The Great Divide with Joseph Stiglitz and Robert Reich
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 июл 2024
- Economist Joseph Stiglitz and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich reminisce about opposing “corporate welfare” during their days in the Clinton Administration and talk here about problematic trade deals, income inequality and Stiglitz’s new book, “The Great Divide: Unequal Societies and What We Can Do About Them.” Reich and Stiglitz are presented by the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. Recorded on 04/29/2015. [5/2015] [Show ID: 29524]
More from: UC Public Policy Channel
(www.uctv.tv/public-policy)
Explore More Public Affairs & Politics on UCTV
(www.uctv.tv/public-affairs)
Public Affairs UCTV goes beyond the headlines to explore economics, public policy, race, immigration, health policy and more. Hear directly from the researchers so you can be informed to make important decisions.
Explore More Business & Careers on UCTV
(www.uctv.tv/business)
From entrepreneurship to economic policies these programs introduce you to leaders and issues in the business community.
UCTV is the broadcast and online media platform of the University of California, featuring programming from its ten campuses, three national labs and affiliated research institutions. UCTV explores a broad spectrum of subjects for a general audience, including science, health and medicine, public affairs, humanities, arts and music, business, education, and agriculture. Launched in January 2000, UCTV embraces the core missions of the University of California -- teaching, research, and public service - by providing quality, in-depth television far beyond the campus borders to inquisitive viewers around the world.
(www.uctv.tv)
Love both of them. It is time to stand up against corruption and greed.
Hear Hear!! NOW!
Let's rewrite the rules.
Hillary Clinton should be in jail. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!
"The way we structure our economy, structures our inequality." Awesome!
US was tied with Denmark on the GINI coefficient of income inequality in 1976, 200 years after the Declaration was signed and the same year America elected the most Christian POTUS in history, too Christian. He would not approve of death squads slaughtering Jesuit nuns and priests bringing democratic capitalism to Central America. He was against the Mayan genocide in Guatemala that Eliot Abrams' team arranged with Reagan's approval in 1983. The Dulles brothers were behind the first Guatemalan coup in 1958 with one as Sec of State and one as CEO of United Fruit meant a coup or genocide or eugenics...but cheap bananas.
In principle I agree with the statement, but I disagree with the ever present word We being used. It implies that society as a whole has some control of the economy in America, and that's absurd. The United States is and always has been an authoritarian oligarchy controlled government, and that government body's sole purpose is to manipulate the United States economy to the benefit of accumulated wealth at the top. If the public had a say the minimum wage today wouldn't be worth 41% less than it did in 1968. The $1.7 trillion Pentagon budget just passed would at least equal to that spent on the welfare of the humans that supposedly have some say in the United States economy. We comes into play in the ignorance of the United States voters who continuously vote against their own best interest, by voting for politicians of either party of the two party system of government that exist today. They are ignorant in respect to that we are ninety-eight percent of all eligible voters. They are ignorant of the social engineering of We that has manufactured their consent to their vastly inadequate existence. This could rightfully go on far longer than this video, but....
Excellent points, good to hear reasonable people talking about the economic problems in this broken country. I also like that they are non-partisan.
It is worth remembering that the Clinton Presidency was when the Glass-Steagal Act was repealed, unleashing the period of consolidation of the financial services sector. This, and other pieces of legislation that removed regulatory oversight extended the extent to which privilege (Robert Reich's "corporate welfare") became the basis for corporate profits and executive compensation.
The gross inequality of incomes in the U.S. is derived from the design our tax system. A key failure (one Joseph Stiglitz agrees with) is the under-taxation of derived from rent-seeking privilege. The effective rate of taxation of land and natural resource assets provides to owners a huge and growing imputed rental income stream capitalized by market forces into asset prices. Correcting this problem has proven to be nearly impossible, in part because landed assets are assessed and tax at the local level by thousands of towns, cities, boroughs, townships, counties and school districts.
Although not the ideal solution, rent-derived income can be publicly captured by a restructuring of the individual income tax that combines real progressivity with tax simplification. The starting point is to exempt all individual incomes up to the national median income (states could do likewise using state income data). Above this exempted level, higher ranges of income would be taxed at an increasing rate of taxation, the rates and ranges determined during the budgeting process in order to raise the revenue needed to balance the budget. As the rate is increased on higher ranges of income, the effect will be to raise more and more revenue from income derived from passive investment and speculation in commodities, financial instruments, real estate and land.
