I get it now, Companies are dependent on the legislative branch, for "beneficial legislation" giving great incentive to companies to become manipulators of the legislative branch. Through company driven legislation, the rest of the people get screwed, while those on top get raises. I knew our problem was fascism, I just needed that little connection between companies and legislation.
I bought Stiglitz's book on a lark and haven't been able to put it down. Surprisingly readable for a PHD. His analysis is fundamentally sound in a way that few currently in economics seem able to compete with. It should be mandatory reading for anyone who holds office in America today. It certainly changed my perspective in many important ways.
What America requires in these dark and portentous times is a "New Deal" kind of a political program that brings about the consensus for a better society. As world leader America should do this.
is that term "Rank seeking?" That is exactly what is going on, our economy is this pie that is staying relatively the same size, with a bunch of people trying to get a bigger piece of it. Its hard for those caught up in the competition, to see that if they would simply improve the wealth of the lower class, they would have a bigger pie, but that would take a collaborative effort on the part of all companies, to end the corruption, and raise the lower class from the ashes.
"Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy" is a cookbook for how to fix much of the current mess we find ourselves in, Kiki Perry. I feel like I am listening to the voice of reason when I hear Joseph Stiglitz.
I would direct everyone who has watched this movie to think of one concept: MONEY. Suppose i was allowed to counterfeit money while everyone else had to work for it. No matter how hard you work, I will always have more money than you do. No matter how many inventions or discoveries you make I will always be able to buy you out. Now most people think that money are those pieces of paper than the government prints out. yes that is some of the money. But the majority of the money is created out of thin air by private commercial banks. The do a scam where they take your promissory note and create a negotiable instruments that is then exchange for their own money. They claim it is a liability but inflation balances their books. It would serve well for everyone to understand the various types of money and how it is created. This is the mystery which only a few people in the world really understand. i am beginning to understand it and although I have researched it for more than 20 years I am not sure if the liability is overcome by inflation. Logically it appears that it does byt you have to be able to make models and test it empiracally. One of the worst things that happens when money is concentrated into a few people is that normal people cannot start their own businesses. We are in a debt based system where a few people have taken over the creation of money and these people charge a personal tax, called interest, This is illegal in the USA because money is suppose to be in accordance with article 1, section 8 clause 5 of the constitution. Private commercial banks pretend that they are lending a liability but that liability is balance by inflation
Thank you very much for taking the time to watch our video clumpy100. We are very proud to provide quality programming that educates the mind, and stimulates debate. Keep watching!
Very true. In the meantime, the richest families in America have already spent north of half a billion dollars and continue to aggressively lobby Washington to abolish the inheritance tax. I just don't know how much hope there is when most Americans (just like Europeans) continue to vote against their own interests, on the basis of the American Dream of one day belonging to the one percent. The clearer it is that they never will, the more desperately they are fixated on the pie in the sky.
Kao-Lee Liaw He might have had a cold that day.He does have an interesting "Elmer Fudd" type of speech defect. I found another video where it's much clearer. thank you though for your rude diagnosis. Look at this thread and you'll see lots of people who, according to you "need a hearing aid." He also says "Politics shape Markeks", "things we have been experienkcing", and "the United Steaks", as well as "raink-seeking".Maybe it is YOU need a hearing aid?
Change will not occur as long as politician's careers are in the hands of the wealthy. When the top 1% can dictate if a politician can get elected or can boot you out if they want, where does his loyalty lie? Who's interests will He/She serve? Of course his employer's (The wealthy). There shouldn't be any option to have campaign contrubutions by individuals, or corporations or any source other than through taxation. Only then democracy can be re-established, instead of today's plutocracy.
The problem is greatly compounded by the demise of liberal, reform politics in the U S A over the last 30 years. If reform is impossible - and it is - then more radical popular movements will take it to the streets as in the Occupy Movement of a couple of years ago. The current political system is so completely dominated by the bankers and the military industrial complex that New Deal-style liberal reforms are almost unthinkable. The Democratic Party is as beholden to Wall Street as the Republican Party. So, where does that leave us? Not a very hopeful situation.
Brazil has he had commented has decreased its inequality level by : 1. electing a marixt president. 2. reducing the overall wealth (growth rate). In other words making the rich less rich is not gonna make the poor better off.
You see? it is you who are interjecting politics into this. Extreme wealth disparity, no matter how you see it politically, is unhealthy for an economy. And if you do look at the data in both on a timeline and country to country, you will see that countries that are attentive to inequality have more success in controlling it. Don't look at us now compared to 1930. look at every year in between. Since the 80s the US has been active in stomping out the influence of labor.
