DiscoverCapitalisn't
Capitalisn't
Claim Ownership

Capitalisn't

Author: University of Chicago Podcast Network

Subscribed: 2,912Played: 63,727
Share

Description

Is capitalism the engine of destruction or the engine of prosperity? On this podcast we talk about the ways capitalism is—or more often isn’t—working in our world today. Hosted by Vanity Fair contributing editor, Bethany McLean and world renowned economics professor Luigi Zingales, we explain how capitalism can go wrong, and what we can do to fix it.


Cover photo attributions: https://www.chicagobooth.edu/research/stigler/about/capitalisnt.

If you would like to send us feedback, suggestions for guests we should bring on, or connect with Bethany and Luigi, please email: contact at capitalisnt dot com. If you like our show, we'd greatly appreciate you giving us a rating or a review. It helps other listeners find us too.
199 Episodes
Reverse
Are bailouts the new “trickle-down” economics? Have government debt and deficits caused capitalism’s collapse—thus ending the American Dream?Ruchir Sharma is a well-known columnist for the Financial Times, the author of bestselling books Breakout Nations and The Rise and Fall of Nations, and an investment banker who worked as Morgan Stanley’s head of emerging markets for 25 years. His new book, What Went Wrong With Capitalism, traces the roots of current disaffection with our capitalist economy to unabashed stimulus and too much government intervention. Take an example: Sharma writes that the United States federal government has introduced 3,000 new regulations in the last twenty years, and withdrawn just 20 over the same span. He likens the Federal Reserve’s constant bailouts—under chairs appointed by presidents from both parties—to the opioid crisis, in which the solution created more problems than the pain it was designed to treat.Sharma joins Bethany and Luigi to explain how constant government intervention leads to inefficient “zombie” firms, higher property prices, housing shortages, massive inequality, and a historic government debt and deficit crisis. Together, they discuss the first step to a cure—a correct diagnosis of the problem—and how to approach the treatment without exacerbating the problems. In the process, they leave us with a renewed understanding of how “pro-business is not the same as pro-capitalism,” a distinction that Sharma says “continues to elude us.”Episode Notes:Link to submit papers for the Stigler Center 2025 Antitrust ConferenceRevisit “Is the Federal Reserve an Engine of Inequality?”, our previous episode on modern monetary theory or the claim that debt doesn’t matter.Revisit “Capitalism After the Crisis,” Luigi’s article for Foreign Affairs (2009), where he outlines the tensions between a pro-capitalism and a pro-business agenda. Also, check out ProMarket.org, our publication at the Stigler Center that he founded in 2016, with the mission of shedding light on this tension and how to ameliorate it.
The Argentinian DOGE

