Podcasts about John Maynard Keynes

Politicians say they can “fix” the economy.But economists Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises pointed out how government “fixes" lead to bigger problems.Hayek and Mises predicted the fall of the Soviet Union. They warned that centrally planned economies fail.But today, socialism is popular again. New York and Seattle have elected socialist mayors.Many politicians still believe that government can manage the economy—an idea popularized by economist John Maynard Keynes.Keynes was revered. Politicians love his arguments.But Hayek and Mises warned that government intervention leads to inflation, instability, and boom-bust cycles.They were right.In this podcast, Ryan McMaken of the Mises Institute explains why we should read Hayek and Mises today.

In 2013 the anthropologist David Graeber examined one of the strangest contradictions in modern capitalism: despite exponential gains in productivity, people were working even harder that ever. In his landmark essay called “On the Preponderance of Bullshit Jobs” and then a book a few years later, Graeber showed how as much as 37% of all jobs in capitalist societies are, well, bullshit. Or, to use his own words “where even the person doing the job secretly believes the job really shouldn't exist.(...) But nonetheless, part of the conditions of employment is that you have to pretend that it does.”Graeber wasn't the first to notice the problem. Back in 1930 the economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that ever-increasing industrial output from factories would make it possible for everyone on earth to work 15 hours a week. Within a few decades the economy met his expectations, but people's workloads didn't get lighter. Fast forward to today, and the question of Bullshit jobs is once again on everyone's lips. Everyone from Bill Gates to Sam Altman and Elon Musk have heralded AI as the new harbinger of the 15 hour work week. After all, the very things that AI is supposedly good at—getting rid of menial intellectual labor and automating digital tasks—are exactly the sorts of things that will get automated away.But here's the thing, what if bullshit work isn't a bug in industrial captialsim? But that it is it's key feature?In this week's video I dig into why Bullshit work is almost definitely here to stay despite the promises of tech barons.

“The rules-based system just hasn't worked. China's system is so opaque that you can't see the subsidies. And when you've got China not interested in new rules and the US not interested in a referee, you've got two of the world's biggest actors who aren't on board.” — Soumaya Keynes It would have been nice to get John Maynard Keynes on the show to get his critique of Trump's trade war. But in the long run, we're all dead — even old Maynard. So instead, we found his great-great-niece, Soumaya Keynes — Financial Times columnist and co-author of How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy. Having already appeared on Jon Stewart this week, Soumaya has a bit of Keynesian star quality about her. But she's also a first-rate economist. Her thesis is that the old rules-based trading system that her great-great-uncle helped design after World War II is gone. And it ain't coming back. China's subsidies are so opaque that rules can't be written to constrain them, let alone enforced. The US is no longer willing to submit to a referee. Without the two biggest players, no rules-based system is meaningful. So — now what? Keynes says we must think like a trade warrior. Donald Trump should leverage the tools available — but use them strategically. Trump's error in his second term was not being tough on China while being too tough on everyone else, especially allies like Canada and Mexico. Soumaya Keynes' most contemporary idea might be her most Keynesian one. John Maynard Keynes proposed penalties for countries running large trade surpluses as well as those running deficits — recognising that global imbalances are a two-sided problem. That idea didn't make it into the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement. Eighty years later, in equally anxious economic times, his optimistic great-great-niece is reviving it. Five Takeaways •       Can Trade Wars Be Won? Yes, Sometimes: The conventional wisdom: no one wins a trade war. Keynes and Bown agree — in theory. In practice, countries in a weaker position cave. History has examples: France in the late nineteenth century told its trading partners they were renegotiating treaties, and the smaller partners complied. Trump's tariffs in his first term produced concessions. The problem is not that trade wars can't be won. It's that the smaller power's only defence — coordinating with other smaller powers — is extremely hard to sustain. There's always an incentive to cut a deal first. •       China Is the Doper on the Sports Field: Keynes's sharpest analogy: the global trading system is like a sports game that needs rules to ensure a level playing field. China's subsidies — cheap credit, corporate handouts, opaque support for state-linked companies — are the equivalent of performance-enhancing drugs. The problem is that unlike doping in sport, China's subsidies are invisible. You can write a rule saying China won't give these handouts. But you can't verify compliance. And without enforcement, rules are meaningless. The WTO has not solved this. Nothing has solved this. •       Trump Was Right About China, Wrong About Everything Else: Keynes is careful here. She credits Robert Lighthizer in Trump's first term with identifying China as the real problem and building a focused strategy. In the second term, Trump put tariffs on everyone simultaneously — which dissipated leverage, alienated the coalition of allies needed to pressure Beijing, and mixed up the problem of China's subsidies with grievances against Canada, Mexico, and the EU. If you were genuinely tough on China, you wouldn't have put tariffs on everyone. You would have been more targeted. •       The Rules-Based System Is Gone and Isn't Coming Back: Why can't we return to the system Keynes's great-great-uncle helped build? Two reasons. China's subsidies are too opaque to write enforceable rules against. And the US has lost confidence in any international referee — a long and complex story, but the result is that America won't submit to neutral adjudication. Without the two biggest players, no rules-based system is meaningful. Yearning for the old approach is not an option. A new strategy is needed — and that's what the book is about. •       AI and the Next Trade War: Services: AI is central to the US-China conflict already — chip restrictions, military advantage, economic supremacy. But Keynes's less-noticed observation: AI could fundamentally reshape international services trade. The UK, for example, is a massive services exporter — finance, legal, consulting, accounting. If AI eliminates demand for those services, the UK faces a new current account crisis, new trade tensions, a new wave of economic conflict. Nobody knows how this plays out. Which is why, she suggests, the tools in the book will remain relevant for longer than the current tariff cycle. About the Guests Soumaya Keynes is an economics columnist at the Financial Times and host of The Economics Show with Soumaya Keynes. Before joining the FT she spent eight years at The Economist. She co-founded the Trade Talks podcast with Chad Bown during Trump's first term. Chad P. Bown is the Reginald Jones Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former Chief Economist at the US State Department under President Biden. Together they are the authors of How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy (Simon & Schuster, May 26, 2026). References: •       How to Win a Trade War: An Optimistic Guide to an Anxious Global Economy by Soumaya Keynes and Chad P. Bown (Simon & Schuster, May 26, 2026). •       Soumaya Keynes on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, May 19, 2026 — referenced in the interview. •       Episode 2892: Jason Pack on the Iran war — the companion episode on America's strategic distractions from the China problem. About Keen On America Nobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,900 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting. WebsiteSubstackYouT...

Take 730 delegates from 44 countries, plus another 2,000 or so hangers-on. House them in a remote, dilapidated hotel with holes in the roof and broken furniture. Deliver a train wagon filled with alcohol. Throw in some Russian spies, German prisoners of war, a troupe of bombshell “secretaries” and a magician. And then have the lead protagonist, the world's most famous economist, almost die of a heart attack. What does that give you? Only the most successful international monetary negotiation in history. This is the story of the Bretton Woods conference of 1944, as relayed by journalist and author Ed Conway to hosts Gillian Tett and Robin Wigglesworth. The three weeks of chaotic talks would deliver three decades of postwar peace and prosperity, and enthrone the US dollar as the global reserve currency. The discussions also nearly killed Britain's lead negotiator, John Maynard Keynes, and would later disgrace his US counterpart, Harry Dexter White.Further reading:The Summit, by Ed Conway (2015)The Economic Consequences of the Peace, by John Maynard Keynes (1919)John Maynard Keynes, biography by Robert Skidelsky in three volumes (1983-2000)Treasonable Doubt: The Harry Dexter White Spy Case, by R Bruce Craig (2004)Credits: King's College Cambridge, the IMF, Dreamstime, Getty Images, the Hulton Archive, Ullstein Bild, Bettmann, Shutterstock, the LIFE Picture Collection, Thomas D McAvoy, Alfred Eisenstaedt, and the Darling Archive.To enjoy future episodes, be sure to subscribe to The Story of Money wherever you get your podcasts, also on the show's dedicated YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@FTTheStoryOfMoneyHosts: Gillian Tett and Robin WigglesworthProducer: Laurence KnightExecutive Producers: Flo Phillips and Manuela SaragosaOriginal music: Breen TurnerBroadcast engineers: Bianca Wakeman and Petros GiuompasisPodcast Development: Laura ClarkeVideo editor: Kristen Kenyon and Josh Divney at Podcast DiscoveryLearn more at ft.com/tsom or get in touch at thestoryofmoney@ft.com.Love listening to FT Podcasts? Join us live on Saturday June 20 at our inaugural NYC FT Weekend Festival at Spring Studios. Put your questions directly to our experts, experience your favourite podcast in person, and see the FT come to life. Register now and enjoy 10% off with code FTPodcast — this is one Saturday you won't want to miss. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Finanzminister Markus Marterbauer spricht mit Eva Konzett im Museum Arbeitswelten in Steyr über die Lehren von John Maynard Keynes. Und wie ein Ruck durch das Land führen könnte. Das Gespräch wurde im Rahmen der Reihe „Politik ohne Filter“ organisiert und aufgezeichnet. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Introducing a new video podcast from the FT: Does scientific, artistic or political brilliance translate into investing success? It's a topical question with hedge funds today accused of sucking talent away from the rest of the economy. So, the FT's Gillian Tett and Robin Wigglesworth sat down with reporter Toby Nangle, who has dug into the archives to assess the investment portfolios of Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, Winston Churchill, John Maynard Keynes and other widely regarded geniuses of the past. What Toby found may surprise you, as will the historical wildcard he's unearthed.To enjoy future episodes, be sure to subscribe to The Story of Money wherever you get your podcasts, also on the show's dedicated YouTube channel here.Learn more at ft.com/tsom Want more?Read Toby's full FT article here.Toby's sources:On Churchill: https://www.amazon.co.uk/No-More-Champagne-Churchill-Money/dp/1784081817 On J.M.W. Turner: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5718586 On John Maynard Keynes: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2023011 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2287262 On Einstein: https://einstein-website.de/en/what-happened-to-the-nobel-prize-money/#:~:text=By%20May%201924%2C%20Mileva%20had,visible%20result%20of%20my%20musings%E2%80%9D On Jane Austen: https://jasna.org/publications-2/persuasions-online/vol36no1/toran/ Hosts: Gillian Tett and Robin WigglesworthGuest: Toby NangleProducer: Lulu SmythSenior Producers: Michela Tindera and Laurence KnightExecutive Producers: Flo Phillips and Manuela SaragosaOriginal music: Breen TurnerBroadcast engineers: Bianca Wakeman and Petros GiuompasisPodcast Development: Laura ClarkeFT Global Head of Audio: Cheryl BrumleyVideo editor: Josh Divney at Podcast Discovery Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Money is both a concrete thing and an abstract measure. If you only look at money as an abstract measure, as traditional economists have done for centuries, you'll miss out on the real role that money plays in our society.  The decisions of governments, corporations, and everyday people are influenced by money, and understanding this is helpful in understanding what's driving the decision making that's ultimately leading to a worsening climate crisis.  While discussing the new book "Against Money" by Arjun Jayadev and JW Mason, we explore a variety of topics such as John Maynard Keynes' early objections to economists' treatment of money, the fuzzy math behind the measurement of inflation and GDP, and even the fallout between Trump and Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. Arjun Jayadev is professor of economics and director of the Center for the Study of the Indian Economy at Azim Premji University in India. JW Mason is associate professor of economics at John Jay College, City University of New York.  You can purchase "Against Money" here:  https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/A/bo265118979.html Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to our newsletter/podcast, The Climate Weekly, to help support this show. Your contributions will make the continuation of this show possible.  Our music is "Gotta Get Up" by The Passion Hifi, check out his music at thepassionhifi.com. Rate, review and subscribe to this podcast on iTunes, Spotify, and more! Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Does scientific, artistic or political brilliance translate into investing success? It's a topical question with hedge funds today accused of sucking talent away from the rest of the economy. So, the FT's Gillian Tett and Robin Wigglesworth sat down with reporter Toby Nangle, who has dug into the archives to assess the investment portfolios of Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, Winston Churchill, John Maynard Keynes and other widely regarded geniuses of the past. What Toby found may surprise you, as will the historical wildcard he's unearthed.To enjoy future episodes, be sure to subscribe to The Story of Money wherever you get your podcasts, also on the show's dedicated YouTube channel here.Learn more at ft.com/tsomWant more?Read Toby's full FT article here.Toby's sources: On Churchill: https://www.amazon.co.uk/No-More-Champagne-Churchill-Money/dp/1784081817On J.M.W. Turner:https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5718586On John Maynard Keynes:https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2023011https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2287262On Einstein:https://einstein-website.de/en/what-happened-to-the-nobel-prize-money/#:~:text=By%20May%201924%2C%20Mileva%20had,visible%20result%20of%20my%20musings%E2%80%9D.On Jane Austen:https://jasna.org/publications-2/persuasions-online/vol36no1/toran/Hosts: Gillian Tett and Robin WigglesworthGuest: Toby NangleProducer: Lulu SmythSenior Producers: Michela Tindera and Laurence Knight Executive Producers: Flo Phillips and Manuela SaragosaOriginal music: Breen TurnerBroadcast engineers: Bianca Wakeman and Petros GiuompasisPodcast Development: Laura ClarkeFT Global Head of Audio: Cheryl BrumleyVideo editor: Josh Divney at Podcast DiscoveryRead a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Naj bo država le tihi opazovalec trga ali arhitekt družbene blaginje? O fascinantnem delu največjega ekonomista 20. stoletja, ki je poskušal obrzdati ekscese kapitalizma svojega časa in s tem preprečiti nove svetovne vojne, se pogovarjamo točno 80 let od Keynesove smrti.Čeprav nobenega človeškega spoznanja ne moremo pripisati samo enemu človeku, ampak vsakdo gradi na temelju vsega znanja, ki smo ga nakopičili skozi zgodovino, je vendarle res, da se v človeški zgodovini pojavljajo posamezniki, ki s svojimi vpogledi resnično preoblikujejo naš svet in odprejo polja, ki so bila prej težko predstavljiva. Eden od teh je tudi John Maynard Keynes, britanski ekonomist in mislec, ki je ne le razprl povsem nove dimenzije razumevanja svetovne in nacionalne ekonomije, ampak si je pravzaprav v marsičem sploh prvi zamislil moderno državo, ki lahko ali celo mora aktivno delovati znotraj gospodarstva - moderno državo, ki nadzoruje obtok denarja in obrestne mere, ki skrbi za celo vrsto družbenih podsistemov, ki lahko odločno ukrepa v času krize, gradi potrebno infrastrukturo in uravnava trg, kadar ta ne uspe delovati v dobro družbe. V središču današnje Intelekte bo prav ta fascinantni mislec, ki ga po eni strani zaznamuje humanističen idealizem, v skladu s katerim si je pred slabim stoletjem celo predstavljal, da bomo danes delali le še 15 ur na teden in prosti čas posvečali svojim bližnjim in duhovnemu ter kulturnemu razvoju - po drugi strani pa ga zaznamujejo zelo praktični predlogi, ki so jih v takšni ali drugačni obliki že za časa njegovega življenja prevzele mnoge zahodne države, ki so se dokazali tudi v prvi in drugi svetovni vojni, njihovo učinkovitost pa so vse težje kritizirali celo njegovi ideološki nasprotniki. Keynesa in njegovo misel nam bodo 80 let od njegove smrti pomagali predstaviti dr. ekonomskih znanosti in dr. zgodovine Neven Borak, zaslužni profesor dr. Maks Tajnikar in dr. Aleksandar Kešeljević z ljubljanske ekonomske fakultete ter dr. Aljoša Kravanja z Oddelka za filozofijo ljubljanske Filozofske fakultete. Oddajo je pripravila Alja Zore. foto: John Maynard Keynes leta 1929, Wikimedia Commons

