Hoy presenté a la prensa mi análisis del Plan de Recuperación español, el único que importa, en el que nos jugamos los 70.000 millones fondos europeos.
Mi valoración es que, actualmente, el plan NO cumple las reglas europeas y es una enorme oportunidad perdida. HILO 1/13
El Plan tiene 3 grandes carencias: 1) Faltan reformas a los problemas estructurales de España 2) El paquete de inversiones no es suficiente para transformar nuestra economía 3) No es un plan de país, es un manifiesto de partido sin consenso político. 2/13
Los problemas que hay que resolver son conocidos: y afectan
- Las Administraciones Públicas
- La competitividad empresarial
- La ciencia y la investigación
- La Educación
- El Empleo
- La sostenibilidad fiscal
EN NINGUNO DE ELLOS HAY REFORMAS DE CALADO 3/13
La reforma de las pensiones es una tomadura de pelo. Se vende como “reformas” lo que solo son trucos contables, contrarreformas o meras listas de deseos. NO son reformas, son parches. 4/13
En el apartado fiscal, más de los mismo, se ocultan los detalles relevantes. ¿Alguien se cree que encargar un informe o crear un comité de expertos va a pasar en Bruselas como una reforma fiscal seria? 5/13
La reforma del sistema educativo es la gran decepción del plan. Es el problema número UNO de España y las medidas incluidas son cortoplacistas, cosméticas y no cuentan con consensos políticos amplios. ¿De verdad es la ley Celáa es una reforma de recorrido? 6/13
En cuanto a la reforma laboral, hay buenas intenciones con respecto a los ERTEs o la simplificación de contratos.
Sin embargo, se repiten viejos errores en políticas activas (vuelta al modelo de subvenciones andaluz) y en negociación colectiva. 7/13
Las inversiones tampoco servirán para transformar la economía española. El Gobierno ha preferido gastar en cosas (rentables electoralmente) antes que en personas. España es el país de la UE con mayor abandono escolar y desempleo juvenil. ¿No deberían ser la prioridad? 8/13
El plan gasta 1.412 millones en equipamiento educativo digital, que si n va acompañado de una reforma educativo solo beneficiará a los que venden portátiles. Los programas educativos que sí podrían marcar la diferencia están infrafinanciados. 9/13
En España hay 580.000 menores de 25 años que están desempleados. El programa clave para que los jóvenes alternen formación con empleo llegará a... ¡3.000 personas en 3 años! El pacto intergeneracional está roto y el Gobierno no usará el plan de recuperación para arreglarlo 10/13
El Gobierno ha ignorado a la oposición, a las CCAA y ayuntamiento y ni siquiera ha llevado el plan al Congreso de lo Diputados
Pedro Sánchez hoy: “Dialoguemos para decidir qué país queremos ser en 30 años”. Ese diálogo debía haberse hecho entorno al plan de recuperación. 11/13
Después de haber estudiado el plan se cumplen los peores temores: el Gobierno va a desaprovechar la oportunidad de transformar España. 12/13
Aquí podéis ver la rueda de prensa donde hago un análisis detallado del plan 👇13/13
Algunos lectores del hilo me preguntan cómo gastaría/con qué prioridades el dinero. En junio de 2020 lo expliqué en el Congreso de los Diputados e hice un hilo de Twitter. Aquí lo tenéis (tb está el vídeo)- entonces el plan eran "sólo" 61.000 m.
Live from Palo Alto! "The Economics of Transformative AI" @nberpubs workshop. I will be trying to live tweet (mega jet lagged--flew from HKG--, so I really hope I can keep it up) the papers presented. Watch this thread
Here is the fantastic line up nber.org/conferences/ec…
Intro talk from Agrawal, Korinec and Brynjolfsson. The assignment: lets not discuss if transformative AI will or not happen. Instead, lets assume it is going going to happen and draw the consequences for makets and the economy.
Paper 1: Agrawal–Goldfarb–Gans, "Genius on Demand: The Value of Transformative AI"
Q: If “genius” is on tap (Einstein level intelligence), what is this worth—and how does it get allocated ?
A: Paper argues in the short run, human geniuses specialise in questions that are furthest from existing knowledge, where their comparative advantage over AI is greatest. In the long run, routine workers may stay at the edges and eventually be completely displaced as AI efficiency approaches human genius efficiency.
There is widespread sense AI adoption is slowing down and productivity gains are hard to get. Is it true? Why? I just attended the inaugural conference of the Center for AI, Management and Organizations at Hong Kong University. A thread on insights.
1/17
A general answer before going deep in: firm adoption of GenAI is widespread, but it is shallow, and barely profitable. An often repeated point was that only a small minority of firms are seeing P&L impact. Data from a Deloitte&CAMO survey of 109 top executives: 2/17
Executives say they overestimated expected financial returns from AI implementation.
At launch, many expected strong ROI but outcomes disappointed. 45% reported returns below expectations; only 10% exceeded them.
3/17
1/10 Good news on AI could be bad news for Europe's debt.
A boom in AI-driven productivity could end decades of slow growth. But for Europe, this silver lining may hide a fiscal storm cloud. Here’s why.
2/10
The key is the global real interest rate, r*. Think of it as the price that clears the world's market for assets. For 70+ years, high demand for assets from savers and slowing productivity has kept r* low. This is about to reverse. siliconcontinent.com/p/r-without-g
3/10
AI changes the game.
It boosts the supply of assets (higher profits, huge data center investments) and lowers demand (richer future generations save less).
More supply + less demand = lower asset prices, which means higher interest rates.
Let's not kid ourselves: Europe can't compete on compute.
- Energy costs 2-3x more than in US.
- Permitting makes building anything a nightmare.
- We lack tech ecosystem.
Catching up in model-building is delusional.
An alternative: Europe can be a smart second mover.
🧵1/10
Nobody knows who will capture the value created by AI: could be chips (NVIDIA), manufacturing (TSMC/ASML), models (OpenAI), or implementation layer.
What we do have:
- 450 million consumers in a (semi-)unified market.
- Top companies in manufacturing, pharma, automotive. - A highly educated workforce.
The question isn't how to build models - it's how to ensure the value stays at the implementation stage. 3/10
1/@EpochAIResearch doubles down on preiction AI will drive 20%+ annual GDP growth. Economists remain skeptical.
This is the defining debate of today: AI builders see infinite prosperity ahead. Economists see the same limits that constrained every technological revolution.🧵 1/13
2/The economists' core insight, which Epoch misses, is that progress works itself out of a job.
The more successful a technology becomes, the less it matters economically. Revolutionary technologies shrink their own importance precisely through their success. Larry Summers:
3/Consider history's greatest productivity miracle: artificial light.
In 1800, one hour of reading light cost more than a day's wages. By the 1990s, we produced the same light using 1/3,000th the energy. The price fell 40,000x.
1/10 🧵 @masuch_klaus have written a post arguing the late 2010s QE was a big mistake. The debate sounds technical--central banks sold is as technical fine-tuning. But it's massive fiscal policy by unelected officials, creating perverse incentives and wealth transfers.
2/10 Fiscal consequences: QE transforms government debt structure. When central banks buy long-term bonds and pay with overnight reserves, they swap fixed-rate debt for floating-rate debt. The state suddenly owes money at today's rates, not yesterday's.siliconcontinent.com/p/the-hidden-c…
3/10 Example: Government issues €100bn in 10-year bonds at 1%. Central bank buys them, creates overnight reserves. When rates hit 3%, annual costs triple from €1bn to €3bn. ECB's €5 trillion portfolio lost ~€650bn when rates rose. Taxpayers absorbed the duration risk.