The Argentinian DOGE

2024-12-0547:57

A new U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is headed by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. Its goals include administrative reductions, cost savings, regulatory cutbacks, and reducing federal spending by nearly $2 trillion. President-elect Donald Trump has called DOGE the "Manhattan Project of our time," and has indicated that DOGE will reduce regulatory burdens to firms and individuals. But is the act of cutting rules and regulations the same as cutting spending? Does it unleash the economy in a way that benefits everyone or just a select few who don't want the rules in the first place?Right now, it’s impossible to know what DOGE will be able to accomplish, but there is another remarkably similar example we can learn from. Argentinian President Javier Milei took office a year ago with a promise to “take a chainsaw to the state.” As part of that promise, he appointed economist Federico Sturzenegger – a former classmate of Luigi's at MIT – as the Minister of Deregulation and State Transformation of the Argentine Republic. Within a year, Sturzenegger has overseen the review of approximately 42,000 laws, and as confirmed by Milei, is in "direct contact" with Musk.Bethany and Luigi talk to Sturzenegger to understand, most importantly, what Argentina's experience might foretell about DOGE's upcoming role and impact on the United States government and economy.
For years, the world worried about overpopulation and our capacity to sustain ever-increasing numbers of people. Now, the worry is underpopulation—and recent numbers are stunning. Fertility rate is the average number of children that are born to a woman over her lifetime. According to the United Nations, this number is currently 1.64 in the U.S.: If it stays this way, in three generations there will only be half as many young Americans as there are today, holding immigration constant. In China, this number is even lower: one child per woman. Just eight countries are expected to account for more than half the rise in global population between now and 2050.Economic theory is based on the idea of expansion, and humanity has been expanding since 1500. If that is about to change, then the very foundation of our economic theory will need rethinking.Acclaimed author, historian, and filmmaker Sir Niall Ferguson (Stanford/Harvard) joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss why we're heading toward a global population decline and what it all means for civilization. They discuss how factors like climate change, immigration, reproductive rights, artificial intelligence, and the trade-offs women face between career and motherhood are influencing decisions to have children. What are the implications of falling birth rates not just for the market economy but also for geopolitics and intergenerational conflict? Can we reverse trends in fertility before it is too late?
While Americans rely on debit transactions for the necessities of life, most are unaware of the networks that drive those transactions, nor are they aware that one company, Visa, has monopolized debit transactions, penalized industry participants that seek to use alternative debit networks, and co-opted innovators, technology companies, and financial institutions to forestall or snuff out threats to Visa's debit network dominance.” So begins the monopolization lawsuit filed on September 24 by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) against the country’s largest card company, Visa Inc.On one level, the case is simple: The DOJ alleges a clear violation of laws protecting markets against monopolies. But the case gets more complicated when looking at the details, in part because payment systems are mostly invisible part of the financial ecosystem. In effect, the DOJ alleges that Visa is pulling the levers of a really opaque and complex system to preclude competition and squeeze fees out of banks and vendors for itself.To understand the complexities and implications of the case, Bethany and Luigi are joined by Kathryn Judge, Harvey J. Goldschmid Professor of Law at Columbia University. Judge is an expert on banking, financial crises, regulatory architecture, and intermediation design beyond finance. Her book, Direct: The Rise of the Middleman Economy and the Power of Going to the Source (HarperBusiness, 2022), was on the long list for the Financial Times Business Book of the Year Award. Together, the three of them discuss both the surface-level and structural issues of an economy where consumers and small businesses are shortchanged on what is essentially a private sales tax on all debit-card purchases—and how to look for collective solutions when opt-outs aren’t possible.Episode Notes: Also check out the ProMarket article “A DOJ Victory Against Visa May Not Help Merchants or Consumers” by Lulu Wang, Assistant Professor of Finance at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management.
As the United States elections draw near, everyone is wondering who will take control of Washington next. In this week’s Capitalisn’t episode, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Brody Mullins reveals how the real winner will be neither Democrats nor Republicans. Rather, it will be the lobbyists.Mullins is the co-author (along with his brother Luke, also an investigative reporter) of The Wolves of K Street: The Secret History of How Big Money Took Over Big Government. Brody joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss how corporations ranging from Genentech to Google participate in the invisible but massively influential lobbying industry to bend government policy toward their favor. Together, the three trace the roots and evolution of political lobbying from the 1970s to now and explore how it penetrates and leverages other spheres of society to abet its operations. How are academia and the media complicit in this ecosystem of influence operations? How has lobbying adapted to the changing attitudes of Americans towards Big Business? How might it change under either a Harris or Trump administration and beyond?Episode Notes: Luigi mentions the transformational work of one figure in American politics who fought back against lobbyists’ substantial influence: consumer advocate Ralph Nader. Revisit our prior conversation and episode with Mr. Nader.
You asked and we answered: Over the last year, we have solicited listeners’ questions via voicemail, email, and social media. In this episode, our producer, Matt, turns the tables on Bethany and Luigi and puts them in the hot seat to answer your burning questions in an Ask Me Anything “AMA” format.How do Bethany and Luigi actually define capitalism? Does universal basic income disincentivize work? Does the adoption of artificial intelligence mean we need to rethink economics? What would Bethany and Luigi do if they were president for a day? And perhaps the scariest one of all: does Luigi believe in taking time off?
Last week, United States presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump delivered hour-long speeches outlining their economic policies for the country if they win in November. This week on a special episode of Capitalisn’t, Bethany and Luigi weigh in on the candidates’ economic proposals. What makes this discussion particularly urgent is that neither candidate is espousing a traditional Republican or Democratic platform. Further, despite the length of their respective speeches, there were few specifics. Instead, both candidates are running on "vibes" more than detailed manifestos. With just under five weeks to go before Election Day, Bethany and Luigi sift through the proposals around taxes, tariffs, price gouging, and the “Opportunity Economy,” helping us separate the substance from the slogans.