“La diferencia entre un chaval de Harvard o del MIT y alguien de la Politécnica que está haciendo Física y Mates es dónde han nacido. El talento está distribuido equitativamente. Las oportunidades no”. Esta frase de Guli esconde una de las verdades sobre la meritocracia. No es el talento, es el entorno. La beca Exponential, un proyecto fantástico, intenta reducir esta brecha ofreciendo a los más jóvenes la oportunidad de trabajar unos meses en una empresa tecnológica de Estados Unidos.Kapital es posible gracias a sus colaboradores:⁠⁠TaxDown⁠⁠. Tus impuestos bien hechos.⁠¿Declaras bien tus inversiones? Este año, si tienes inversiones, hay nuevos cambios y regulaciones que tienes que saber (DAC8, modelo 721, normativa europea), así que es clave hacerlo bien. Si inviertes, yo te recomiendo TaxDown por ser la forma más fácil de presentar la Renta. TaxDown se integra con la mayoría de brókers, te lo calculan todo, y además cuentan con expertos fiscales en inversiones que revisan tu caso. Así evitas líos y cálculos raros. Si quieres probarlo, puedes usar mi código KAPITAL para obtener descuento. O puedes entrar directamente desde este enlace.La Cartera K⁠. Invierte en lo que no cambia.La Cartera K es la evolución lógica de El Proyecto K. Pablo González Vidal y yo abrimos el taller de inversión para que los pequeños ahorradores tomaran el control de sus finanzas. El curso ha sido un éxito (¡nueva edición en junio!) y por eso queremos dar ahora la oportunidad de invertir directamente en una cartera automatizada que siga esos principios K. Lo hacemos de la mano de la plataforma de inversión inbestMe. Con el fin de proteger tu capital en estos tiempos inciertos, la Cartera K sigue una estrategia indexada de bajas comisiones con una diversificación sectorial. Si estás interesado escríbeme a joan@elproyectok.comPatrocina Kapital. Toda la información en este link.Índice:0:32 Subir el listón con el proyecto Sputnik.8:34 La riqueza de la sociedad americana.13:21 No trabajan más horas, pero sí están más horas pensando en el trabajo.16:05 El magnífico proyecto de Exponential.28:20 En el deporte vemos bien la hiperespecialización.36:27 Ley de potencias en el emprendimiento.46:45 Tomarse en serio tu trabajo.1:04:37 Manufacturar la serendipia.1:12:36 Los ricos tienen más balas.1:19:42 Nunca ha sido tan fácil llegar al 1%, nunca ha sido tan difícil llegar al 10%.1:31:50 Twitter, Reddit, YouTube y enterarte de todo unos días antes.Apuntes:Average is over. Tyler Cowen.Bullshit jobs: A theory by David Graeber. Eliane Graser.Las posibilidades económicas de nuestros nietos. John Maynard Keynes.El cisne negro. Nassim Nicholas Taleb.3Blue1Brown. Grant Sanderson.Veritasium. Derek Muller.

For today's episode, host Josh Sidman sat down with Guido Preparata to discuss Silvio Gesell's monetary economics, the nature and origin of interest, and the controversial relationship between Gesell and John Maynard Keynes.Guido Preparata is an Italian-American economist who currently resides in Umbria, Italy. He did his PhD in Political Economy at the University of Southern California and also has a masters in Criminology from Cambridge University. He taught political economy at the University of Washington and was a Fulbright Scholar studying Middle Eastern international relations at the University of Amman in Jordan. Among his diverse professional interests is the economic perspective of Silvio Gesell, which he has been writing about since the 1990s. He wrote a paper in 2002 arguing that some of Keynes's most important insights on money were inspired by, if not plagiarized from, Silvio Gesell.To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.hgsss.org/⁠⁠⁠⁠ 

Aphorism: The word aphorism means a short sentence that cleverly expresses, in a few words, what is believed to be a general truth. https://links.artisanenglish.jp/Aphorism  Thanks for visiting ArtisanEnglish.jp, The Posts – The Podcast today.  These podcasts and posts are created to help our students and anyone who wants to access them to improve their English vocabulary.  Take the first step to perfect your English ability, take a FREE TRIAL LESSON with me, David, at https://www.artisanenglish.jp/contact/  https://links.artisanenglish.jp/TrialLesson  I provide 100% error correction, engaging discussion topics, and detailed written feedback after each lesson.  Here are some terms from today's episode that may have been new to you.  Time is money: a powerful phrase emphasizing the importance of not wasting time because it is as useful as money. https://links.artisanenglish.jp/TimeIsMoney Animal spirits: the term animal spirits, coined by John Maynard Keynes, refers to the way humans behave and the financial decisions they make under stress. https://links.artisanenglish.jp/WedAnimalSpirits What goes up must come down: indicates the observation that everything that rises must also fall. There is balance in the universe. https://b.link/WednesdayWhatGoesUpMustComeDown   Website: https://www.artisanenglish.jp Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/artisanenglish.jp Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/david.artisanenglish.jp/ X: https://x.com/ArtisanEnglish YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Artisanenglish Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/artisanenglishjp   

Franklin D. Roosevelts "New Deal" erreicht 1936 den Höhepunkt: Gegen Widerstand der Superreichen setzt er auf wirtschaftlichen Aufschwung durch hohe Löhne und Investitionen - er behält Recht. Von Thomas Pfaff.

Un minaccioso fantasma si aggira nei talk show, sui giornali e nel dibattito pubblico italiano: il neoliberismo, additato come causa ultima di ogni male contemporaneo.  Ma come stanno davvero le cose? In questo episodio ne parlo con Andrea Mingardi, economista, direttore dell'Istituto Bruno Leoni,  ed autore – fra gli altri – di “La verità, vi prego, sul neoliberismo” (Marsilio). Contrariamente alla narrazione dominante, i dati mostrano in maniera chiara come la spesa pubblica in Occidente non sia mai stata così alta nella storia, così come la pressione fiscale sia di parecchi punti superiore al limite massimo che John Maynard Keynes (il più noto e seguito teorico dell'intervento statale nell'economia e nella società) teorizzava come soglia per il collasso di uno Stato.  E allora dov'è e che cos'è esattamente il neoliberismo? Una conversazione in puro stile PDR su uno dei maggiori non detti del nostro tempo. Questo episodio è offerto dall'olio extravergine "Il Fuoco invisibile": https://tinyurl.com/4b7tb9va La nuova edizione di ODIO è qui: https://amzn.to/44VUzdh I libri di tutti gli ospiti di PDR e qualche consiglio di lettura sono qui: https://www.amazon.it/shop/danielerielli La mia newsletter gratuita: https://danielerielli.substack.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

En fin, querido Lunar principiante, "La Teoría General" no es solo un libro denso de los años 30: es la razón por la quehoy los gobiernos actúan en crisis en vez de cruzarse de brazos. Keynes, con su mente brillante y pragmática, nos enseñó que la economía es humana – con miedos, esperanzas y necesidad de intervención inteligente. Como economistaliterario, te digo: léelo y entenderás por qué el desempleo no es "natural", sino evitable. ¡Es desafiante, pero transformador – una lectura que te hará ver el mundo con ojos más sabios y compasivos!"El capital del siglo XXI" de Thomas Piketty:https://youtu.be/LYFau_2kQ08"Crónicas Lunares di Sun" es un podcast cultural presentado por Irving Sun, que abarca una variedad de temas, desde la literatura y análisis de libros hasta discusiones sobre actualidad y personajes históricos. Se difunde en múltiples plataformas como Ivoox, Apple Podcast, Spotify y YouTube, donde también ofrece contenido en video, incluyendo reflexiones sobre temas como la meditación y la filosofía teosófica. Los episodios exploran textos y conceptos complejos, buscando fomentar la reflexión y el autoconocimiento entre su audiencia, los "Lunares", quienes pueden interactuar y apoyar el programa a través de comentarios, redes sociales y donaciones. AVISO LEGAL: Los cuentos, poemas, fragmentos de novelas, ensayos y todo contenido literario que aparece en Crónicas Lunares di Sun podrían estar protegidos por derecho de autor (copyright). Si por alguna razón los propietarios no están conformes con el uso de ellos por favor escribirnos al correo electrónico cronicaslunares.sun@hotmail.com y nos encargaremos de borrarlo inmediatamente. Si te gusta lo que escuchas y deseas apoyarnos puedes dejar tu donación en PayPal, ahí nos encuentras como @IrvingSun  https://paypal.me/IrvingSun?country.x=MX&locale.x=es_XC  Síguenos en:  Telegram: Crónicas Lunares di Sun  ⁠Crónicas Lunares di Sun - YouTube⁠ ⁠https://t.me/joinchat/QFjDxu9fqR8uf3eR⁠  ⁠https://www.facebook.com/cronicalunar/?modal=admin_todo_tour⁠  ⁠Crónicas Lunares (@cronicaslunares.sun) • Fotos y videos de Instagram⁠  ⁠https://twitter.com/isun_g1⁠  ⁠https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy9lODVmOWY0L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz⁠  ⁠https://open.spotify.com/show/4x2gFdKw3FeoaAORteQomp⁠  https://mx.ivoox.com/es/s_p2_759303_1.html⁠ https://tunein.com/user/gnivrinavi/favorites⁠ ORTOLARRY:  - NORTE 9 #175 ESQ. OTE 164. COLONIA MOCTEZUMA SEGUNDA SECCION. CDMX - NORTE 17# 211-A COLONIA MOCTEZUMA SEGUNDA SECCION C.P 15530 ALCALDIA VENUSTIANO  Teléfonos: 5557860648, 5524158512. Whatsapp: 5561075125 

