Wray explains, washing my own dishes is not considered to be officially productive, but paying someone else to do it is. Why? Because they were paid, I wasn't. In other words, productivity as officially measured is substantially a reflection of, not the production itself, but how much workers were paid in exchange for it. Despite consistently increasing output, wages have remained stagnant since around 1970 – nearly half a century. Have workers really been less and less productive? Or have they been more and more screwed? Currently, the only thing that's considered officially productive is what makes somebody else richer – who, by the way, is someone that seems to never be me. Productivity is essentially equated to profit because business owners are essentially the only ones who get to decide who is to be paid, what they will be paid for, and how much to pay them. Instead of only paying people for making some business owners profit, perhaps we can also start paying people for making our world a better place. For helping other people. For cleaning our environment, for holding the hand of the dying, for recording the history of the old, for helping a child with homework, or a teacher in the classroom, or a youth soccer coach on the field. Wages are not created by productivity, productivity is created by wages. How do you increase productivity? By paying workers more. By paying them at all. We don't have to measure productivity with maths and models, we don't have to equate...

Welcome to episode 52 of Activist #MMT. Today I talk with one of the original developers of Modern Money Theory, L. Randall Wray. Dr. Wray tells the story before the story: his life before meeting Warren Mosler and Bill Mitchell in the Post-Keynesian Talk or PKT email forums in 1996, where MMT came to be. Dr. Wray originally set out to be a fourth grade elementary school teacher and did his student teaching in Mexico City. Since the OPEC oil crises made it difficult to start a teaching career, he instead got a job in solid waste management in Sacramento County, California. He got the job thanks to the Jimmy Carter administration's Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, or CETA, which was a New-Deal style public-sector job creation program. It was here where he had the opportunity to take free college courses, but only if they somehow applied to his job. His boss suggested he take some courses in economics, which he did at Sacramento State College. Dr. Wray said that he really liked the mainstream courses he took... because they took so little thinking, as long as you could do a bit of mathematics. He says he immediately knew how unrealistic it was, and to such an extent that he felt it wasn't even worthy of choosing a garbage truck, which happened to be part of his subsequent job at the California Energy Commission under the Governor Brown administration. He took every course he could, in both mainstream and heterodox, and despite still wanting to be an elementary school teacher, he decided to try a PhD. in economics. He ended up studying under Hyman Minsky, who he was told was "the best Keynesian there is," at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. We end today's episode by discussing Dr. Wray's November 2019 , which was partially in response to the March 2019 Republican resolution to denounce MMT. We look back at a particularly unfriendly set of questions he had to endure, and how the hearing that was supposed to contain many friendly faces, due to a last-minute vote, unfortunately had fewer than expected. Here's the of the 2.5 hour hearing (and where it comes from), and a that I believe will be of interest to MMTers (and where it comes from). The latter contains all of Dr. Wray's testimony, plus interesting (and painful) statements by Congress members on both sides of the aisle. Finally, we discuss his , as submitted in advance. This is a unique document written exclusively to a mainstream audience, identifying and validating their fears of deficit and debt and then slowly walking them, step-by-step, to exactly why deficits are not fearful in the way they think, and that they are largely not even under their direct control as members of Congress. Dr. Wray calls it the best, strongest case he's ever made using data. In part two, we move on to some general MMT questions, and especially focus on two subjects: the real meaning of the word productivity, and an overview of the entirety of MMT specifically from the Kansas City point of view. A full introduction will also be included before part two. Many resources, both related to part one and two of this interview, can be found in the show notes of part one. This includes the full audio to the hearing in which Dr. Wray participated, and another, both in audio and video formats, that contains only highlights I believe will be interesting to MMTers. Note: Before we get started, a small correction: Dr. Wray wanted me to mention that he believes Warren Mosler's initial undergraduate degree was in fact, engineering. Resources MMT: REPORT FROM THE FRONT, parts , , and . A of the congressional hearing, and Dr. Wray's , which includes a question by Minnesota representative Ilhan Omar, and a detailed response Dr. Wray's July 2020 paper, and a that is a kind of precursor to the KC paper. His 1997 paper, which serves an excellent introduction to the MMT-JG guarantee, "" #LearnMMT For an overview of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) with many reliable sources to learn...

Today’s guest is Soo Chuen Tan, founder and President at Discerene Group, based in Stamford, Connecticut. Discerene is a private partnership, which invests globally on behalf of several long-term institutions and families. Soo Chuen is a long-term value investor and the depth of his commitment to his craft came through in our conversation. He’s able to seamlessly translate a high-level philosophy of investing into the practical hard work of executing fundamental securities research and the critical psychological aspect of being a contrarian who is at the same time constructive. We talked about Mega Study, a trailblazing South Korean online test prep company that saw its star fade when VC-fueled rivals emerged, but that Soo Chuen’s research revealed to have durable long-term value. If you would like notes from today’s episode, please subscribe to our free newsletter. I hope you enjoy this conversation as much as I did. Feel free to email info@investingindepth.com with feedback. 1:40 Journey to becoming an investor 3:05 Mega Study is the leading online high school KSAT test preparation company in South Korea, supplying the country’s “educational arms race” with a must-have service that has strong demand 7:00 Top teachers in Korea are pop stars with celebrity status and compensation 8:40 How Mega Study hit Soo Chuen’s radar screen: Looking for companies protected by structural barriers to entry (i.e., “economic moats”) at times when they are out of favor 10:00 Focusing on economic moats in evaluating the business as an investment. Mega Study has attractive economic characteristics as the owner of a self-reinforcing, two-sided platform 14:47 An opportunity to invest with belts and suspenders that provide a margin of safety: Venture-backed competitors ate into Mega Study’s business and the stock price declined below tangible book value (i.e., cash and value of property, plant, and equipment on its balance sheet, consisting primarily of real estate) 17:05 How Mega Study widened it economic moat:  Adopting bundled pricing to transition from being a multi-homing network to a single-homing network 21:18 The psychology behind being a value investor taking a contrarian position. The hallmark of value investing is, in the words of Warren Buffett, “Being greedy when others are fearful and being fearful when others are greedy.” Four defining characteristics of value investors are: Independent mindedness. “The best value investors we know tend to be cats, not dogs.… They are comfortable marching to the beat of their own drums and making up their own minds about things with little regard for conventional wisdom or a desire to fit in or please others. They deliberately invert propositions and test counterfactuals.” Natural skepticism while at the same time being constructive  Using mean reverting mental models Deferred hedonism (i.e., patience) 29:25 The Discerene research process: Combining “The Harvard Business School Approach” and “The Chicago School Approach” 34:40 Soo Chuen’s secret sauce: Compounding and building out a network 39:50 Conducting due diligence on hard assets 43:30 Areas of uncertainty and risk 45:20 Sizing the investment 47:40 Monitoring the investment 48:55 Recommended reading On Korean education, Education Fever by Michael Seth On investing: Securities Analysis by Graham and Dodd; Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits by Phil Fisher; all of Warren Buffett’s letters; Seth Klarman’s Margin of Safety; various books by Michael Mauboussin; Howard Marks’ The Most Important Thing; Edward Chancellor’s Capital Account More broadly on economics, business, and finance: the work of John Keynes, Jean Tirole, John Sutton, Joseph Schumpeter, Hyman Minsky, Phil Rosenzweig, as well as current and former Harvard professors Michael Porter, David Yoffie, Clay Christensen, John Wells, Bob Merton, Andre Perold, Stuart Gilson, Peter Tufano, and so many others. David Hume on epistemology Among contemporary authors: Thinking Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman; Triumphs of Experience, by George Vaillant; The Second Mountain by David Brooks. Note: This podcast is for educational purposes only and nothing here constitutes a recommendation or offer. Note: For full disclosure, I have in the past served as a senior advisor to Discerene Group. I now have no commercial relationship with, and receive no financial benefits or compensation from, the firm.

