Category Archives: Cost of Free Money

The Cost of Free Money – Reviews

At the beginning of August The Scotsman published a review of my latest book The Cost of Free Money (July 2020, Yale University Press). As more reviews are steadily coming in, I thought it would make sense to create one place where they can be accessed easily. You can find the list below, which I’ll update as needed.


  • “Just as we are getting used to the existence of  ‘magic money trees’ which have helped finance the massive  stimulus packages we have seen during the pandemic (some 12% of GDP in the UK and the US for example, so far), here comes this excellent book to remind us that there is no such thing as free money.” Vicky Pryce, The Society of Professional Economists (8 March 2021)
  • “Paola Subacchi gives a brilliantly clear and concise analytical history of monetary management from the Gold Standard, through Bretton Woods, the Washington Consensus, into the post crisis period.” Originally posted on Amazon (25 February 2021)
  • “Paola Subacchi’s book helped me, as a non-economist, to understand what it means to live in a world with low or negative interest rates. For governments and international institutions to run up debts seemingly without limits goes against everything I thought I had learned. But there is no free lunch and this book explains why!” Originally posted on Amazon (9 January 2021)
  • “I was delighted to find the writing crisp and fluid. The explanations of the current monetary system are characterized through the wide lens of history. Instead of a chronological survey, they form a causal analysis of the monetary agreements, systems, and institutions that we take for granted today. A such, The Cost of Free Money makes for an entertaining, informative, and thought-provoking read.” Originally posted on Amazon (4 January 2021)
  • Una recensione (in italiano) di The Cost of Free Money su Aspenia 91, 2020. Andrea Goldstein offre spunti interessanti e una chiave di lettura efficace. Per esempio, il rapporto tra interdipendenza e cooperazione internazionale: “[…] lungi dal rappresentare elementi di vulnerabilità – come invece nella tradizione realista – l’interdipendenza rappresenta un elemento posi- tivo perché incita alla cooperazione. Subacchi identifica alcuni problemi fondamentali cui solo un’azione comune può dare risposta – la difficile e forse impossibile convivenza tra paesi strutturalmente in avanzo e paesi in disavanzo, l’eccessiva libertà di movimento di capitali di cui godono gli speculatori e l’abbondanza di buchi nelle maglie comunque tutt’altro che strette della regolamentazione della tassazione internazionale.”
  • The Cost of Free Money was named one of the Best Economics Books of 2020 by the Financial Times; “Subacchi, an expert on global financial and monetary systems, lucidly describes the failings of the international monetary “non-system” that emerged after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in the 1970s, the dominance of the dollar, and the need to restore a co-operative and global monetary and financial order.” (Martin Wolf, 17 November 2020)
  • “The problem with economic globalisation is not, as many leftists have it, free trade, but rather the free movement of capital, argues economist Paola Subacchi.” Money Week (Matthew Partridge, 28 August 2020)

You can also read a preview of the book on Google Books here.

The Cost of Free Money – Panel Discussion, 14 July 2020

To mark the publication of my latest book The Cost of Free Money (July 2020, Yale University Press) we organised an online panel discussion looking at the future of the global economic order. I was delighted to be joined by a stellar panel of thinkers, including Barry Eichengreen, University of California Berkeley; Danny Quah, National University of Singapore; and Martin Wolf, Financial Times. 

Paola Subacchi, Barry Eichengreen, Winnie King, Paul van den Noord, David Vines, Martin Wolf, Danny Quah

You can now stream the panel discussion (password: 5C#f7&Fw)

Our discussion began with a question central to the book: what happens when competition for markets spreads into open rivalry? And what happens when this rivalry is between states with conflicting domestic political systems, as we see today between the United States and China? The panel agreed that achieving a better balance is going to be an even more arduous task in a post-covid-19 world. 

Among other topics, we further discussed who gets to decide the shape and form of the international order, the dollar, the new regional institutions in Asia, and how climate change and public health must be at the forefront in the future. 

There was wide agreement among the panel that Europe’s prospects in the global economic order are looking radically brighter now than they did before covid-19, and that only Europe has the capacity to move from theorising to action. While Barry Eichengreen predicted that the euro will have come to surpass or match the dollar within three decades time, Paul van den Noord intervened and commented that we might expect this to happen sooner. 

Danny Quah – who played the role of devil’s advocate in the debate – took a different stance: “I would put my bets on new parts of the world that we haven’t thought about historically – not the US, not Europe, not China. We’ve spent the past quarter of a century lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, not all of them in China alone. We have brought scores of nations out of the periphery where they used to be, to be central now. They need to have more of a say in how the international system evolves and that’s where I’m going to put my money.”