O Brasil vive um "curto-circuito" de memória e identidade, e as instituições religiosas não estão imunes a esse fenômeno. Neste episódio crucial do Módulo 3 da série "A ORDEM", mergulhamos em um diagnóstico sóbrio e urgente da estrutura da Igreja. Utilizamos ferramentas de análise metapolítica e econômica — de Adam Smith a John Maynard Keynes e Friedrich Hayek — para entender como uma organização, criada para ser um organismo vivo, pode acabar se tornando uma máquina estéril de manutenção. Neste episódio, discutimos: 1. O Mecanismo vs. O Organismo: Quando a estabilidade administrativa substitui a vitalidade da missão. 2. A "Mente Capturada" na Igreja: Como as 11 feridas da cultura brasileira afetam a percepção da nossa identidade profética . 3. Keynes vs. Hayek na Eclesiologia: O perigo do planejamento centralizado e a necessidade de recuperar a "ordem espontânea" da Igreja Primitiva. 4. O Custo Humano: Como a rotatividade pastoral e o clericalismo ferem o pastoreio encarnacional. 5. Reforma, não Revolução: Uma proposta de transição estratégica baseada em novas métricas de discipulado e na descentralização responsável. Este episódio é uma defesa da organização adventista em sua essência mais pura. Entendemos que a estrutura é um instrumento dado por Deus, e é justamente por zelar por ela que propomos uma 'reforma de recalibração'. O foco não é a revolução, mas o retorno aos princípios de movimento e sacerdócio universal que marcaram nossos pioneiros. É uma proposta para que a instituição seja a plataforma de lançamento de uma geração verdadeiramente profética. Tese do Prof. Dr. Marcelo Dias - https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2865&context=dissertations Links Instagram http://instagram.com/alexpalmeira7 Podcast Catalisadores http://open.spotify.com/show/6zJyD0vW8MnyRKPYZtk3B5?si=065e95b72bca4b13 X http://x.com/alexpalmeira9 Facebook http://facebook.com/profile.php?id=100069360678042

Der DAX erholt sich nach zwei schwachen Tagen deutlich und schließt mit +1,8 % bei 24.205 Punkten. Auch der TecDAX springt mit +2,9 % an. Entspannung bringt die Energieseite: Öl beruhigt sich, der Gaspreis fällt sogar um 12 %. Das lindert Inflationssorgen und die Angst vor neuen Lieferkettenproblemen rund um die Straße von Hormus. Brenntag wird DAX-Schlusslicht mit -4,3 % nach Dividendenkürzung auf 1,90 Euro je Aktie, nach 2,10 Euro. Adidas verliert -4 % trotz Rekordumsatz 2025 von 24,8 Mrd. € und Ausblick auf mehr Umsatz und EBIT 2026 von rund 2,3 Mrd. €. Continental erwartet 2026 Umsatz 17,3 bis 18,9 Mrd. € und hebt die Dividende auf 2,70 Euro. Bayer meldet 2025 einen Verlust von 3,62 Mrd. € bei Sonderaufwendungen von gut 6 Mrd. € und steht mit -6 % unter Druck. In den USA sorgt Moderna mit einem Vergleich über bis zu 2,25 Mrd. USD für Kursfantasie, Intel baut den Verwaltungsrat um. Gold steht um 17:30 Uhr bei 5.142,92 USD, Brent bei 81,22 USD und WTI bei 73,94 USD. Zum Schluss eine Börsenweisheit von John Maynard Keynes: "Der Markt kann länger irrational bleiben, als Sie liquide bleiben."

Kyle discusses the investing evolution of John Maynard Keynes and the timeless lessons modern investors can draw from his successes and failures. IN THIS EPISODE YOU'LL LEARN: 00:00:00 - Intro 00:03:50 - Why John Maynard Keynes is such a fascinating case study in evolving as an investor 00:08:28 - A key resource that helped him think of assets from a bottom-up approach 00:10:59 - Why Keynes's experiences of going broke multiple times helped shape him into a long-term thinker 00:17:13 - How he thought about speculation and investing, and used that to beat the market 00:28:16 - How he improved his temperament, overcame overconfidence, and adopted a long-term mindset 00:36:21 - His thoughts on diversification and reducing risk 00:41:30 - Why he believed that markets were social systems, and the errors that exposed investors to 00:50:25 - What he thought about short-term volatility 01:01:16 - Why Keynes used adaptability as such a powerful tool 01:03:50 - Six impactful takeaways Disclaimer: Slight discrepancies in the timestamps may occur due to podcast platform differences. BOOKS AND RESOURCES Join the exclusive ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TIP Mastermind Community⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to engage in meaningful stock investing discussions with Stig, Clay, Kyle, and the other community members. Learn how to join us in Omaha for the Berkshire meeting ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Read ⁠Keynes and the Market⁠. Read ⁠Concentrated Investing⁠. Follow Kyle on ⁠X⁠ and ⁠LinkedIn⁠. Related ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠books⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ mentioned in the podcast. Ad-free episodes on our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Premium Feed⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. NEW TO THE SHOW? Get smarter about valuing businesses in just a few minutes each week through our newsletter, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Intrinsic Value Newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Check out our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠We Study Billionaires Starter Packs⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Follow our official social media accounts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠X⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Browse through all our episodes ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Try our tool for picking stock winners and managing our portfolios: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TIP Finance Tool⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Enjoy exclusive perks from our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠favorite Apps and Services⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn how to better start, manage, and grow your business with the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠best business podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. SPONSORS Support our free podcast by supporting our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠sponsors⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠: ⁠HardBlock⁠ ⁠Human Rights Foundation⁠ ⁠Simple Mining⁠ ⁠Unchained⁠ ⁠Masterworks⁠ ⁠Netsuite⁠ ⁠Vanta⁠ ⁠Shopify⁠ ⁠Fundrise⁠ References to any third-party products, services, or advertisers do not constitute endorsements, and The Investor's Podcast Network is not responsible for any claims made by them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://theinvestorspodcastnetwork.supportingcast.fm

La economía estudia la asignación de unos recursos escasos y en la resolución de este problema ético, la filosofía es de mayor utilidad que las matemáticas. María Blanco quiere saber cómo se ha estudiado la economía a lo largo de los siglos. Esta ciencia se matematizó en la segunda mitad del siglo XX por culpa de Paul Samuelson, quien representaría mediante complejas ecuaciones las funciones de la oferta y la demanda. No siempre fue este el método de estudio, los primeros economistas se asemejaban más a los filósofos. Antes de escribir La riqueza de las naciones, Adam Smith había publicado La teoría de los sentimientos morales, un tratado sobre la moral. Por suerte, todo río regresa a su cauce. La economía del siglo XXI será filosófica, no matemática.Kapital es posible gracias a sus colaboradores:⁠Thenomba⁠. La escuela que te hará encontrar tu propósito.Thenomba es la escuela que te prepara para encontrar un propósito, no un trabajo.Me han hecho embajador del máster y puedo ofrecerte un descuento especial en el precio. Si quieres matricularte, utiliza el código KAPITAL20 para llevarte una rebaja del 20%. 42 oyentes de este podcast ya utilizaron el código en la exitosa edición de diciembre. Si te preguntas si esto encaja contigo, te recomiendo simplemente escuchar los episodios de hace unas semanas con Higinio Marín y Ricardo Piñero. Higinio y Ricardo son dos de los profesores del máster y esas dos entrevistas reflejan la vocación humanista de su programa. Si resuenan en tu cabeza algunas de las ideas de esas conversaciones, entonces Thenomba es para ti.Patrocina Kapital. Toda la información en este link.Índice:0:32 Un empresario paga costes antes de conocer beneficios.8:18 Valor contraintuitivo de Mercadona.14:23 Compañía de las Indias Orientales.21:04 Todos somos empresarios.32:24 Economistas con vidas de película.39:55 Batalla de gallos entre Keynes y Hayek.46:46 Innecesaria matematización de la economía.49:50 Las movidas de Veblen.54:02 Académicos multidisciplinares.1:06:20 ¿Es un historiador optimista sobre el futuro?1:15:54 Escuela de Salamanca.1:24:04 Solo los judíos podían prestar con interés.1:29:43 Tigres, leones, todos quieren ser los campeones.1:38:26 Es más fácil contar pobres que contar ricos.Apuntes:La riqueza de las naciones. Adam Smith.La teoría de los sentimientos morales. Adam Smith.Risk, uncertainty and profit. Frank Knight.The capitalist and the entrepreneur. Peter Klein.Start-up nation. Dan Senor & Saul Singer.Tratado de economia politica. Jean Baptiste Say.La acción humana. Ludwig von Mises.Teoría general de la ocupación, el interés y el dinero. John Maynard Keynes.Principios de economía política y tributación. David Ricardo.Hacia la estación de Finlandia. Edmund Wilson.Teoría de la clase ociosa. Thorstein Veblen.Economical writing. Deirdre McCloskey.Armonías económicas. Frédéric Bastiat.Bastiat as an economist. María Blanco & Carlos Rodríguez Braun.

