Economist and author Mariana Mazzucato talks about her book The Value of Everything with EconTalk host Russ Roberts. Mazzucato argues that economists have mismeasured value and have failed to appreciate the role of government as innovator. She argues for a more active role for government in the innovation process and for government to share in revenue proportional to its role in the creation of new technology.
United States


00:00:04welcome to Aecon talk part of a library of economics and liberty I'm your host Russ Roberts at Stanford university's Hoover Institution our website is econ talk dot org for you can subscribe to comment on this podcast and find links and other information related to today's conversation also find
00:00:21our archives we listen to every episode we've ever done going back to two thousand and six or email addresses male econ talk dot org we'd love to hear from today's December sixth twenty eighteen and my guest is a communist an author Marianna masa Cotto she holds the chair
00:00:39in the economics of innovation and public value at University College London and its founder and director of the University College London institute for innovation and public purpose her latest book is the value of everything making and taking in the global economy which is the subject of today's conversation
00:00:57round a welcome to Aecon talk thank you so much very happy to be here under on your book is the idea that the economics profession has misunderstood the nature of what is valuable and how to think about it and that in turn is hampered good public policy summarize
00:01:13your argument so one of the key points in the book is actually that we stop debating value so ironically the concept has left economics departments and gone to business schools where the word is all over the place in terms of shareholder value value chains are shared value we're
00:01:32trying to a to talk about it but economists use to basically for four hundred years actually debate what are the productive parts of the economy and what are the props unproductive parts that if they grow too large will siphon out resources so the physiocrats back in the seventeen
00:01:47hundreds were very concerned about how the landlords of the time seem to be siphoning out too much value compared to the value that was actually being created by the value creators in their minds who were the farm labor is similarly the classical economist people like Adam Smith David
00:02:03%HESITATION Carter and Karl Marx they focused on the value creation that occurred basically by industrial labor and inside factories and so someone like Adam Smith was very interested in the division of labor within these factories how thinking about that division would increase productivity growth and hence the wealth
00:02:22of nations and Karl Marx complimented that also with his big focus on the role of technological change and the fact that would actually have on the amount of labor required which he thought was one of the key sources of surplus value and profits in the system through the
00:02:38exploitation of labor so he questioned whether capitalism itself would be able to reproduce itself given what was happening on the labor side but doesn't say the big revolution that happened which type ten point in the book was that this concern with the objective conditions of production in other
00:02:53words what was actually happening in the agricultural land what was happening in the factories with the machinery with the division of labor technological change that then changed with modern neo classical thinking and the attention went to a subject of understanding of value where value is actually basically in
00:03:11the eye of the beholder so supply and demand curves press friend says all this focus on the individual firm the individual consumer individual worker so even wages are looked at in terms of preferences that workers have for leisure versus work what I do in the book as I
00:03:27don't say a look at today's value theory it's totally wrong what I actually argues that the debate around value has disappeared value itself is no longer contested what we end up having a having is kind of a a fuzzy %HESITATION flimsy notion of value which makes it much
00:03:47easier for value extraction activities to actually pass for value creation once that's what's new it's not the value extraction itself is new that was already at the physiocrats highlighted happening in the seventeen hundreds but the landlords of the time didn't pretend to be value creators they didn't pretend
00:04:06to be innovators or fundamentally creative parts of society they just said give me your money that's why by the way Adam Smith called rent robbery and landlords thieves they were seen as basically earning income by doing nothing so rent itself as a category rent as a cat it
00:04:23as an economic category was seen as unearned income west today that concept the scene just as an imperfection towards a competitive price but so this big revolution of making value go from an objective to a subjective category but in the process economics students no longer being taught that
00:04:42there is actually different notions of value and that this fundamental effects how we measure GDP for example or how we think about governance particular types of organizations and business or elsewhere then you know it makes it very difficult to steer economies and ways that actually produces %HESITATION in
00:05:02an innovation that grow sustainable growth inclusive growth which everyone seems to want to where we agree on here is I think well let me let me restate the part of your anatomy try to restate your argument different a slightly different way I think a lot of capitalists which
00:05:22%HESITATION free market people like myself would argue that profits earned yet to get a profit you have to make something of value that people like if they're willing to pay for it obviously there they like it that's the subject of part and I think we agree on that
00:05:35where we also agree is that there are some profits that don't appear to be producing %HESITATION real value and that would say the financial sector where their profitability in an incredible gross in their proper belly does not seem to be related with producing value and I am I
00:05:57have smart friends who will when I point out that that this is a problem smart friends who I happen to agree with me ideologically they say but don't we need a big financial sector two to enhance gross and and to spend to fund good activities etcetera am I
00:06:13answer that is now and I suspect that your answer also we'll see so it depends it's quite curious because Adam Smith %HESITATION you know again who's one of the three main classically economists first of all he would differ from you and how you talk about the free market
00:06:29for Adam Smith it wasn't free from the state it was free from rent free from rent seeking and in order to limit to rent seeking an economy which he understood to be on earned income so people kind of just moving things around and yet getting a %HESITATION funds
00:06:46for that %HESITATION that you actually need it also more smart state but the other thing is that unlike I don't disregard any I don't disagree with any of that yeah yeah that's what I yeah I guess I would mean more how the common %HESITATION economist offers are also
00:07:02sometimes uses the word free market I don't think most people realize that Adam Smith met free from rent not free from the state but sort of at another point in terms of Smith and and how he comes into this discussion as he actually made a list is quite
00:07:16funny list actually of those activities he thought were productive in those he thought were unproductive unproductive list is quite funny because he seemed to not like the opera Mary much so he would operate dancers opera singers and offers musicians which didn't mean that he thought they weren't actually
00:07:30important he decide they weren't actually creating value what what I think mark stood with Adam Smith didn't do is he didn't make the static list like you this is where production happens this is our values created this is where it's sort of doesn't happen he actually looked at
00:07:44what was happening so if you were driving a truck %HESITATION with certain types of merchandise in a particular direction you might actually be creating value if you are just kind of driving around like Jerry so you were at %HESITATION in other words the financial sector itself it's not
00:07:59about finance being good or bad or being value creating value extracting as well what is finance actually doing and so and don't forget that Marx's object it was actually quite different he was very interested in how we get surplus value exploitation occurs in the economy but still he
00:08:15had a more dynamic understanding of this kind of these categories and I think the question of finance today it's the real question is how can we reform finance for example for it to have a more direct relationship with productive capacity in the real economy for example in in
