Gavin Jackson
@gavinjackson.bsky.social
10K followers 790 following 2K posts
Mumbai correspondent at the Economist
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
gavinjackson.bsky.social
A starter pack of all the Economist journalists I could find on BlueSky. If there are any more I've missed let me know and I'll add them go.bsky.app/GNQbuoM
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Then the issue is a wealth tax does not raise enough, not that it is one-off. A one-off burst of inflation can be big enough to change debt dynamics.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Definitely not your job to make left-wing cases.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Need permission from the leaseholder Londoncel
gavinjackson.bsky.social
It can reduce interest service costs, thereby reducing the deficit.
Reposted by Gavin Jackson
yougov.co.uk
🧵/ Our major new study on young men, masculinity, and misogyny questions the extent to which Gen Z men are really more likely to hold misogynist views than older generations of men
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Oh are Labour going to increase LA funding?
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Vindication for Ed Balls as neoclassical endogenous growth theory wins a Nobel prize
Reposted by Gavin Jackson
guy-normal.bsky.social
'Nature's Labubu': why are Gen Z 'unboxing' conkers?
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Populations and incomes would swiftly collapse which should reduce environmental damage
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Urban populations also richer, no?
Reposted by Gavin Jackson
erikangner.com
That's like four economics awards in a row with a substantial economic-history component, right? That strikes me as a remarkable shift. www.nobelprize.org/prizes/lists...
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Other social scientists saying economics is stupid? Must be a E̶c̶o̶n̶o̶m̶i̶c̶s̶ ̶N̶o̶b̶e̶l̶ ̶ day ending in y
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Yes. The problem here is fundamentally that levies are on electricity.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
I guess the question is whether you think it’d be better to subsidise wind farms by selling off a public asset for less than you can get for it rather than increasing the cfd pot. I’m not convinced.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
The answer for energy markets would be that consumer costs are determined by the marginal supplier and not the results of CFD auctions. It would I guess increase prices if the CFD auction pots are recovered by levies on energy bills but that would be compensated by higher profits from the auction
gavinjackson.bsky.social
This would imply you don't get higher consumer prices because the consumer price is set by the energy market (where the marginal producer is gas) rather than the results of the CFD auction. bsky.app/profile/gavi...
gavinjackson.bsky.social
This is what the designers of the spectrum auctions said about it. pages.stern.nyu.edu/~wgreene/ent...
gavinjackson.bsky.social
This is what the designers of the spectrum auctions said about it. pages.stern.nyu.edu/~wgreene/ent...
gavinjackson.bsky.social
But then you get a lower quantity because (I think) the pot is fixed.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
But in spectrum auctions the cost of the licenses was not passed along to consumers, why is that different in this case?
gavinjackson.bsky.social
I think the actual answer is that spectrum auction prices should be treated by bidders as a sunk cost and not affect prices whereas the cost of leases is passed along in higher prices.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Well it does because the government can use the money raised from spectrum auctions to fund renewable energy infrastructure or subsidise energy prices in the same way as seabed auctions.
gavinjackson.bsky.social
Yes I know. And the amount given to fund the civil list is an analytically independent choice for the exchequer. Government could reduce monarchy funding while profits of the crown estate increase.