Dairy futures have been anything but calm. In just three weeks, prices across Class III, Class IV, cheese, butter and nonfat have surged, then whipped back and forth enough to exhaust even full-time market watchers. In this episode of The Milk Check, Ted Jacoby and the T.C. Jacoby & Co. team break down why dairy futures can look irrational, even when the underlying fundamentals haven't changed much. What's driving the chaos (beyond fundamentals) Short squeezes 101: how a crowded short can turn into a domino effect Flow first, narrative second: why the buying often hits before the story shows up Realized vs. implied volatility: what the market did vs. what the options market is pricing in Why nonfat may be the center of the storm: the team debates whether this is a true regime change Why butter and cheese moved too: how spread relationships and algorithmic trading can drag correlated dairy contracts higher Spot market feedback loops: how NDPSR-linked spot markets can amplify futures moves (tail-wagging-the-dog dynamics). What usually happens next: why squeezes rarely park at the top Plus: stick around for a director's cut featuring the unedited, behind-the-scenes debate the team usually leaves on the cutting room floor. Got questions? We'd love to hear them. Submit below, and we might answer it on the show. Ask The Milk Check Ted Jacoby III: [00:00:00] It has been wild and crazy every day for the last three weeks. Welcome to the Milk Check from T.C. Jacoby and Company, your complete guide to dairy markets, from the milking parlor to the supermarket shelf. I’m Ted Jacoby. Let’s dive in. We’ve got a special treat for you this week. We’re gonna drop the director’s cut of this podcast where we include some of the conversations that usually get edited out: how we debate internally about some of these market dynamics. So, stay tuned after the end of the podcast and listen to the off-takes. My name is Ted Jacoby, CEO of T.C. Jacoby & Co., and joining me today is Jacob Menge, our Vice President of Risk Management and Trading Strategy, Josh White, our Vice President of Dairy Ingredients, and Joe Maixner, our Director of Sales. We are in week three of a very high level of volatility in the dairy markets. We’ve had a very interesting last few weeks. It’s February 9th, and since January 15th, our Class III March futures are up 18%. Our [00:01:00] March cheese futures are up over 15%. Butter futures are up over 26%. nonfat futures up 37% and Class IV milk futures up 36%. These markets have not gone up in a straight line. There’s been a massive amount of volatility, a lot of green, a lot of red, and then a lot of green, and then a lot of red again, enough to make all of us who talk these markets on a daily and an hourly basis to be flat out exhausted. The question becomes, what’s causing this level of volatility?  We are gonna talk a little bit about market psychology. Why can markets do what they’ve done in the last three weeks, and why our actual fundamental market analysis hasn’t really changed that much.  To quote the famous British economist, John Maynard Keynes, “Markets can remain irrational far longer than you and I can remain solvent.” And I’ll tell you that the last three weeks reminded me repeatedly of that phrase. It serves as a warning against over leveraging or trying to fight the tape, trading against trends, suggesting that just because you are right about a trend’s [00:02:00] long-term direction, it’s useless if you run out of capital. Ted Jacoby III: And I have a feeling that based on what we’ve been experiencing lately, there’s probably a few people out there that exactly that happened to. It has been wild and crazy every day for the last three weeks. Jake, why do markets do this? Jacob Menge: You threw out your little soundbite anecdotes. We will pull out some more of ’em during those podcasts, I’m sure, because those are all written by people that have been burned by short squeezes like we’re seeing, right? One that sticks out to me is: volatility is the tax you pay for liquidity and leverage, and that’s what futures markets are, right? They are a way for people to express their opinion on price action. Obviously, even a hedger is in some way expressing an opinion using futures or options. They’re highly liquid. You don’t even have to pay full price for ’em because you only gotta put up that margin upfront. And again, volatility is usually the tax that you pay for that. When you have this easy leverage, and everybody can get on one side of the boat you can’t have your cake and eat it, too. You can’t [00:03:00] have tight spreads, you can’t have the leverage and smooth prices all at the same time. And that can result in things like short squeezes. We were primed for one. You’re right, we had low volatility. We had a lot of people that were short the market because that was the prevailing narrative. As a result, all it took was one little spark to set some pretty dry kindling ablaze. That’s exactly what we saw, especially on the nonfat side. I’ll pull out my second anecdote. I’ve always heard: squeezes are flow events first, narrative events second. That’s exactly what was going on with nonfat. Meaning we get this massive bullish order flow coming in. The market goes up 30%+ in a few week period, and it’s only after that happens that all of a sudden we start having these conversations of, well, what was everybody missing in nonfat? I think the market probably was missing something on the nonfat side. But at the end of the day when you have volatility near lows, volume that was [00:04:00] fairly average, it makes sense that really the only way to go is gonna be up. If there’s any kind of news. And the news this time turns out there’s a whole lot less nonfat out there than people probably expected. And away we go. And it turns into this snowball where there’s the first people to see that and start wanting to buy, and the second they start wanting to buy, turns out there’s not a whole lot of sellers there, because everybody that wanted to sell already had sold. You get that first nice air pocket jump higher. That really is that first domino where if you’re a market maker, say, and you need to hedge your book, you’re trying to run a delta neutral trading book as a market maker, you might say, “Okay, well hey, I need to go get some long delta myself.” And you might go try to buy some options, to buy calls, to offset that. And then all of a sudden the market maker that is selling the calls want more for the calls than they wanted just a day ago. Ted Jacoby III: A day ago? Try an hour ago. Jacob Menge: Yeah, an hour ago. Truly. And so [00:05:00] that would be what we call implied volatility. Right. And I think that’s one important distinction here is we have volatility, what we call realized volatility, which is what the market actually did, like how crazy the market is, and then implied volatility, basically what the market is charging for options usually and implying what the market thinks the volatility will be in the future. And that’s where it gets really fun because even though we didn’t have a lot of realized volatility, if the market thinks it’s gonna become volatile and starts charging more for these options, it can almost be a self-fulfilling prophecy, right? Because now you have to pay more to buy that insurance policy, and you can see how that snowball really can grow fairly fast. We have one other really  fun part in dairy markets that I can’t help but mention, and that is that we also have spot markets. Those spot markets indirectly are linked to the futures prices because of our National Dairy Products Sales Report (NDPSR) system. And so we [00:06:00] can really wind up with the tail wagging the dog in our futures markets and in our spot markets where, say the spot markets were driving the ship on the way down. People had a lot of products, they’re selling them. Well, all of a sudden, if we start getting a little bit of a squeeze in our futures markets, now if you have product, you don’t wanna sell it on the exchange, you wanna just hold onto it and capture the carry in the futures curve. And so you’re not gonna sell. And so any bidder on the spot auction has to bid it higher. And guess what? Now the futures see the spot auction being bid up and they say, “Well, well, we are right to be panicking. We need to go higher.” And that’s just pouring gasoline on the fire. We’ve already got a raging inferno at this point, but that adds the final pour of gasoline. Ted Jacoby III: You remind me of one of my learning moments 20 some odd, almost 30 years ago, when I was watching these markets, as the futures markets were just becoming relevant to the dairy industry. And it was the realization that futures markets and spot markets are [00:07:00] two different markets with a different set of drivers of supply and demand. On the spot market, supply is, let’s talk about butter, is the supply of 80% bulk butter. Demand is the demand for that 80% bulk butter. The futures butter markets, it may settle to that NDPSR price of the bulk butter market, but the reality is the supply is the number of people who are willing to sell those futures, and the demand is the number of people that are willing to buy those futures. And so you can have people coming into the market that really don’t care at all about how much block butter are out there because they’re actually trying to hedge cream cheese or a chocolate shake or something completely different that has butter in it, but they need to own those futures, and that futures market can move quite a bit and has nothing to do with the actual supply and demand of the market it’s based on. Jacob Menge: Anecdote number three. I always have heard squeezes feel irrational because risk systems are mechanical. And I think that is true here, right? You have stops in place. A lot of [00:08:00] companies will have risk management policies that say, “Hey if VAR gets to a certain point, you have to get out of your position.” Or on the opposite side, you have to hedge your product if something has happened, or you have to hedge your buy price if the market hits a certain threshold. And so, that can really send the market in the short run to some areas that feel irrational, but again, it’s because the systems behind it are mechanical sometimes and not even human. Obviously, the human factor makes things even spicier. But once your mechanical stops have all been hit, and the party is coming to an end very, very rarely — I’m struggling to think of one short squeeze I’ve ever seen — that actually goes to the top and then just starts trading sideways. It is almost always an overshoot and a retracement back down to some level. And that is really where our different volatilities really matter because on that collapse back to reality, and reality can [00:09:00] be very different than where we started, just to be clear, if nonfat started at a $1.20, and we go way up to a $1.60, and then settle at a $1.40, we’re still 20¢ higher than where we started. So, don’t get me wrong, right? Short squeezes, there’s usually some fundamentals behind it, but it’s that blow off top that we might say feels super, super irrational. And again, we’ll have kind of this realized volatility going higher as we are going up and going down. But the more interesting thing in my opinion is that as we’re doing that retracement off of this super high blow off top, implied volatility tends to drift lower. That’s actually an important concept to really understand because as implied volatility is moving lower with the market moving lower, it gives the market breathing room, and that is the point where we can really find equilibrium and come out at maybe the price we should have been three months ago, but [00:10:00] shouldn’t have been last week during that crazy short covering rally. Josh White: Hey guys, what should we make of the fact that our least volatile product over the past, I mean, what decade, 20 years, is the most volatile right now? Or is it is nonfat technically the most volatile product? That’s it. Ted Jacoby III: It is. Josh White: Yep, Ted Jacoby III: it is. Josh White: What should we make of that? I mean, that to me should be the definition of a market cycle change, right? Do we believe that? Joe Maixner: If the market with historically the lowest amount of volatility now has the highest amount of volatility, does that mean that there is a structural change in the way that the market is operating? Jacob Menge: Yes. This might mean regime change for the nonfat market. But we’ve also had these other short squeezes in butter, in Class III. We’re still in a volatile period, but those could just be because we have algorithms keeping Class III and Class IV in check. We’re pondering the question: is there this regime change in nonfat from a low volatility commodity to a high volatility commodity? It’s probably too early to tell. My [00:11:00] guess would be yes, we’re not gonna go back to this boring state nonfat had been in, because it’s just a very evolving market with what we’re seeing on the protein beverage side, you name it: the market’s doing a really good job of taking a boring commodity and finding these new, exciting uses for it. And, and so it kind of passes the sniff test. What probably doesn’t pass the sniff test is what we’re seeing on the other commodities right now: butter and just the Class III products, frankly, I should say cheese in general. What we’re seeing right now with those is they’re following along with the nonfat rally. This really seems to me like nonfat is in the driver’s seat. And I think there’s pretty logical explanations for why we’re seeing cheese and butter do what they’re doing along with nonfat. We’ve got algorithms that trade spreads within our market, right? We do have a crushable commodity. We can take Class III, Class IV, and break it down into its components. As a result, [00:12:00] there’s some opinions on, say the Class III, Class IV spread. And so if we get this massive rally in nonfat, well then any algorithm that’s trading the Class IV crush is probably dragging butter along with it. And now we’ve got Class IV rallying, and there’s probably other algorithms and other people with opinions in the market on what that Class III, Class IV spread should be. And so, even if the absolute price is seeming outta whack there’s enough people with opinions on maybe spreads or calendar spreads or what have you, that are causing the reactions that we’re seeing. Ted Jacoby III: This is the scenario that I can imagine. Everybody has been short, pretty much all of the dairy markets for about six months now. Maybe it took other people longer than it took us to realize that there was gonna be too much milk out there all over the world. But by the time we got to the second week in January, I think everybody who wanted to be short this market already was. Then people started to realize that maybe they weren’t entirely right about the nonfat market. Kind of makes sense if you think [00:13:00] about what we’ve been talking about over the last six months, which is: too much butterfat, too much cheese, but protein’s still really in good demand. Guess what? Nonfat is 34% protein. So, all of a sudden people realized, shoot, maybe the nonfat market has a different dynamic to it and it might need to go up so they start buying it. Well, that causes the Class IV market to go up. And if you have insurance companies that are part of the DLP program that are short this Class IV market, then all of a sudden it’s going the other direction on ’em and they need to go figure out how to get some length in the Class IV market. But shoot, they can’t find any liquidity in the Class IV market. So, instead they’re gonna buy nonfat and they’re gonna buy butter. Now think about it. Now they’re gonna go buy butter. Everybody that wanted to be sure at the butter market is already sure at the butter market. There aren’t any sellers left in the butter market because everybody already did their selling. And so now they’re buying butter, driving the butter market up. And then the last few people who sold the butter market, those who were late to the party, all of a sudden are noticing their margin accounts go negative. Now they’ve gotta throw in the [00:14:00] cash. Maybe they don’t have the financial resources to fund a margin call. And so now they have to buy their futures back, and all of a sudden it becomes this domino, forcing more and more people, for one reason or another, to have to buy back their positions. The next thing you know, you’re up 26%, even though the reality is supply and demand to butterfat, not just in the U.S., but frankly, probably in the world, hasn’t changed one bit in the last three weeks, and that’s why we’re up 26% right now. Jacob Menge: Crowded trades don’t break because they’re wrong. They break because they’re crowded. Ted Jacoby III: I like that. I haven’t heard that one before. I like that . So what happens next? You talk about markets being in strong hands and weak hands. Moments like this force everybody who is a weak hand out of the market, and so the only people left with a position in the market are the ones in strong hands. Does the market go back, and I’m thinking butter, not necessarily nonfat. I think we were all in agreement that the nonfat market has probably had somewhat of a dynamic change. I don’t know if it’s a 36% change, but it’s had [00:15:00] somewhat of a change. But now the butter market, which really probably hasn’t had the same amount of change, the supply and demand for butterfat probably is the same thing it was four weeks ago. And I don’t think you’re gonna find many people out there who are arguing that butter needs to be at $2, like the current March futures say it should be. So what happens in the butter market next? Does it go back to where it was? How do these short squeezes usually play out? Jacob Menge: As an economist, I will say the markets are a perfect system and they will find the exact right price where buyers and sellers meet and everybody is happy. The reality is, short squeezes are really good for hitting the reset button and finding a new equilibrium. And sometimes that is right back to where they started. Sometimes that is closer to the top of the squeeze than the bottom. I think we’re still in that reset period. I don’t think we know where equilibrium is on all of our commodities. It’s gonna still take some time, right? [00:16:00] Because let’s just run with the theory of cheese is gonna go back to where we kinda started all this thing in the $1.40s on the futures. It’s gonna take time for sellers to step back in the market and chew through all this new buy-side liquidity. This buy-side liquidity can come from risk management plans that are in place. And so it just takes time to find that equilibrium. But that is in theory what the market’s going through. Ted Jacoby III: I wanted to have this kind of a conversation because the reality is this was one of those where there’s a lot of people out there right now, they’ve got about half the hair they used to have. Jacob Menge: I don’t think we made them feel any better. Ted Jacoby III: Unfortunately. I know. Stay tuned for the deleted scenes from this podcast.  And now the director’s cut. Josh White: Protein’s demand has absolutely changed. Ted Jacoby III: All along we were saying protein demand was strong. To me, this is more about butter than it is about nonfat. Why in the world [00:17:00] is butter up 30¢? Jacob Menge: I think we need to gut check every single model we have in any spreadsheet anywhere. Josh White: A hundred percent. Jacob Menge: Because it’s a new era. Ted Jacoby III: I would argue though that, I mean, we can talk all day long about whether or not our market analysis is right or wrong, but the reality is this was everybody’s market analysis. Josh White: That’s the point we’re making. Ted Jacoby III: I think the irony is, I think the short squeeze had absolutely nothing to do with underestimating how much protein was going to fluid. I think it started for a completely different reason, but once it started moving, we all started looking harder at our analysis. And said, “Man, maybe we’re missing something,” and then actually found it. Josh White: That’s the part that I’m struggling with is I’m actually thinking butter’s easier to rationalize in my mind than nonfat. I think nonfat is a bigger story right now than anything else because butter, what’s the elasticity of demand? And there’s a shift in it because we’re exporting again. Yeah, it’s making it hard for us to measure, but we definitely have been cheaper. And so for it [00:18:00] to be buoying around for price discovery, to try to find that new equilibrium with seasonality, with different products and all that, to me that’s actually easier for me to understand. Like it drops from a price that was significantly higher. Upper twos even pushing three and exceeding three for a short amount of time all the way down to a $1.50. If we don’t think there would be some demand response to that globally and that we would have some retracement or volatility for the opposite reasons that nonfat is probably going too high and gonna have to retrace lower. That to me, like I don’t think we should be super shocked that butter’s doing that. You know what I mean? Like trying to find its equilibrium. To me that’s easier to explain. Ted Jacoby III: Completely agree with everything you’re saying, but I would say this. What we’re arguing about butter is, it’s a vagueness of knowing the balance where the equilibrium price is. We’re just bouncing around trying to find it. I think that’s different from what happened in nonfat. I think with nonfat, the market, the physical market itself, literally [00:19:00] couldn’t get what it wanted. Joe, did we ever have a moment when we couldn’t get the butter we wanted? Before the run started, could you get all the butter you wanted? Joe Maixner: Not off exchange. Josh White: Not 80% fresh salted product. It was being hoarded, right? Joe Maixner: There’s multiple facets to this, right? Like yes, you cannot get any 80% fresh salt right now. But we’re also struggling on getting any old crop, 80% salt off of exchange right now because the old crop situation is much different than it was back when old crop was an actual market mover. Five years ago, all the old crop butter was only at a 12 month shelf life on domestic salted. Everyone’s gone to a 18 or 24 month shelf life. So the product’s still good off exchange for a lot longer than it used to be. So nobody’s out there needing to technically dump it at this point in time if you don’t have a sale for it, because you could still use it off exchange. For a brief period, yes, the salted market got tight, but it’s also because we had the carry in [00:20:00] the market that we had, right? We had the 20¢, 30¢ carry in the market. So, whether you had new crop, old crop, whatever, why would you sell it at a $1.35 in January when you could sell it for a $1.75 a $1.80 in March at that time? Now, we’ve come down, you know, now we’re at a $1.83 in March right now, but at one point we were at $2.00 on March futures with this rally. It’s simple economics. You can carry the products for 3¢ a month and you can make 14¢ to 25¢ depending on the month you wanna sell it in or you let it go for way too cheap. Ted Jacoby III: I hear you. But to me, that’s wholesaler math, that’s trader math. At the end user level, at the people who consume butter, has there been a fundamental shift in how much butter is being consumed? Joe Maixner: No, I don’t think so. Ted Jacoby III: Whereas I think when we’re talking about nonfat and especially the protein in nonfat, I think there has been. It actually manifested itself as a lower amount of supply in nonfat. But I think what’s happened is we were [00:21:00] taking that protein away from the nonfat dryer and using it somewhere else. Whereas with butter, I don’t think that’s happened. Joe Maixner: No, but at the same time, I think that there’s similarities between butter and nonfat, whereas people came into this year structurally short. They didn’t contract because they anticipated the supply to be there. Ted Jacoby III: And then everybody showed up, that’s essentially being short the market. Joe Maixner: Yeah. Ted Jacoby III: When I talk about how everybody who wanted to be short this market was already short this market, so there were no more sellers left to sell. So when somebody wanted to start buying, there was nobody to sell. Joe Maixner: I mean, ultimately you’re just explaining the classic short squeeze. Ted Jacoby III: Right? To me though, that is what we’re dealing with. That’s what we’ve been dealing with right now. That’s what the short squeeze is. It wasn’t just everybody was short this market. Then they were ready to start buying ’cause the market was low enough. Then they found there wasn’t anybody left to buy from ’cause everybody had already sold everything they wanted to sell. And that caused the short squeeze, without any real rationality of there being a fundamental change in demand or supply. It was all at the wholesale [00:22:00] level. Whereas with nonfat, I would argue that the market came to a realization that we were pulling protein away from the dryer to sell it into liquid UF, causing a fundamental shift in the actual supply and demand balance, whereas I don’t necessarily think that happened with butter. With butter, I think it was just the noise in the middle of people making choices about being long or short of market. I don’t, am I making any sense? Joe Maixner: I think you’re getting to the point where you’re talking in circles, if I’m being honest. Ted Jacoby III: To me there’s a difference between talking tactics and talking trading strategy and talking about a fundamental supply demand analysis. Josh White: I think it’ll make a compelling podcast for those that are wondering what’s going on. I genuinely mean that. Ted Jacoby III: We might actually want to have the 15 minute version of talking about what happened in market psychology. Then have an appendix to it capturing the discussion as to what is the real difference between what’s going on in butter and nonfat. Josh White: Or how do [00:23:00] these guys communicate when the makeup’s off? Joe Maixner: I think we leave, I think we leave it all in.

