This morning I woke up thinking, how on earth is Jack (Keeley Jones’ girlfriend in Ted Lasso) so rich? Google Gemini fetched me the right answer. Turns out, she was born to a billionaire and is a venture capitalist funding Keeley’s PR agency. Looks like being born in a rich family can take you places, the best modern internet-era example being ‘heyjns’ who founded his own company at 25 which is now worth hundreds of crores.
In a gloomy world affected by multiple wars, energy crises and falling GDP, the resilience of the Indian economy offers hope. The World Bank, IMF, and the RBI has revised India’s growth forecast from 6.4% to 7% this fiscal and for the 2027-28 financial year. Some of the factors driving India’s growth are: its population, infrastructure investment — amounting to almost 1/3rd of GDP, banks and businesses with strong balance sheets and surprisingly strong export performance despite global headwinds. But there are a couple of sticking points too such as persistent inflation, underwhelming stock market conditions and the MDR on UPI payments that have sent sellers into a tizzy. Striking a balance is key.
The big news this week is however the Nobel Prize for Economics. It went to Robert E. Hall and Michael Woodford, of Stanford and Columbia Universities, respectively. They helped develop ‘New Keynesian Economics’ which looks at economic problems such as inflation, production etc through ground-up microeconomic approaches. That is, by looking at how households make decisions based on macroeconomic expectations — for example, will hiring increase, will incomes grow, and similar economic questions. At the heart of the prize winners’ work is stabilisation theory — how central banks and governments respond to various economic crises. The generic central bank playbook of issuing a slew of counter-cyclical policy measures when hit with a crisis has been around since the Great Depression. They lower interest rates, while governments raise budget deficits to assail the bust. The cure worked until the oil shock of the 1970s which sent crude prices soaring, causing stagflation around the world. This spawned the rise of Friedmanomics and monetarism — arguing against abrupt changes in supply and budget deficit — which ultimately become the economic-ideological hallmarks of Reaganism and Thatcherism. This year’s Nobel prize shows how these measures work at the level of individual. More importantly, it alerts macroeconomic practitioners to future possibilities in the field given the current state of geopolitical shocks, protectionism, and trade imperfections. Central banks now work just as much to indicate to the economy at large, which also includes individual households, where they are headed in terms of interest rates. Notably, central banks around the world act in concert given how globally interconnected economic issues are. From the micro to the macro, the individual to the central bank, this year’s Nobel prize shows the importance of stabilising the foundations to strengthen the fundamentals.
Let’s step away from economics a bit. The US has suspended eight technology companies from its Permanent Labour Certification Programme (PERM). The programme helped employers’ sponsor permanent residency or green card for its highly-skilled foreign workers. The decision raises the possibility of crucial R&D and engineering jobs shifting to GCCs in India.
The US’ increasing aversion to multilateralism and the sharpening Sino-US competition, especially in technology, has given rise to a new concept in international relations — workarounding. It refers to the act of middle powers cooperating with one another on interest-based, flexible mini laterals that does not involve the two great powers. It has increased 2015. But the intent of many of these is to ward off completion from China rather than truly rise above the fighting duo. Surely, the US is not oblivious to these initiatives. For instance, Europe is focused on cutting down its yuan deficit with China. In the meantime however policymakers must not lose sight of the broader picture.
The hooligan stereotype in English football stadiums is outdated. It is an ancient relic other European fans like to excavate from time to time to build the case for the superiority of their football culture. Tribal culture in English football fandom is still prevalent — as with every other footy-obsessed country — and some cautionary notes include: not standing up to cheer for the opposing side if you’re surrounded by home team fans, not drinking in the stands. The ‘ends’ behind both goal posts is reserved for the noisier tribalist fans, and they’re cheaper too.
Everybody is talking about Nathan Fielder’s new documentary about Elizabeth Holmes, the notorious founder of Theranos. How the interviewer stepped into the interlocutor’s personal space and made it seem like he was one within Ms. Holmes circle and its consequent slightly-disorienting effect on the viewer is being much appreciated in review columns.
On that note, alvida.
Leave a Reply