00:08:32in in industry and how would we have to then change the ways that it is relating to the real economy but also literally maybe think up new types of financial institutions %HESITATION an example would be you know innovation which is very key to economic growth doesn't require any
00:08:48type of finance it requires patient long term strategic finance of the kind that some public banks are providing around the world you know while I number one telecoms company in the world today would not have existed without the patient finance it received from the China Development Bank similarly
00:09:04that the internet would have never happened without the patient finance received from a dark but type institution in the US and so this kind of need for more patient strategic long term committed finance would be one way to turn finance to be more valuable in terms of actually
00:09:20being a better able to drive the long term capacity building in the economy verses just kind of saying finance has been to extracted and we need more kind of industrial capacity because industry itself has become overly find out July's many companies you know Fizer and Cisco spend huge
00:09:37amounts of their income just some buying back their shares to boost stock prices stock options and executive pay yeah that doesn't bother me %HESITATION and we might talk about that I think that's a bit of a red herring but I I wanna make out a a quibble about
00:09:53Adam Smith and then I want to move on to more substantive stuff I don't I'm pretty confident Adam Smith never use the phrase free market %HESITATION so when we talk about whether that means free from the state or free from ran the part I agree with this surely
00:10:09Adam Smith was a big fan of competition and knew that without it %HESITATION business would often pre cartels the end and try to raise prices and exploit consumers that's clearly %HESITATION is very aware of the profit motive up but he also was very wary of overman involvement covering
00:10:28the economy side you know I think he was both a fan a competition and a fan of limited intervention is not an anarchist either might most people I know called themselves free market they don't literally no government but I think the interesting places where you and I disagree
00:10:42we're gonna get to the sooner our over over that up what's the appropriate role for government thinking about financing my just like in the financial sector are concerned about the financial sector is its ability to use other people's money to invest and to create financial vehicles and and
00:11:03that to me is overwhelmingly driven by the opportunity to use government money are from from bailouts into perspective aspect of bailouts do you do you worry about that not in it seems to me in your book at least in one place you you're a fan of the bailouts
00:11:19do you think those were a mistake %HESITATION and do they worry or do they were you currently there mmhm lost you I'm gonna call you back if you can hear me if you can hear me to call you back we what Hey I don't know what happened there
00:11:48last year %HESITATION that's weird can you hear me now I can did you hear me asked that question I heard you I I I heard you all find so I can't yeah every %HESITATION take a breath and go ahead so I'm not either a fan or on on
00:12:03the fan of the bailouts I'm you know in terms of the balance what was interesting for me is that you know many people don't realize that governments saved the capitalist system from falling apart through the ballot now where I'm definitely not a fan is out you know it
00:12:18usually does bailout system if you build it out which they did and that again say the capitalist system from basically %HESITATION exploding in terms of you know finance global finance with saved %HESITATION there should have been very strong conditions attached to then what had to happen even just
00:12:37purely financial conditions to be honest I mean you know the the level of risk also that governments took in the bailout process should have been rewarded so if the taxpayer is saving Goldman Sachs what did the taxpayer get back %HESITATION from Goldman Sachs in terms of that kind
00:12:53of risk reward relationship and I find to be honest this is a general problem you know when government gave a guaranteed loan to Solyndra for five hundred million it gave almost the same amount to Tesla cylinder went bust taxpayer bailed out cylinder I got pretty %HESITATION peeved off
00:13:12in the process but why did they not get a direct return from the Tesla investment because of course what we now in any venture capitalist would admit the stuff for every success that you have when you're investing in innovative areas you're gonna have to accept quite a high
00:13:27failure rate and what was Rick very interesting also because this all happened right after the financial crisis by the way these investments that then were made in different types of green %HESITATION greentech areas what Obama said to Tesla is the opposite of what he should have said he
00:13:43said if you don't pay back the loan we get three million shares in your company %HESITATION and the price per share with us the received the the the loan in two thousand nine was nine dollars a share when I paid it back because it was successful two thousand
00:13:56thirteen it was ninety per share I imagine that difference multiplied by three million that would have more than paid back the cylinder loss and the next round of investment that same mentality could have been also %HESITATION you know played out with Goldman Sachs not just getting back the
00:14:10money by getting up with a high level of interest given the rest that the taxpayer was %HESITATION was %HESITATION you know taking on and so this is the problem and I think this probably gets to the heart of where you and I disagree I don't see the role
00:14:24of government as just kind of enabling and facilitating investing in infrastructure your rose police force private property historically and capitalism which is a system that has been fundamentally driven by innovation the government when organize big when I'm Italian say no and this goes wrong big land when organized
00:14:44properly through these DARPA type institutions but also you know around the world we see these popping up in different forms has actually been an investor a first resort not just a lender of last resort has allowed to search in high risk high capital intensive areas to be finance
00:15:01before the business sector is willing to put their money in in fact the history bachelor couple is very clear they've only come in after the government paid the waves but you know for example in biotech twenty to thirty years of national institutes of health spending before the venture
00:15:17capitalists came in so in terms of the bail outs where I see it they went wrong was not so much the ballot itself but the complete lack of conditions attached to make sure that the public sector and the taxpayers in the process got back a reward for this
00:15:32big risk that they took and bailing out banks that could have just then ended up going under so we disagree on that in that I don't think they say capitalism I think that already hampered it and done some bad things in the past with previous bailouts before two
00:15:45thousand eight that help set the stage for but that's a different talk at a different conversation I wanna I wanna move away from that because I think what you said about the proper role for government and governments potential to be reimbursed or to share in the gains is
00:15:58the really interesting question it's the I think the most innovative part of your work and %HESITATION so I'm at I'm gonna step back so you argue that there's been a lot of %HESITATION innovation last decades that was government funded government started and that such a capitalist reap the
00:16:16benefits %HESITATION and and taxpayers got little or nothing from other than indirect %HESITATION taxing %HESITATION profitability the corporations that dent and investors ASAP enjoyed that but I'm gonna go back really that this is certainly the transformation of the stand living in the modern world of the last three
00:16:34hundred years government did not play a crucial innovative Roland that or did it in other words in my view which you said character is quite accurately I want government set the rules %HESITATION allow for courts property rights police defense infrastructure that's poorly provided by the private sector like
00:16:53sewage and perhaps up but that it was governments Roland told up maybe seventy or eighty years ago and the lack the first two hundred years of the industrial pollution did transforms sterile living through innovation technology without government taking an active role or do you disagree with a so
00:17:13I think there's two different issues one is that the government has historically definitely played a basic role so finding the roads including the railroads and I'm you know schools and kind of what we call an economic speaker innovation speak these horizontal conditions that without which you know it