Jan Kregel explains the fundamental problem with the economic system is its focus on providing finance to investors. Hyman Minsky, who understood that financial instability is inherent to capitalism, proposed changing the economy's objective to employment.

Michael Pettis is no stranger to episodes of financial crisis.  Trading through multiple Latin American debt crises in the 1980’s, the Southeast Asia currency debacle in 1997 and, in its aftermath, the capital flight that engulfed Brazil, Michael has developed a rigorous framework for the how and why of these disruption events.  Central to his approach is Hyman Minsky’s focus on the balance sheet and the relationship between assets and liabilities both for individual entities and across the system.  Driving financial fragility, in Michael’s rendering, is a specific type of mismatch in which the payments on the liability side are vulnerable to sharply increasing when conditions become less favorable.  Our conversation considers these events in the context of China, a country that Michael moved to in 2002 and has become a renowned expert on.  Seeing China on an unsustainable debt path as early as 2007, Michael argues that the conditions for financial crisis are less obvious given the closed nature of the Chinese banking system and the powerful ability of the regulators to be able to force the creditors to restructure.  Michael has plenty to share on a number of other important topics including MMT and his recent, important book, “Trade Wars are Class Wars”, in which he lays out the impact of globalization on wages and the resulting shifting of political tides in the US and abroad.  Please enjoy this episode of the Alpha Exchange, my discussion with Michael Pettis.

What are these green shoots India's government is speaking of? Is our economy getting better? Amit Varma and Vivek Kaul give context to the hype in episode 2 of Econ Central. They also discuss the incentives of politicians in the Indo-China conflict and bust the Zero-Sum Fallacy.     Also check out: 1. Should We Be Aatma Nirbhar? -- Episode 1 of Econ Central. 2. India’s Economy in the Time of Covid-19 -- Episode 177 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vivek Kaul). 3. The Nuances of Lockdown -- Episode 176 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Anup Malani).  4. The Indian Economy in 2019 -- Episode 153 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vivek Kaul). 5. The State of Our Farmers -- Episode 86 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Gunvant Patil). 6. India's Agriculture Crisis -- Episode 140 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Barun Mitra & Kumar Anand).  7. Democracy in Pakistan -- Episode 79 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Pranay Kotasthane & Hamsini Hariharan). 8. The India-Pakistan Conflict -- Episode 11 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Srinath Raghavan). 9. Our foreign policy is 8% growth -- Nitin Pai. 10. The Indian Armed Forces -- Episode 175 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Lt Gen Prakash Menon). 11. Stabilizing an Unstable Economy -- Hyman Minsky. 12. Why Minsky Matters -- L Randall Wray. 13. Ponzi Schemes -- Episode 142 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vivek Kaul). 14. India's Lost Decade -- Episode 116 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Puja Mehra). 15. Profit = Philanthropy -- Amit Varma. 16. India’s Problem is Poverty, Not Inequality -- Amit Varma. 17. On Inequality -- Harry Frankfurt.   And hey, do also check out Vivek’s book, Bad Money, as well as Amit’s online course, The Art of Clear Writing.

McAlvany Weekly Commentary Hyman Minsky’s Financial Instability Hypothesis coming to you soon Gold hits record high levels in most currencies Group think & momentum – Forget accurate analysis to your own peril Minksy’s Instability Thesis: Click Here The post Delaying Panic With Hypnosis (Ponzi Finance) appeared first on McAlvany Weekly Commentary.

The absolute importance of Valentine's Week; Coronavirus update; How big will he economic impact be? Hyman Minsky; Donald Trump's $4.8-Trillion spending budget; How economic growth actually works; AOC and "Milton" Keynes; what government is supposed to provide; the cost to the economy; the next Minky Moment; AOC's Bootstraps; if our president was Chinese; Consumerism run amok; How to create wealth.

The absolute importance of Valentine's Week; Coronavirus update; How big will he economic impact be? Hyman Minsky; Donald Trump's $4.8-Trillion spending budget; How economic growth actually works; AOC and "Milton" Keynes; what government is supposed to provide; the cost to the economy; the next Minky Moment; AOC's Bootstraps; if our president was Chinese; Consumerism run amok; How to create wealth.

Hey did you know that Hyman Minsky talked about Ponzi finance? It’s all part of his financial instability hypothesis. Join us as Eric Tymoigne busts some of the more persistent myths about MMT.

The Higher Calling for Kingdom Entrepreneurs  In this episode we're going to tackle the "6 Stepping Stones" that Christian Entrepreneurs who start with nothing have to go through in order to build a life that truly matters- A Life of Kingdom Significance! This will definitely give you a breakthrough and help you understand which stepping stone you are on, and give you the direction you need to reach God's Ultimate Goal for your life.   In This Episode You Will:  Learn the pros and cons found in each stage.   Learn the meaning of true Success   Discover the 5 main differences between Success and Significance   Understand the threefold Characteristics of Kingdom Significance   Understand God's Ultimate Goal for your life   Memorable Quotes and Verses:    "You don't have to be great to start, but you have to start to be great." - Zig Ziglar   Many have accepted their lives, and are not leading their lives.   "Stability leads to instability. The more stable things become, the more unstable they will be when the crisis hits." - Hyman Minsky     You can be successfully wrong - T.D. Jakes     "Significance ALWAYS leaves a legacy. Kingdom Significance leaves an untouchable and eternal legacy." -Sebastien Richard     Recommended Resources:  T.O.P. Ebook:   https://www.thrivingonpurpose.com/t-o-p-ebook/ (https://www.thrivingonpurpose.com/t-o-p-ebook/)   (https://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?event=AFF&p=1203735&item_no=88771) By Zig ZiglarMaximize your potential for success with the on-target advice of a world-class motivational speaker! Drawing on his 40-plus years of experience, Ziglar shows you how to achieve the things that matter most - happiness, good health, prosperity, financial security, peace of mind, and sensitivity. Learn to be more at peace with yourself and accomplish more with your skills and abilities. Get the Audio version of this book through: (https://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?event=AFF&p=1203735&item_no=548217) By John C. MaxwellYou don't have to be a certain age, have lots of money, or be famous to make a real difference. You can be part of something noble---starting today! Derived from Maxwell's best-selling Intentional Living, this compact volume offers practical guidance on how to discover your purpose, start small but believe big, and more. Get the Audio Version of this book through: .fb_iframe_widget_fluid_desktop iframe { width: 100% !important; } The post Thriving on Purpose (https://www.thrivingonpurpose.com) . Support this podcast

