Joseph Stiglitz makes too much sense for one man to have.

[Thorn777]

Long vid, but its a good listening as well while doing other stuff. Its contently excellent concerning many of our current problems by an economics nobelprize winner and former head+chief-economist of The World Bank. Its telling for the state of our society that this vid only gets 4000 hits on youtube, while a Glenn Beck TV-class gets several millions...



If you dont agree please point out what and why?

[Platon]

Yeah, interresting but I've heard everything before. I have read Stiglitz book on Globalisation and many articles his written. I can understand why you (Thorn) like him, since he is a social-liberal .. or a Keynesian.
In all this discussion about the crisis usually the big combat is between the Keynesians and the laissez-faire people. Noone questions the fundamental flaws of free market in the first place. Of cource if Stiglitz would do that, he wouldn't get a Noble Price or lead the World Bank.

[Thorn777]

Yeah, interresting but I've heard everything before. I have read Stiglitz book on Globalisation and many articles his written. I can understand why you (Thorn) like him, since he is a social-liberal .. or a Keynesian.
In all this discussion about the crisis usually the big combat is between the Keynesians and the laissez-faire people. Noone questions the fundamental flaws of free market in the first place. Of cource if Stiglitz would do that, he wouldn't get a Noble Price or lead the World Bank.

1)He got the nobelprize for his information-asymmetry theory, very much exposing "fundamental flaws of the free-market", and at the World Bank he got fired for opposing its policies he just couldn't come to terms with.

2)He like many others get there are "flaws" but at the same time realize that a)other systems have flaws as well, b)that theories are great but that they have to have realistic and foreseeable outcomes in the fragile real world, and c)believes like many others that the "systemic flaws" to great extends can be prevented or at least weakened, as happened and happens to great extends.

His grand argument evolves around regulations and how they actually worked. Richard Wolff talks about regulations having worked as well but in the end prove to be useless since govt will always get bought by big-business, and he bases his whole "no other option than my Marxism" theory on this premise. Well people are going to be people in any system, so I rather not have crazy transitions happening with unforeseeable consequences. I like to have the shots called from a multi layered democratic society that checks and balance each other out and where "the free-market" is as much a part of it as an independent justice-system is. The only solution Richard Wolff dares to speak of in his much watched lectures, is more democracy at the work-place, well thats in principle not against a free-market at all. In Germany stock-indexed companies need to have 50% employees on the board of directors and so to say can block any CEO/Shareholder decision that they don't agree with. Things like this, whats wrong with it...

It really wasn't that bad of a deal when thinking about what could have gone right instead, when not doing the wrong things. We knew which things where right and wrong before....

But indeed Im starting to get cynical as well when seeing what people choose to ignore over and over despite all the facts and history around.

Well there is much more to say but I have to go now.

[Platon]

..so I rather not have crazy transitions happening with unforeseeable consequences.

Don't worry, you will have that anyway

..In Germany stock-indexed companies need to have 50% employees on the board of directors and so to say can block any CEO/Shareholder decision that they don't agree with. Things like this, whats wrong with it...

They are bought and paid for - the moment they step into that executive room.

Regulations and workers rights may have worked for some decades after WW2. After the Soviet collapse it was over and the neo liberal agenda ruled. The results.. we see already.
Say Goodbye to all those rights our grandfathers have fought for. Now we gonna have:
Privatized health-school-energy-insurance-safety.... just about anything that can give some profit.
Lower wages, longer work hours, shorter vacations, more labor years until pension, slashed welfare system, worse schools (unless you pay extra fees), temp work (can get fired anytime), lower minimum wage..

And if you dare to complain: Auf Wiedersehen!! - there is always another desperate soul whos ready to take your place.
The Governments can't do , their hands are tight. Even if they wanted to tax and regulate, the finance will just move somewhere else where the environment is more friendly for their investments.

Have you heard the frase "we have to be more competitive" lately?
We hear it every day - and I'm sure we're not the only ones..

[MathiasOfAthens]

Hes a keynesian... k Ill listen to it too.

[Thorn777]

^I dunno, people like Stiglitz and many others among the political and economic elite more more come to the understanding that 90% of privatizations failed and backfired, that the Washington Consensus and its IMF failed, even when it comes to making "larger profits and cutting costs".

Indeed I do see great difficulties as well where nation-states today still compete on every inch instead of working together to impose healthy incentives, and this globalized world is still pretty mature while the imbalance is grand already, but I do have confidence that the lingering necessity creates the needed political-will and public-support to have more international coordination looking a bit past petty self-destructive national-interests.

I do see some positive signs for such like tax-agreements between countries, imposing actual market incentives for speculators, financial-taxes, going after tax-havens etc. Not effectively realized nearly enough, and much more other things need to be done, but what is the alternative? Talking about problems is easy, but what are the solutions?

[Platon]

..Talking about problems is easy, but what are the solutions?

First of all the only way a sollution can work is if it's taken globally. When we know what we don't want it's a little bit easier to come up with ideas.
Trying to regulate a free market system is meaningless in the long run, when the only purpose a private enterprice has is to make a profit. They will use all their money and power to circumvent those same regulations - that should be obvious to everyone.

[Thorn777]

First of all the only way a sollution can work is if it's taken globally. When we know what we don't want it's a little bit easier to come up with ideas.

Clearly...

Trying to regulate a free market system is meaningless in the long run, when the only purpose a private enterprice has is to make a profit. They will use all their money and power to circumvent those same regulations - that should be obvious to everyone.