00:17:33be very hard to have successful commerce and competition between companies that wanted to invest and innovate because you would basically have the ground work there and those aren't areas infrastructure is not an area where where the private sector's been willing to invest in us where I differ is
00:17:47that you know basically how we talk about this in economics is that this is a fixing market failures of fixing those areas where the private sector is not investing whether they're it's due to a positive externalities so areas where the spillovers from that investment is so large is
00:18:01hard to appropriate the profits from that so the private sector doesn't best so public sector has to come in that's by the way why sound American but I'm Italian so my dad does basic research a nuclear fusion physics so we left it to the to go to the
00:18:14US because the US department of energy has been a big investor in these kinds of that basic research energy areas of the private sector wasn't willing to invest in their little controversy there or negative externalities pollution you know it's the opposite problem where companies aren't including in their
00:18:30cost structure is the kind of negative things they're doing like polluting so the government might have to come in with something like a carbon tax so this notion of what the government's for it's not that it's wrong it's just very limited it's just fixing a problem and those
00:18:43problems deftly exists there is a big market failures what my approach has been a sister with step back a minute that explain some things but it doesn't help explain innovation kind of heat big important general purpose technologies so you know revolutionary changes that have occurred read the internet
00:19:03aviation around renewable energy will not attack biotech which actually required government to play a much larger role which I called market shaping and market co creating not just market fixing and this is not I repeat not about the state versus the private sector by sector of course is
00:19:20important and all those different areas they just mention private businesses were you know part of the evaluation process but the role of the public sector wasn't just you know creating the background infrastructure skills and I'm dedication are some rules of the game that level the playing field it
00:19:36was also acting as an investor first resort everything in your smartphone if you have a smart phone which I assume you do because we're escaping and you must have some smart products in front of you everything that makes those products Martenot stupid were government financed forget whether it
00:19:51was a civil servants are public servant you know who actually thought about it but the money the high risk funds did not come from venture capital came from government will settlement but the internet south into it but not all of it let me just list them it in
00:20:05your are smartphone I seem to have as much you don't have one of those little curly wired on right so internet GPS touchscreen display sciri they were all government finance other things of course were financed by business but I'm not debating that we know that we have those
00:20:21things in the world those things were quote financed by government touchscreen GPS Syrian cetera they were partly funded by government things innovations that made them possible in their final form were funded by government but of course there were other innovations that made them useful and practical going on
00:20:42that but see we're on what I'm not doing is saying the private sector is not important what what you are potentially doing and you know maybe your not but some other people are many people are is denying the role that government played in doing more than just the
00:20:57infrastructure government around even you know battery storage today which would be the equivalent of a huge innovation it's it's actually downstream is not just basic research the biggest innovation came out of RP which is the sister organization of DARPA which was in the department of defense which basically
00:21:12came up with the internet now the point is not %HESITATION there is also some private sector activity we know that the real question is how could it be that a whole book on Steve Jobs that great book by Isaacson which also turned into a movie that not one
00:21:25cage not one paragraph not one sentence that not one little word this is my point not one word on any of the public investments that made apple's success possible which is not to say the people working in apple are not incredibly smart geniuses an apple as a company
00:21:44is not fantastic I think that that's true but you know for example the great design and yet the fact this tee tops of the took this calligraphy classes that's all really well documented there and not itself is incredibly important I would never dismiss that but why do we
00:21:59dismiss the role of government and also the self fulfilling prophecy by the way is when you do dismiss one dismisses all of government we also don't ask the difficult questions well what does this mean how should we actually set up different types of public organizations so they welcome
00:22:16risk taking welcome exploration experimentation can be innovative as innovative as dark but was but in the areas like health their energy or whatever these key questions that business schools ask of private business because they know correctly so that business is innovative and value creating they take classes like
00:22:34strategic management organizational behavior decision sciences there's none of that trading for public servants so we end up getting the kind of inertial slow bureaucratic public servants and the we call them bureaucratic slow an inertial well that's how we made them because we didn't admit actually the success stories
00:22:50when government was organized differently so I would never deny any of that I think that's all true I think the real question which is the big question you you pose and I think it's a great question is %HESITATION what we make of this what are the implications of
00:23:04this reality so we do romanticize often and I'm guilty of this the private sector's innovative use of of these underlying technologies and I may be down sufficiently remember or champion the role that government innovation played allowing them to flourish but I think there's a flip side as we
00:23:26don't over romanticize what government achieved in particular in particular almost all these innovations came out of the defense department the military the space program things that were the United States are really good at I mean I might you know might I'm gonna give you a different perspective on
00:23:42government from the standard one or yours which is your government's really good at two things killing people and taking money from one group and giving it to to another and the killing part is United States has got a really good military that's one of its most successful things
00:23:59that's led to a bunch of good things at times and some really horrible things and other times it's not the scope of this conversation but a sidelight of that the a ridiculous amount of money that we've devoted to the military that state is it yeah we've come up
00:24:14with a bunch of technologies that were used in ways that were never intended never planned by the government as some private innovations are also bug come out that way so the question then is would what we make of that obviously yet you're not to suggest we should increase
00:24:30the size the military budget United States because as all these positive spillovers I assume what what what do we do with the fact that yes some government innovation particularly from the military has been useful to a private sector actors right well so one of the points of my
00:24:48book is really is say to the other but the under federal state but was too first document also linked to yes I %HESITATION which was basically to document exactly what you just said which is the role that the military through by the way a different types of organizations
00:25:05that wasn't just kind of top down need a department of the military was through that kind of more nimble DARPA type institutions had on innovation but then the next question was sell what are the lessons being learned or not being learned unfortunately lots of lessons are not learned
00:25:18about how we might device similar types of organizations in other areas which actually are urgent and they also have security implications now should first start by saying they have been learned in some areas so in health you know the national institutes of health in the U. S. publicly
00:25:35funded body spent over thirty billion dollars a year on financing from the most high risk high capital intensive parts of the innovation cycle in both biotech and pharmaceuticals and in fact the health department basically second to the department of defense department of energy as well as I mentioned