In Episode 70 of Hidden Forces, Demetri Kofinas speaks with Andrei Shleifer, professor of economics at Harvard University. Dr. Shleifer is the most cited economist in the world according to RePEc’s database. Throughout the course of his career, Andrei Shleifer has worked in the areas of comparative corporate governance, law & finance, behavioral finance, as well as institutional economics. He has published seven books, including, A Crisis of Beliefs: Investor Psychology and Financial Fragility with his co-author Nicola Gennaioli.    Demetri’s conversation with Andrei centers on the subject of beliefs: how they impact markets and how economists and financial practitioners are attempting to model them using data about people’s expectations, assumptions, and attitudes in order to make better-informed investment and policy decisions. The first half of the episode is devoted to exploring the mechanics of the 2007-2008 credit crisis, and the role played by structured products and derivatives, off-balance sheet vehicles, money market funds, GSE’s, and a policy of ultra-low interest rates that fueled over-confidence in the power of regulators and in the sustainability of the status quo. In the second half, Dr. Shleifer provides us with a more formal approach to thinking about Hyman Minsky’s instability hypothesis and how market participants can draw radically different conclusions about that same data when their beliefs about the world change dramatically. Given the destabilizing forces of populist politics, trade tensions, and changing geopolitical fault lines, the ability to draw valuable insights from data about expectations and beliefs is invaluable for any investor or policymaker looking to gain a sense of market sentiment: where it stands and where it might be going. Producer & Host: Demetri Kofinas Editor & Engineer: Stylianos Nicolaou Join the conversation on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter at @hiddenforcespod

Nima and Dylan discuss Hyman Minsky's views on banking and financial instability. Source: Why Minsky Matters (https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10575.html)