Here's how to solve poverty, unemployment, welfare AND the minimum wage issue all at once, and reverse the recession almost overnight. It's the 'Third Way' that can break the Left/Right ideological impasse. Trying to manipulate banks and corporations into creating jobs is an economic ideology that has proven itself futile. This new 'Third Way' supports capitalism by allowing corporations (including small businesses) to focus on profit and frees them from having to provide social services and jobs. It also frees people from living under the thumb of government-run social programs such as welfare. The 'Third Way' is called an Unconditional Basic Income (UBI). A UBI is an adequate amount of basic income that gets automatically deposited into everyone's bank account every month (roughly the equivalent of a US $10 per hour job). The same amount to everyone, rich or poor, working or not, and with NO MEANS TESTING, so NO new government bureaucracies. People can choose to work and can make as much money as they want to ABOVE the UBI so capitalism remains intact. Switzerland is holding a referendum on this. If it passes, every Swiss citizen will receive an Unconditional Basic Income, rich or poor, working or not. The simplicity of the idea is it's beauty. It has been supported by both left and right leaning politicians as a way to eliminate poverty and avoid violent revolution. Both Milton Friedman and Martin Luther King supported the idea of a Basic Income. It can be funded by diverting most present social service funds into this more efficient model and then shutting down large numbers of government departments except education and medical. (Theoretically, the UBI can be run on a single computer that transfers the UBI into everyone's bank account automatically every month.) Another source of funding could be a Financial Transaction Tax (a tiny percentage taken off every stock market transaction). (This would also address the out-of-control microsecond computer trading issue on the stock markets.) But either way, businesses would not have to pay for for the UBI. A UBI is different than a minimum wage because employers do not pay for a UBI. It is funded through taxes. Employers in low wage industries could retain those low wages because people would no longer NEED high wages if they are just working to add to their Basic Income. There would be no inflation as long as the UBI is funded through taxes and not through 'printing' money. (Inflation is caused by money creation in excess of demand.) Employers also won't need to inflate prices because they won't have to increase wages. In fact, a UBI would be better for business as there would be more people buying products. Business would increase overnight. Instant consumer demand and instant stimulation WITHOUT government intervention! Wherever a UBI has been tried, people worked more, not less, and started small businesses. That's because the money was adequate enough that they didn't need to go into debt to the banks to ask for a startup loan. For instance, in Dauphin, Canada's "Mincome" experiment and in Omitara, Namibia, crime decreased, health care costs went down, and the overall economy improved. Two basic income pilot projects have been underway in India since January 2011 resulting in better food, better healthcare, better children's school performance, a tripling of personal savings and a doubling of new business startups, all leaving the overall economy much healthier than before the UBI. Because there is NO MEANS TESTING, no extra bureaucracy would be needed. We have many unpaid workers in our society. Volunteers, artists, musicians, homemakers, grandmothers, etc. It's now time that they were valued monetarily by society. Most of them are shut out from being consumers because of poverty. It's time for REAL change - an Unconditional Basic Income! But politicians won't do anything this radically positive without a grassroots uprising from the people DEMANDING a UBI. So tell your friends (copy and paste this blurb) and help make the UBI go viral!
So many fallacies, so much intellectual dishonesty. 1. the 1 % in the 60's, 70's, 80's are not all the same people. 2. there's been a massive increase in the US population, (particualarlly from immigration). 3.there 's been great economic growth & innovation since the 70's, 80's, generating thousands of new millionaires & billionaires, and a subsequent rise in the standard of living. AND I CAN GO ON ON But the what disturbed me the most is him saying, basically Horatio Alger is dead.
![Don Toliver - Attitude (feat. Charlie Wilson & Cash Cobain) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A90X6-jIe1g/mqdefault.jpg)
I have shared this on Facebook with tags in the hopes that any general search on economics and inequality will flag it for those searching
The book and its argument is more relevant than ever!
It adds to the discussion now underway, that has been triggered by Thomas Pikkety's book.
I get it now, Companies are dependent on the legislative branch, for "beneficial legislation" giving great incentive to companies to become manipulators of the legislative branch. Through company driven legislation, the rest of the people get screwed, while those on top get raises. I knew our problem was fascism, I just needed that little connection between companies and legislation.
