Archive for the ‘Folbre’ Category

Boyce explains Econ4 in Valley Advocate

Thursday, December 22nd, 2011

James Boyce

James Boyce, UMass Amherst economics professor, is interviewed by the Valley Advocate about Econ4, a new initiative focused on economics for people, for the planet, and for the future. The organization supports the Occupy Wall Street movement and opposes what it calls “the ideological cleansing of the economics profession” and the “political cleansing in the vital debate over the causes and consequences of our current economic crisis.” (Valley Advocate, 12/22/11)

“We can’t just write on our computers,” Boyce says. “We need a strategy for communicating ideas. We aim to do an end run around the corporate-controlled media and its talking heads by using new information technologies.”

By contributing Internet-friendly teaching materials and creating a collaborative space for an online community of dissident economists—their Network for Innovative Economics Teaching—Econ4 hopes to change the study and implementation of economics.

“Part of the problem is economics itself, in the research being done and the economics being taught,” Boyce continues. “We want to change the public understanding of how the economy works, and, more importantly, how it should work.”

Econ faculty featured in Chronicle of Higher Ed

Thursday, December 15th, 2011

UMass Amherst Economics Professors James Boyce, Gerald Epstein and Nancy Folbre and Econ4, a collaborative organization which originated at UMass Amherst earlier this year, are featured in a Chronicle of Higher Education article which discusses the effort to expand viewpoints and teaching methods in the field of economics. Boyce, Epstein and Folbre argue alternatives to the orthodox approach. (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 12/13/11)

 

James Boyce

The founders of Econ4 want the economy, and the study of economics, to pay more attention to such issues as the fair distribution of opportunities; to emphasize minimizing vulnerability in the economic system instead of maximizing efficiency; and to strive to give a fuller accounting of the costs and benefits of market and government decisions, including consequences for the environment and the value of caring for dependents.

“Our basic aim is to try to produce a change in economics in the United States,” said James K. Boyce, professor of economics at UMass-Amherst, and a founder of the group. “We see a connection in how the economy is such a mess and what has happened in the economics profession over the last two decades.”

The continuing political debate over whether the government should intervene in the markets, or whether they should be left to themselves, also needs to be reframed, Mr. Boyce said. “The central question is the distribution of wealth and power,” because the two are increasingly correlated.

“If you don’t have purchasing power, you lose when markets operate. If you don’t have political power, you lose when it comes to how governments operate,” he said. “Do we live in a democracy or an oligarchy?”

 

Gerald Epstein

Higher education is no stranger to complaints of ideological dominance in certain disciplines, but they regularly come from conservative scholars who see a bias against their viewpoints. The irony is not lost on those who want economics to be more intellectually inclusive.

While he acknowledged that political bias probably does sometimes exist in such departments as gender or ethnic studies, the difference in economics is that the bias is not just one of perspective but also of methods, said Gerald A. Epstein, a professor of economics at UMass-Amherst and a founder of Econ4.

“The problem is that their view of how to think like an economist is extremely narrow to the point of being cut off from some of the major questions affecting society,” Mr. Epstein said. “In the end it is a form of indoctrination.”

 

Nancy Folbre

While every discipline is resistant to unorthodox ideas, said Ms. Folbre of UMass-Amherst, this tendency is amplified in economics departments because its scholars study how economic power is deployed. “Whether you favor the current deployment of power has big implications for what kind of resources you can get,” she said. “It’s more subject to ideological bias than sciences that aren’t so embedded in realpolitik.”

Ms. Folbre pointed to the pay that economists earn as proof of the perceived value of the discipline.

Over the past 30 years, economics and business professors have seen their salaries soar in comparison with their colleagues, according to a recent analysis published in The Chronicle. In 1980, a full professor of economics earned 13.9 percent more than a full professor of English. Thirty years later, the economics professor earns 41 percent more. Similarly, business faculty were paid 11 percent more than the typical full professor of English in 1980. Business professors now earn 50.9 percent more. The only gap larger was for law professors.

“The closer you are to the center of power, the better you’re paid,” Ms. Folbre said. The stakes and penalty for acting out, she added, also increase.

 

Faculty support of Occupy Wall Street movement

Tuesday, December 13th, 2011

UMass Amherst Economics Department faculty continue to participate in events and publish information on the Occupy Wall Street movement. The “Occupy” protests started on Wall Street and have spread internationally. Protests have been held locally in Amherst, Boston and Northampton.

UMass Amherst Economics Professor Arindrajit Dube, who is also a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) based in Bonn, discussed the Occupy Wall Street movement with his colleague Marta Murray-Close for the UMass Amherst Department of Economics Echoes alumni newsletter. (Echoes, 12/12/11)

In her Economix blog, Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, says concerns about growing economic inequality that spurred the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement should be the focus of a wider discussion by economists about capitalism and its effects. (New York Times, 11/28/11)

Gerald Friedman participated in an Occupy Wall Street Teach-In at Smith College. His talk can be viewed here. (11/12/11)

More than 350 economists have added their name in support of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Read their statement and watch a video featuring UMass Amherst Professors James Boyce, Nancy Folbre and Mwangi wa Githinji.

