Thomas Ferguson is the Research Director at the Institute for New Economic Thinking. He is Professor Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Boston and Senior Fellow at Better Markets. He received his Ph.D. from Princeton University and taught formerly at MIT and the University of Texas, Austin. He is the author or coauthor of several books, including Golden Rule (University of Chicago Press, 1995) and Right Turn (Hill & Wang, 1986). His articles have appeared in many scholarly journals, including the Quarterly Journal of Economics, International Organization, International Studies Quarterly, and the Journal of Economic History. He is a member of the editorial board of the International Journal of Political Economy and a longtime Contributing Editor at The Nation.

By this expert

How Much Can the U.S. Congress Resist Political Money? A Quantitative Assessment

Paper Working Paper Series | | Apr 2020

The links between campaign contributions from the financial sector and switches to a pro-bank vote were direct and substantial

Rule Number 1 for Government Bailouts of Companies: Make Sure Voters and Taxpayers Share in the Upside

Article | Mar 23, 2020

If the public is to be called upon for the second time in twelve years to bail out businesses, it should get something back for its money. Bailed out firms should be compelled to issue convertible bonds to the government.

Coronavirus Means Zero Hour for the European Union

Article | Mar 16, 2020

If the European Central Bank does not jump to the aid of peripheral countries weakened by the pandemic, the Eurozone could collapse.

The New Hampshire Democratic Primary in One Graph

Article | Feb 12, 2020

Lower Income Towns in New Hampshire Voted Heavily for Sanders; Richer Towns Did the Opposite.

Featuring this expert

Thomas Ferguson is quoted in Alternet on Georgia's senate election

News Dec 7, 2020

“Ferguson, whose research has shown that candidates who raise more money stand a much greater chance of winning election, added that “when you get that much money pouring into the election, it means that you have all these investors who decide which election is ‘worth it’ and that tends to pull even liberal democrats to the right. It is a somewhat subtle effect but a very real one and clearly an anti-democratic consequence of the system.” — Andrew Kennis

INET study is cited in the Socialist Worker

News Dec 7, 2020

“Rich economies have more resources to spare to prioritise saving lives. And Wolf reproduces the Institute for New Economic Thinking’s now famous chart that refutes the idea there is a “trade-off” between saving the economy and saving lives. On the whole, those states that prioritised saving lives also lost less economic output. China is the standout case. But it isn’t just about how rich an economy is. The same chart shows that the states that suffered the biggest losses of lives and output include Italy, Britain, Spain, and France. The US and Belgium aren’t far behind.” —Alex Callinicos

INET article cited in NTV on how to handle the pandemic this winter

News Dec 7, 2020

“A look around the world shows that so far no country has managed to effectively protect its risk groups when the number of infections is high - Sweden at the beginning of the pandemic or Switzerland in the second wave also had to pay for their special routes with many deaths. And if such a strategy fails, you have wasted valuable time and may find yourself confronted with an infection that is completely out of control. This would mean a collapse of the health system with all the ensuing consequences. This also includes immense damage to the economy. This is also confirmed by a study by the Institute for New Economic Thinking. Those who reacted belatedly or wavered between strategies not only had very high casualties, but were also the most damaging to their economies, it said. The authors cite Great Britain as a negative example.” — Klaus Wedekind

INET study featured in Queensland

News Dec 7, 2020

“The “go-hard/go-early and no regrets” approach of the Australian states has been vindicated by the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), a nonpartisan, nonprofit organisation established in the wake of the 2009 global financial crash.” …. “We must be ready to accept renewed restrictions, targeted shutdowns and border closures. As the INET report clearly demonstrates, the failure to act is much more costly than any temporary measures, such as those used in South Australia last month.” — Dennis Atkins