After touching on the topic of risk in many other episodes of this podcast, David and Blair finally take a full episode to discuss at length the role of risk in entrepreneurship.   LINKS "Confessions of a Recovering Consultant" by Blair Enns Hyman P. Minsky Archive Twitter exchange with Jonathan Stark on risk Strategic Coach program with Dan Sullivan "A Mission With No Exit" by Blair Enns Peter Drucker   TRANSCRIPT BLAIR ENNS: David, what's the riskiest thing you've ever done? DAVID BAKER: I've always wanted to have a really long pregnant pause right after you start something, because you're always telling me I can regain the power with silence. The biggest risk I've taken was probably telling my wife about the risks I was going to take. BLAIR: Yeah, right. Wow. Hands up, everybody. DAVID: She's only told me there was one thing I could not do and it's so illogical. She says I cannot jump out of an airplane. She doesn't terrify flying, or race, or whatever, but I can't jump out, which seems so illogical. So, as soon as I get some, you know what, I'm going to jump out of an airplane. BLAIR: You've got some high risk hobbies. I'm not sure that you indulge in all of them, but tell us a little bit about your high risk hobbies. List them off, because it's a little bit incredible. Here's the consultant, somebody who types for a living. DAVID: Oh, that is dismissive, types for a living. BLAIR: Well, I refer to myself that way too. DAVID: Yeah. BLAIR: Like I'm a typist, right? I have friends who have calluses, like they're real men. You and I, we type and talk on the phone. DAVID: Okay. So, I taught motorcycle racing. I fly airplanes and helicopters. I travel to very dangerous parts of the country. BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: I love the shooting sports, not shooting at each other. I'm not so much into those, and I don't hunt, but I like shooting sports. And I do a podcast with you, that's pretty up there too. What are yours? BLAIR: Yeah, right. Okay. I knew I was going to open with this question. For those of you listening, if anybody is listening, this is the risk episode, where we're going to talk about various types of risk, but to answer your question. When I knew I was going to pose this question to you, I started thinking oh, what's the most riskiest thing I've ever done? Other than some things that were driven by kind of alcohol and youth that were just outright stupid when I put my life or the lives of others in danger, other than that, I can't ... The riskiest things I've done in business have been investing in the business. By that I mean spending money, seeing something as an investment but knowing in the short-term, the expense is potentially debilitating to the business. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: But then trusting that it's going to pay off in revenue down the road. DAVID: Oh. The biggest risk you took that I can remember was when you totally changed your business model to a training model from a consulting model. That was a huge risk, to me at least it felt, maybe it didn't feel that way to you as much as it did to me. I was looking, from the outside, in marvel really. I was thinking, "Wow, that is a big risk." BLAIR: You were thinking, "Wow, that is a stupid move." I remember you telling me like a year later, "You know you could still go back to being a consultant," and I couldn't because I wrote that 3,000 word blog post called "Confessions of a Recovering Consultant." DAVID: Right. BLAIR: The reason I did it is I put it out there so that I would not ... That was my version of burning the ships so that I would not go back. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: And here we are. DAVID: But you do take some pretty significant physical risks. They may not seem like it to you because of where you live, but you hike in pretty crazy places and you poke bears, maybe not literally but close to it. BLAIR: I once said to my son, who was 15 at the time, I said, "You know, you're one of the few people in the world who has put your hand into a grizzly bear's mouth," and he responded promptly by saying, "I'm one of the few people in the world who has stuck a thermometer up a grizzly bear's butt." DAVID: Except he didn't use that word, but yes we gathered. BLAIR: He did. DAVID: He did? BLAIR: Okay. Enough about us. So, I sent you a text saying, "Hey, we should do a whole show on risk," because probably like one in three or four episodes, we keep coming back to the subject of risk, like how much risk that the principals of creative firms take. So, where do you want to start here? Do you want to start with your Minsky quote? DAVID: You know, I never used to pay any attention to economists, until you kept quoting different economists to me. So, as I was thinking about risk last night, watching a very boring TV show, I found this quote that just struck me. It's by Hyman Minsky, and it says this. He said, "Stability is destabilizing." And then there was an article on the Wall Street Journal talking about that concept and he also said, "That's because, in other words, stability is destabilizing because long periods of calm induce behavior and innovation that make the next downturn more violent" I was thinking about times in history where all the nobles were safe in the castles and the rest of the people are dismissed, and all of a sudden, they revolt against everybody. You think about all of these cycles that have happened over time, and the apparent stability that just slowly, slowly was like boiling a frog in water, people don't even notice, and all of a sudden it just breaks out. Or you think about some of the terrible diseases that have wiped out millions of people, or you think about some of the financial crises that almost all of us now are not too young to remember, like the Housing Crisis and so on, and yet we think that somehow this isn't going to happen. Then other times, we think it's going to happen. The more I thought about risk, the more confused I got really because I think of myself as quite a risk taker, but I also wonder if I really am. BLAIR: Isn't that interesting? Why do you doubt that? DAVID: Well, because I have one of those personalities that thinks really carefully about the implications of something, and then I just do it. So, I have what's called the DC conflict in a personality, so I tend to overthink things a lot and I'm a bit of a control freak. BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: Then I think well, after I thought through this this much, it doesn't feel like that much of a risk. That's why it doesn't feel like I'm as much a risk taker I think as maybe other people who've seen my behavior might think that I am, because it's just no, I'm going to do this. But also, you and I have had really interesting conversations usually after a Manhattan or whatever we happen to be drinking. BLAIR: It's a Negroni this year. Let's just be clear, this is the year of the Negroni. DAVID: The year of the Negroni, that's right, yeah. But I have run my business and my life in a way that I'm going to try to make principle decisions and that means that I'm not going to stop short of those because of fear. So, I am willing to picture myself homeless, that is, without a business, without any significant level of asset, and I will still be making decisions based on principle. DAVID: That just seems like such a logical position for me to have, and so in that sense, it doesn't feel all that risky to me because what's the worst that can happen? Oh, homelessness, oh, I'm okay with that. That's why risk is a confusing concept to me. BLAIR: I think that some listening to this might think, oh that's a bit of an exaggeration, but like somebody who knows you and has had many conversations with you, in which you have brought up that scenario, you have very vividly painted this scenario of you being homeless, you usually had a dog. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: You've lived in this future state where you've imagined it quite a bit, and so you've tried it on and thought, "Yeah, I'm okay with that, as long as I can live with myself and the decisions that I've made." DAVID: Right. I believe that I am a few stupid mistakes, let's say I'm struggling with some emotional or mental issue and I make a bad decision, and then it's compounded by another one out of 10, so two decisions. BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: Do you think you are a couple of decisions away from a very altered lifestyle? BLAIR: Wow, you know, you're probably asking me at exactly, I won't get into the details, but we're considering a big move in the business, financial move. So, I have thought okay, if this goes wrong, I'm really vulnerable. If this goes wrong and something else goes wrong, I might be starting over. But like you, being bankrupt and starting over doesn't worry me. It worries me because it would terrify my wife and my obligation to my marital partner. My kids will be fine. I'm okay with starting over. When you get these compounded variables, it's like okay, I'm going to take a big risk. DAVID: Yeah. BLAIR: And you take a big risk and it doesn't work out. Usually, we're not betting the entire firm or our entire lifestyle on it. But if something else happens at the same time, then possibly we're wiped out. That's how populations go extinct, this combination of a steady pressure and then an incident. I forget, there's a name for it, it will come to me in a second. So, the steady pressure might be economic decline. So, we're in a period of recession and then something goes wrong, so when you get those two variables together, that's when everybody is really vulnerable. BLAIR: I was really interested in this topic because a friend of mine, Jonathan Stark, on Twitter he's a developer and teaches developers about value-based pricing, and he was tweeting about an episode of one of his podcasts recently, and I haven't listened to it yet. But he was ... just the subject of risk, I forget what his question was, but I tweeted that ... and I was really thinking through this as I was forming the tweet that's, "I've come to the conclusion that the state of entrepreneurship is that you are all in all the time. You're always making ... You always have a bet on the line." BLAIR: His reply was, "Yeah, but you're not always betting the business. It's a series of small bets." I tweeted back, "Yeah, I agree with that," but I don't fully agree with that. I want to come back to that Hyman Minsky quote in a minute, but I think there's something about the state of entrepreneurship where you