International technology policy expert, Stanford University academic, and former European parliamentarian Marietje Schaake writes in her new book that a “Tech Coup” is happening in democratic societies and fast approaching the point of no return. Both Big Tech and smaller companies are participating in it, through the provision of spyware, microchips, facial recognition, and other technologies that erode privacy, speech, and other human rights. These technologies shift power to the tech companies at the expense of the public and democratic institutions, Schaake writes.Schaake joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss proposals for reversing this shift of power and maintaining the balance between innovation and regulation in the digital age. If a "tech coup" is really underway, how did we get here? And if so, how can we safeguard democracy and individual rights in an era of algorithmic governance and surveillance capitalism?Marietje Schaake’s new book, “The Tech Coup: Saving Democracy From Silicon Valley,” is available here. Read an excerpt from the book on ProMarket here.
America’s universities have powered its economy by developing an educated workforce and producing transformative technology, including the internet and vaccines. They were seen as vehicles for social mobility; when veterans returned home from World War II, the newly enacted G.I. Bill compensated millions with paid college and vocational school tuition. However, universities today are bloated and expensive, losing the public's trust, and have become a battleground for controversial culture wars. Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a second Trump administration, plans significant cuts to university subsidies. A big battle is looming over the future of American universities.To shed some light on what this future might look like, Bethany and Luigi are joined by Hanna Gray, Distinguished Service Professor Emerita of History and President of the University of Chicago from 1978 to 1993 — a period marked by immensely challenging debates on free speech, financial constraints, and leadership decisions. Gray has written that the creation of the modern university “rested on a faith, pervasive in the post-war world, and the potential for education to create a better world, to produce both social mobility and a meritocratic society that would realize the true promise of democracy.” With her trademark humor, sharp wit, and unwavering resolve, she offers insights from her trailblazing experience into whether this promise is more unkept than kept and if faith will be enough for the modern university system to survive.Episode Notes: Read the Kalven Report on the University's Role in Political and Social Action here.
Is race a more consequential determinant of social mobility than class? How and under what circumstances do Americans move up the economic ladder?For years, Harvard economist Raj Chetty has leveraged big data to answer these questions. In his recent paper, Chetty and his team show that Black millennials born to low-income parents have more quickly risen up the economic ladder than previous Black generations, whereas their white counterparts have fared worse than previous low-income white generations. That said, Chetty finds little movement in or out of the top income brackets and that the income gap between Black and white Americans remains large.Chetty joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss these new insights as well as why mobility matters, what costs come in the pursuit of bolstering mobility, and how other factors such as parenting, gender, and social capital factor into the equation. What policies should America pursue, especially against the backdrop of the 2024 presidential election, where many conservatives argue that white working-class Americans are falling behind and liberals argue that Black and brown Americans continue to face systemic inequalities?Show notes:Revisit our Capitalisn't conversation with Oren Cass, who is mentioned by LuigiRevisit our Capitalisn't conversation on Chile, which is mentioned by BethanyCheck out related coverage on ProMarket, including a write-up by Raj Chetty and co-authors on "Lost Einsteins," mentioned in the episode
This week we're taking a quick summer break, but in the meantime, we wanted to re-share a special episode that is relevant in the news again. With the recent federal court ruling that Google engaged in illegal monopolization of internet searches, we thought it would be a great opportunity to share our episode with lawyer Dina Srinivasan. She's an expert in the field of competition policy and a fellow with the Thurman Arnold Project at Yale University. Google is no stranger to lawsuits and has previously defeated many of them, but now, antitrust experts are optimistic that this case against Google's advertising business is even stronger for the government than the Search case that Google lost just last week.To simplify the apparent complexity of the case and understand why and how it matters to consumers, the advertising market, the tech industry, and the economy, Luigi conducted a special bonus interview with Srinivasan. Following the interview, Bethany joins Luigi to discuss the implications of this case for consumer harm, the business model of journalism, democracy, and beyond.Read more on ProMarket: https://www.promarket.org/tag/google-ad-tech-case/ Watch: 2024 Antitrust and Competition Conference | Antitrust Case Studies: Google https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw6-LaVh55U
Harvard professor of international political economy Dani Rodrik has long been skeptical of what he calls "hyperglobalization," or an advanced level of interconnectedness between countries and their economies. He first introduced his theory of the "globalization trilemma" in the late 1990s, which states that no country can simultaneously support democracy, national sovereignty, and global economic integration.At the time when he proposed his trilemma, Rodrik was considered an outcast. However, economists and policymakers have come to accept his theory as governments seek to address populism, trade imbalances, and uneven growth through renewed interest in industrial policy, or government efforts to improve the performance of key business sectors. Rodrik joins co-hosts Bethany and Luigi to discuss changing attitudes towards globalization: its distributional effects, how it affects politics, and how it is still searching for a narrative consistent between academic circles and the media. Together, the three of them discuss what role corporate America should play in our world restructured by economic and political populism and if economics is getting too far away from the rest of the social sciences when it comes to shaping industrial policy and creating the jobs of tomorrow.Show Notes:Read Rodrik's co-authored December 2023 paper on the "New Economics of Industrial Policy"Read an ebook by ProMarket on cutting-edge contemporary debates around industrial policy
In one of this year's bestselling books, "The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood is Causing An Epidemic of Mental Illness," New York University social psychologist Jonathan Haidt argues that today's childhoods spent under the influence of smartphones and overprotective parenting has led to the reported explosion in cases of teenage anxiety and depression. He calls this process a "three-act play": the diminishment of trust in our communities, the loss of a play-based childhood, and the arrival of a hyper-connected world.Haidt also believes the problem is solvable. On this episode of Capitalisn't, he joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss parenting, learning, adolescence, and in an age where Congress won't act on regulation, his four proposed solutions to break social media's "collective action trap" on children.But are his solutions feasible? How do we weigh their costs, benefits, limitations, risks, and the roadblocks to their implementation? What are the consequences of an anxious generation for our economy — and what can we really do about it?Read more about Haidt's work here: https://www.anxiousgeneration.com And follow his Substack here: https://www.afterbabel.com