I don't find that bullet-proof at all.

Why not "regulate" campaign funding? Criminalize the various legal-corruption activities? Restrain peoples representatives from hopping back and forth making policies and sitting on corporate boards? Slash the media monopolies so people dont get fed the agenda nonsense 24/7? Slash the to big to fail financial conglomerates so they cant be to big to fail anymore(as happened with ING of Holland by the EU). Why not have democratic oversight over central-banking so the ideologic Greenspans of this world cant be just appointed and sustained by a clique of ideologic sympathizers? Why not tax the very wealthy 70% on their income again instead of the average single household being taxed 70% all together when adding up his/her labor, taxes in the rent, VAT etc?

I know why and we agree, but like I said "necessity creates willingness". If only the many millions of people with similar worries like you and I would click on Stiglitz lectures more than on Glenn Beck's antics....

[Ahlerich]

i cannot see how anybody honestly thinks there is any other option then regulations to stop the investment zoo from going nuts again.

they have the data that no deep crisis was only during the short time span when heavy regulations were in place. this doesnt necesarryly mean that heavy regulations will work but there is no evidence yet that it wont work. in contrary there is lots of evidence that no regulations didnt work. so heavy regulations should be worth a shot. apparently that idea isnt popular at all in the anglo-saxon world. too bad.

well regulations and like in the basel contract that banks need more capital so they have enough security to bail themselfes out. although the % found in basel (2% or so) is still to low. should be more like 5%. if american bank would have had that security they wouldnt have needed government money.

never herd the nickname "düsseldorfs", thats great. sad but great.

[Thorn777]

never herd the nickname "düsseldorfs", thats great. sad but great.

hehe, and just imagine the damage that could have been done to our banks if we didn't have these strong regulations in place. Now they only had 2 weeks to lose these tens of billions they lost, since minister Steinbrück loosened the age-old regulations for these hot-potato products two weeks prior to when the crisis unrevealed.

Funny what 2 weeks of buying financial-products from there can cause. I can only imagine the scale of the Steinbrück asskissing by American lobbyists prior to this...

Crazy...

[Ahlerich]

hehe, and just imagine the damage that could have been done to our banks if we didn't have these strong regulations in place. Now they only had 2 weeks to lose these tens of billions they lost, since minister Steinbrück loosened the age-old regulations for these hot-potato products two weeks prior to when the crisis unrevealed.

Funny what 2 weeks of buying financial-products from there can cause. I can only imagine the scale of the Steinbrück asskissing by American lobbyists prior to this...

Crazy...

sure but as long as we are bailing out european members it doesnt help the german citizen and taxpayer.
a eu memebr bank crises will at the end arrive as a state crisis of all members. spreading the disease and sending banks the wrong impulses..
its messed up. 4% inflation and no bigger wages, everything becoming more expensive now already before the inflation.. dark times for peasants.

[Thorn777]

sure but as long as we are bailing out european members it doesnt help the german citizen and taxpayer.
a eu memebr bank crises will at the end arrive as a state crisis of all members. spreading the disease and sending banks the wrong impulses..
its messed up. 4% inflation and no bigger wages, everything becoming more expensive now already before the inflation.. dark times for peasants.

Its all about preserving the status-quo. On one side protecting the riches, at another maintaining overall stability. Its a duality...

Could indeed all blow up really hard though.

[Denny Crane!]

I can't understand how there isn't more focus around removing business influence from government, and I would also add massive union influence as well. I would suggest it is because the political parties think their survival is linked to not changing the rules.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Unions are not always bad though Denny. When the idea here is that Employees are given more influence in store policy. Take Winco Foods for instance, not really a union because it is Employee owned but it serves my point.

[Denny Crane!]

Unions are not always bad though Denny. When the idea here is that Employees are given more influence in store policy. Take Winco Foods for instance, not really a union because it is Employee owned but it serves my point.

Go back and read my post again mate. You didn't actually see me saying that unions are bad, you saw me saying we should address union contributions. If you are wondering why this is a concern perhaps you could examine New Labour and their union connections, latest moves have left the Unions in virtual control of a political party which is just as bad as businesses having control of a political party. Undue influence of a few powerful individuals is wrong, it doesn't matter whether it is a business which are beneficial entities or unions which can be beneficial entities.

[MathiasOfAthens]

My apologies... your right. I was too quick to respond. This guy in the video pretty smart. I'm just now watching the video and I agree with what he said about the bailouts to the banks and comparing it to the trickle down belief. The Banks had no motivation to give out loans after the bailouts.

[Denny Crane!]

I confess I haven't watched it yet but I intend to tomorrow before I work.

[MathiasOfAthens]

20: mins in is pretty good he starts to discuss what we should do during a recession and with a deficit.

Interesting at 33-34 mins in too. He is talking about Reagen and deregulation and brings up a man who brought down inflation in the late 70s but was fired by Reagen because the man was a regulator and worked to separate Investment banks from Commercial Banks. Reagen however was fixated on deregulation.

[Ahlerich]

glad that people start watching the video so they can discuss it now. for me it was a really interesting watch. i can say i learned quite abit of the connection of the crisis.

[Thorn777]

I like the seemingly improvised last line of this lecture in the question-round answering to someone: "Yes we know what to do, which is to break them up. Restrict their activities. Unfortunately the banks made very bad economic investments, as we saw in the crisis, but they made very good political investments, and so far the political investments payed big dividends".