are always walking some sort of line and when I read Minsky's quote, let's just reread it again. BLAIR: So, "Stability is destabilizing, that's because long periods of calm induce behavior and innovation that make the next downturn more violent." I read that quote, I think of our listeners, our clients, and the ones who are like they get comfortable. They build a comfortable business. They're not constantly reassessing their business model. Then along comes change and they're just caught flatfooted. It's like your friend who says, "Yeah, my wife left me and I ..." DAVID: It was a surprise. BLAIR: We didn't even have any trouble. We never argued, and you think you idiot. A married person needs to be just slightly paranoid about the state of their marriage, the way an entrepreneur needs to be slightly paranoid about the state of the market. Something could come along, the karate instructor or whoever it is. DAVID: I just love how you just lay your whole life out in front of thousands of people. BLAIR: Well, I've learned my wife doesn't listen to this podcast, so I'm okay. DAVID: Oh, that's given you a lot of freedom, yeah. BLAIR: When you read the Minsky quote, were you thinking about yourself or were you thinking about those clients that you've had who it's like good stable business, and they're playing golf or they're so comfortable, they don't change anything, and all of a sudden, the condition are slowly, slowly changing like the boiling frog. BLAIR: And then bang, they wake up one day and everything is different and they kind of blame the market or they don't understand what's happened to them. What's happened to them is they got comfortable. They weren't sufficiently paranoid to the point that they weren't constantly reinventing things, constantly taking risk. That's what I see in that quote. What do you see? DAVID: I see the same thing, and your description of these entrepreneurs, these principals that are listening is exactly right. They wake up in the morning and if they're not worried, they're worried. They're worried about nothing to worry about. They're always paranoid about something, even if they have to make up something that they're paranoid about. They envision that maybe an employee is plotting with a client to take the business, or they read something that isn't even there in a comment that a client made about oh, their client is going to leave. Or they read something in the news about how this entire industry is changing. So, yeah, that's exactly right, but I feel conflicted because on the one hand, I look at firms who just toil under the radar, they're not firms that anybody is trying to emulate. They're not winning all kinds of awards. They're not the cool places that all the young folks want to go work at. They just do good solid work. They've got solid financial fundamentals as well. They've got decent principles about how to manage people, and year after year, they make money. Then you have the other ones who are innovating at the frontline and creating new service offerings and saying, "Hey, you know what? Nobody is going to be developing websites in three years. So, in one year, I'm going to stop doing that and reinvent myself." What's the better model, because I just don't see too many firms who have much of a balance between those two things. It seems like it's one or the other, and I want ... Maybe this is my personality coming through here, but I want a little bit more balance and I hate the fact that they're constantly paranoid, but I love the fact that they're constantly paranoid. Does that make sense even? BLAIR: So, you're saying at one end of the spectrum, there's an unhealthy paranoia. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: Right, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: At the other end of the spectrum, there's this complacency. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: And you're saying you would like to see more firms in the middle that have where the principal has a healthy level of paranoia. Is that what you're saying? DAVID: Yes, I am. I wish there was some way to figure out where principals were on that spectrum. Here's an example, this may not be the answer, but it illustrates what I'm thinking of. Maybe you need to be making your employees a little bit nervous most of the time, but not flat terrifying them, right? BLAIR: I agree with that completely. I really identify with that. DAVID: Okay. BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: Or another would be you need to run a culture where people really want to stay and work for you, but some of them should still leave for the right reason. We don't want to read too much into people, or read the wrong things into people leaving. We want them to leave for the right reasons, and so on. I'm just inventing these on the fly. I don't know exactly what the answers are here. Then there's also this whole notion of an efficient marketplace. Here's an example of that. An efficient marketplace says that there are very few unexplored arbitrage opportunities in that a market will usually fill in those low spots on the road or knock off those high spots on the road within a couple of days. Okay, but entrepreneurs principals or folks listening, our clients, your clients, they're always seeing like oh my God, there's an unmet need that I can fill, but they don't think about those opportunities very objectively. The same sort of objectivity they bring to solving problems for their clients, they don't bring that same level of objectivity to solving problems for themselves in terms of evaluating the soundness of an opportunity. This is why, as we were thinking about this topic, I'm thinking you know, you're always saying that the sample of the work you do for the client is the sale. You say it differently, but that's the idea. BLAIR: The sale is the sample. DAVID: Sale is the sample, yeah. And here, the fact that we are bouncing all over the place, this is the risk thing and we're taking a huge risk even talking about all this stuff without really knowing. We're flailing around here. We're just kind of getting inside each other's heads a little bit.   BLAIR: Okay, we're talking about risk. This is the risk episode. Do you remember, David, a couple of years ago I asked you to translate something into Latin for me? Do you remember what the phrase was that I said this is my personal motto? DAVID: No, I don't. I don't remember that. BLAIR: So, looking up on the wall, I'm still seeing your handwriting of the various ways to translate this into Latin. But it's unpredictable, but dependable. To me, just looking at this it's still tacked to my wall, I'm thinking when you were mentioning how your employees should maybe be a little bit nervous about what you're going to do next. DAVID: Yeah. BLAIR: I was thinking about I really enjoy in relationship with my wife, who's not only my life partner, but my business partner, I enjoy the role of disruptor. I enjoy the role of being the person who shows up and says, "Okay, we're going to take a whole bunch of risk," and then she and the other calm people around me kind of have this little meltdown and I enjoy seeing them go into meltdown mode. BLAIR: So, it's really important for me as my personal identity, and I really wonder the people listening out there, all the entrepreneurs, I wonder if you identify with this as well, to be seen as unpredictable, but not unstable. I would like to be known as somebody not just in business, but in life who is seen as you never know what Blair is going to do next, but I know I can always depend on him. DAVID: Yes, buttressed with the fact that you have scared them before. BLAIR: Yes, and they have survived. DAVID: And they've survived, and they've also seen, they followed your lead, and you led them through the Red Sea and nobody, or not too many people drowned. BLAIR: I didn't lose many. DAVID: You didn't lose many, right. So, the idea is that okay I've had crazy ideas in the past, some of them have not worked out, but enough of them have that we should at least have a really good discussion about this. In the end, I'm going to listen to everybody says, but I'm going to make a decision on my own kind of. Maybe not on my own, that's a little bit ... That doesn't sound good, but it's not going to be democratized. BLAIR: Yeah, yeah, with the input of others. DAVID: Right. BLAIR: So, I wonder if that shouldn't be the motto of all entrepreneurs and not just me. While we're skipping across risk related topics here, another thing I really wanted to talk about is this idea of no exit. A few years ago, I had a revelation about my own business from a couple of different sources. One was the Strategic Coach program and Dan Sullivan, and another entrepreneur who had said something publicly. I'd had this revelation and this epiphany that I was never going to sell my business and I was never going to retire. So I wrote a lengthy blog post about it called "No Exit", and I've since done a bunch of exercises around this when I'm speaking to a room full of agency principals. The first time I did this was at Revenue 2.0, that's an event you and I did together twice about alternative business models, and I do this talk that I have called The Five Constraints, but the first constraint is this idea of no exit. So, if you're listening to this, if you're the owner of a business of any kind of, whether it's a creative marketing business or some other kind, I want you to try on this constraint. The constraint is that you can never sell your business and you can never retire, and then I'll just stop there while you think about that for a second. Then I'll ask you if that's the constraint you had to live by, what are the changes that you would make in your business right now? Make a list of the changes that need to be made in your business, and then what are the changes that need to be made in your life. So, I give people a couple of minutes to make some notes, and then I ask the audience, "All right, what did you write down?" People say, "Well, I've got to change my role. I've got to quit sacrificing today for tomorrow. It's important that I show up to do a job that I love, so I've got to change my role. I've got to delegate. I've got to take more vacation." DAVID: Right. BLAIR: So many people say, "I need to start working out." I'm not exactly sure how that's connected, but it's a really interesting constraint. The real source of it, I was inspired by a couple of different people, but the real source of it is I noticed this pattern in my clients' businesses. When the principal gets to a certain age, and the age is just a few years shy of where I am. I'm 52 at this recording, so I start to see it around 55, late 50s, so definitely in the early 60s, when somebody gets to that age, when they can tell me when they're going to retire, I know it's over. It's over because as soon as they have one eye on the exit, they quit taking risk. Have you see this too? DAVID: I have, but I'd never seen it expressed quite like that. Immediately I say, "Oh, that's something I could study." BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: Because as soon as they have a date three years, now what does their decision making look like when they know that it's only going to be three years or five years or two years or whatever it is? BLAIR: I'll tell you this anecdotally, if somebody says they've got an eye on a retirement date that's within five years, they will not make a difficult decision around positioning. DAVID: I was just going to ask, positioning would seem to be the likely one. BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: What are some of the other topics they would avoid decisions around? BLAIR: They won't make difficult staffing decisions. I might not be right about this, but I'll say it anyway because it never stopped me before. DAVID: Wait, is this the same Blair? Who took your mic? BLAIR: They kind of cede control of the culture. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but if you think about like a vibrant firm, at the helm of the firm is a truly inspired leader whose primary job is to keep an eye on the horizon and say, "We're going this way," and to make decisions about things that are going to happen in the future, spotting things in the market, spotting trends in technology, et cetera, et cetera. So, that vision is at least five years out, and as soon as that vision gets to a five years, four years, three years, they're not really thinking about the health of the firm long-term. That has a significant impact on the culture of the firm. The energy is different. As I'm talking about this, I'm hoping that you can imagine firms or just recall firms that you've walked into where you realize, oh yeah, this is not a vibrant young place, and it's not so much to do with the chronological age of the people, although that is a factor. But the energy of a place where the principal is thinking about retirement is completely different. As soon as the principal starts thinking about retirement, they lose, I don't know if it's moral authority, but they become less of a guiding force. So, where does the guiding force come from? Maybe it doesn't come from anywhere. Maybe there's a power battle. DAVID: Nature fills a vacuum, right? So, if they're not leading, then somebody is going to step up. I think I can illustrate what happens along this same line. What I have seen is that you will be more tolerant of talented assholes as employees. You do that, not just because you don't want to rock the boat, but because this talented asshole is somebody that has taken something away from you and you don't want to step back in. You don't want to find somebody else to do this for you. That is making a huge ethical compromise honestly. BLAIR: Yeah. That's part of the problem I have with it. I do see some of these compromises as ethical compromises. You avoid the big fights. You're absolutely quick taking risk in the marketplace, and that's another element of risk. My favorite Peter Drucker quote, there are so many great Peter Drucker quotes, is, "In business, all profit comes from risk," and I like to add, in life, all profit comes from risk. So, you imagine that okay, if that's the nature of profit and risk in business, so you imagine that your client decides that they're going to go out into the marketplace and take some risk in the market as a way of earning profit. So, first of all, your client decides I'm going to take some risk, and then they hire you and in part, what they're hiring you to do is to make some of that risk go away. In every price that you charge, put forward to your client or charge your client, there's some sort of risk level built into the price. There's just risk all around. When somebody in the middle of the equation that is the principal of the firm quits taking risk, then everything kind of doesn't grind to a halt, but everything kind of slows down, gets less interesting, less value is created. DAVID: And clients start to run things more as well. You don't push back. BLAIR: Yeah. There's another tough decision that you're not going to make. You're not going to push back on this client. You're thinking ah, three more years. DAVID: Yeah. BLAIR: Three more years. DAVID: Don't want to upset the applecart. BLAIR: I've some friends who are cops and once they get 20 years of service in, they always say three bad days. If I have three bad days in a row, I can just quit and I've got pension. I feel like that's what happens to agency principals when they have one eye on the exit. I just want to clarify here, I'm not saying you can never retire. I am saying you obviously want to build a business. You want to create your wealth, so at any moment you can stop, you can shut it down. But the idea that an entrepreneur is going to, in five years from now, I'm going to keep sacrificing and then in five years or whatever the time period is, I'm going to like shut it all down or go do something else and start my new life. I think if that's what's driving you, if that's kind of your vision, maybe you've just inherited it from the previous generation where we were taught, for whatever, that that's how things are done. We just need to unlearn this old practice of retirement. We should just get away from this practice of retirement, or you've just built your business in a way that it's just ongoing sacrifice, sacrifice, sacrifice. So, what I'm advocating is your business should serve you, right? Structure your business in a way that it serves you, in a way that you love showing up to work, and you're energized by work, and you're making good money, and you're getting all of your needs met, and you get to this place where your business is so good at serving you that the idea of retirement becomes ridiculous. DAVID: Right. Now, if you catch this early enough, let's say ... And I get this, because I get calls from people who want me to help sell their business, and if it's early enough in the process, I can probe and say, "Oh, you know what? This isn't the problem. The problem is that you're just not as interested in it anymore, but we're catching this quick enough. You could reinvent yourself and you wouldn't want to sell your business." Sometimes that's quite possible, right? But if you're past that tipping point, there's very little that can happen. I'm hoping that as people listen to this, they're inspired to be honest with themselves about this, and to live with some of the discomfort and the paranoia and to let that make them feel alive and to embrace the risk taking, and also to picture themselves homeless or whatever that looks like for them. Maybe it's just not enough money for a latte tomorrow or whatever. But picture themselves and embrace that fear and then make better decisions that follow some deeply held principles that you have and not be dragged along by the marketplace. My goodness, that's what I hope people hear here. BLAIR: Yeah, and again, back to this point I was trying to make earlier is at some point, things change, your partner, like health problems, whatever, everything changes, and you do want to be in a position where you can shut your business down or sell it if there's a willing buyer. I'm not saying you can never sell your business and you can never retire, because there are times for lots of people when it's going to make sense to do one or the other. What I'm saying is you should operate your business with this idea that you're going to die with your boots on, so that you never quit taking risk, you never quit facing the difficult business decisions. I want to close by, I'll give you the last word here, but I want to close my part here by recalling a tweet that I saw last week on the subject. I'm not sure who it was from. I think it was a financial advisor. He was saying the pattern in life when it comes to retirement is you've got a job, and at some point, you get to a certain age you realize, at this rate, I'm not going to have enough money to retire in the style that I want to retire. That situation, that realization forces you into entrepreneurship. So, you begin to take risk and you start a business, and then what this guy says is the inevitable is you make the money that will allow you to retire, but you're having so much fun now that you completely ... You discard the idea of retirement and this guy is saying this is a pattern that he sees over and over again. That really resonated with me. I think there are certain jobs that you absolutely have to retire from. There are certain businesses that it might make sense to retire from. But when you're already an entrepreneur, you're already taking risk, we're not coal miners. You're not wearing out your body. I think you structure your business today so that it remains fascinating to you and the requirement of that is that you keep taking risk. When you do that, and you don't have one eye on the horizon, you're going to focus on living a long healthy life. You're going to focus on shaping your role in your business so that it serves you, and the idea of ever retiring is going to be absurd. So, that's my last word on this. What do you want to finish on? DAVID: I can't top that. We'll leave it at that. I think that's a very apt way to end this thing, and it's been fun to talk about this risk. There's just such a brotherhood out there, of risk takers and almost like a secret handshake, you meet somebody that you hardly know but they're an entrepreneur and you immediately know that there's something you share with them. It's this risk taking thing. All of a sudden, you understand their world, even when you don't even know it yet. It's just an amazing thing. BLAIR: That is so profound. Like I got goosebumpy when you were talking about it, because I'm remembering there was no room I would rather be in than a room full of entrepreneurs. DAVID: Yeah. BLAIR: A room full of people taking risk, and then you drop the person in who's like got his eye on the retirement and it's like, yeah, you're in the wrong room, dude. DAVID: Yeah. This has been great. BLAIR: Yeah. DAVID: This has been a fantastic discussion. Thank you, Blair. BLAIR: Thanks, David. Talk to you next time.