If democracy is a social contract, why don’t we allow everybody who is willing to sign it? Why don’t we have open borders for immigration?In their book "Streets of Gold: America's Untold Story of Immigrant Success," Princeton University’s Leah Boustan and Stanford University’s Ran Abramitzky provide insights from big data to explore how immigration shaped the United States by looking at the economic legacies of immigrants and their children. On this week’s encore episode, hosts Luigi Zingales and Bethany McLean talk with Boustan to unpack how immigrants and their progeny have impacted jobs, wages, and housing prices for native-born Americans. Conversely, how do immigrants’ countries of origin overcome obstacles to socioeconomic change when many of their most-motivated citizens leave? Can data move the U.S. immigration debate beyond the current border crisis?
In the last 60 years, few economists have contributed more to exposing the failures of capitalism than Joseph Stiglitz. Formerly the chief economist of the World Bank and chair of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton, Stiglitz won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2001 for his work showing that the possibility of having different information can lead to inefficient market outcomes.On this episode of Capitalisn't, Stiglitz joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss his latest book, "The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society" (W.W. Norton, 2024). The book, as Bethany describes it, is a "full frontal attack on neoliberalism" that provides a prospective roadmap towards a more progressive form of capitalism. Together, the three discuss the role of mis- and disinformation in producing market inefficiencies, the importance of regulation, institutional accountability, and collective action in correcting market failures, and the role of neoliberalism in today's global populist uprising. In the process, they underscore the close link between economic and political freedom.
Is the famed American Dream still attainable for the immigrants and working class of today? What made America the land of opportunity — and if it isn't the same anymore, what happened to it?Joining co-hosts Bethany and Luigi to discuss these questions is David Leonhardt, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author of "Ours Was the Shining Future." In his book, Leonhardt describes what he calls today's "rough-and-tumble" capitalism and distinguishes its laissez-faire characteristics from a more bygone, democratic version. Charting shifts in manufacturing, labor power, and the perennial tension between immigration and wages, Leonhardt and our hosts deliberate over the ramifications of this story for progressive and populist movements in a tumultuous election year and offer potential pathways to rekindle the promise of prosperity and upward mobility.
Critics of the food industry allege that it relentlessly pursues profits at the expense of public health. They claim that food companies "ultra-process" products with salt, sugar, fats, and artificial additives, employ advanced marketing tactics to manipulate and hook consumers, and are ultimately responsible for a global epidemic of health ailments. Companies are also launching entirely new lines and categories of food products catering to diabetes or weight management drugs such as Ozempic.Marion Nestle, a leading public health advocate, nutritionist, award-winning author, and Professor Emerita at New York University, first warned in her 2002 book "Food Politics" that Big Food deliberately designs unhealthy, addictive products to drive sales, often backed by industry-funded research that misleads consumers. This week on Capitalisn't, Nestle joins Bethany and Luigi to explore the ultra-processed food industry through the interplay of four lenses: the underlying science, business motives, influencing consumer perceptions, and public policy.
Over the last few weeks, university politics has captured headlines as students across the country occupy sections of their campuses and demand that their schools divest from Israel in protest of its contentious war in Gaza. Last week for Compact Magazine, Luigi and Nobel Laureate Oliver Hart stressed that one lesson from these protests is that universities need to make transparent their investment strategies and how they contribute to the school’s financial operations, including financial aid.Increased transparency can inform ethical debates about divestment, but can it solve them? Even if students get what they want, will it matter? Or should they be focusing their efforts elsewhere to maximize impact? Who gets to make the decisions about the ethics of college endowment investments, and how should votes be divided between different stakeholders — students, faculty, alumni, and donors? This week on Capitalisn’t, Bethany and Luigi record a late-breaking episode tackling these foundational questions that underlie the governance of today's universities.
The meteoric rise of private credit over the last decade has raised concerns among banks about unfair competition and among regulators about risks to financial stability. Historically, regulated banks have provided most of the credit that finances businesses in the United States. However, since the 2008 financial crisis, banks have restricted their credit lines in response to new regulations. In their place has arisen private credit, which comprises direct (and mostly unregulated) lending, primarily from institutional investors. Estimates peg the current size of outstanding private credit loans in the U.S. at $1.7 trillion.Private credit loans aren't traceable, and there are incentives to lend to riskier borrowers in the absence of regulation. This could lead to catastrophic spillover effects in the event of a financial shock. This week, Bethany and Luigi sit down with Jim Grant, a longtime market and banking industry analyst, writer, and publisher of Grant's Interest Rate Observer, a twice-monthly journal of financial markets published since 1983. Together, they try to answer if private credit is in the public interest.
"The only true aging is the erosion of one's ideals," says Ralph Nader, the former third-party presidential candidate who just turned 90 after more than 60 years of consumer advocacy and fighting for small business in America. From influencing the transformative passage of car safety legislation to advancing numerous environmental protection and public accountability causes, Nader has fought against the proliferation and insinuation of corporate power in our government.In between all of that, Nader has also found the time to develop a prolific writing career. In this week’s episode, Nader joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss his new book, "Rebellious CEO: 12 Leaders Who Got It Right." The three talk about the possibilities of ethically profitable business, Nader’s lifelong pursuit of justice, his views on the state of capitalism today, the political disillusionment of the public, and how we can reclaim democratic control of capitalism.
loading
Comments (12)