Last episode, we talked about the brewing conflict between what currently passes for mainstream conservatism and the schizophrenic reactionary Groyper politics of Nick Fuentes. Subscribe on Patreon to support making this show, get premium only episodes, and listen to our entire back catalog. patreon.com/wetwired We wrapped things up with the idea that conservatism has never really bothered to conserve anything. Aside from a few exceptions, most of the time they keep themselves busy fighting culture wars about immigration, civil rights, women's rights, Christianity, and demonizing organized labor. What they keep trying to “conserve” is whatever the status quo power dynamic was when their grandad was a kid.  After the Civil War, they wanted slavery back. Women's suffrage, desegregation—they wanted to get rid of all those things. This isn't the first fight inside conservatism. As part of its periodic reinvention of itself, conservatives have gone back to the political well and dredged up the same slogans more than once. We tied this malleable idea of conservatism in with the evolution of the field of unashamed ideological political economists into what we now think of as the pseudoscience of Economics. At least the political economists were up front about whatever ideological bent they had. If you were a socialist, you'd start with your convictions about socialism being the absolute best way of running society on offer, and they work to come up with an economic theory or plan that made it seem possible. It was honest. By the time the 1800s were wrapping up, that wasn't good enough. Economists wanted to be taken more seriously, so they started dressing the whole thing up like they were doing physics or pure math. They could talk about whatever economic system as if they were describing the laws of nature. That didn't get rid of the ideology, though. It just buried it under metric tons of academic jargon and complicated formulas. After all, what's the difference between modeling a tsunami and a stock market crash? The answer is that the tsunami wasn't caused by Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. That all brings us around to FDR's New Deal and the era of John Maynard Keynes and what Matt Christman has called his "Keynesian machine for dispensing treats". As many contradictions as Keynes gathered into his economic model, it remains the only proven way to maintain capitalism. To set the tone, David Talbot has a quote in his book The Devil's Chessboard about Bertie Pell, a friend of FDR's who Talbot described as a “full-on traitor to his class”. “I am almost the last capitalist who is willing to be saved by you,” Pell wrote Roosevelt in 1936 in a letter beseeching the president to draft him for the New Deal cause. The following year, Pell wrote again, praising FDR's accomplishments: “Your administration has made possible the continuance of American institutions for at least fifty years. You have done for the government what St. Francis did for the Catholic Church. You have brought it back to the people.” It turns out Pell was eerily correct. Those institutions managed to last just a little longer than 50 years. They are about gone now, though. Our long promised merch is here!! Fly your crypto-leftist flag with our personal love letter to Juan José Arévalo, philosopher and socialist president of Guatemala, and the airline he nationalized. wetwired.printful.me/ Subscribe on Patreon to support making this show, get premium only episodes, and listen to our entire back catalog. patreon.com/wetwired Music:Airglow - Spliff and Wesson (CC-BY)

Since our species first emerged on the planet some 300,000 years ago, the overriding problem for most humans has been the struggle for food and shelter. But in 1930, the British economist John Maynard Keynes foresaw that economic growth (despite the Great Depression) would mean that in a century, the vast majority of people in developed societies would enjoy mass plenty and only a small number of unfortunates would still struggle with material deprivation. This would mean that “for the first time since his creation man will be faced with his real, his permanent problem — how to use his freedom from pressing economic cares, how to occupy the leisure which science and compound interest will have won for him, to live wisely and agreeably and well.” But Keynes worried that transitioning to this new problem would present huge difficulties for humanity: “there is no country and no people, I think, who can look forward to the age of leisure and abundance without dread.”Brink Lindsey, senior vice president at the Niskanen Center, has written a visionary new book addressing Keynes' conundrum. In The Permanent Problem: The Uncertain Transition from Mass Plenty to Mass Flourishing, Lindsey ponders the paradox that people in developed countries live in conditions of unparalleled wealth, health, and technological progress — and yet most people feel disappointment rather than gratitude at the results. We enjoy an abundance of material goods, yet most people are missing out on the sense of meaning, purpose, and belonging that define human flourishing.In this podcast discussion, Lindsey describes the “triple crisis of capitalism” that has brought material prosperity but also social disintegration, sputtering dynamism, and dysfunctional politics. But he also sees encouraging signs that point toward how mass flourishing might be accomplished in developments that include new technological breakthroughs and the growing Abundance movement. Ultimately he hopes for a future in which people will have closer relationships with each other as well as the natural world, and in which humanity's drive to explore and understand will reach into the larger universe. “Our destiny is up to us,” he concludes, “and therefore we should make the most of that chance. We ought to aim high.”

Dalam lanskap politik ekonomi Indonesia kontemporer, muncul fenomena menarik yang layak dicermati: bagaimana Presiden Prabowo Subianto dan Menteri Keuangan Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa menggunakan pendekatan psikologis dalam menggerakkan roda ekonomi. Target pertumbuhan ekonomi 8 persen yang dicanangkan bukan sekadar angka ambisius di atas kertas, melainkan instrumen strategis untuk membentuk persepsi dan kepercayaan pasar. Ini adalah penerapan konsep “animal spirits” yang dipopulerkan ekonom legendaris John Maynard Keynes, di mana optimisme dan kepercayaan menjadi katalis pertumbuhan ekonomi—bahkan terkadang melampaui perhitungan rasional semata.

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

The great John Maynard Keynes explained it a century ago. In his 1930 essay, "Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren," Keynes predicted that the future would be defined by economic abundance rather than scarcity. But such a cornucopian future, Keynes warned, would create societies teetering perpetually on the brink of a nervous breakdown. Keynes' vision has been updated by Niskanen Center SVP Brink Lindsey in his new book, The Permanent Problem. Today's societies, the Thailand-based Lindsey observes, are all on the verge of nervous breakdowns triggered by economic prosperity rather than poverty. So the challenge today, he notes with his own Keynesian flourish, is transforming this mass plenty into mass human flourishing. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Nachdem wir in Folge 333 über den ersten Teil des Aufsatzes „Beyond Capitalism“ von Aaron Benanav diskutiert haben, geht es nun um den zweiten Teil, der eine Umsetzung der Synthese aus Karl Marx und John Maynard Keynes skizziert.Entstehen soll eine neue Wirtschaftsordnung. Der Wirtschaftshistoriker schlägt nicht die Abschaffung des Geldes, sondern ein duales Währungssystem vor, in dem es Punkte und Credits gibt. Während die Verbraucher mit Credits ihre Bedürfnisse stillen können, erhalten die Unternehmen, die von Investitionsgremien überwacht und gegründet werden, Punkte, mit denen sie Investitionen tätigen können.Diese beiden weitgehend entkoppelten Kreisläufe dienen dazu, die Profitlogik des Marktes auszuhebeln. Fortan entscheidet der Demos darüber, was zu welchem Zweck produziert wird. Zwar gibt es noch einen freien privaten Konsum, aber die Produktionsmittel sind vergesellschaftet.In der neuen Folge diskutieren Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt über das ambitionierte Konzept.Literatur:Aaron Benanav: Beyond Capitalism 2, in: The New Left Review, online verfügbar unter: https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii154/articles/aaron-benanav-beyond-capitalism-2Unsere Zusatzinhalte könnt ihr bei Apple Podcasts, Steady und Patreon hören. Vielen Dank!Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/wohlstand-f%C3%BCr-alle/id1476402723Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/oleundwolfgangSteady: https://steadyhq.com/de/oleundwolfgang/about