Consideration should also be given to imposing a penalty on tax-exempt entities that do not hold assets as long-term investments. Any gains on the sale of an asset should be taxed at a diminishing rate of taxation based on the length of time held. With the huge hoildings of financial assets by foundations and other tax-exempt entities the effect on markets is highly disruptive. Tax exemption is capitalized into higher asset prices than warranted by price-earnings ratios and other measurements of a strong and growing business.
I really enjoyed this! Thanks for the upload!
Well done
Great talk. Thank you for sharing!
Two great men and minds ! You can tell by looking at their faces they are genuine and good persons ! We don't have that in politics these days ..
The pro-equality-scholar look, I.e., genuine and kind look.
well, the Democrats destroyed Bernie -we "could" have had Bernie, but they wanted Biden to hold onto their capital corporate gains. The Democrats are corporate capitalism - ask how much money Pelosi has made while serving the people and living off the people's dime. Just look at Obama. Obama was pushing so hard for the TPP. This "secret" trade deal he pushed hard to pass, is the most undemocratic document, vesting power in money, and corporate profits, at the expense of people and planet. So no, we don't have people like Bernie in positions of real power because those in government today are all in favor of and stick together to keep corporate capitalism as the law of the land. People and planet be damned.
7 years ago we were talking about the same issues we are in November 2022. Knowing what’s wrong hasn’t informed policy.
The term corporate welfare was not new. Back in the 70s or 80s The leader of the NDP party in Canada took it a step further and called the companies receiving money, Corporate welfare bums.
Great vid. I shared it on Facebook. Probably won't get near as many views or likes as the cute cat videos do from some of my friends but it is much more important.
Why does America have greater inequality than any other socially developed country? It's not the underlying drivers but American policy which are then related to American politics. Inequality in the US is a matter of choice and that choice is in the hands of a select few. It has to do with the role of money in politics says Joseph Stiglitz and has to do with lobbyists engineering tax subsidies and 'corporate welfare'.
Watching this on 24 feb 2020.
Enlightening discussion!
If you want to understand there is no such thing as economy but only political economy, this is a constructive conversation for beginners - or for those with a further capacity to think.
What about the subsidised prison construction policy where companies profit from a system of 3 strikes for people who can't afford good counsel plus the free trade agreement which destroyed American jobs.
Hello people at the bottom. Wake up now. Spread the love.
The question is: what we can do against the great divide? Honestly? Nothing.
"Two families inherited as much wealth as the bottom forty-four percent of America." Stiglitz is correct: His physics background tells him what all should have learned from high-school algebra: if X has more, Y has less
not necessarily - both can have x-
@@Grace-ht3qz
That’s irrelevant?
these messages is so much impressive to increases in some one intellectual knowledge of whosoever listen to the message
Who the person that tried to fire Reich?
If you have experience and knowledge of the different economic classes you would see that the wealthier get more breaks and are given so much compared to others who have the same situations except on a smaller level. Their smaller level means that they have even less. I don't get breaks on my mom and pop size business even if I incorporate. I end up paying so much more than the big competiters that it makes it impossible to grow bigger. I have found that I couldn't succeed
unless I gave up my integrity and morals and I wouldn't do it.This is an example in business and in personal lives it is just as bad.
Everyone should pay a percentage into ssi. Not have a ceiling that is so low like it is for wealtheir people. They get back what they put in and in the early years helps to keep the fund going strong. With the cap, and the ability of like what the GOP did, to raid the money with an IOU and then want to get rid of it altogether is B.S.
I am neither lazy or feel entitled to someone elses income they earned but I also
think that they should be subject to the same rules.
There is so much that prevents a person pulling themselves up by their
bootstraps as they say, today, that didn't exist before. It is almost as though the
powerful don't want anyone to be able to succeed.
I have seen both sides of this argument you allude to. There is all different kinds of inequality, but economic inequality exist because the haves do whatever they
can to not pay a living wage to the producers of their wealth. Our minimum wage was an attempt to make industry pay fairly but money corrupts and our
politicians have not kept that promise. And the minimum has never been enough to truly be a livable wage for 1 person, but it at least came close enough to find a way to make it work.
The law happened because industry did what the rule of Capitalism is and that is Profit. Captialism will never be about people without government forcing them to pay a fair compensation. They get around a lot of it by creating millions of part
time jobs to escape giving overtime, vacations and other additional
compensation.
Everytime a law is made to rein in Capitalism, they find a way to subvert it. If they would practice a form of capitalism that accounts for people's welfare, the
people who produce those goods and services, we would not have these
complicated tax laws, employment laws etc. Greed and power never want to
create a better world. They want to create more money at any price.