00:25:53before fusion but not just fusion lots of applied areas for example through RP that I mentioned which is a sister organization of DARPA so in some ways one could say we have you know it it used to be just the military industrial complex and fact all those different
00:26:07organisms technologies I mention internet GPS you know those are kind of the navy basically discovered GPS GPS %HESITATION you know those lessons have been is somewhat carried over to these other areas but the point that I've actually been working on a lot with global governments and ironically trump
00:26:28is on learning the Silicon Valley story at the same time that China is learning it that's to be a big worry for Americans interested in competitiveness %HESITATION what's interesting is how do we then take really important challenges that we have whether it's around climate change the future of
00:26:45health systems growing inequality in some countries so just take what we call the sustainable development goals the seventeen goals that over a hundred countries have signed up to how do you turn them into not just these kind of blah blah challenges but really concrete moon shots that could
00:27:02actually also have some sort of innovation road mapping both through international organizations together because many of these challenges our global but also within countries even at the city level you know or the state level if if you see what %HESITATION California is at least that talking about doing
00:27:17around climate change what would it look like question mark to have kind of a mission oriented approach towards the way the public and private sector actors coal invest across the whole innovation chain to taco particular challenges and by the way I just wrote a report it's it's probably
00:27:35the thing I'm most proud of which came out last February February two thousand eighteen for the European Commission medallion and live in the UK but grew up in the US of a bit of a chameleon here but I'm ready for the commission to say Hey guys you spend
00:27:48all this money on innovation but look at what happened in the U. S. when they did the moon shot to go to the moon and back again in one generation required not only in a really ambitious agencies like NASA coming up with that ambition inspirational bold and high
00:28:02risk but also required lots of different sectors in the industrial base to work on that problem so it wasn't just aeronautics it was also clothing you couldn't go to the moon in jeans and a tee shirt nutrition you can and does it a hamburger or hot dog out
00:28:16there right so lots of different sectors had to innovate and invest to get there that should you know be important today when we see the record level hoarding that we have that both Europe and %HESITATION do you ask but also lots of different projects and kind of homework
00:28:30problems had to be resolved hundreds which many felt in the once a succeeded are precisely those that are smart products today so thought about public or private but how do you also said a really strategic direction for this public investment since of the NIH does plowing and thirty
00:28:47two billion a year and kind of just assuming that somehow this is gonna end up resulting great health problems and then allowing me this is what's crazy allowing the pharmaceutical industry to set whatever price they want to do this dysfunctional notion of value that they call value based
00:29:03pricing why not learn from that mission oriented approach to the moon and kind of implement that for how we think of the big challenges around health and energy so I think this is quite interesting case %HESITATION there was a very specific goal get to the modem back we
00:29:21mobilize through the public sector and the private sector as you point out old enormous amount of resources %HESITATION I happen to be a very romantic lover of of space travel so I'm really glad we went personally but I'm not sure was worth it %HESITATION and I think that
00:29:37right challenge you know it's hard to pick the goal should to go beyond allies everything to cure cancer if so which kind should the Gobi to cure %HESITATION various other health challenges should we try to get better water to Africa cleaner water in Africa that mean there's so
00:29:52many human challenges and is should we will will will the government do a good job right I think N. I. H. is a great example I'm a big fan of an I. H. I think there's a very powerful case for a private she's doing for government funding of
00:30:08basic research but there's also a good case for private funding to foundations and they're doing their courses is well there's fads in medicine that man H. response to their fads in political all set influence what political forces that employs one eight but an H. spends its money on
00:30:24the channel not sure a good thing but I think the deeper point I'm gonna come back to a point about Salander intestate which I think some more interesting point of of a practical public policy you make the point which I think is undeniable that government spending are often
00:30:42leads to benefits that or go on captured say by taxpayers and then get captured by say venture capitalists or %HESITATION the pharmaceutical industry in the case of an I. H. I want to hear the case for why I should care about that what should it's undeniably true it
00:30:58just doesn't seem to me to be necessarily that to me does not that it's undeniably true that government spending has side benefits for private actors and for taxpayers and and and that there's value created by some government activity maybe a lot why does that imply the government it
00:31:15should be a profit center and retriever of revenue us when those go well okay so I think first saw you framed it really well it's a really important question and all sort of on take different dimensions of it first of all the public did care the US population
00:31:33apparently cared a lot when cylinder went bust there was a whole discussion almost every paper I I saw at least address that which was what is government to government should not be picking winners it should just be doing those background kind of that investment that we were talking
00:31:50about the beginning kind of set the rules of the game protect private property invest and roads and infrastructure in and get out of the way so the first point is to say actually government has historically done much more than that and sometimes it succeeded and sometimes it has
00:32:04failed the cylinder loss which everyone seems to know about was a failure why did they not know about the test the success most people would not know that Tesla's initial investment came from Uncle Sam nor would they know that you won musk the person behind Tesla and forget
00:32:23his more recent reputation after he started tweeting Twitter seems to be the downfall of many people maybe I should stop treating I'm a you know do you one must himself has received five billion dollars of different forms for his three companies SpaceX SolarCity and Tesla so the first
00:32:42point is just the marketing government has actually been quite stupid it hasn't marketed you know the successes is just allow people to know about the failures because it's very easy to criticize things when they go wrong on the second point is it's not true that government just funds
00:32:57basic are indeed because I would agree with you to be honest when government is funding basic our indie forget it don't worry about getting a monetary return you do it precisely because of the public good those spillovers do spell over in terms of the great knowledge that is
00:33:11you know created that the private sector was not willing to fund for the reasons I laid out before and that itself is a return to the country you've created this great band called the knowledge base but the truth is government has gone way beyond that in recent years
00:33:25precisely because finance has become an increasingly short term as much of the long term patient finance downstream and by downstream I mean to the actual companies like the Tesla investment which is a four hundred and sixty five million guaranteed loan to one company that's very different from you
00:33:43know finding a nuclear fusion that I was mentioning before my father moved from Italy to the US for that I think is naive it's simply naive for government not to at least ask what should the return be be on some sort of you know base explorist because there
00:34:00isn't a base explorist that's for the test the car which by the way is quite expensive so it's not as if it reaches every American for those kinds of downstream investments unlike the basic are indeed there's all sorts of different ways that government could get a return one
00:34:14could be equity I'm not necessarily a big fan of that it was just interesting that the government did think about it but in the opposite way should've it's that if you don't pay back the loan we get three million shares I'm saying it's just the opposite but there's
