Azeem Azhar

And of course, in the detail that you forget when you just read the summary is a detail that did catch me out.

So there are some behaviors that we have found to be perhaps, you know, a little bit more effective.

Slow yourself down, make sure you're reading, but you need to have a certain...

culture and i think that a lot of businesses a lot of american businesses really you know they're thinking about short-term productivity they are thinking about volume being more valuable than that insight and that that depth would you be able to see in your data whether anyone was designing around around this or are we just going to see this quarter by quarter optimization

You've caught me out as well because I can now explain the mistake I made.

And it does absolutely, as you rightly say, relate to this question of long-run growth.

And it was fundamentally about, just to remind the audience who are not up on neo-indulgent growth theory on a Thursday morning, just take us to where that is.

This is economists trying to figure out how economies grow and

Until the early 90s, there was a sense that you needed capital and labor.

And then amazingly, from somewhere, like a deus ex machina and a Greek play, technology would appear.

And that didn't reflect our intuitions because we sort of know that

that we make the technologies and countries that have good human capital and institutions make the technology.

So where does that come from?

And that's the idea of endogenous growth, that it just sort of arises from investments and interactions and incentives in the economy.

So Romer writes this great paper in, I think, 1990, 91 or something.

He gets a Nobel Prize quite rightly a few years later.

But one of the challenges that emerged in the 20 years after that was that we weren't seeing productivity, total factor productivity, grow exponentially in a way that you might in certain types of endogenous growth.

And the argument seemed to be that, and I'm just, Peter, if I'm giving this summary to listeners wrongly, you should jump in.

The argument seemed to be that

The human researchers were just adding knowledge to an already enormous stock of knowledge.