I bought Stiglitz's book on a lark and haven't been able to put it down. Surprisingly readable for a PHD. His analysis is fundamentally sound in a way that few currently in economics seem able to compete with. It should be mandatory reading for anyone who holds office in America today. It certainly changed my perspective in many important ways.
What America requires in these dark and portentous times is a "New Deal" kind of a political program that brings about the consensus for a better society. As world leader America should do this.
excellent talk!!!
I like reading your books
wonderful discussion. thank you
Awesome video a must see.
is that term "Rank seeking?" That is exactly what is going on, our economy is this pie that is staying relatively the same size, with a bunch of people trying to get a bigger piece of it. Its hard for those caught up in the competition, to see that if they would simply improve the wealth of the lower class, they would have a bigger pie, but that would take a collaborative effort on the part of all companies, to end the corruption, and raise the lower class from the ashes.
Essential listening for any person who wants to activate change
"Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy" is a cookbook for how to fix much of the current mess we find ourselves in, Kiki Perry. I feel like I am listening to the voice of reason when I hear Joseph Stiglitz.
What Stiglitz refers to as "rent seeking" is what Marx called "accumulation by dispossesion" rather than accumulation through profit on capital.
That is an excellent way of putting it, humanityfirstnow.
I would direct everyone who has watched this movie to think of one concept: MONEY. Suppose i was allowed to counterfeit money while everyone else had to work for it. No matter how hard you work, I will always have more money than you do. No matter how many inventions or discoveries you make I will always be able to buy you out.
Now most people think that money are those pieces of paper than the government prints out. yes that is some of the money. But the majority of the money is created out of thin air by private commercial banks. The do a scam where they take your promissory note and create a negotiable instruments that is then exchange for their own money. They claim it is a liability but inflation balances their books. It would serve well for everyone to understand the various types of money and how it is created. This is the mystery which only a few people in the world really understand. i am beginning to understand it and although I have researched it for more than 20 years I am not sure if the liability is overcome by inflation. Logically it appears that it does byt you have to be able to make models and test it empiracally.
One of the worst things that happens when money is concentrated into a few people is that normal people cannot start their own businesses. We are in a debt based system where a few people have taken over the creation of money and these people charge a personal tax, called interest, This is illegal in the USA because money is suppose to be in accordance with article 1, section 8 clause 5 of the constitution. Private commercial banks pretend that they are lending a liability but that liability is balance by inflation
Thank you very much for taking the time to watch our video clumpy100. We are very proud to provide quality programming that educates the mind, and stimulates debate. Keep watching!
Very true. In the meantime, the richest families in America have already spent north of half a billion dollars and continue to aggressively lobby Washington to abolish the inheritance tax.
I just don't know how much hope there is when most Americans (just like Europeans) continue to vote against their own interests, on the basis of the American Dream of one day belonging to the one percent. The clearer it is that they never will, the more desperately they are fixated on the pie in the sky.
Very good comprehensive view of the real America.
Profoundly Intellectually Honest !!!
What is "rainkseeking"? He keeps mentioning "Rainks" (sp?)
+Patricia Leary Rent-seeking. You probably need a hearing aid.
Kao-Lee Liaw He might have had a cold that day.He does have an interesting "Elmer Fudd" type of speech defect. I found another video where it's much clearer. thank you though for your rude diagnosis. Look at this thread and you'll see lots of people who, according to you "need a hearing aid."
He also says "Politics shape Markeks", "things we have been experienkcing", and "the United Steaks", as well as "raink-seeking".Maybe it is YOU need a hearing aid?
Change will not occur as long as politician's careers are in the hands of the wealthy. When the top 1% can dictate if a politician can get elected or can boot you out if they want, where does his loyalty lie? Who's interests will He/She serve? Of course his employer's (The wealthy). There shouldn't be any option to have campaign contrubutions by individuals, or corporations or any source other than through taxation. Only then democracy can be re-established, instead of today's plutocracy.
The problem is greatly compounded by the demise of liberal, reform politics in the U S A over the last 30 years. If reform is impossible - and it is - then more radical popular movements will take it to the streets as in the Occupy Movement of a couple of years ago. The current political system is so completely dominated by the bankers and the military industrial complex that New Deal-style liberal reforms are almost unthinkable. The Democratic Party is as beholden to Wall Street as the Republican Party. So, where does that leave us? Not a very hopeful situation.
Good problem definition, Steven Yourke. What should we do about it?
Brazil has he had commented has decreased its inequality level by :
1. electing a marixt president.
2. reducing the overall wealth (growth rate).
In other words making the rich less rich is not gonna make the poor better off.
