I think Richard Murphy is performing an important service by explaining economics in terms that the layman can understand and by giving us the vocabulary needed to articulate our concerns more effectively. The general public is unlikely to plough through academic papers/scientific reports and I very much doubt the majority of our politicians do either, even those which are part of their brief. They too need to understand the vocabulary in order to hold the "academic consensus" to account. It is all to easy to bamboozle when your audience is unfamiliar with the vocabulary being used. The consequences of current economic orthodoxy are plain to see and its negative effects are primarily being felt by ordinary people who need to be able to hold those responsible to account.
It strikes me that right here your view departs from mainstream academic thinking. Not because you are right and the rest are wrong, but because you are thinking about it in an entirely different way from everyone else. Perhaps the way forward is to join forces with some other social scientists (economics is after all another social science) and start producing papers which put the issues into academic debate rather than popular public opinion. We all know that the politicians never listen to the general public but they do pay attention to scientific research and academic consensus.
I am, as you say, thinking entirely differently. But I also work at least 12 hours a day during the week, and maybe only 10 over a weekend. Doing more would be hard....
There is, I believe, a recent and growing body of academic and policy-related work around these views. See, for example, Mark Carney: Value(s); Kate Raworth: Doughnut Economics; works by Maria Mazzucato; and others too erudite for me to know. What I particularly like about Richard’s work here is its accessibility. It will reach a much wider, less specialised audience, but not less important. We all vote (I hope!) and that is the ultimate pressure for politicians. Best we should be well-informed and thoughtful about basic ideas.
Thanks Virginia, I already Know about Raworth’s Doughnut Economics and I do believe UBI is a viable idea, particularly in light of the problems that AI is going to cause for employment. I’ll have a look for Mazzucato and Carneys stuff. I did like Carney when he was the head of the Bank of England and wasn’t a bit surprised when he got elected in Canada.
Another excellent Infographic!
I think Richard Murphy is performing an important service by explaining economics in terms that the layman can understand and by giving us the vocabulary needed to articulate our concerns more effectively. The general public is unlikely to plough through academic papers/scientific reports and I very much doubt the majority of our politicians do either, even those which are part of their brief. They too need to understand the vocabulary in order to hold the "academic consensus" to account. It is all to easy to bamboozle when your audience is unfamiliar with the vocabulary being used. The consequences of current economic orthodoxy are plain to see and its negative effects are primarily being felt by ordinary people who need to be able to hold those responsible to account.
It strikes me that right here your view departs from mainstream academic thinking. Not because you are right and the rest are wrong, but because you are thinking about it in an entirely different way from everyone else. Perhaps the way forward is to join forces with some other social scientists (economics is after all another social science) and start producing papers which put the issues into academic debate rather than popular public opinion. We all know that the politicians never listen to the general public but they do pay attention to scientific research and academic consensus.
I am, as you say, thinking entirely differently. But I also work at least 12 hours a day during the week, and maybe only 10 over a weekend. Doing more would be hard....
That’s a very good point. I also enjoy a busy retirement. Much more fun than working
There is, I believe, a recent and growing body of academic and policy-related work around these views. See, for example, Mark Carney: Value(s); Kate Raworth: Doughnut Economics; works by Maria Mazzucato; and others too erudite for me to know. What I particularly like about Richard’s work here is its accessibility. It will reach a much wider, less specialised audience, but not less important. We all vote (I hope!) and that is the ultimate pressure for politicians. Best we should be well-informed and thoughtful about basic ideas.
Thanks Virginia, I already Know about Raworth’s Doughnut Economics and I do believe UBI is a viable idea, particularly in light of the problems that AI is going to cause for employment. I’ll have a look for Mazzucato and Carneys stuff. I did like Carney when he was the head of the Bank of England and wasn’t a bit surprised when he got elected in Canada.