My sentiments exactly. Now into 2021, it is going to be an interesting time of suffering to see who gets the bailouts and how they are structured.
8:35 corporate welfare13:35 stock options
can´t hear the name Stiglitz now without thinking of Inglorious Bastards
we need to regulate captialism for sure.
Who would have thought that the guy who signed NAFTA and approve China into the WTO would eventually have a wife run for the presidency and the states most damaged by those two actions would not vote for her for president? Or that his party after 40 years in control in the house and senate would pretty much loose them from that point on?
2021. And now? I wonder what your thoughts would be?
@@carolleenkelmann4751 very concerned that Trump had so many people voted for him, the house lost seats and senate did not obtain more seats. Look up article by Joan C. William entitled "How Biden Won Back (Enough of) the White Working Class" in the HBR. Also, listen to interviews by Brian Alexander who wrote THE GLASS HOUSE about that book or read the book. Anything by Thomas Frank and Mark Blyth is close to where I am now.
The choice of inequality is made in the aspiration of “the American Dream”. An aspiration used to excuse run away wealth with the claim that every one wants to have the “freedom” to become Rich.
When I spent 2 years in a 6 foot square trailer beside the yacht I was building I had a sign over the kitchen counter which declared...”Rich is a State of Mind”.
This is only true if your situation is by your own choosing.
and could you get a decent insurance?
@@carolleenkelmann4751 insurance against what?
From best hope to worst nightmare...
democratic socialism helps turn capitalism into something more fair and ethical
that is grossly overstating the power of the peanut gallery to affect decisions by capital [forget reform]
Free markets, without any government regulation, are the most fair distribution of wealth possible.
there is no such thing as a 'free market' and never will be ... someone is ALWAYS manipulating - there is always someone with more power swaying outcomes ...
Spoken like a habitual victim...
American confuse every kind of regulation, welfare program with socialism. Instead of using democratic socialism, I would use the word social democracy. Giving a better education to the general population and improving human capital for most of America, is a better way os social efficiency.
"Political economy." What a novel idea in the 21st century. Never mind that it was foundational in both premise and parameter to establishment of the economics field.
Of course when universities separated "politics" from "economy" in the 20th Century, the nation's "learning" structure has systematically produced largely to mainly illiterates in the 21st century. At a minimum a literate economist would have read at least Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments and the reservations Smith had about a "market economy" without constraint in Wealth of Nations. And many thinkers who once followed through at least the days of Veblen. Of course, today the illiterate will retreat into their own clubs and are not likely to care throughout their lifetime.
Given their level of advice, too bad for America. Although there remains a strand of hope.
All hope gone. The USA is going through a stage of autophagy. No one knows who will be left to nibble on the bones. And this has very little to do with Trump who is more the sympton rather than the disease.
Free money is money created as debt because the debt can never be paid down, not now and never in the future. All money is born as debt or could be spent to the economy by the governments, but as I understand it all spending goes down to the books as debt.
"That person" (they can't name name) must be no other than Larry Summers ;)
yin ng Robert Rubin, actually. That would jibe more with some of the hints they dropped.
***** yea, rubin was the dog, summers was the tail
+Martin Rayner My immediate guess was Rubin too. But Rubin was too important to worry about what Stiglitz and Reich were doing. It doesn't suit his personality or track record. Only Summers would bother to bully Reich for using the term "corporate welfare" Would Rubin do that? He has a reputation for avoiding that kind of micromanaging. You said that Rubin "would jibe more with some of the hints they dropped." What other hints did they drop?
The problem of US political system is the two parties are the same people who are both the referees and the athletes. They always win in any games.
Mengapa ekomomi global tidak berkeadilan?
Foreclosure is not something that will be easily fixed as the benefits go to the banks. The banks at law own all of the money in the economy so therefore they get to sell the debts, hence a debt market that serves only the financial insiders. They will not allow debt forgiveness as it represents a loss to them, or so they think, but there again since they have managed to get free money to save the banks once, they might get it twice, but just include more of their so-called custom base next time.
Two words, Corruption and Greed.
The Great Divide lies between little Robbie’s ears!