Episode Synopsis:Did the ideas of John Maynard Keynes die along with him, or are the notions of macroeconomics and global finance persistent enough to maintain a stranglehold on society, long after their visionary author was put to rest?We talk about this and much more, including:What are some of the cognitive limitations in forming beliefs?Who was John Maynard Keynes and how does his idea of macroeconomics rule the world from the grave?What are some of the devastating consequences of adopting the ideals espoused by Keynesian Economics?How have Central Banking and government economic intervention harmed our economy?How did the Illuminati birth the ideas of modern day globalism?Original Air DateOctober 29h, 2025Show HostsJason Spears & Christopher DeanOur PatreonConsider joining our Patreon Squad and becoming a Tier Operator to help support the show and get access to exclusive content like:Links and ResourcesStudio NotesA monthly Zoom call with Jason and Christopher And More…ORP ApparelMerch StoreConnect With UsLetsTalk@ORPpodcast.comFacebookInstagram

There is no denying that capitalism has played a leading role in warming the planet.   As the Industrial Revolution ushered in previously unseen levels of prosperity for some people, human beings' negative impact on the natural world exploded at a ferocious rate.  While it's helpful for modern-day economists to look back at the faults and failures of capitalism as a way to explain the multitude of problems facing humanity in the 21st century, it's even more interesting to understand the critiques that economists of the 19th and 20th century had about capitalism and what they were experiencing in real time that led them to these incredibly-prescient conclusions. John Cassidy joins the show this week to discuss his new book "Capitalism and Its Critics: A History: From the Industrial Revolution to AI". John has written about economics and politics for The New Yorker for over 30 years. He's also the author of "How Markets Fail" and "Dot.Con: How America Lost Its Mind and Its Money in the Internet Era."  John's new book covers 250 years of economic critiques of capitalism from well known economists like Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, and Joan Robinson, as well as some lesser-know, yet incredibly important critics like Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, Rosa Luxemburg, JC Kumarappa, and many more. The Climate Pod is going to be live in Chicago! Join us for our Chicago Climate Bash, the hottest comedy show on the planet! On Sunday, October 26th at 5 pm CT at The Lincoln Lodge, we're featuring an amazing lineup of great comedians and expert guests. There will be standup, panels, music, and more. This show is a live recording of The Climate Pod. Featuring Chad The Bird, Lucia Whalen, and Kat Abughazaleh! Get your tickets now: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/chicago-climate-bash-tickets-1758346845749?aff=oddtdtcreator Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to our newsletter/podcast, The Climate Weekly, to help support this show. Your contributions will make the continuation of this show possible.  Our music is "Gotta Get Up" by The Passion Hifi, check out his music at thepassionhifi.com. Rate, review and subscribe to this podcast on iTunes, Spotify, and more! Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

From the Dark to the Light Do you celebrate life or death? We talk about figures like Charlie Kirk, Martin Luther King Jr., and JFK. Their lives were taken by another human being. Why do we want to kill someone for words they say or beliefs they hold? F.A. Hayek and John Maynard Keynes had vastly different beliefs and yet had a great friendship. They talked about their different beliefs and had friendly debates. Charlie Kirk was encouraging people with different beliefs to talk to each other and said that when people stop talking, that's when problems begin. We discuss the kid that shot him and what he is facing now. Bad things can happen, and how you choose to think about that situation can not only determine your results but can make a difference in how happy you are. The Golden Rule tells us to treat others the way we want to be treated. If we could all follow that, this world would be a better place. Turning Point USA Sponsors: American Gold Exchange Our dealer for precious metals & the exclusive dealer of Real Power Family silver rounds (which we finally got in!!!). Get your first, or next bullion order from American Gold Exchange like we do. Tell them the Real Power Family sent you! Click on this link to get a FREE Starters Guide. Or Click Here to order our new Real Power Family silver rounds. 1 Troy Oz 99.99% Fine Silver Abolish Property Taxes in Ohio: www.AxOHTax.com  Get more information about abolishing all property taxes in Ohio. Our Links: www.RealPowerFamily.com Info@ClearSkyTrainer.com 833-Be-Do-Have (833-233-6428)

In an extended version of the programme that was broadcast, Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the influential book John Maynard Keynes wrote in 1919 after he resigned in protest from his role at the Paris Peace Conference. There the victors of World War One were deciding the fate of the defeated, especially Germany and Austria-Hungary, and Keynes wanted the world to know his view that the economic consequences would be disastrous for all. Soon Germany used his book to support their claim that the Treaty was grossly unfair, a sentiment that fed into British appeasement in the 1930s and has since prompted debate over whether Keynes had only warned of disaster or somehow contributed to it. With Margaret MacMillan Emeritus Professor of International History at the University of Oxford Michael Cox Emeritus Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics and Founding Director of LSE IDEAS And Patricia Clavin Professor of Modern History at the University of Oxford Producer: Simon Tillotson Reading list: Manfred F. Boemeke, Gerald D. Feldman and Elisabeth Glaser (eds.), The Treaty of Versailles: A Reassessment after 75 Years (Cambridge University Press, 1998) Zachary D. Carter, The Price of Peace: Money, Democracy and the Life of John Maynard Keynes (Random House, 2020) Peter Clarke, Keynes: The Twentieth Century's Most Influential Economist (Bloomsbury, 2009) Patricia Clavin et al (eds.), Keynes's Economic Consequences of the Peace after 100 Years: Polemics and Policy (Cambridge University Press, 2023) Patricia Clavin, ‘Britain and the Making of Global Order after 1919: The Ben Pimlott Memorial Lecture' (Twentieth Century British History, Vol. 31:3, 2020) Richard Davenport-Hines, Universal Man; The Seven Lives of John Maynard Keynes (William Collins, 2015) R. F. Harrod, John Maynard Keynes (first published 1951; Pelican, 1972) Jens Holscher and Matthias Klaes (eds), Keynes's Economic Consequences of the Peace: A Reappraisal (Pickering & Chatto, 2014) John Maynard Keynes (with an introduction by Michael Cox), The Economic Consequences of the Peace (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019) Margaret MacMillan, Peacemakers: Six Months that Changed the World (John Murray Publishers, 2001) Etienne Mantoux, The Carthaginian Peace or the Economic Consequences of Mr. Keynes (Oxford University Press, 1946) D. E. Moggridge, Maynard Keynes: An Economist's Biography (Routledge, 1992) Alan Sharp, Versailles 1919: A Centennial Perspective (Haus Publishing Ltd, 2018) Robert Skidelsky, John Maynard Keynes, 1883-1946 (Pan Macmillan, 2004) Jürgen Tampke, A Perfidious Distortion of History: The Versailles Peace Treaty and the Success of the Nazis (Scribe UK, 2017) Adam Tooze, The Deluge: The Great War, America and the Remaking of the Global Order, 1916-1931 (Penguin Books, 2015) Spanning history, religion, culture, science and philosophy, In Our Time from BBC Radio 4 is essential listening for the intellectually curious. In each episode, host Melvyn Bragg and expert guests explore the characters, events and discoveries that have shaped our world.

An der University of Notre Dame hat Rüdiger Bachmann die Vorlesung “Intermediate Macroeconomic Theory” gehalten und wir haben insgesamt 21 Sendungen aufgezeichnet, um diese Vorlesung – so gut es ohne die dazugehörende Folienpräsentation geht – hörbar abzubilden.