Nima and Dylan discuss Hyman Minsky's views on banking and financial instability. Source: Why Minsky Matters (https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10575.html)

Nima discusses American economist Hyman Minsky's ideas and contributions. Source:Why Minsky Matters by L Randall Way (https://www.amazon.com/Why-Minsky-Matters-Introduction-Economist-ebook/dp/B00XNZA8CO)

In Episode 130, we welcome Eric Falkenstein. The show starts with Meb and Eric discussing ice fishing in Minnesota (where Eric is currently located). But then Meb asks for Eric’s origin story. Eric tells us about being a teacher’s assistant for Hyman Minsky, wanting to be a macro economist, the turn that pushed him toward investing, and a well-timed put option that made him a boatload in the ’87 crash. Next, the conversation turns toward Eric’s interest in low volatility. He tells us about being one of the first people to study low-vol. He was early, and the broader investing community wasn’t ready for the findings. People dismissed the suggestion that high volatility stocks (with high risk) didn’t outperform low vol stocks. Eric tells us that given all this, “low vol” wasn’t enough of a selling point – you had to layer on another factor just to get people to pay attention. Meb asks about the main value proposition of low-vol. It is a smoother ride? Better returns? And why does this factor persist? Eric’s answer touches on CAPM, high beta, low beta, risk, various premiums, high flying stocks, and alpha discovery. This bleeds into a conversation about factoring timing relative to valuations. Eric tells us he tried factor timing, but didn’t find it to be too helpful out of sample. The conversation bounces around a bit, with the guys touching on Meb’s paper, “A Quantitative Approach to Asset Allocation,” bonds and how the US is flirting with the top bucket of bond yields, whether low vol translates to global markets and different asset classes, and Eric’s take on risk parity. After that, the guys turn to crypto. Despite the current pullback, Eric believes “in the long run, it’s going to work.” He believes that crypto will eventually replace Dollars as people will want an alternative to fiat currency, something not susceptible to manipulation by politicians. He tells us that he sees a tipping point coming. There’s plenty more in this episode – Eric’s books, pithy quotes and maxims, how people often think about the specific investment they want, but not the “plumbing” such as the bid/ask spread of that investment, the volume, and so on… And as always, Eric’s most memorable trade. Get all the details in Episode 130.

Nima discusses American economist Hyman Minsky's ideas and contributions. Sources: Why Minsky Matters by L Randall Way (https://www.amazon.com/Why-Minsky-Matters-Introduction-Economist-ebook/dp/B00XNZA8CO) Club Of Rome on inventing global warming scare (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome#The_Limits_to_Growth)

Bill Janeway stops by to discuss his latest book, "Doing Capitalism in the Innovation Economy." In this fully revised and updated edition, Janeway interweaves his professional experience with political and financial history, giving a lively explanation of how successive technological revolutions have transformed the market economy, and revealing why America may yield leadership of the innovation economy to China. William H. Janeway has lived a double life of “theorist-practitioner,” according to the legendary economist Hyman Minsky, who first applied that term to him twenty-five years ago. In his role as “practitioner,” Bill Janeway has been an active growth equity investor for more than 40 years. He is a senior advisor and managing director of Warburg Pincus, where he has been responsible for building the information technology investment practice, as well as a director of Magnet Systems and O'Reilly Media. As a “theorist," he is an affiliated member of the Faculty of Economics of Cambridge University, a member of the board of directors of the Social Science Research Council and the Fields Institute for Research in the Mathematical Sciences, and of the Advisory Board of the Princeton Bendheim Center for Finance. The Rhodes Center is housed at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University. You can read or download the transcript of this episode here: [https://drive.google.com/file/d/10ZM9c8yRB12GiwloTW2CwsmfwGAATCTd/view?usp=sharing] Watch Bill's talk at the Watson Institute here: https://youtu.be/fJoY6YJNhLE

Clarity Financial Chief Investment Strategist Lance Roberts w Dir. Financial Planning Richard Rosso on Houston Hurricanes, Hurricane Florence, Ray Dalio's Debt Cycles, and Hyman Minsky's Minsky Moment in the economy.

There are back-to-back monologues on today’s episode. The two episodes consist of the same material, just said a little different. The first take Michael was told was too aggressive with too many F bombs, so he re-recorded but still left it up on the tail end of the podcast. The double header podcast today was inspired by a film Michael recently re-watched called, “Boom Bust Boom”. Michael talks about Hyman Minsky’s “financial instability hypothesis”. Minsky said that there is instability in capitalism and if capitalism was eliminated, that would help eliminate bubbles. Minsky believed that offsetting the economy is how you eliminate instability. This is where the government came up with zero interest rates, and in some places, negative interest rates. Due to the Minsky mentality, economists think they can control the markets and stop human nature from happening. Michael ties his documentary film into the discussion and describes the insight he got during ’08 when he happened to be filming. Trend following strategies and behavioral economics have these characteristics in common: 1. People will never be rational. 2. Markets will always trend up, down and sideways. 3. You can’t predict trends. 4. There are ways to make money even though numbers 1-3 are set in stone and will not change. In this episode of Trend Following Radio: The tulip bubble March 2000 Fall of 2008 Financial instability hypothesis Trend following philosophy Behavioral economics

As part of The Economist's latest 'schools brief' series, we take a look at the seminal papers that have transformed economics and the thinkers behind them. First, our Asia economics editor explains why Hyman Minsky was pulled out of obscurity after the 2008 financial crisis, becoming a posthumous star. And our US economics editor tells us about George Akerlof and his market for so-called 'lemons'. Andrew Palmer hosts. Audio of Janet Yellen, Bruce Kasman and Robert J. Barbera taken from the 18th Annual Hyman P. Minsky Conference, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

As part of The Economist's latest 'schools brief' series, we take a look at the seminal papers that have transformed economics and the thinkers behind them. First, our Asia economics editor explains why Hyman Minsky was pulled out of obscurity after the 2008 financial crisis, becoming a posthumous star. And our US economics editor tells us about George Akerlof and his market for so-called 'lemons'. Andrew Palmer hosts. Audio of Janet Yellen, Bruce Kasman and Robert J. Barbera taken from the 18th Annual Hyman P. Minsky Conference, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Japan's big surprise, stand up for capitalism and driving made easy: Merryn and John talk about the ongoing descent into central banking madness, the way to protect capitalism from itself, and why Hyman Minsky was right about pretty much everything.

