Jonathan David Ostry (born July 29, 1962) is an international economist, who is currently Deputy Director of the Research Department of the International Monetary Fund. He is also a Research Fellow at the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR). His recent work has focused on the management of international capital flows, in particular the role of capital controls; this work has been influential in bringing about a shift in the institutional position of the IMF on capital controls. Ostry has also published influential studies on the relationship between income inequality and economic growth, where his work—which has featured prominently in the financial press—suggests that high income inequality and a failure to sustain economic growth may be two sides of the same coin. His other work focuses on fiscal sustainability issues (especially the role of a country’s track record of fiscal management in enabling it to access the international capital markets). Ostry has many distinguished academic publications, and his work has been cited widely in scholarly journals, and in the press, including the Economist, the Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Post. Ostry was listed in Who’s Who in Economics in 2003. He was named one of the 100 most powerful people in global finance by Worth magazine in 2016, and as one of the economists whose research shaped the world in 2017.
Jonathan D. Ostry
|Born||July 29, 1962|
|Institution||International Monetary Fund|
|Alma mater||Oxford University |
London School of Economics
University of Chicago
|Information at IDEAS / RePEc|
Ostry received a B.A. (with Distinction) from Queen’s University (Canada), where he was an Undergraduate Medallist, at the age of 18. He then went on to do another B.A. at Oxford University (Balliol College) as a Commonwealth Scholar in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, followed by an M.Sc. at the London School of Economics. He earned his Ph.D. in Economics at the University of Chicago, where he was a Mackenzie King Fellow, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Doctoral Fellow, and Pew Fellow. He has held several senior positions at the IMF, including leading country teams on Japan and several Asian countries, and leading the team that produces the IMF’s flagship World Economic Outlook. At the IMF, Ostry has led work on global systemic macrofinancial risks, including as a member of the advisory board of the World Economic Forum's Global Risk Report.
Ostry’s work covers various aspects of domestic and international macroeconomic policy, including exchange rate regimes, capital controls, fiscal space, and income inequality. He has written several books on international economic matters, most recently Taming the Tide of Capital Flows (MIT Press, 2017) and Confronting Inequality (Columbia University Press, 2018). He has published numerous articles in scholarly journals, such as the American Economic Review, the Economic Journal, the Journal of Monetary Economics, the Journal of International Economics, the Journal of Development Economics, among others. His work has featured extensively in the press, including in the Economist, the Financial Times, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, The Independent, the Washington Post, Bloomberg, Business Week, Forbes, Time magazine, Les Échos, Fortune, BBC, CNBC, National Public Radio, Maclean's, and HBO's Last Week Tonight show. His work has been cited in remarks made by, among others, US President Barack Obama, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, US Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Jason Furman, and IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde.
Ostry is involved in efforts to raise awareness of inequality issues at the global level, including through his membership in the World Economic Forum's Global Agenda Councils on new growth models and inclusive growth, and through his writings on the impact of neoliberal policies, which have received widespread media attention. His work on inequality and debt sustainability is being used by credit rating agencies (S&P, Moody's) for their credit rating analysis.
Following the global financial crisis of 2007–08, there was a worldwide resurgence of interest in Keynesian economics among prominent economists and policy makers. This included discussions and implementation of economic policies in accordance with the recommendations made by John Maynard Keynes in response to the Great Depression of the 1930s—most especially fiscal stimulus and expansionary monetary policy.From the end of the Great Depression until the early 1970s, Keynesian economics provided the main inspiration for economic policy makers in Western industrialized countries. The influence of Keynes's theories waned in the 1970s, due to stagflation and critiques from Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Robert Lucas, Jr. and other economists, who were less optimistic about the ability of interventionist government policy to positively regulate the economy or otherwise opposed to Keynesian policies. From the early 1980s to 2008, the normative consensus among economists was that attempts at fiscal stimulus would be ineffective even in a recession, and such policies were only occasionally employed by the governments of developed countries.In 2008, a rapid shift of opinion took place among many prominent economists in favour of Keynesian stimulus, and, from October onward, policy makers began announcing major stimulus packages, in hopes of heading off the possibility of a global depression. By early 2009 there was widespread acceptance among the world's economic policy makers about the need for fiscal stimulus. Yet by late 2009 the consensus among economists began to break down. In 2010 with a depression averted but unemployment in many countries still high, policy makers generally decided against further fiscal stimulus, with several citing concerns over public debt as a justification. Unconventional monetary policy continued to be used in attempts to raise economic activity. By 2016, increasing concerns had arisen that monetary policy was reaching the limit of its effectiveness, and several countries began to return to fiscal stimulus.Bernard Ostry
Bernard A. Ostry, (June 10, 1927 – May 24, 2006) was a Canadian author, philanthropist, and civil servant, who is best known for being chair and CEO of TVOntario.
