Categories
- ACTUARIAL DATA SCIENCE
- AFIR / ERM / RISK
- ASTIN / NON-LIFE
- BANKING / FINANCE
- DIVERSITY & INCLUSION
- EDUCATION
- HEALTH
- IACA / CONSULTING
- LIFE
- PENSIONS
- PROFESSIONALISM
- Thought Leadership
- MISC
ICA LIVE: Workshop "Diversity of Thought #14
Test CVH
Test EA
Italian National Actuarial Congress 2023 - Plenary Session with Frank Schiller
Italian National Actuarial Congress 2023 - Parallel Session on "Science in the Knowledge"
26 views
0 comments
0 likes
0 favorites
Democratic governments have shown a propensity to spend and a reluctance to increase taxes. So,
1) Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) says that governments should spend to benefit society and sees no spending constraints except inflation. That was great when there were downward pressures on inflation but was it ever realistic? We can create a better plan. I suggest a Real Monetary Theory (RMT) that says governments should invest to benefit society with a similar inflationary constraint and a requirement to earn returns above the level of inflation –-> profitable and purposeful non-inflationary investments. 2) Should governments see themselves as players rather than facilitators/regulators? Should they enter partnerships rather than providing grants? Should they create revenue rather than oligarchs? I argue that governments must create revenue to improve outcomes. In the limited time available, I propose; • A Wealth Creation Fund (to generate revenue beside the risk taking Sovereign Wealth Fund) • Default financial services that serve most of the population (that could generate $A20bn pa in Australia), • Home ownership solutions, • Improving capital allocation globally, • Freeing up risk capital to generate more wealth.
Find the Q&A here: Q&A on 'Challenging the Norm with Investments'
0 Comments
There are no comments yet. Add a comment.