I would like it if those people would say "That's why you have to read his book" instead of "That's why you have to buy his book".
You see? it is you who are interjecting politics into this. Extreme wealth disparity, no matter how you see it politically, is unhealthy for an economy. And if you do look at the data in both on a timeline and country to country, you will see that countries that are attentive to inequality have more success in controlling it. Don't look at us now compared to 1930. look at every year in between. Since the 80s the US has been active in stomping out the influence of labor.
'RENT-seeking' not 'renk-seeking'.
Here's how to solve poverty, unemployment, welfare AND the minimum wage issue all at once, and reverse the recession almost overnight. It's the 'Third Way' that can break the Left/Right ideological impasse. Trying to manipulate banks and corporations into creating jobs is an economic ideology that has proven itself futile. This new 'Third Way' supports capitalism by allowing corporations (including small businesses) to focus on profit and frees them from having to provide social services and jobs. It also frees people from living under the thumb of government-run social programs such as welfare.
The 'Third Way' is called an Unconditional Basic Income (UBI). A UBI is an adequate amount of basic income that gets automatically deposited into everyone's bank account every month (roughly the equivalent of a US $10 per hour job). The same amount to everyone, rich or poor, working or not, and with NO MEANS TESTING, so NO new government bureaucracies. People can choose to work and can make as much money as they want to ABOVE the UBI so capitalism remains intact.
Switzerland is holding a referendum on this. If it passes, every Swiss citizen will receive an Unconditional Basic Income, rich or poor, working or not.
The simplicity of the idea is it's beauty. It has been supported by both left and right leaning politicians as a way to eliminate poverty and avoid violent revolution. Both Milton Friedman and Martin Luther King supported the idea of a Basic Income.
It can be funded by diverting most present social service funds into this more efficient model and then shutting down large numbers of government departments except education and medical. (Theoretically, the UBI can be run on a single computer that transfers the UBI into everyone's bank account automatically every month.) Another source of funding could be a Financial Transaction Tax (a tiny percentage taken off every stock market transaction). (This would also address the out-of-control microsecond computer trading issue on the stock markets.)
But either way, businesses would not have to pay for for the UBI. A UBI is different than a minimum wage because employers do not pay for a UBI. It is funded through taxes. Employers in low wage industries could retain those low wages because people would no longer NEED high wages if they are just working to add to their Basic Income.
There would be no inflation as long as the UBI is funded through taxes and not through 'printing' money. (Inflation is caused by money creation in excess of demand.) Employers also won't need to inflate prices because they won't have to increase wages. In fact, a UBI would be better for business as there would be more people buying products. Business would increase overnight. Instant consumer demand and instant stimulation WITHOUT government intervention!
Wherever a UBI has been tried, people worked more, not less, and started small businesses. That's because the money was adequate enough that they didn't need to go into debt to the banks to ask for a startup loan. For instance, in Dauphin, Canada's "Mincome" experiment and in Omitara, Namibia, crime decreased, health care costs went down, and the overall economy improved. Two basic income pilot projects have been underway in India since January 2011 resulting in better food, better healthcare, better children's school performance, a tripling of personal savings and a doubling of new business startups, all leaving the overall economy much healthier than before the UBI.
Because there is NO MEANS TESTING, no extra bureaucracy would be needed. We have many unpaid workers in our society. Volunteers, artists, musicians, homemakers, grandmothers, etc. It's now time that they were valued monetarily by society. Most of them are shut out from being consumers because of poverty.
It's time for REAL change - an Unconditional Basic Income! But politicians won't do anything this radically positive without a grassroots uprising from the people DEMANDING a UBI. So tell your friends (copy and paste this blurb) and help make the UBI go viral!
Wonderful talk! Oh, and - The Best, you're being profoundly intellectually dishonest. And/or you're not paying attention.
people who are lazy whine, people who are normal work hard. Its that simple. Are you a loafer/taker? or a hard working person?
Correct diagnosis - Wrong medicine!!!
You don't fight inequality with soviet economic policies, BUT with reforms and competition.
So many fallacies, so much intellectual dishonesty.
1. the 1 % in the 60's, 70's, 80's are not all the same people.
2. there's been a massive increase in the US population, (particualarlly from immigration).
3.there 's been great economic growth & innovation since the 70's, 80's, generating thousands of new millionaires & billionaires, and a subsequent rise in the standard of living.
AND I CAN GO ON ON
But the what disturbed me the most is him saying, basically Horatio Alger is dead.
I hate long presentations