Born in Wadena, Saskatchewan, he received a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Manitoba in 1948. From 1948 to 1952, he did post-graduate work in the field of international history at the London School of Economics (LSE) under the Cambridge historian Charles Webster. From 1951 to 1955, he was a research associate for the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Birmingham. As well, from 1951 to 1952, he was a Special Assistant and Advisor to the Leader of the Indian delegation to the United Nations. From 1956 to 1958, he was the David Davies Fellow in International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).
In 1955 Ostry co-authored with historian H S Ferns the critical biography of Canadian prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, The Age of Mackenzie King: The Rise of the Leader. The book was supposed to be the first of a multi-volume biography of the former prime minister but the co-authors fell out in the process of writing and publishing the book. When it was published The Age of Mackenzie King created a minor controversy because of its critical tone. In February 1956 there were allegations that the federal Liberal government had censored public discussion of the book.Leaving academics, he served as the Secretary-Treasurer for the Commonwealth Institute of Social Research from 1959 to 1961. He returned to Canada in 1961 to become Secretary-Treasurer for the Social Sciences Research Council of Canada, a position which he held until 1963.
Changing careers again, he became a moderator for the CBC program Nightline from 1960 to 1963. From 1963 to 1968, he was a supervisor in the Department of Public Affairs (Radio & TV) at the CBC. From 1968 to 1969, he served as the Chief Consultant to the Canadian Radio Television Commission. Next, from 1968 to 1970, he was the Commissioner for the Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's Task Force on Government Information.
From 1970 to 1973, he was the Assistant Under Secretary of State (Citizenship). From 1974 to 1981, he was the Deputy Minister for various provincial and federal ministries including National Museums of Canada, Communications, Industry & Tourism, Industry & Trade, and Citizenship & Culture. From 1981 to 1985 he was a deputy minister in the Bill Davis government in Ontario variously as deputy minister of industry and trade, deputy minister of industry and tourism and then deputy minister of citizenship and culture.
In 1985, Premier David Peterson appointed Ostry to the position of chairman and CEO of TVOntario. Ostry retired from TVO in 1992.
In 1988, he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada for being "an outspoken advocate of cultural sovereignty, ethics in the public service and the preservation of public broadcasting". He was promoted to Companion in 2006. He has received honorary degrees from University of Manitoba, University of Waterloo, and York University.
He married Sylvia Ostry. They had two children: Adam Ostry (a senior federal civil servant himself) and Jonathan D. Ostry (Deputy Director, Research Department, International Monetary Fund). He died in Toronto of prostate cancer, aged 78.Capital control
Capital controls are residency-based measures such as transaction taxes, other limits, or outright prohibitions that a nation's government can use to regulate flows from capital markets into and out of the country's capital account. These measures may be economy-wide, sector-specific (usually the financial sector), or industry specific (for example, “strategic” industries). They may apply to all flows, or may differentiate by type or duration of the flow (debt, equity, direct investment; short-term vs. medium- and long-term).
Types of capital control include exchange controls that prevent or limit the buying and selling of a national currency at the market rate, caps on the allowed volume for the international sale or purchase of various financial assets, transaction taxes such as the proposed Tobin tax on currency exchanges, minimum stay requirements, requirements for mandatory approval, or even limits on the amount of money a private citizen is allowed to remove from the country. There have been several shifts of opinion on whether capital controls are beneficial and in what circumstances they should be used.
Capital controls were an integral part of the Bretton Woods system which emerged after World War II and lasted until the early 1970s. This period was the first time capital controls had been endorsed by mainstream economics. In the 1970s free market economists became increasingly successful in persuading their colleagues that capital controls were in the main harmful. The USA, other western governments, and multilateral financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank began to take a critical view of capital controls and persuaded many countries to abandon them to facilitate financial globalization.The Latin American debt crisis of the early 1980s, the East Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s, the Russian ruble crisis of 1998–99, and the global financial crisis of 2008, however, highlighted the risks associated with the volatility of capital flows, and led many countries — even those with relatively open capital accounts — to make use of capital controls alongside macroeconomic and prudential policies as means to dampen the effects of volatile flows on their economies.
