Today we had a meeting of @RenewEurope to discuss Ukraine. I share here a few proposals on #EconomicWarfare I prepared for the Group to discuss (link at end).
Given the failure of Putin´s initial plans, tough economic sanctions are crucial NOW.
Starting point: this is warfare, even if economic-- thus we, the EU countries (and US!), will need to incur serious costs. No free lunch.
My view is that there we must act on 4 axis:
- Swift
- Central Bank Assets
- Oligarchs money
- Energy: Zero-gas
2/12
First: SWIFT, paired with several other measures, including blocking alternative payment systems linked to bank accounts, and blocking access of all banks to the financial system (more on energy later!).
Painful to Putin: EXTREMELY
Painful to us: VERY
3/12
Second, cut off Russian Central Bank, block its assets abroad.
Putin has done a huge effort diversifying away from US Dollars etc but there is a huge amount (10% is 60 bn in Europe) to seize just in EU, probably GER.
Painful to Putin: Very
Painful to us: Little (short run)
4/12
Third: @gabriel_zucman@PikettyLeMonde confiscatory tax on assets of oligarchs.
Their two key insights
- Wealth in Russian is extremely concentrated
- It is held offshore in extremely high proportion
5/12
So how to do it? Zucman, in personal commmunication proposes a tax (left slide). PIketty in blog too. Legally, sounds dubious.
So here is a new idea. Everyone linked to this war of aggression is a war criminal. A lot of regime honchos seen on TV supporting aggression.
6/12
This has never been done, but there is no reason why it cannot be done- e.g. there is space for this in the Guideliness of the Council.
Painful to Putin: Hugely
Painful to us: Not at all
7/12
Final idea: Zero-gas.
Starting point here is that we are subsidizing this war.
WE, the EU citizens are the evil people givin Putin the cash for this crazy advanture.
8/12
We can survive 0-gas.
Winter is almost over, we have huge LNG surplus capacity, we need to bring back nuclear and other closed plants (yes, thermal plants) but we can do it.
WE CANNOT CONTINUE PAYING FOR THE WAR EFFORT OF PUTIN!
9/12
One caveat: this shock is very asmmetric. Different countries incur very different costs. Thus Europe needs to absorb the cost of this policy with a new facility modeled after NextGEn.
Like Covid, we are facing a one off, massive supply shock. Europe needs to absorbe it.
10/12
Conclusions:
Do it all
Do it hard
Do it now
11/12
I know it is a pain to read slides like this.
Here is a link to the full PDF . I hope it can stimulate a good discussion
12/12 dropbox.com/s/0g599p297cbu…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
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.
Germany's powerful Sparkassen (359 local savings banks with €2.5 trillion in assets) are a key obstacle to completing the banking union (together with the Italian government). Why?
THREAD on my Silicon Continent post 1/11
Without a banking union, the sovereign-bank doom loop threatens to return to the EU.
This is where a crisis in a country's government and its banks can dangerously feed each other, a risk now higher with rising interest rates.
Link to post:
THREAD: It is clear that something has gone horribly wrong in European energy policy. How did this happen? Why did the entire political center go along with this?
My views on the anatomy of an error from our post today. 1/11🧵
Like many, I assumed grid operators, utilities, and industry would intervene if truly catastrophic policies were being implemented. We trusted that leaders like Angela Merkel and Mark Rutte would get sound advice and make sensible decisions. 2/ siliconcontinent.com/p/anatomy-of-a…
Why did politics fail?
My hypothesis: climate action is politically difficult. Its benefits are slow and global. Voters know they can free-ride, while immediate costs are clear and the worst climate impacts fall on future generations. Selling sacrifice is hard. 3/
This Draghi piece is a quiet indictment on the @EUCommission's failrue on its core Treaty mandate: "establishing the internal market" & ensuring "free movement of goods, persons, services and capital."
A thread with the facts adn saying the quiet part out loud 1/
PRICES:
IMF shows EU internal barriers =
- 45% tariff on manufacturing,
- 110% on services.
As services become more important in the economy, barriers on service trade create an even bigger drag on growth.