00:34:26other ways that you could think about the return I just read a report called the people's prescription rethinking health innovation for public value for the pharmaceutical industry and they're the public returned could also be conditions on reinvestment you know lots of these big pharmaceutical companies but also the
00:34:42big energy companies don't re invest their profits they increasingly hoard them or use them for share buybacks which would be fine if these were optimistic you know companies just getting their profits out of the blue but if it also is due to public investment there could be that
00:34:56condition which by the way is the condition that got us Bell Labs eighteen TI was forced to read to reinvest its profits in order to retain its monopoly status that's where bell labs came from it could be conditions on the I PR so the patent system today we
00:35:11are we have a dysfunctional patent system I've nothing against patents but we have a loud pop is to be a so intellectual property rights to go increasingly upstream so that the tools for research are being patented that's a bad deal for the state which is given a twenty
00:35:26year monopoly on %HESITATION to accompany what ideally what happened after this twenty years is that knowledge then gets they fused more than it used to be in the Middle Ages when there was just secrecy nothing was written down the patents actually you know co defy this knowledge but
00:35:41if we patented the science than if it becomes very hard for that to happen or it could also be conditions on pricing and that's the obvious thing that we should have done with the medicines which receive something like two thirds of the research funding from the state why
00:35:54don't the medicine prices were blacked out so those are just examples you know equity reinvestment I. P. R. prices could be the way the government gets less naive for its public investment so we don't just socialize risks but also socialize rewards not in a communist way but to
00:36:12make capitalism more functional so groups on the patents are we've been dysfunctional system I recommend listeners go to the robin Feldman episode will put a link up to that we talked about some of the ways that the system is currently being abused %HESITATION by the pharmaceutical industry %HESITATION
00:36:29so I agree with you on that I I want to talk to someone talk about this general issue of patience and short termism governments pretty short term to most politicians are very short time horizon I don't see any reason to think they're going to be more long term
00:36:44on then than private sector investors in fact we see right now seen it many times private sector our our antiques Norma's amounts of money going into areas that are very iffy and the take a very large amount of patience the genetic mapping of the genome of course much
00:37:03of it came from the public sector but a lot of it's come from the private sector people are waiting for that return in biotech it's not really come a wanted to continue to invest in it and I'm optimistic it'll happen but course along the way a lot of
00:37:15people lost a lot of money because it took too long for their right there %HESITATION Risan similarly the driverless car extraordinary amounts of money being put into it by enormous companies spending huge amounts of money for a long long period of time so I I don't see patients
00:37:32%HESITATION as the as the biggest problem with why we don't have more innovation night I'm I see the fundamental problem being that it's just really hard to do and I don't see why I agree with you the government has spent some time and money doing things beyond the
00:37:51rules it's occasionally successful to be crude about it I would say a pig every once in awhile finds a truffle so that the military sector for example does come up with lots of things that it didn't intend that they have nice human impact beyond job war but what's
00:38:09the evidence that governments can do this well what would we encourage government took step outside its rule making rule keeping yeah area and and and do things like Teslin cylinder it's less hassle I I'm against it I wish they hadn't given that loan guarantees might happen by the
00:38:25private sector anyway it made but it did turn out pretty well so far %HESITATION we'll see we'll debate about whether test was really a viable concern the absence of government help of other kinds but just so the government does lots of things really badly in the United States
00:38:41at school system one of its fundamental roles which should be spokesman a lot more time in and potentially money if they could spend it well doesn't do well so I think that's the fundamental reason that fundamental reason that so many Americans are skeptical about a more active role
00:38:57for government innovation forget the department motor vehicles which is a standard or the post office just things that you know people SMOM government people like to pick on the on the big stuff education within government should be doing and should be doing well doesn't do well why would
00:39:13I why should we have a more active role why should government compete with private sector investors for innovation why should it be involved let's let's let the private sector which is very imperfect at it it's hard to do we have a lot of money at stake and they
00:39:29still make lots of mistakes why would we think government officials would do better okay so for so I went to a state school in New Jersey imprints in high school and it was a great state school there's other state schools that are terrible there's some private companies that
00:39:45work really well they're efficient produce great products and services that the world wants to buy other ones that don't so my point is there's nothing as I mentioned before the DNA of the public sector or the private sector that will necessarily make it a good innovator because we
00:40:02have admitted that the private sector is essential as it is to innovation we ask really difficult questions to it and that's why the top you know CEOs also go to some great schools the study those issues that one of my colleagues wrote a book called rejuvenating them a
00:40:17chore corporation why because when corporations get big and heavy and bureaucratic they can get really and nurse all in slow and dinosaur ash so they have to rethink themselves when the government becomes big and bureaucratic we just say oh that's government government's bureaucratic right so the first thing
00:40:34is to recognize that value is in fact potentially created collectively by different types of actors including by the way this isn't just about public and private the third sector has become so the voluntary kind of philanthropic sector is becoming increasingly important in some areas like say the gates
00:40:50foundation around health but also we should never forget trade unions we would not have weekends we would not have the eight hour work day we would not have you know children not working in the factories without trade unions fighting for that which is a fundamental force in capitalism
00:41:06to make it work as it currently does it was a part of this market co creation process that I mentioned the beginning so if we then hone in on the public sector we should ask difficult questions to it how should you organize yourself because you're not organized properly
00:41:21you won't be able to organize your activities whether it's education health or energy or particular investments in those areas well so the real question should be what has happened in recent years to the way the USS thought about education including by the way the outsourcing of the capacity
00:41:38of the government to even be innovative I mean I've seen this from NASA to other organizations around the world that increasingly disinvest it in their own ability to think big and have internal capabilities which we all know is important in the private sector but the other really important
00:41:54issue raises the short termism because the the business sector short term S. due to certain factors for example the pressure from shareholders but the governments are often short term as for the reasons of elections you know if an election happens every four years or five years or whatever
00:42:11that might make the politician at bass just have a little pet project just so they have their name on it or you know at worse just not want to make an important investment and just kind of hand out some money to potential voters and that's all sorts of
00:42:25you know sort of issues around corruption and capture can occur there and that's true so my question is and this is why I've set up this institute for innovation a public purpose at University College London is to actually pose those questions so for example well how was DARPA's
00:42:39set up or because everyone knows about DARPA let me mention a different organization how was the Italian ET cetera was I out are high it was called the east okay what was a collection I think was the easy to join it at any cost to to any thank