In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, as capital inflows surged to emerging market economies, a group of economists at the IMF outlined the elements of a policy toolkit to manage the macroeconomic and financial – stability risks associated with capital flow volatility. The proposed toolkit allowed a role for capital controls. The study, as well as a successor study focusing on financial-stability concerns stemming from capital flow volatility, while not representing an IMF official view, were nevertheless influential in generating debate among policy makers and the international community, and ultimately in bringing about a shift in the institutional position of the IMF. With the increased use of capital controls in recent years, the IMF has moved to destigmatize the use of capital controls alongside macroeconomic and prudential policies to deal with capital flow volatility. More widespread use of capital controls, however, raises a host of multilateral coordination issues, as enunciated for example by the G-20, echoing the concerns voiced by John Maynard Keynes and Harry Dexter White more than six decades ago.Olivier Blanchard
Olivier Jean Blanchard (French: [blɑ̃ʃaʁ]; born December 27, 1948) is a French economist, professor and Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. He was the chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, from September 1, 2008 to October 2015. He was appointed to this position under the tenure of Dominique Strauss-Kahn. He is also Robert M. Solow Professor of Economics emeritus at MIT. At the IMF, he was succeeded by Maurice Obstfeld.Opposition to trade unions
Opposition to trade unions comes from a variety of groups in society and there are many different types of argument on which this opposition is based.Progressive tax
A progressive tax is a tax in which the tax rate increases as the taxable amount increases. The term "progressive" refers to the way the tax rate progresses from low to high, with the result that a taxpayer's average tax rate is less than the person's marginal tax rate. The term can be applied to individual taxes or to a tax system as a whole; a year, multi-year, or lifetime. Progressive taxes are imposed in an attempt to reduce the tax incidence of people with a lower ability to pay, as such taxes shift the incidence increasingly to those with a higher ability-to-pay. The opposite of a progressive tax is a regressive tax, where the relative tax rate or burden decreases as an individual's ability to pay increases.The term is frequently applied in reference to personal income taxes, in which people with lower income pay a lower percentage of that income in tax than do those with higher income. It can also apply to adjustments of the tax base by using tax exemptions, tax credits, or selective taxation that creates progressive distribution effects. For example, a wealth or property tax, a sales tax on luxury goods, or the exemption of sales taxes on basic necessities, may be described as having progressive effects as it increases the tax burden of higher income families and reduces it on lower income families.Progressive taxation is often suggested as a way to mitigate the societal ills associated with higher income inequality, as the tax structure reduces inequality, but economists disagree on the tax policy's economic and long-term effects. Progressive taxation has also been positively associated with happiness, the subjective well-being of nations and citizen satisfaction with public goods, such as education and transportation.Redistribution of income and wealth
Redistribution of income and redistribution of wealth are respectively the transfer of income and of wealth (including physical property) from some individuals to others by means of a social mechanism such as taxation, charity, welfare, public services, land reform, monetary policies, confiscation, divorce or tort law. The term typically refers to redistribution on an economy-wide basis rather than between selected individuals.
Interpretations of the phrase vary, depending on personal perspectives, political ideologies and the selective use of statistics. It is frequently heard in politics, usually referring to perceived redistributions from those who have more to those who have less. Occasionally, however, it is used to describe laws or policies that cause opposite redistributions that shift monetary burdens from wealthy to low-income individuals.The phrase can be emotionally charged and used to exaggerate or misconstrue the motivations of opponents during political debates. For example, if an individual politician calls for increased taxes on higher income individuals, their sole focus may be to raise funds for specific government programs, tapping the largest available sources while realizing that low-wage workers have little or no excess income to draw tax revenues from. Political opponents might argue that this politician's prime motivation is to redistribute wealth, when redistribution is not their goal.
The phrase is often coupled with the term "class warfare," with high income earners and the wealthy portrayed as victims of unfairness and discrimination.Redistribution tax policy should not be confused with predistribution policies. "Predistribution" is the idea that the state should try to prevent inequalities occurring in the first place rather than through the tax and benefits system once they have occurred. For example, a government predistribution policy might require employers to pay all employees a living wage, not just a minimum wage, as a "bottom-up" response to widespread income inequalities or high poverty rates.
Many alternate taxation proposals have been floated without the political will to alter the status quo. One example is the proposed "Buffett Rule", which is a hybrid taxation model composed of opposing systems, intended to minimize the favoritism of the special interest tax design.
The effects of a redistribution system are actively debated on ethical and economic grounds. The subject includes analysis of its rationales, objectives, means, and policy effectiveness. A 2003 survey among 264 members of the American Economic Association found that 71.2% of them support redistribution, while 20.4% oppose it, and 7.2% had mixed feelings.Sylvia Ostry
Sylvia Ostry, (born June 3, 1927) is a high-ranking Canadian economist and former public servant. She was educated at McGill University and the University of Cambridge.