Folbre blogs about British austerity measures

Thursday, December 8th, 2011

Nancy Folbre

Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, writes in the Economix blog about how the British government is dealing with its debt problems by imposing strong austerity measures which include cutting pension benefits and strictly limiting wage increases for public-sector workers. She says the cutbacks have stalled the economy and are sparking protests from middle-class and working people there. (New York Times, 12/5/11)

Cuts in public spending seem to reflect a divide-and-conquer strategy. Planned increases in unemployment benefits next year will be paid for by cuts in tax credits for low-income families.

Although the Cameron government insists that it remains committed to a longstanding British campaign to reduce child poverty, it has scrapped its plans to increase the child tax credit. Families with children in the lower half of the income distribution will be hurt most.

Opposition to the austerity program is growing. On Wednesday – just as I was leaving the country – public-sector workers staged the largest strike in a generation, closing more than half of all state schools, as well as many hospitals.

Protesters from Occupy London found their way to the office of the highest-paid chief executive in the country, Mick Davis of Xstrata, to brandish a banner reading “You get £18,426,105, we get austerity.”

 

Faculty and grad students on “Occupy” protests

Friday, November 4th, 2011

Anastasia Wilson (Photo by Diane Lederman, The Republican)

Many UMass Amherst Economics Department faculty and graduate students have participated in the “Occupy” protests that started on Wall Street and have spread internationally. Occupy protests have been held locally in Amherst, Boston and Northampton.

On Oct. 19 UMass Amherst economics professors Gerald Friedman, David Kotz, and Stephen Resnick joined colleagues Dean Robinson and Jillian Schwedler (political science), Max Page (art), and Millicent Thayer (sociology) for the first Occupy UMass Teach-In held in the Cape Cod Lounge on the UMass Amherst campus. (The Daily Collegian, 10/20/11)

Deepankar Basu (Photo by Diane Lederman, The Republican)

Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, writes in the Economix blog about the Occupy Wall Street movement and what it may mean for the debate about wealth distribution in the U.S. She says visiting the protestors in New York City showed her that they weren’t proposing class warfare, but were instead expressing class rage. (New York Times, 10/17/11

Graduate student Mark Paul is profiled in a story about local residents who are taking part in the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in New York City. (Gazette, 10/11/11)

A group of UMass Amherst students held a rally outside the Student Union on Oct. 12 calling for economic justice as part of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Speakers at the rally included UMass Amherst economics professors Deepankar Basu and David Kotz. (Republican, 10/13/11)

UMass Amherst graduate students, including Anastasia Wilson (shown in photo), participate in the Occupy Amherst protest on the Town Common. A video of the event highlights their message. (Republican, 10/5/11)

Folbre a supporter of the “Tax Wall Street” campaign, quoted in The Nation

Thursday, September 1st, 2011

Nancy Folbre

A columnist writing for The Nation says President Obama could pay for an expansive new job creation program by taxing financial transactions by Wall Street traders. The author notes that top national economists, such as UMass Amherst economics professor Nancy Folbre, have supported the idea, noting that European countries already have such taxes. Folbre argues that the current U.S. tax policy encourages speculation in financial instruments that don’t invest in productive outcomes. (The Nation, 8/31/11)

How Will We Pay for Obama’s New Jobs Push? Answer: Tax Wall Street
John Nichols | August 31, 2011

University of Massachusetts Amherst economics professor Nancy Folbre [6], a MacArthur Fellowship recipient who has consulted with the World Bank and the United Nations Development Office professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, praised the NNU’s “Tax Wall Street” campaign in a recent New York Times piece that explained the push in an international context.

“Purchases of stocks, bonds and other financial instruments in the United States go untaxed but for a tiny fee on stock trades that helps finance the Securities and Exchange Commission. In Britain, by contrast, a 0.5 percent tax on stock transactions raises about $40 billion a year. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany recently announced plans to introduce a similar tax in the 27 nations of the European Community,” wrote Folbre. [7] “Our current tax policies favor speculative investment in financial instruments over productive investments in human capabilities. This imbalance helps explain why nurses’ unions in the United States (NNU) have been particularly outspoken advocates of a financial transactions tax. As they put it: ‘Heal America. Tax Wall Street.’ ”

Folbre blogs, “Unemployment? Who Cares?”

