I have watched quite a lot of these discussions now, that make economics accessible without sacrificing sophistication. Thank you.

Hot take but one of the first remedies we need is jail time for mismanagement of whatever we would consider "too big to fail". Is it big enough to be bailed out by the government? A bailout immediately sends the board of directors and the c-suite to jail for minimum two years. Second, strategic management positions in any corporation considered to be "large" require a professional license. You lose that license permanently if you work (in strategic management, e.g. C-suite) for a corporation that needs to be bailed out by the government, or if you worked for it in recent times before it went belly up, and if anyone can make a case that your management was directly responsible for the crash regardless of how long ago. You lose that management license permanently so you can never manage anything considered by the government to be large ever again. Of course this is not the solution to anything, it is merely a quick band-aid until we decide upon the more systematic things we need to change.

And by the way the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission found that the 2008 crisis was avoidable and answers of who was at fault and to what extent. Part of it is that warning signs were disregarded; it is not as if they didn't know or were warned, etc.

Excellent video, I especially enjoyed the point brought up about how “personal freedom” is used as a straw man whenever the prospect of regulating risky or harmful behaviour in financial markets is discussed

I appreciate and enjoy this econ content immensely, & I do largely consume it as a podcast (i.e. listening, not necessarily watching) but I was surprised by the poor vid quality. Do you all have a podcast channel? If so I'd sub, these longer form conversations are excellent. cheers

Central Bank capture by the financial institutions has led to repeated failures to regulate.

Good to be informed

Also isn't there a concept of "publicness" somewhere in public management theories and that of "hybrid organizations" in innovation and technology transfer literature? I find those can be useful in more things than they are being applied to nowadays. If we don't just separate enterprises into government-owned or privately-owned with two very distinct worlds of regulation, purpose, transparency and metrics, but acknowledge that all organizations, even when fully privately owned, have some degree of publicness, and size alone already suggests a high degree of publicness (other factors too but I am too lazy to check if someone has already bothered to list) then I see this as a perfect basis to introduce democratic practices into their strategic management, including (but not only) voting for who your managers are with limited terms (in the corporations you work for), plus transparency in the finances of the company, at least some, but specially in money spent with lawyers, PR and political donations (for example like FOIA?). Idk I am too lazy to articulate it and I know that some financial and legal information is strategic and may be used by competitors, however it seems like a high degree of publicness implies that the interests of society surpass the private interests of directors and strategic managers at some point. Honestly I'd go as far as making all cash flow records public with some delay for corporations deemed to have high degrees of publicness, with listed origins and destinations, even if the delay is a decade or so. Idk if that makes sense or if I am too high rn, but consider that the idea of "hybrid organizations" is mostly being upheld to demand private-like business behavior from public and academic institutions, and to justify the intrusion of profit seeking and market logic into the academic and public sectors, but never to demand private businesses to fit into public sector expectations when it makes sense, seems like it is about time.

32:24 Modern Monetary Theory suggest US sovereign debt could be retired with a $30T coin and likely have a deflationary effect due to eliminating the interest income to investors who are very unlikely to consume with the repayment proceeds. Thoughts?

Debt a modern kind of slavery and class oppression

The people provide 10% of the Bank funds to the Bank lends 90% and the problem is no longer just the Banks, but the over the counter derivatives that are many times over and almost totally unregulated.

Crises outweigh benefits, and it is the wrong incentives. You don't need research to figure these out :-) Policy makers do not lack 'superior' knowledge, but willingness to regulate.

*6:30** answer: Gamers figure out how to GAME this financial system, then a collapse, then rules to stabilize, rinse and repeat with a new game.*

Beating a dead horse.

Sorry to ramble😂

Govt must be capitalistic to earn more revenue.

Trump2024

thank you for this interview. perhaps the gentleman can mute himself while he sniffles and blows his nose

The crypto was different. If it doesn't spread to the real economy perhaps what is being said in this presentation is just false. law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/area/center/isp/documents/weaver_death_of_cryptocurrency_final.pdf