What has not been discussed to this day is that had Obama just given the 1 trillion dollars to the homeowners rather than the banks, the foreclosures would have stopped, the banks would have had the mortgages paid back, and the middle class would have benefitted tremendously. Had Obama given every homeowner who had a 10% equity in their homes $100,000, he would have spent less than what they gave to the banks, and every family would have had money to pay back the banks, plus more for spending in the economy, so immediate growth which would have provided money for infrastructure, etc. He also would have gone down as the greatest president in history instead of a mediocre one who made history only by being African American, and making wealthy people and corporations wealthier. And with Trump, there is nothing hopeful.
The inequality is in the amount of work pepole do I work hard and someone that won't work think they have a right to what I've earned I call them thieves robing me at gun point or through taxes is the same thing if you want to fix this stop taking what pepole worked hard for and giving it to people that wont lift a finger stop giving free shit pepole will go to work
The great divide
Conservation of energy works in all fields
wicked inequality. shame.
OMG, do we need Bernie Sanders or WHAT!
Hotel Villa Bahia, I guess so.
Go Bernie!
Well, guess what!
Enjoyed this, thank you. Two questions for me would be...
1) How does Mr. Reich feel about Hillary breaking a billion in her campaign raising, vis-a-vis his comments about Koch bros raising $900M for 2016?
2) If Mr. Stiglitz didn't back the minimum wage boost 20 years ago because a large percentage of those paid that were teenagers/etc...but now a disproportionate number are trying to support their families, is the problem the minimum wage or more complicated (job training, jobs sent over seas, etc....)?
Anyways great stuff overall, I am NOT down with the TPP nor the stock buy-back synchronized with CEO, among many other points of agreement.
How can the american working people change it besides voting? The courts are influenced by the politicans and the politicians are influenced by the large corporations and wealthy via contributions and biologists.
and the wheel turns 'round and 'round...
Stiglitz should write a book about how the Chinese economy developed over the past 40 years and the Russian economy developed since 1990.
Stiglitz only participates in debates or conversations with people who agree with him... Just saying...
I had to look twice when the music came on....I thought I was listening to ellie goulding for a sec....
Too much analysis of the problems; not enough discussion of solutions. But, of course, these guys helped to perpetuate the problem. Not solve it.
don't forget the Politicians behind the Policies. All working toward self-interest.
The manager at a McDonalds should not make the same as the cashier. Inequality is good.
+Alan Fox
This pertains more to the fact that some global corporate leaders have stratospheric wealth, compared to even a McDonalds manager. Not only that, but those same people are funding movements within government and more specifically the legislature that balance the wealth in their direction. They are a dangerous drain on the economy, and the reason for much of its instability.
+Alan Fox
McDonald's CEO makes between $20,280,000 to $67,580,000 per year. McDonald workers get paid a median salary of about $20,000 per year.
insiders.morningstar.com/trading/executive-compensation.action?t=MCD
CEOs earn more off shareholders lo,
Look at the hourly rate of pay for these people and compare it to the cost of living, particularly rental or morgage. Then compare it with the lurks and perks of the Manager. Unfair business practise is not good.
Felicidades.criminales
Interesting talk. There's some things said that are particularly noteworthy:
1) Dr. Stiglitz should know better than to call the CATO institute "conservative" and demonstrates one dimensional thinking politically and results in a complete failure to make proper distinctions - this is the reason the CATO institute OPPOSES "corporate welfare" - precisely because they are NOT "conservative" (and, as a matter of fact, rather anti-neoconservative).
2) I'm glad there's an admission that Fed policy has an affect on inequality (a tacit, almost "in passing" at ~12:30 when talking about stock options, then again at about 26:00ff).
3) There's no discussion about the simple fact that money exists in politics because the government has it's fingers in everything and therefore it's an easy target for corporations to grab the reigns that controls all those string. For this reason all large governments lead to crony-capitalism.
4) Robert Reich praises Hillary Clinton, someone in the top 1% of the top 1% with a net worth of $100million. 100% of it was made since the Clinton's were in politics. Politics is big business and I'm not sure how one of the biggest bought-and-paid-for players is going to fix it.
Homer Simpleton CATO is a conservative institute.
Chomsky:
Good for the public
Bad for the corporates
To much populations , laws , taxes
Sounds like these two fellas are walking to their bank to fill their pockets!
I enjoy the commercial break showing the half hunk~~~half eagle sun- god doing house chores while master orders him about~~indeed.
So you identify with the effete lazy masters??
Not I sir
You think you control this sun beast~~>?
Think again!
This beast is about to rule in its cycles
Watch the sky and feel the earth shudder!
Stigletz is socialist
Unions created this problem ,of less jobs
Robert Reich for president B LUE WAVE