The Secret History of Gold comes out this week. Here for your viewing pleasure is a fim about gold based on the first chapter.“Gold will be slave or master”HoraceIn 2021, a metal detectorist with the eyebrow-raising name of Ole Ginnerup Schytz dug up a hoard of Viking gold in a field in Denmark. The gold was just as it was when it was buried 1,500 years before, if a little dirtier. The same goes for the jewellery unearthed at the Varna Necropolis in Bulgaria in 1972. The beads, bracelets, rings and necklaces are as good as when they were buried 6,700 years ago.In the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, there is a golden tooth bridge — a gold wire used to bind teeth and dental implants — made over 4,000 years ago. It could go in your mouth today.No other substance is as long-lasting as gold — not diamonds, not tungsten carbide, not boron nitride. Gold does not corrode; it does not tarnish or decay; it does not break down over time. This sets it apart from every other substance. Iron rusts, wood rots, silver tarnishes. Gold never changes. Left alone, it stays itself. And it never loses its shine — how about that?Despite its permanence, you can shape this enormously ductile metal into pretty much anything. An ounce of gold can be stretched into a wire 50 miles long or plate a copper wire 1,000 miles long. It can be beaten into a leaf just one atom thick. Yet there is one thing you cannot do and that is destroy it. Life may be temporary, but gold is permanent. It really is forever.This means that all the gold that has ever been mined, estimated to be 216,000 tonnes, still exists somewhere. Put together it would fit into a cube with 22-metre sides. Visualise a square building seven storeys high — and that would be all the gold ever.With some effort, you can dissolve gold in certain chemical solutions, alloy it with other metals, or even vaporise it. But the gold will always be there. It is theoretically possible to destroy gold through nuclear reactions and other such extreme methods, but in practical terms, gold is indestructible. It is the closest thing we have on earth to immortality.Perhaps that is why almost every ancient culture we know of associated gold with the eternal. The Egyptians believed the flesh of gods was made of gold, and that it gave you safe passage into the afterlife. In Greek myth, the Golden Apples of the Hesperides, which Hercules was sent to retrieve, conferred immortality on whoever ate them. The South Americans saw gold as the link between humanity and the cosmos. They were not far wrong.Gold was present in the dust that formed the solar system. It sits in the earth's crust today, just as it did when our planet was formed some 4.6 billion years ago. That little bit of gold you may be wearing on your finger or around your neck is actually older than the earth itself. In fact, it is older than the solar system. To touch gold is as close as you will ever come to touching eternity.And yet the world's most famous investor is not impressed.‘It gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or some place,' said Warren Buffett. ‘Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.'He's right. Gold does nothing. It does not even pay a yield. It just sits there inert. We use other metals to construct things, cut things or conduct things, but gold's industrial uses are minimal. It is a good conductor of electricity, but copper and silver are better and cheaper. It has some use in dentistry, medical applications and nanotechnology. It is finding more and more use in outer space — back whence it came — where it is used to coat spacecraft, astronauts' visors and heat shields. But, in the grand scheme of things, these uses are paltry.Gold's only purpose is to store and display prosperity. It is dense and tangible wealth: pure money.Though you may not realise it, we still use gold as money today. Not so much as a medium to exchange value but store it.In 1970, about 27 per cent of all the gold in the world was in the form of gold coinage and central bank or government reserves. Today, even with the gold standard long since dead, the percentage is about the same.The most powerful nation on earth, the United States, keeps 70 per cent of its foreign exchange holdings in gold. Its great rival, China, is both the world's largest producer and the world's largest importer. It has built up reserves that, as we shall discover, are likely as great as the USA's. If you buying gold or silver coins to protect yourself in these “interesting times” - and I urge you to - as always I recommend The Pure Gold Company. Pricing is competitive, quality of service is high. They deliver to the UK, the US, Canada and Europe or you can store your gold with them. More here.Ordinary people and institutions the world over use gold to store wealth. Across myriad cultures gold is gifted at landmark life events — births and weddings — because of its intrinsic value.In fact, gold's purchasing power has increased over the millennia, as human beings have grown more productive. The same ounce of gold said by economic historians to have bought King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon 350 loaves of bread could buy you more than 1,000 loaves today. The same gold dinar (roughly 1/7 oz) that, in the time of the Koran in the seventh century, bought you a lamb would buy you three lambs today. Those same four or five aurei (1 oz) which bought you a fine linen tunic in ancient Rome would buy you considerably more clothing today.In 1972, 0.07 ounces of gold would buy you a barrel of oil. Here we are in 2024 and a barrel of oil costs 0.02 ounces of gold — it's significantly cheaper than it was fifty years ago.House prices, too, if you measure them in gold, have stayed constant. It is only when they are measured in fiat currency that they have appreciated so relentlessly (and destructively).In other words, an ounce of gold buys you as much, and sometimes more, food, clothing, energy and shelter as it did ten years ago, a hundred years ago or even thousands of years ago. As gold lasts, so does its purchasing power. You cannot say the same about modern national currencies.Rare and expensive to mine, the supply of gold is constrained. This is in stark contrast to modern money — electronic, debt-based fiat money to give it its full name — the supply of which multiplies every year as governments spend and borrowing balloons.As if by Natural Law, gold supply has increased at the same rate as the global population — roughly 2 per cent per annum. The population of the world has slightly more than doubled since 1850. So has gold supply. The correlation has held for centuries, except for one fifty-year period during the gold rushes of the late nineteenth century, when gold supply per capita increased.Gold has the added attraction of being beautiful. It shines and glistens and sparkles. It captivates and allures. The word ‘gold' derives from the Sanskrit ‘jval', meaning ‘to shine'. That's why we use it as jewellery — to show off our wealth and success, as well as to store it. Indeed, in nomadic prehistory, and still in parts of the world today, carrying your wealth on your person as jewellery was the safest way to keep it.The universe has given us this captivatingly beautiful, dense, inert, malleable, scarce, useless and permanent substance whose only use is to be money. To quote historian Peter Bernstein, ‘nothing is as useless and useful all at the same time'.But after thousands of years of gold being official money, in the early twentieth century there was a seismic shift. Neither the British, German nor French government had enough gold to pay for the First World War. They abandoned gold backing to print the money they needed. In the inter-war years, nations briefly attempted a return to gold standards, but they failed. The two prevailing monetary theories clashed: gold-backed versus state-issued currency. Gold standard advocates, such as Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England, considered gold to be one of the key pillars of a free society along with property rights and habeas corpus. ‘We have gold because we cannot trust governments,' said President Herbert Hoover in 1933. This was a sentiment echoed by one of the founders of the London School of Economics, George Bernard Shaw — to whom I am grateful for demonstrating that it is possible to have a career as both a comedian and a financial writer. ‘You have to choose (as a voter),' he said, ‘between trusting to the natural stability of gold and the natural stability of the honesty and intelligence of the members of the Government… I advise you, as long as the Capitalist system lasts, to vote for gold.'On the other hand, many, such as economist John Maynard Keynes, advocated the idea of fiat currency to give government greater control over the economy and the ability to manipulate the money supply. Keynes put fixation with gold in the Freudian realms of sex and religion. The gold standard, he famously said after the First World War — and rightly, as it turned out — was ‘already a barbarous relic'. Freud himself related fascination with gold to the erotic fantasies and interests of early childhood.Needless to say, Keynes and fiat money prevailed. By the end of the 1930s, most of Europe had left the gold standard. The US followed, but not completely until 1971, in order to meet the ballooning costs of its welfare system and its war in Vietnam.But compare both gold's universality (everyone everywhere knows gold has value) and its purchasing power to national currencies and you have to wonder why we don't use it officially today. There is a very good reason: power.Sticking to the discipline of the gold standard means governments can't just create money or run deficits to the same extent. Instead, they have to rein in their spending, which they are not prepared to do, especially in the twenty-first century, when they make so many promises to win elections. Balanced books, let alone independent money, have become an impossibility. If you seek an answer as to why the state has grown so large in the West, look no further than our system of money. When one body in a society has the power to create money at no cost to itself, it is inevitable that that body will grow disproportionately large. So it is in the twenty-first century, where state spending in many social democracies is now not far off 50 per cent of GDP, sometimes higher.Many arguments about gold will quickly slide into a political argument about the role of government. It is a deeply political metal. Those who favour gold tend to favour small government, free markets and individual responsibility. I count myself in that camp. Those who dismiss it tend to favour large government and state planning.I have argued many times that money is the blood of a society. It must be healthy. So much starts with money: values, morals, behaviour, ambitions, manners, even family size. Money must be sound and true. At the moment it is neither. Gold, however, is both. ‘Because gold is honest money it is disliked by dishonest men,' said former Republican Congressman Ron Paul. As Dorothy is advised in The Wizard of Oz (which was, as we shall discover, part allegory), maybe the time has come to once again ‘follow the yellow brick road'.On the other hand, maybe the twilight of gold has arrived, as Niall Ferguson argued in his history of debt and money, The Cash Nexus. Gold's future, he said, is ‘mainly as jewellery' or ‘in parts of the world with primitive or unstable monetary and financial systems'. Gold may have been money for 5,000 years, or even 10,000 years, but so was the horse a means of transport, and then along came the motor car.A history of gold is inevitably a history of money, but it is also a history of greed, obsession and ambition. Gold is beautiful. Gold is compelling. It is wealth in its purest, most distilled form. ‘Gold is a child of Zeus,' runs the ancient Greek lyric. ‘Neither moth nor rust devoureth it; but the mind of man is devoured by this supreme possession.' Perhaps that's why Thomas Edison said gold was ‘an invention of Satan'. Wealth, and all the emotions that come with it, can do strange things to people.Gold has led people to do the most brilliant, the most brave, the most inventive, the most innovative and the most terrible things. ‘More men have been knocked off balance by gold than by love,' runs the saying, usually attributed to Benjamin Disraeli. Where gold is concerned, emotion, not logic, prevails. Even in today's markets it is a speculative asset whose price is driven by greed and fear, not by fundamental production numbers.Its gleam has drawn man across oceans, across continents and into the unknown. It lured Jason and the Argonauts, Alexander the Great, numerous Caesars, da Gama, Cortés, Pizarro and Raleigh. Brilliant new civilisations have emerged as a result of the quest for gold, yet so have slavery, war, deceit, death and devastation. Describing the gold mines of ancient Egypt, the historian Diodorus Siculus wrote, ‘there is absolutely no consideration nor relaxation for sick or maimed, for aged man or weak woman. All are forced to labour at their tasks until they die, worn out by misery amid their toil.' His description could apply to many an illegal mine in Africa today.The English critic John Ruskin told a story of a man who boarded a ship with all his money: a bag of gold coins. Several days into the voyage a terrible storm blew up. ‘Abandon ship!' came the cry. The man strapped his bag around his waist and jumped overboard, only to sink to the bottom of the sea. ‘Now,' asked Ruskin, ‘as he was sinking — had he the gold? Or had the gold him?'As the Chinese proverb goes, ‘The miser does not own the gold; the gold owns the miser.'Gold may be a dead metal. Inert, unchanging and lifeless. But its hold over humanity never relents. It has adorned us since before the dawn of civilisation and, as money, underpinned economies ever since. Desire for it has driven mankind forwards, the prime impulse for quest and conquest, for exploration and discovery. From its origins in the hearts of dying stars to its quiet presence today beneath the machinery of modern finance, gold has seen it all. How many secrets does this silent witness keep? This book tells the story of gold. It unveils the schemes, intrigues and forces that have shaped our world in the relentless pursuit of this ancient asset, which, even in this digital age, still wields immense power.That was Chapter One of The Secret History of Gold The Secret History of Gold is available to pre-order at Amazon, Waterstones and all good bookshops. I hear the audiobook, read by me, is excellent. The book comes out on August 28.Hurry! Amazon is currently offering 20% off.Until next time,Dominic This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.theflyingfrisby.com/subscribe

https://a16z.com/the-techno-optimist-manifesto/ " Techno-optimism is the belief that rapid technological progress is the main driver of human prosperity and should be pursued as a moral imperative. It argues that: Growth = Good: Innovation creates abundance, longer lives, and better living standards. Barriers = Bad: Regulation, caution, and pessimism slow down progress and should be resisted. Technology as Solution: Challenges like poverty, disease, and climate change are best solved by accelerating science and technology rather than restricting them. In short: Techno-optimism sees faster innovation as the surest path to human flourishing — and treats resistance to technological progress as harmful. " Here's a structured overview of the major schools of economic thought, mapped across time, followed by an estimate of which views dominate public and policy thinking today.

A century ago, economist John Maynard Keynes confidently predicted that by 2030, we would only be working 15 hours a week. Yet, here we are—working harder than ever! While technology has dramatically boosted productivity, our work hours remain largely unchanged, and the prevalence of “bullshit jobs” is alarming. It's time to consider whether a four-day workweek could finally break this exhausting cycle or if we are stuck in our ways. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us a textEric covers the economy and the system's design of Ukraine's Drone squadron. What does economy balancing look like in the face of war? Phil can't stop gushing about Heroes of History, but there's one economy design piece holding it up. The crew descends into a John Maynard Keynes debate as a 4* or 5* character. Chris covers the economic impact of the UK's new obligation for internet providers, potentially transforming UGC as we know it.https://ericguan.substack.com/p/ukraine-gamified-drone-warfare

On this week's MACRODOSE, James continues our economics history series with a look at the life and legacy of one of the most famous economists of the 20th century - John Maynard Keynes.For exclusive content - including our new chat show, The Curve, and Macrodose's monthly newsletter, The Fix - visit: https://www.patreon.com/macrodose. Got a question or comment? Reach out to us at ⁠macrodose@planetbproductions.co.uk⁠.To learn more about the work we do at Planet B Productions, head to ⁠planetbproductions.co.uk⁠.

The US Government is buying back its own bonds. Scott Bessent is following in the footsteps of John Maynard Keynes. Senator Josh Hawley is pushing for raising the minimum wage. But while the government redistributes the wealth (largely from the middle class to the lower class), wealth disparity is increasing because Federal Reserve policies will always favor the rich. The shell game is impossible for the average person to follow. But suffice it to say, some animals turn out to be more equal than others. But why not just trust God, and run the economy by biblical principles and honest money? This program includes: 1. The World View in 5 Minutes with Adam McManus (Death toll in Texas flash floods climbs to 79; Trump's Big Beautiful Bill defunded Planned Parenthood; Pakistani Christian girl, kidnapped for two years, escapes) 2. Generations with Kevin Swanson

For a long time, Republicans and many Democrats espoused some version of free-trade economics that would have been familiar to Adam Smith. But Donald Trump breaks radically with that tradition, embracing a form of protectionism that resulted in his extremely broad and chaotic tariff proposals, which tanked markets and deepened the fear of a global recession. John Cassidy writes The New Yorker's The Financial Page column, and he's been covering economics for the magazine since 1995. His new book, “Capitalism and Its Critics: A History,” takes a long view of these debates, and breaks down some of the arguments that have shaped the U.S.'s current economic reality. “Capitalism itself has put its worst face forward in the last twenty or thirty years through the growth of huge monopolies which seem completely beyond any public control or accountability,” Cassidy tells David Remnick. “And young people—they look at capitalism and the economy through the prism of environmentalism now in a way that they didn't in our generation.”

Give to help Chris make Truce Milton Friedman may be the most famous American economist. His research and theories have profoundly shaped the modern American economy. But few of us can clearly articulate what he taught and what it means for our times. Friedman's career was defined by the aftermath of the Great Depression. He worked in the government administering the New Deal, but never really agreed with it. He joined the faculty at the University of Chicago and built a department around him that taught a version of free-market economics known as monetarism. Essentially, monetarism is the idea that inflation is a product of how much money is in circulation. Friedman did not like the Federal Reserve or the gold standard, instead, advocating for a standard 4% increase in the money supply every year that would not be shifted. By setting a rule, he hoped to do away with an entire governmental department. Friedman and his co-authors ventured into areas that other economists thought, perhaps, unwise. They used economics to explain things like marriage and school choice. He was also a proponent of school vouchers. Stanford professor Jennifer Burns joins Chris today to explore the many facets of Milton Friedman. This is the first of two parts. Sources: Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative by Jennifer Burns The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Part to Power by Robert Caro https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/laissez-faire “Keynesian Economics Theory: Definition and How It's Used” Investopedia article https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2014/article/one-hundred-years-of-price-change-the-consumer-price-index-and-the-american-inflation-experience.htm Reaganland by Rick Perlstein Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman Milton Friedman: A Concise Guide to the Ideas and Influence of the Free-Market Economist by Eamonn Butler Friedman on the Donahue show in 1979 Discussion Questions: Had you heard of Friedman before this episode? If so, what did you know about him? What does "laissez-faire" mean in economic terms? Does it line up with the Bible in any direct way? Why do you think so many conservative Christians lean toward laissez-faire? How bad was the Great Depression? If you had worked for the government during the Depression, what would you have advocated? Why are some people against the New Deal? What did the New Deal mean to starving people during the Depression? How does a fear of communism play into anti-New Deal sentiment? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

You've heard the Republican ticket's pro-worker rhetoric. It often contradicts their own actions and party ideology, but is representative of an emerging faction within the right wing. Joining us to explore this new conservative ideology are Oren Cass, Chief Economist at American Compass, and Zachary Carter, author of "The Price of Peace: Money, Democracy, and the Life of John Maynard Keynes." Together, we delve into key policy battlegrounds, from labor rights and immigration to domestic manufacturing and trade. Plus, the group considers a Post-Trump Republican Party. Follow The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart on social media for more:  > YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@weeklyshowpodcast > Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/weeklyshowpodcast > TikTok: https://tiktok.com/@weeklyshowpodcast  > X: https://x.com/weeklyshowpod Host/Executive Producer – Jon Stewart Executive Producer – James Dixon Executive Producer – Chris McShane Executive Producer – Caity Gray Lead Producer – Lauren Walker Producer – Brittany Mehmedovic Video Editor & Engineer – Sam Reid Audio Editor & Engineer – Nicole Boyce Researcher & Associate Producer – Gillian Spear Music by Hansdle Hsu — This podcast is brought to you by: ZipRecruiter Try it for free at this exclusive web address: ziprecruiter.com/ZipWeekly Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sixty percent of the jobs that Americans do today didn't exist in 1940. What happens as our labor becomes more technical and less physical? And what kinds of jobs will exist in the future?  SOURCES:David Autor, professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Paula Barmaimon, manager of coverage and audience analytics at The New York Times.Ellen Griesedieck, artist and president of the American Mural Project.Adina Lichtman, co-host of the Our Friends Are Smart party.Avi Popack, co-host of the Our Friends Are Smart party.Huck Scarry, author and illustrator.James Suzman, anthropologist and author.Ben Varon, rabbi and chaplain at NYU Langone Hospital—Brooklyn . RESOURCES:"New Frontiers: The Origins and Content of New Work, 1940–2018," by David Autor, Caroline Chin, Anna Salomons, and Bryan Seegmiller (The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2024).Work: A Deep History, from the Stone Age to the Age of Robots, by James Suzman (2020).Working: People Talk About What They Do All Day and How They Feel About What They Do, by Studs Terkel (1974).What Do People Do All Day?, by Richard Scarry (1968)."Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren," by John Maynard Keynes (1930).American Mural Project. EXTRAS:"Will the Democrats 'Make America Great Again'?" by Freakonomics Radio (2023)."How to Stop Worrying and Love the Robot Apocalypse," by Freakonomics Radio (2021)."Did China Eat America's Jobs?" by Freakonomics Radio (2017).People I (Mostly) Admire.