00:42:55you Anna so this is basically the public entity that was set up %HESITATION god under Mussolini sorry I I hate to talk about its original foundations but it became one of the most innovative %HESITATION organizations in Italy when it was transitioning from an agricultural economy to an industrial
00:43:12economy and it had three phases public and not politicized public and super politicized each party put its hands then and then privatized in the second and third stages were equally bad in terms of its ability to actually be ambitious and innovative the first phase it actually constructed with
00:43:31call the autostrada there so at the motor where that goes from the top of the blue to the bottom of the bid %HESITATION towards Sicily in a four year as it was the %HESITATION huge amount of kilometers whereas recently I could barely do the Tarentum alon so how
00:43:46it was actually constructed in that early phase which was %HESITATION independent from all the different political parties getting their hands and actually made it one of the coolest places to work the top Italian managers found it to be an honor to work inside ET in more recent %HESITATION
00:44:02history I found that is very interesting when Obama was doing his fiscal fiscal stimulus package which in Europe we kind of forgot to do because we just obsessed about austerity yet about eight hundred billion that he wanted to pour into the system and initially he I think had
00:44:17some really interesting ambitions around he really wanted to green the economy and so he this is the the pier at precisely the pier that are but he ended up getting set up in two thousand nine one year after the crisis and because he had an ambition to direct
00:44:31the fiscal stimulus and he really started talking about the green that kind of manufacturing you know how to use green as a direction for the whole economy it was an honor for noble prize winning physicist called Steve to Chinese American to direct that agency the department of energy
00:44:48for certain peered was directed by a noble prize winning physicist who then set up RP but he would have never even wanted to do it forget what actually happened what didn't just talk about talent you know how to attract talent no noble prize winning physicist would have wanted
00:45:02to work for an agency whose re met was %HESITATION go help Ilan mosque you know go D. rescue on Moscow fix a market failure it really had emission as as ambitious as the D. O. D. has had to win the war or you know go up to space
00:45:17and that becomes one of the ways that you also track talent than how you use your tools for example procurement policy price schemes grants to really crowded and that bottom up experimentation because we know top down doesn't work that's why the Soviet system failed but how do you
00:45:33%HESITATION use government instruments let's just take procurement policy which is government's purchasing power to gonna be very clear on what government wants for example we want we want us soldiers not to die when they're in the inside their tanks well driverless cars are not about solution to that
00:45:53and that's basically where the initial investments a driverless cars came from fracking by the way also came mainly from the DOE which doesn't mean that the private sector later wasn't important of course that was the way you often see from these mission oriented public agencies as a blade
00:46:08the way they took on the national risk they also had a bold kind of inspiration to solve a public you need which could be either fighting the war or curing a disease or getting a renewable source of energy which then if done in ambitious ways lays the groundwork
00:46:25for than the private sector to increase their expectations of where these future growth possibilities lie the irony is that when government doesn't have that ambition it ends up actually doing what we end up blaming government for either being too boring and slow or even worse crowding out this
00:46:42this where that economists like crowding out the private sector because they end up doing with the private sector should do but doesn't do well I think the crowning as important to think about %HESITATION how important is always empirical question but you know what challenges we haven't talked about
00:46:55is that I meant to mention this when we talked about the space shipments of NASA in the getting to the man we don't know what the opportunity cost is so that we don't know what was for gone we don't know what investments or activities didn't take place we
00:47:08look at the success and we expected a happy about and that's true in the same be true Bell Labs other things that that lead to good outcomes are ones that we point to that we happen to like I want to go back to one thing you said they're
00:47:21still think it's it's important I don't think trade unions have much to do with the fact that children no work in the in the in the minds or anywhere else anymore or that there's a weekend or that there's %HESITATION shorter work week we have a shorter work week
00:47:34for the last week amount of time people work's been falling steadily because we want to work less were richer to market force in it trade use occasionally have have bought ask for but if it wasn't happening through market forces it wasn't what people wanted it would've been very
00:47:51hard to get %HESITATION and often they do their creasing less support now for that reason I say that it's a starkly just wrong I mean trade unionists and workers I mean just talk about workers trade unions are simply their organization that kind of bargains for them but workers
00:48:05fought for many and died for many of these advantages that you just mentioned that they would have happened anyway I don't think there's I don't think there is the world that I days a week that I mean I could say the private sector would have invented the internet
00:48:20I mean but you have no way to actually prove that so little is talking away on it make I think it's an anger on their side of it is just an empty claim the act that the work week is getting shorter now without that yeah yeah that yeah
00:48:35but but the eight hour work day is something that was specifically fought for by trade unions %HESITATION you know the fact the construction workers have construction happens when they get that job was fought for by trade unionists otherwise things were falling on their heads and people actually had
00:48:50to pay for their own construction house there's many different examples I could give you like that that was fought for that doesn't mean that we glorify trade unions I personally think that they should be much more offense of unless defensive with that technology they should if we had
00:49:04a stakeholder governance type of corporate governance trade unions to be at the table you know saying whatever I mean whether it's good or bad what they're saying is that even the point but they would be debating along side the shareholders alongside the managers alongside some businesses sorry government
00:49:18officials that would be at the table given the subsidies that these businesses are receiving what form up you know sort of new digital landscape are we you know co creating together and and and why we should really kind of think through how to %HESITATION allow or how how
00:49:34to construct the type of you know kind of big data I a I kind of that %HESITATION a market that is currently developing instead of %HESITATION was ex post worry about the fact that might be having a laborer taxation but your your other question I think is a
00:49:48really important one which is you know was the moon shot even something to do would have happened anyway so one of the issues is is if you take a systems perspective which which I do take because I really believe in innovation systems and and what I mean by
00:50:02that is you know the Soviet Union was spending a huge amount on innovation one of the biggest funders of it in the world but where science I S. as a science and all knowledge base but it did it turn into innovation in terms of commercialize about innovation because
00:50:17they didn't have innovations systems they didn't have those for example science industry linkages they didn't have a financial system that was flexible so systems do matter so even though you put in a lot of our indie money that won't lead to innovation unless you have that system so
00:50:31once you take that I mean that's just one example but once you really on pick that and terms of the real kind of granular structures that were important places like Silicon Valley then you could ask even if we hadn't gotten to the moon and back again but you
00:50:46had actually structure the innovation system properly so yet both public and private actors across that innovation chain working in this dynamic way as they in fact did in that case would all these spillovers which ended up happening along the way happened anyway and I think the answer there
00:51:02is sort of yes which is that what really matters is the process the systems if you have a linear top down system where you think that just because you put in a lot of money that somehow is going to you know lead to great things at the end