ncooty

@9:50: This story about the evolutionary basis for liking sugar seems specious and poorly substantiated. It's a hypothesis, and one that seems amenable to empirical tests, but there are simpler, more straightforward explanations.

Jun 10th
Reply

ncooty

It's very strange that Bethany pronounces "food" as "fud". To me, it sounds like either laziness or performative apathy... as if she can't be bothered to enunciate.

Jun 10th
Reply

ncooty

The interviewer's questions are frustratingly narrow, closed-ended, and self-involved. It's as if he's insecurely trying to perform or to frame the discussion on his terms so he can preen his ego. I wish he'd just ask questions that allow guests to make their cases. I truly don't care to listen to him administer oral exams to grade his guests on whether or not they share his brain.

Apr 5th
Reply

ncooty

@15:32: Said like a true economist--essentially: "This doesn't count as evidence unless it's in the vernacular of economics." You might like to see additional analyses--and I invite you to do them--but they aren't a necessary condition of relevance. Also, maybe you could polish your interviewing skills to sound a little less arrogant, dismissive, and narrow-minded? Currently, your interviewing tone often sounds as if you're smugly deriding guests for not being economists, which is a bit ironic on a podcast largely about the shortcomings of economists. Economists aren't half as well educated as they think they are, and the evidence suggests their analyses are quite errant. Numerical obsession is no substitute for actual numeracy. Even in the question cited at the time-stamp above, you seemed to overstate the interpretability of statistics despite poor methods, all so you can have your precious numbers, calculated out to 10 or 15 decimal places... while simultaneously implying the in

Apr 5th
Reply (1)

ncooty

In the future, if there's a mic problem, please fix it. E.g., just ask the guest if they can adjust the mic. You can edit out that little portion before broadcast. Even better, you could do a sound check before recording.

Apr 5th
Reply

ncooty

I would've needed to hear more details and specific facts to be convinced in either direction. In my opinion, this discussion comprised too many generalities, broad conclusions, loose assertions, and conjectures. Given your assertion that the facts of the matter are not sufficiently widely known, why not primarily discuss actual facts?

Apr 5th
Reply

Reza Gholi

the sound quality is terrible. although the quality of discussion is superb.

Oct 9th
Reply

David Chandler

You strawman and sht on MMT, then to be fair, bring on its "biggest critic" to further strawman and sht on MMT! This wasn't a fair analysis, it was a neoliberal hot takes garbage hour. No serious MMT advocate says that you can spend without ever worrying about inflation, but you state it as a given constantly here, and it goes unchallenged. Chicago School gonna Chicago School, I guess. Kate kept Luigi's dumbest instincts at bay, but Bethany doesn't seem to offer the same contrast. I've followed this podcast since the start, but more dishonest or nakedly uninformed takes will get you an unsubscribe.

Oct 8th
Reply (1)

Raphael Pantet

the bit about the flat tax is the type of cringe that only someone with awards could say in earnest

Apr 19th
Reply

Ben william

This episode was fantastic. A little more of the technical stuff sprinkled into all episodes would be great. keep up the good work!

Oct 28th
Reply