It somehow reminds me of another annoying trendy political buzz-word,
windfall gains.
Annoying terms that have no visible connection with what they actually describe.
The Economist actually has a pretty clear and non-text-bookish definition of these terms:
Windfall gains
INCOME you do not expect, such as winning a lottery prize. Economists have long argued about whether people are likely to save such windfalls or spend them. According to the PERMANENT INCOME HYPOTHESIS, favoured by most economists, people save the lion's share of windfall gains. But real life often contradicts this; ask any lottery winner.
Windfall profit
A controversial concept, often used by politicians to justify imposing a TAX on PROFIT that in theory is earned unexpectedly, through circumstances beyond the control of the company concerned, and is thus deemed undeserved and ripe for the taking by the tax authorities. As the profits were neither expected nor a result of the efforts of the firm, taxing them should not harm the firm's incentives to maximise future profits. The problem comes when greedy politicians start claiming that profits are windfalls when in fact they are deserved and expected. Then taxing them sends a signal to FIRMS that they should not try too hard to make profits, as if they do too well they will not get to keep the profits anyway. If this became widely believed, effort would probably decline and economic GROWTH would be slower.