00:51:15that almost never works if you get kind of the feedback loops happening this is something by the way that the US has started to under find you know Germany has these Fraunhofer institute the the U. K.'s investing in these catapults under is this is really one of the
00:51:29great things that the US did have which was you know centers where industry in big science kind of basic blue sky science Matt in places like Stanford in places %HESITATION but the the a great national labs if we stop not only finding them but stop also making sure
00:51:48that their structured in ambitious ways that are not also measured in really static ways that they have to prove their economic value tomorrow then you know they will remain very important parts of that system but you know in some ways I think that the way we elect politicians
00:52:07should be based on the moon shots you know look at Alexander %HESITATION castle court does this campaign around the green new deal forget whether he's right or wrong but that's how she campaigned we should be using you know net present value and cost benefit calculations on whether we
00:52:22should be going to the moon that should be what politicians you know kind of argue for in order to get elected you know we wanna green transition we want a digital revolution we think we should be talking to big productivity challenges that's what we should be in a
00:52:34democratic society electing our politicians that one Sir elected we should make sure that we have the right kind of public institutions private institutions third sector institutions interesting places for them to collaborate and dialogue together on how to then achieve those goals but unfortunately I would argue that the
00:52:52political process has also become incredibly static and %HESITATION miserable were not also debating some of the biggest challenges of our times and people are getting elected based on a pretty a flimsy promises probably ground that I'm gonna go back to something you said about risk taking because it's
00:53:10another part of our I think an error that I think is easily massed you talked you said in passing and it's it's all over your book is well about how the public sector %HESITATION takes the risk they took the risk with tassel of that one panned out they
00:53:26took the risk was cylinder didn't pan out %HESITATION date in it the N. I. H. all the fundamental research that states taking place there %HESITATION there's a lot of uncertainty but the problem is and this is I would say the crucial difference between the public and private sector
00:53:43in a challenge I think to your vision of of a larger public role is that the public sector doesn't really have to take risks because they can always raise money at the point of a gun through the tax system where is the private sector runs out of money
00:53:59if that idea doesn't work there's eventually they can't attract investment in Marin that disappears do you worry about that is a problem with the public sector that I I know we don't want to overstate the role of profits but since there's often no accounting measure of success or
00:54:15failure for the for investments of these kinds that we're talking about how will we know that there are done well and what's to stop bad ideas from continuing to take money away from good ideas I'm so I would even be more extreme than you are in the summer
00:54:30that I be agreeing with you but even more than than you just said which is that the government actually doesn't rely on taxes it can even just literally print the money that's what it does when we go to war I don't think you've ever heard a government set
00:54:44up sorry we can't go to Dennis and we don't have enough tax money to go to Iraq we can't fight World War two in those cases and this comes back to your previous point about the military industrial complex when things were or seen are framed in terms of
00:54:57security issues urgency national priorities they can only like family line like a like a household just create that money and hence also potentially run into this will actually run into this accountability question so but but that's the first very important point which sometimes would work against some of
00:55:19what maybe some of your listeners thank which is that the government should be acting like a responsible household because you shouldn't be spending the money you don't have so the first point is governments are not household they actually can a print the money and be well this is
00:55:35when you have your own central bank by the way in Europe that's different %HESITATION and and also you can stimulate the economy and if done so properly you can actually generate a lot of tax revenue if you also want to find your your priorities to tax revenue so
00:55:49this is the first kind of clarification that struggled on but then your point comes then which is the important point which is then there's a big distinction right you know if a private sector company doesn't do things well it'll just fell by the way that's not always true
00:56:03just look at all of trump's businesses he just got up again because he got bailed out so that's your bell out question before but anyway so so that's a really important question which is what is the right way to then account for a measure of value eight government
00:56:18activity given that you know it's different from a private sector company which in theory not in practice but in theory would just go under if it under performs so the first issue is %HESITATION kind of more %HESITATION %HESITATION proactive kind of point which is the kind of point
00:56:33I was making before well let's learn from those parts of government that worked well precisely on that issue one of DARPA's great success point is precisely knew when to turn the tap off this wasn't just turning the top on throwing on a public money in the reason the
00:56:50dark but the RP is in the global into the few global organizations that have been able to replicate that kind of %HESITATION organization the public sector been successful is they not only have the missions that we were talking about before but also were flexible you know taking risk
00:57:05but also flexible inside to no man should be turned this top off because it just isn't going anywhere and that requires going against the grain because if someone is in there just for career reasons are just wanting to you know please %HESITATION the supervisor you might just keep
00:57:20the top on so also you I mean you know she so that that organization you know funded all these great things but if it's not you know happening turned off and knowing how to turn off the top is a skill it means also having dynamic metrics because you
00:57:33don't wanna turn it off too quickly is that might lead to short termism but if it's not going anywhere stop funding it but the other issue is we should have dynamic metric so I mean let me give you a really concrete example the Concord claim it's not fine
00:57:48is it a failure deathly private sector failure because the private sector would want to build the plane that is flying and they're earning profits from that that would be stupid if it's not fine for the public sector which was a puppet any that was a publicly funded project
00:58:03the actual investments made in the Concord had massive spillovers across economy and all sorts of other sectors that actually led to innovation in different sectors now the last thing I want to do is say that the Concord plane was a good investment or the right investment or or
00:58:17or success but the metrics we have that government should have should be dynamic metrics which in this case should be able to capture explicitly the spill over that occur across the economy with that investment even if that investment the final outcome fails that kind of comes back to
00:58:33my point about the moon shot even if we had it gone to the moon had there been a functional dynamic innovative ecosystem innovation system then maybe it would have been less important getting to the moon as long as other spillovers happened which again our insider smartphones today now
00:58:47All I Want to say with this is it's hard none of this means %HESITATION it's easy to throw out a public money at stuff in fact in Italy the country I'm from what's interesting as these lessons have been learned so there's a lot of public money going to
00:59:00all sorts of things but there aren't the right public structures and by the way one of the obsessions that economists have with the deficit you know %HESITATION let's keep the deficit low actually makes little sense when you look at different countries Italy has always had a low deficit
00:59:14it's almost always been lower than Germany's for example but its debt to GDP is very high so debt to GDP is not the same thing as the deficit and precisely because it's public and private actors both of them in the last twenty years have been pretty rubbish at