Steve Keen is Professor of Economics and Head of Department of Economics, History and Politics at Kingston University, London. Steve's interpretative analysis is quite different to the norm. Steve likes to be known socially as an anti-economist and has spent 40 years fighting delusion in economics. That delusion has led us into a crisis and Steve may have finally won his battle... or has he? Steve is the winner of the Revere Award for being the economist who most convincingly warned of the economic crisis and whose work is most likely to prevent another one. He topped the poll beating Roubini, Shiller, Soros, Stiglitz and Krugman. Economic Themes: In this interview, Steve mentions and discusses: Keynesian economics, supply, demand and equilibrium,demand curves, Debt/GDP ratio, financial crisis, housing market bubble, IS-LM model, Economists and Economic Schools: In this interview, Steve mentions: Frank Stilwell, John Maynard Keynes, Hyman Minsky, John Hicks, Paul Krugman, Paul Samuelson, Marshallian economics (Alfred Marshall), Walrasian Economics (Leon Walrasian) Find Out: how Steve saw the 2008 financial crisis coming when he investigated Debt/GDP levels. Steve's views on current economic teachings in many school, colleges and universities around the world. what should be done at these colleges and how a pluralist approach to teaching economics is best. about Steve's thoughts on the treatment of Keynesian economics. about Steve's involvement in a Marvel-style comic book dedicated to teaching economics. and much more. You can find all the links and books mentioned by Steve at http://www.economicrockstar.com/stevekeen  

American economist Hyman Minsky died in 1996, but his theories offer one of the most compelling explanations of the 2008 financial crisis. His key idea is simple enough to be a t-shirt slogan: "Stability is destabilising". But TUC senior economist Duncan Weldon argues it's a radical challenge to mainstream economic theory. While the mainstream view has been that markets tend towards equilibrium and the role of banks and finance can largely be ignored, Minsky argued that in the good times the seeds of the next crisis are sown as the financial sector engages in riskier and riskier lending in pursuit of profit. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, this might seem obvious - so why did Minsky die an outsider? What do his ideas say about the response to the 2008 crisis and current policies like Help to Buy? And has mainstream economics done enough to respond to its own failure to predict the crisis and the challenge posed by Minsky's ideas? Producer: James Fletcher.

This week we are joined by Professor Matheus Grasselli. Matheus is the Deputy Director of the Fields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences, and an associate professor at McMaster University, where he is the co-director of PhiMac, the Financial Mathematics Laboratory. He also writes a blog on Quantitative Finance for the Fields Institute, where he discusses his work, and thoughts on economic modelling, complexity theory, and probability. Matheus has been working with Prof. Steve Keen to help give a mathematicians viewpoint on his ground-breaking monetary economic models of the capitalist system. We discuss the current state of neoclassical macroeconomic modelling, complexity and emergence, Wynn Godley and his stock-flow consistent models, Hyman Minsky and Ponzi finance, black swans and fragility, Bayesian vs Freqentist statistics, Poker, and Samuel Beckett. You can check out his blog here: http://fieldsfinance.blogspot.co.uk/

This week we talk to Professor Andrew Kliman, about the current economic crisis, and what Karl Marx would make of it all. Professor Kliman, is a Professor of Economics at Pace University and author of several publications on Marxian economics, including the books Reclaiming Marx’s “Capital”, and ‘The Failure of Capitalist Production: Underlying Causes of the Great Recession’. We talk of Marx's labour theory of value, the falling rate of profit, production for productions sake, and what Marx would think about the insights of the post-keynesian, Hyman Minsky. The Professor is a leading proponent of the Temporal Single System Interpretation of Marx's labor theory, which defends Marx’s cconomic theories against various claims of its inconsistency from other economists. I’m currently reading Das Kapital myself, so it’s a real treat to hear what one of the worlds foremost Marxists has to say about the current economic situation. You can buy his books here: http://www.amazon.com/Andrew-Kliman/e/B001JSALNS/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_1?qid=1351094041&sr=8-1 You can check out his blog here: http://akliman.squarespace.com/ Enjoy!

L. Randall Wray — A Minskian Explanation of the Economic Crisis – 2/24/11Professor of Economics, University of Missouri–Kansas City A Minskian Explanation of the Economic Crisis Thursday, February 24, 2011Anita Tuvin Schlechter Auditorium, 7:00 p.m. Relying upon the theories and assumptions of Hyman Minsky, Wray will explore and expound upon the factors that contributed to the current economic and financial crisis. This event is co-sponsored by the Department of Economics. Biography (provided by the speaker)L. Randall Wray is a professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City as well as research director, the Center for Full Employment and Price Stability, and senior scholar at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, NY. A student of Hyman P. Minsky while at Washington University in St. Louis, Wray has focused on monetary theory and policy, macroeconomics, financial instability, and employment policy. He has published widely in journals and is the author of Understanding Modern Money: The Key to Full Employment and Price Stability (Elgar, 1998) and Money and Credit in Capitalist Economies (Elgar 1990). He is the editor of Credit and State Theories of Money (Edward Elgar 2004) and the co-editor of Contemporary Post Keynesian Analysis (Edward Elgar 2005), Money, Financial Instability and Stabilization Policy (Edward Elgar 2006), and Keynes for the Twenty-First Century: The Continuing Relevance of The General Theory, Palgrave, 2008. Wray is also the author of numerous scholarly articles in edited books and academic journals, including the Journal of Economic Issues, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Review of Political Economy, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Economic and Labour Relations Review, Economie Appliquée, and the Eastern Economic Journal. Wray received a B.A. from the University of the Pacific and an M.A. and Ph.D. from Washington University in St. Louis. He has served as a visiting professor at the University of Rome, the University of Paris, and UNAM (Mexico City). He was the Bernardin-Haskell Professor, UMKC, Fall 1996, and joined the UMKC faculty as professor of economics, August 1999.DownloadL. Randall Wray's website is: New Economic PerspectivesSource: The Clarke ForumAired: 2/24/11 12:00 AMThis podcast is an aggregate of audio files freely available online. Please visit the original source and subscribe to the host website.

In this episode Steve Keen shares his knowledge of economics to not only debunk the reverence paid to economists by policy makers but to explain that the titans of the economic theory are misunderstood. Keynes wasn’t the advocate for stimulus spending as many assume and Karl Marx actually had a lot of great insights that are conveniently swept under the carpet. Steve goes on to provide a tutorial on the life and ideas of his hero Hyman Minsky, explaining how this was one of the few who understood the sheer unpredictability that underlies all economics. We also discuss the how there is nothing special about the Australian, Canadian, or Chinese economies other than the fact that they have been able to breathe new life into their economies by blowing bigger bubbles. The end result is inevitable: global deflation. You can read about Steve’s book “Debunking Economics” here: http://debunkingeconomics.com/ You can read Steve’s blog posts on economics here: http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/

In this episode Steve Keen shares his knowledge of economics to not only debunk the reverence paid to economists by policy makers but to explain that the titans of the economic theory are misunderstood. Keynes wasn’t the advocate for stimulus spending as many assume and Karl Marx actually had a lot of great insights that are conveniently swept under the carpet. Steve goes on to provide a tutorial on the life and ideas of his hero Hyman Minsky, explaining how this was one of the few who understood the sheer unpredictability that underlies all economics. We also discuss the how there is nothing special about the Australian, Canadian, or Chinese economies other than the fact that they have been able to breathe new life into their economies by blowing bigger bubbles. The end result is inevitable: global deflation. You can read about Steve’s book “Debunking Economics” here: http://debunkingeconomics.com/ You can read Steve’s blog posts on economics here: http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/