The Henry George School Podcast podcast

161. Rethinking Economics - Untangling investment from investing

0:00
55:42
Retroceder 15 segundos
Avanzar 15 segundos

“Show me the incentives and I’ll show you the outcome”. These were the wise words of the late Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett’s former business partner. What he meant by that was that if you incentivize good and productive business behavior, your business will grow. If you reward bad and unproductive behavior, your business and, ultimately, the consumer, will suffer. Since the 1980s, the economic and legal frameworks we’ve used have incentivized bad behavior. Today, we’ll discuss Shareholder Primacy, which is the idea that a firm’s primary responsibility is to maximize value for its shareholders. Its proponents believe that by maximizing value for shareholders, there is greater accountability, more incentives to invest in productive capabilities, and a higher likelihood of risk-taking leading to innovation. 


From the 80s to the 2000s, these ideas reigned supreme across economic and legal circles. They helped shape law and policy to create the highly corporatized economy we see today. But now, some of the flaws of this framework are beginning to manifest. 


Corporate profits as a percentage of GDP remain high relative to prior decades. Corporate profits now make up 12% of GDP, down from its peak of 12.8% in 2021, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. This is at a time when most Americans are still reeling from inflation earlier in the 2020s. A recent report from the Ludwig Institute for Shared Economic Prosperity found that the bottom 60% of households are out of reach of a minimal quality of life. Using the framework of shareholder primacy, a time of high corporate profits should translate to a high standard of living. But we just aren’t seeing that.


Why? Well, it depends on who you ask. I sat down with Harrison Karlewicz, a P.hD candidate at UMass Amherst, whose work shows that investing in equities doesn’t always translate to investment in productive assets that will help companies grow. Instead of efficiently channeling savings to companies that need resources, like we’re taught financial markets are for, they have become a place where speculation can lead to rent-seeking. 


There was a lot of nuance to the conversation. Financial markets weren’t all good or all bad. But, I think we have to be realistic about the role financial markets and assets play in the economy. Our conversation touched a lot upon how businesses can be better structured to invest in assets that will help the company grow and provide good-quality products to consumers.


Mr. Karlewicz is wrapping up his dissertation at UMass Amherst, where he works with Lenore Palladino, a Political Economist, on projects about corporate governance, industrial organization, and financialization. He is a research assistant at UMass’s Political Economy Research Institute and a Fellow at McClave and Associates, an economic consulting firm. He has taught economics and math at Springfield College and Berkshire Community College. His work has been published by multiple outlets such as the Roosevelt Institute and Jacobin. Harrison earned his bachelor’s degree in economics and political science from Seattle Pacific University and his master’s from Bard College in Economic Theory and Policy. 


Together, we discussed the Robinhood-Gamestop debacle, the differences between public and private financial markets, and how policy can better incentivize investment in productive capabilities. 


To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/

Otros episodios de "The Henry George School Podcast"