00:59:30structuring themselves in strategic ways providing that patient long term finance in both areas also the private sector than their productivity hasn't ground so long run GDP housing brown but that's the denominator of debt to GDP so even with a mildly rising deficit debt to GDP can in theory
00:59:46go to infinity if the denominators not growing now again that doesn't need to spend spend spend but what my point is spent wisely strategically instructor the organizations in both the public and the private sector in ways that are smart mission oriented and also work together well because almost
01:00:04all the challenges we have ahead have to happen in partnership we agree on the spend wisely part I think the challenge we probably grin this to the problem to challenges incentives and my concern is that I don't see why the public sector bureaucrats with their nimble or brilliant
01:00:23like Steven chew as I I Q. I don't know if he's for useful as a bureaucrat or leader for our organization like that okay let's is very expensive %HESITATION Simon of his talents to the and and and and be interesting to see a cost benefit study and that
01:00:38but I just don't see why you would think that that's gonna go well in the private sector sure that it won't necessarily go well why should always go well you're putting a huge amount of pressure on a public organization that you I don't think we ever ask a
01:00:52private or an organization a hundred percent probability that everything goes well you never have innovation the private sector that's how they thought well that's not what I think of go well go well to me means use the money what spend wisely I don't know why of course is
01:01:05going to be failures is of enormous amount of uncertainty going back to the venture capital example one out of ten as a whole it incredible home run through two out of three two or three make a little bit of money the other forty five lose money and it's
01:01:19all gone you lose all of it so it's very focusing your really trying hard to to do well and even in that world it's really hard to do well so expect the public sector too badly also but at least in the private sector they have to pass some
01:01:33kind of market test I don't owe you have history rescue have history against you fracking nuclear technology aviation internet you know green technology without the public sector playing this ambitious mission oriented role you would not have had private innovation so it's not about saying private good public about
01:01:55or vice versa it's about that the public sector what it was ambitious that actually laid the groundwork for the private sector to even see an opportunity for investment now that's not necessarily true with gadgets I am I must say this is where I would you know sort of
01:02:09put a a conditional when I'm talking I'm talking with the big stuff the big serve that has driven growth under capitalism for the last two hundred years but that's you know history is complicated my view history I give you my story and then you can counter let you
01:02:23close it out my story is that when government was small which was up until about nineteen thirty and government wasn't really even large until about nineteen sixty and even then it wasn't so mainly transfers not actual regulation innovation and spending of the investment so that you were talking
01:02:40about %HESITATION prosector pretty well coming up with new stuff really kind of amazing like antibiotics that's private that's not public sure many current antibiotics came were helped by public investment but most of the innovations %HESITATION as I liked it my one of my favorite lines is %HESITATION or
01:02:57more right to double pilot's license a lot of the the great innovations that %HESITATION people came from purchase private people fiddling around sometimes for large amounts of money and other times just because they were creative people Isaac Newton didn't come up with calculus because he thought it was
01:03:10going to make him rich she did it because he loves thinking and the respect of his peers and that's a pretty powerful thing and it's worked it worked well for a long time really well and it would continue to work really well I think in the last half
01:03:23of the twentieth century and the twenty first but you're right government through a bunch of things it didn't intent created some good stuff you're hoping I think to some maybe this is unfair look for your reaction you're hoping that if we tried harder to intended it would turn
01:03:39out even better that this is an obvious to me but tell me why I'm wrong and I'll give you the last word okay so again you know for me it's it's never about saying %HESITATION the private sector wasn't %HESITATION %HESITATION innovative during these periods in which I have
01:03:55tried to highlight that basically history of some of these massive technological shift for the public sector did play a big role it's not as at the pump that the private sector is not important it's that the form that these public investments this is another thing I'd say that's
01:04:09not use the word spend but investments public investments investor first resort played actually required not just a bunch of public money thrown at things but particular types of organizations and is sometimes the spell just because of the you know it's inevitable to fail for it you know all
01:04:23the successes that also occur but also they could fail precisely because those organizations are structured problematically so in the nurse away is with the wrong kind of career structures where you're not allowed to take risks I remember when I interviewed %HESITATION Cheryl Martin who is one of the
01:04:38first directors of RP she said we actually measure our success by how much risk we're willing to take and how much are then economy wide success our successes have so my first point is always about the structure of the structure the structure that because we've admitted the private
01:04:54sector is important we structure it and in some cases properly the public sector unfortunately often miss structured so I'm sort of the green with you when it doesn't work now that the times has worked best was when it actually had a problem to solve that's precisely why the
01:05:13military has actually been really important they want to win the war they want the soldiers not to die date you know even a lot of the %HESITATION medical innovations have actually also been funded not just by the department of health but also by the department of defense because
01:05:28they're certain diseases or vulnerabilities that soldiers have which you know people just living in wealthy cities don't have so you know the question is these urgency is that then allowed government to take the problem seriously and to structure their innovation system in ways that was dynamic that was
01:05:44fueled by both basic research and applied research and institutional capacity that fuel the feedback between them unfortunately we haven't always learn those lessons in the big challenges we have the head around health and energy and I would actually argue in health we sort of have because of the
01:06:01N. I. H. but actually the N. I. H. one of my critiques of it is it hasn't been ambitious enough so most of the research spending that occurs in the and national institutes of health which is precisely the spending that has actually led to most of the new
01:06:15molecular entities with priority rating again it's been incredibly innovative also compared to the by the pharmaceutical industry however why just drugs why had they allow the pharmaceutical industry to define the market and not really also invest just as much in areas like healthy living there's very little proper
01:06:34research on that so many of us think we know what healthy living as but it's kinda does voodoo or you know even to be on a something more boring than healthy living diagnostics and surgical treatments much less research done at those areas than that drugs so I think
01:06:48the role of public actor and I would also argue about philanthropy is to be a thorn in the side of how we define markets to be an active market creator not just in terms of investing with the private sector does an impasse but also redefining that market %HESITATION
01:07:02that's by the way what what I often argued the BBC was able to do in the broadcasting area but that would be a whole other conversation which we can maybe come to some other time search my guest today has been Mariana masa Cotto Maranda thanks for being part
01:07:14of the contract thank you very much I'm glad we agreed and disagreed this is econ talk part of the library economics and liberty for mori contacted econ talk dot org or you can also comment on today's podcast and find links in readings related cidades conversation sound engineer free
01:07:38Cantacuzino yet I'm your host Russ Roberts thanks for listening talk to you on Monday

Transcribed by algorithms. Report Errata
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from EconTalk: Russ Roberts, Library of Economics and Liberty, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.


Thank you for helping to keep the podcast database up to date.