Wednesday, July 13th, 2011

Nancy Folbre

In her Economix blog, Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, examines why deficit reduction and not unemployment is dominating the public policy agenda. She offers several possible explanations including the fact that high unemployment rate is not adversely affecting overall business profits.   (New York Times, 7/11/11)

July 11, 2011
Unemployment? Who Cares?
By NANCY FOLBRE

The A.F.L.-C.I.O. and other unions keep demanding “Good jobs now!” Progressive think tanks like the Economic Policy Institute carefully monitor employment trends. Many economists, including the professionally prominent members of the Employment Policy Research Network, insist on the need for more attention to the issue. As Till von Wachter of Columbia University put it, “Unemployment is the No. 1 economic problem facing the country today.”

Some business leaders have spoken up. Last summer, Andrew Grove, the former chief executive of Intel, wrote a passionate commentaryfor Bloomberg BusinessWeek calling for a “job-centric” economy.

But this is not something the country can achieve with jobs-oblivious politicians. Why isn’t unemployment reduction front and center on the policy agenda? More specifically, why has the debate over deficit reduction shoved it aside?

First, unemployment is concentrated among the less educated, blacks and Hispanics who lack political or economic clout.

Second, high unemployment is not hurting overall business profits, which have soared to historic heights. In the 1930s, joblessness reduced the demand for consumer goods, idling many businesses as well as workers, creating economic incentives to support public job-creation efforts.

Today, our largest corporations and richest investors are well positioned to take advantage of growing demand in emerging markets far from our shores, whether in the form of increased exports or new investment opportunities.

As a small-business owner explained in a recent Wall Street Journal article, he only sells domestically and does not have the opportunity to “exploit foreign markets that are growing faster.”

Folbre blogs, some children may be “Born to Lose”

Tuesday, June 28th, 2011

Nancy Folbre

Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, writes in the Economix blog about how low birth weight is a strong economic indicator of how a child will do in society. She also argues that exposure to environmental pollution is a key contributor to the health of newborns and has a strong impact on birth weight. (New York Times, 6/27/11)

June 27, 2011
Born to Lose: Health Inequality at Birth
By NANCY FOLBRE

Epidemiologists and economists have long agreed that low birth weight is an important, albeit approximate, predictor of future health problems. A wealth of new economic research tracing individuals over time shows that it is also an approximate predictor of future earnings problems, with statistical effects almost as strong as children’s test scores.

Among other things, low birth weight increases the probability of suffering from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and lowers the probability of graduating from high school.

In the current American Economic Review, Janet Currie of Princeton, a pioneer in this new area of research, summarizes recent findings and points out that children of black mothers who dropped out of high school are three times as likely as children of white college-educated mothers to suffer low birth weight.

Many of the mechanisms that underlie this inequality are linked to characteristics of the physical environment, such as exposure to environmental toxins.

Folbre blogs on the value of early childhood education

Thursday, June 23rd, 2011

Nancy Folbre

Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, writes in the Economix blog about the value of early childhood education and why businesses should consider it a good investment. She notes that the programs have political support across the ideological spectrum, but also points out that budget cutting at the state and federal levels are likely to reduce funding for the programs. (New York Times, 6/20/11)

June 20, 2011
Will Business Buy In To Early Childhood Edcuation?
NANCY FOLBRE

Economists disagree about a lot of things, but many agree that public investments in early childhood education pay off. The social benefits far exceed the social costs.

A recently released study of 1,000 poor children who benefited from Chicago’s Child-Parent Center Education Program (which includes intensive preschool, parent training and support for students through third grade), suggests that every dollar spent on the program yielded nearly $11 to society, including increased tax revenue and reduced spending on child welfare, special education and grade retention.

VT moves toward single-payer health insurance

Tuesday, June 7th, 2011

Nancy Folbre

Nancy Folbre, UMass Amherst economics professor, writes in the Economix blog about how Vermont is bucking the national trend and creating a Canadian-style, single-payer health insurance system for its citizens. She notes that Gerald Friedman, economics, estimates Massachusetts could see savings of 17 percent in its health care costs under a similar system. (New York Times, 6/6/11)

June 6, 2011
Vermont’s Move Toward Single-Payer Health Insurance
By NANCY FOLBRE

My University of Massachusetts Amherst colleague Gerald Friedman, active in efforts to promote a single-payer system in this state, estimates that similar changes in Massachusetts could sharply reduce the cost of billing and processing insurance claims, generating savings of 17 percent. As he puts it, a universal single-payer approach is not just more affordable; in the long run, it may be the only affordable option.

The current Massachusetts health-insurance system, like that emerging on the national level, requires residents to buy health insurance and provides subsidies only to low-income families. As a result, it leaves many people vulnerable to increases in the cost of insurance and may also create political resentments among those with incomes just above the subsidy eligibility level, who are forced to buy insurance they can ill afford.

The system is not “wildly unpopular,” as some conservatives assert, but it’s not wildly popular either.

As Vermont moves forward with its plan, a fascinating standard of comparison should emerge. The Canadian single-payer system grew out of successful innovations in the province of Saskatchewan, which led other provinces to follow suit. Here in Massachusetts, many of us are looking hopefully over our shoulder at the Green Mountain State.