Located in New York City, SCEPA is at the center of a network of leaders dedicated to progressive and innovative education and ideas.
SCEPA faculty are investigating the economics of climate change, from mitigation proposals to implementation.
SCEPA focuses on the U.S. economy, with an awareness of the global context of domestic economic developments.
A research institute within The New School’s Economics Department, SCEPA is dedicated to collaboration between today’s experts and tomorrow’s leading economists.
SCEPA is working to reform a retirement system that is failing Americans.
Our projects are designed to empower policy makers to create positive change. With a focus on collaboration and outreach, we provide original, standards-based research on key policy issues.
SCEPA joined with the Economic Policy Institute on Capitol Hill to brief congressional staff and policy experts on tax expenditures, or incentives given through the tax code without scrutiny by Congress.
SCEPA economists are working on the prospects for a more progressive economic order to emerge from the shock of the recession. They have published papers and documents that place current events in a longer-term context as well as policy proposals to deal with short-term concerns. They are also documenting the emerging discussion of how the discipline of economics is reacting to the Great Recession and the questioning of conventional economic analysis.
Lance Taylor, a SCEPA Faculty Fellow, presents an overview of his new book, Maynard’s Revenge, in a Google Tech Talk.
The book, published this November by Harvard University Press, is a timely analysis of mainstream macroeconomics, posing the need for a more useful and realistic economic analysis that can provide a better understanding of the ongoing global financial and economic crisis.
The government spends $143 billion through tax breaks in an effort to expand pension coverage and security. Yet, over half of the American workforce does not have a pension. Retirement insecurity hurts business plans, workers’ lives and retiree well-being. Reform is needed.
SCEPA’s Guaranteeing Retirement Income Project, sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation and in collaboration with Demos and the Economic Policy Institute, has a plan to guarantee safe and secure retirement income for all Americans.
Robert Hiltonsmith, Policy Analyst for Demos and team member of SCEPA's Guaranteeing Retirement Income Project, published an opinion article in Newsday on April 8th, titled, "(401)k is a Bad Option for Any Worker."
The article delves into the debate that many state governments now face: how to reform state retirement plans to ensure sustainability. Many have proposed that governments follow the lead of the private sector and move towards a 401(k) system, but Hiltonsmith argues that high administration costs for 401(k)-type plans give states reason to stop and consider other alternatives.
Hiltonsmith is author of a comprehensive report from Demos on the failures of (401)k's to provide American workers with adequate retirement income. Click below for the full article.
SCEPA Director and retirement expert Teresa Ghilarducci once again joins the New York Times "Room for Debate " blog to discuss the growing insecurity of American's retirement. As part of a series on "The Sorry Lot of the Risk-Averse Saver," Ghilarducci asks why savers can't have the same deal that Federal Reserve employees do? She points out that the unintended victims of low interest rates are a particular kind of saver whose major source of income comes from interest rates on bank accounts and other safe assets whose returns are linked to Federal Reserve policies.
Read the full article.
SCEPA fellow Jeff Madrick's new piece in The New York Review of Books provides an analysis of the recent report by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) and it's many revelations of unethical practices by Wall Street bankers and the systematic tolerance of such abuses by regulators.
"Written by the six members appointed by congressional Democrats, the FCIC report concludes, 'The crisis was the result of human action and inaction, not of Mother Nature or computer models gone haywire.' Many readers would think the conclusion obvious. But Wall Street professionals repeatedly claimed that similar crises occurred frequently in the history of modern capitalism, that they are merely the price paid for a dynamic and innovative economic system, and that individuals were not to blame. They thus minimized their own responsibility for the events and cast doubt on the need for significantly more intense regulation of their activities. The FCIC majority dismisses such arguments."