Welcome to the Not Old Better Show, Smithsonian Associates Edition. I'm Paul Vogelzang, and today, we're diving into the minds of history's greatest economists with our special guest, Smithsonian Associate, Dr. Robbie Mochrie.Dr. Mochrie is not just an esteemed economist with over 30 years of teaching experience, but also an insightful author whose latest book, How to Think Like an Economist, explores the timeless wisdom of economic giants like Aristotle, Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, and Esther Duflo. In a world where the economy affects every aspect of our lives—from the way governments navigated the pandemic to the pressing need to tackle climate change—Dr. Mochrie shows us that understanding economics is indispensable.But we have Dr. Mochrie today,  and we'll explore how these thinkers shaped the world and how their ideas continue to influence policies that can make or break our future. We'll also discuss Dr. Mochrie's favorite economist and delve into the revolutionary ideas that could help us address some of the most significant challenges of our time.It's a conversation that will challenge what you think you know about economics, offering new perspectives on how we can all contribute to a better, more sustainable world. So, stay tuned as we uncover the power of economic thought with Dr. Robbie Mochrie, right here on the Not Old Better Show, Smithsonian Associates Interview Series on radio and podcast.You can find out more about about Dr. Mochrie, including his upcoming Smithsonian Associatespresentation titled, How To Think Like an Economistin our show notes today.  My thanks to the Smithsonian team for all they do to support the show.  My thanks to Executive Producer Sam Heningerfor his audio direction and my thanks to you, our wonderful audience here on radio and podcast.  Be well, be safe and let's Talk About Better™ The Not Old Better Show, Smithsonian Associates interview series on radio and podcast.  Thanks, everybody and we'll see you next week.Hosted by Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Take the 2024 Planet Money Summer School Quiz here to earn your personalized diploma!Find all the episodes from this season of Summer School here. And past seasons here. And follow along on TikTok here for video Summer School. We are assembled here on the lawn of Planet Money University for the greatest graduation in history – because it features the greatest economic minds in history. We'll hear from Adam Smith, Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, and some surprising guests as they teach us a little bit more economics, and offer a lot of life advice. But first, we have to wrap up our (somewhat) complete economic history of the world. We'll catch up on the last fifty years or so of human achievement and ask ourselves, has economics made life better for us all? This series is hosted by Robert Smith and produced by Audrey Dilling. Our project manager is Devin Mellor. This episode was edited by Planet Money Executive Producer Alex Goldmark and fact-checked by Sofia Shchukina. Help support Planet Money and hear our bonus episodes by subscribing to Planet Money+ in Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org/planetmoney.Always free at these links: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the NPR app or anywhere you get podcasts.Find more Planet Money: Facebook / Instagram / TikTok / Our weekly Newsletter.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

HARRIS/WALZ CAMPAIGN ADVANCING PRICE CONTROLS: WHAT ALWAYS GOES WRONG? 3/4: Samuelson Friedman: The Battle Over the Free Market. by Nicholas Wapshott . https://www.amazon.com/Samuelson-Friedman-Battle-Over-Market-ebook/dp/B08589Z7M9/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Nicholas+Wapshott+%2B+samuelson&qid=1627690920&s=digital-text&sr=1-1 From the author of Keynes Hayek, the next great duel in the history of economics. In 1966 two columnists joined Newsweek magazine. Their assignment: debate the world of business and economics. Paul Samuelson was a towering figure in Keynesian economics, which supported the management of the economy along lines prescribed by John Maynard Keynes's General Theory. Milton Friedman, little known at that time outside of conservative academic circles, championed “monetarism” and insisted the Federal Reserve maintain tight control over the amount of money circulating in the economy. In Samuelson Friedman, the author and journalist Nicholas Wapshott brings narrative verve and puckish charm to the story of these two giants of modern economics, their braided lives and colossal intellectual battles. Samuelson, a forbidding technical genius, grew up a child of relative privilege and went on to revolutionize macroeconomics. He wrote the best-selling economics textbook of all time, famously remarking "I don't care who writes a nation's laws—or crafts its advanced treatises—if I can write its economics textbooks." His friend and adversary for decades, Milton Friedman, studied the Great Depression and with Anna Schwartz wrote the seminal books The Great Contraction and A Monetary History of the United States. Like Friedrich Hayek before him, Friedman found fortune writing a treatise, Capitalism and Freedom, that yoked free markets and libertarian politics in a potent argument that remains a lodestar for economic conservatives today. In Wapshott's nimble hands, Samuelson and Friedman's decades-long argument over how—or whether—to manage the economy becomes a window onto one of the longest periods of economic turmoil in the United States. As the soaring economy of the 1950s gave way to decades stalked by declining prosperity and "stagflation," it was a time when the theory and practice of economics became the preoccupation of politicians and the focus of national debate. It is an argument that continues today. SEPTEMBER 16, 1920 WALL STREET BOMBING

HARRIS/WALZ CAMPAIGN ADVANCING PRICE CONTROLS: WHAT ALWAYS GOES WRONG? 1/4: Samuelson Friedman: The Battle Over the Free Market. by Nicholas Wapshott . https://www.amazon.com/Samuelson-Friedman-Battle-Over-Market-ebook/dp/B08589Z7M9/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Nicholas+Wapshott+%2B+samuelson&qid=1627690920&s=digital-text&sr=1-1 From the author of Keynes Hayek, the next great duel in the history of economics. In 1966 two columnists joined Newsweek magazine. Their assignment: debate the world of business and economics. Paul Samuelson was a towering figure in Keynesian economics, which supported the management of the economy along lines prescribed by John Maynard Keynes's General Theory. Milton Friedman, little known at that time outside of conservative academic circles, championed “monetarism” and insisted the Federal Reserve maintain tight control over the amount of money circulating in the economy. In Samuelson Friedman, the author and journalist Nicholas Wapshott brings narrative verve and puckish charm to the story of these two giants of modern economics, their braided lives and colossal intellectual battles. Samuelson, a forbidding technical genius, grew up a child of relative privilege and went on to revolutionize macroeconomics. He wrote the best-selling economics textbook of all time, famously remarking "I don't care who writes a nation's laws—or crafts its advanced treatises—if I can write its economics textbooks." His friend and adversary for decades, Milton Friedman, studied the Great Depression and with Anna Schwartz wrote the seminal books The Great Contraction and A Monetary History of the United States. Like Friedrich Hayek before him, Friedman found fortune writing a treatise, Capitalism and Freedom, that yoked free markets and libertarian politics in a potent argument that remains a lodestar for economic conservatives today. In Wapshott's nimble hands, Samuelson and Friedman's decades-long argument over how—or whether—to manage the economy becomes a window onto one of the longest periods of economic turmoil in the United States. As the soaring economy of the 1950s gave way to decades stalked by declining prosperity and "stagflation," it was a time when the theory and practice of economics became the preoccupation of politicians and the focus of national debate. It is an argument that continues today. SEPTEMBER 16, 1920 WALL STREET BOMBING

HARRIS/WALZ CAMPAIGN ADVANCING PRICE CONTROLS: WHAT ALWAYS GOES WRONG? 2/4: Samuelson Friedman: The Battle Over the Free Market. by Nicholas Wapshott . https://www.amazon.com/Samuelson-Friedman-Battle-Over-Market-ebook/dp/B08589Z7M9/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Nicholas+Wapshott+%2B+samuelson&qid=1627690920&s=digital-text&sr=1-1 From the author of Keynes Hayek, the next great duel in the history of economics. In 1966 two columnists joined Newsweek magazine. Their assignment: debate the world of business and economics. Paul Samuelson was a towering figure in Keynesian economics, which supported the management of the economy along lines prescribed by John Maynard Keynes's General Theory. Milton Friedman, little known at that time outside of conservative academic circles, championed “monetarism” and insisted the Federal Reserve maintain tight control over the amount of money circulating in the economy. In Samuelson Friedman, the author and journalist Nicholas Wapshott brings narrative verve and puckish charm to the story of these two giants of modern economics, their braided lives and colossal intellectual battles. Samuelson, a forbidding technical genius, grew up a child of relative privilege and went on to revolutionize macroeconomics. He wrote the best-selling economics textbook of all time, famously remarking "I don't care who writes a nation's laws—or crafts its advanced treatises—if I can write its economics textbooks." His friend and adversary for decades, Milton Friedman, studied the Great Depression and with Anna Schwartz wrote the seminal books The Great Contraction and A Monetary History of the United States. Like Friedrich Hayek before him, Friedman found fortune writing a treatise, Capitalism and Freedom, that yoked free markets and libertarian politics in a potent argument that remains a lodestar for economic conservatives today. In Wapshott's nimble hands, Samuelson and Friedman's decades-long argument over how—or whether—to manage the economy becomes a window onto one of the longest periods of economic turmoil in the United States. As the soaring economy of the 1950s gave way to decades stalked by declining prosperity and "stagflation," it was a time when the theory and practice of economics became the preoccupation of politicians and the focus of national debate. It is an argument that continues today. SEPTEMBER 16, 1920 WALL STREET BOMBING

HARRIS/WALZ CAMPAIGN ADVANCING PRICE CONTROLS: WHAT ALWAYS GOES WRONG? 4/4: Samuelson Friedman: The Battle Over the Free Market. by Nicholas Wapshott . https://www.amazon.com/Samuelson-Friedman-Battle-Over-Market-ebook/dp/B08589Z7M9/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Nicholas+Wapshott+%2B+samuelson&qid=1627690920&s=digital-text&sr=1-1 From the author of Keynes Hayek, the next great duel in the history of economics. In 1966 two columnists joined Newsweek magazine. Their assignment: debate the world of business and economics. Paul Samuelson was a towering figure in Keynesian economics, which supported the management of the economy along lines prescribed by John Maynard Keynes's General Theory. Milton Friedman, little known at that time outside of conservative academic circles, championed “monetarism” and insisted the Federal Reserve maintain tight control over the amount of money circulating in the economy. In Samuelson Friedman, the author and journalist Nicholas Wapshott brings narrative verve and puckish charm to the story of these two giants of modern economics, their braided lives and colossal intellectual battles. Samuelson, a forbidding technical genius, grew up a child of relative privilege and went on to revolutionize macroeconomics. He wrote the best-selling economics textbook of all time, famously remarking "I don't care who writes a nation's laws—or crafts its advanced treatises—if I can write its economics textbooks." His friend and adversary for decades, Milton Friedman, studied the Great Depression and with Anna Schwartz wrote the seminal books The Great Contraction and A Monetary History of the United States. Like Friedrich Hayek before him, Friedman found fortune writing a treatise, Capitalism and Freedom, that yoked free markets and libertarian politics in a potent argument that remains a lodestar for economic conservatives today. In Wapshott's nimble hands, Samuelson and Friedman's decades-long argument over how—or whether—to manage the economy becomes a window onto one of the longest periods of economic turmoil in the United States. As the soaring economy of the 1950s gave way to decades stalked by declining prosperity and "stagflation," it was a time when the theory and practice of economics became the preoccupation of politicians and the focus of national debate. It is an argument that continues today. SEPTEMBER 16, 1920 WALL STREET BOMBING