Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “Unintended Consequences should be read by anyone who takes for granted the superiority of progressive taxation and has not thought carefully about the trade-offs involved.” - The New Republic
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences
Buy the Books
  • Macro Roundup
  • About Roundup
  • About Ed Conard
  • Highlights
  • Topics
  • Subscribe
Edward Conard
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • youtube

Yale Economist Shiller Wrong About Zero Sum Economy

In his Sunday New York Times op-ed ” Today’s Inequality Could Easily Become Tomorrow’s Catastrophe,” Yale economist Robert Shiller paints a dire picture of the economy as a zero–sum game where the gains of the rich come at the expense of the poor. He says: 

“Economic inequality is already a concern, but it could become a nightmare in the decades ahead. … Innovations in robotics and artificial intelligence, which are already making many jobs uncompetitive, could lead us into a world in which basic work with decent pay becomes impossible to find. … Angus Deaton of Princeton, … gave a pessimistic prediction: “Those who are doing well will organize to protect what they have, including in ways that benefit them at the expense of the majority. ” … In each of four devastating famines in different parts of the world, there was enough food to keep everyone alive. The problem in each case was that… systems of privilege and entitlement permitted hoarding of food by people of status whose lives went on much as usual, except that they had to brush off starving beggars and would occasionally see dead bodies on the street.”

Shiller knows the economy is not zero–sum. Competition demands investors produce $5 to $20 of value for others for every dollar they keep for themselves. When tractors displaced subsistence farmers, the displaced farmers didn’t starve to death; they prospered. If displaced farmers couldn’t have found work that was more valuable than the now-lower cost of food, they would have remained subsistence farmers (and tractors wouldn’t have displaced them). By lowering the cost of food, tractors made it easier for displaced farmers to find relatively more valuable work. The same is true of robots today.  

Perhaps innovation will allow the prosperity of the rich to grower faster than the rest of the economy. But it’s hard to imagine an economy where innovation makes “decent pay…impossible to find.

Share this:

  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
© Copyright 2026 Coherent Research Institute · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Terms