marijuana | Law | Economy | Investing | Marketing | Entrepreneurship | Economic Policy | Globalization | Emerging Markets

Joseph Stiglitz: Freefall

More from this series:

Commonwealth Club of California

More videos from this partner:

33
Likes
0
Dislikes
RATE

  • Info
  • Bio
  • Chapters
  • Preview
  • Download
  • Zoom In
Advertisement
There are 27 comments on this program

Please or register to post a comment.
Previous FORAtv comments:
cat1012000 Avatar
cat1012000
Posted: 03.04.10, 04:39 PM
The teaparty does not advocate "No government" we want limited government. The fact that government pre-empted "Bucket Laws" that had protected the market from abuses in unconscionable. Derivatives, credit swaps & ETFs are crazy and unless stopped will continue to fuel further market abuses. In fact, George Soros is using ETFs to "bet" against Greece. You see how well that is going. By the way, I've created/invented/produced many services and products across several industries & never took a dime from the government - so your statement that we need "government" to fund research & new products is greatly flawed. Do you work in the academia world? Certainly sounds like it. What is more flawed is Public-Private partnerships. Where the taxpayer money pays for all the research and a private company gets all the profits - now that is a flawed system.
balthazarF Avatar
balthazarF
Posted: 03.04.10, 02:31 PM
THE COWS ARE GONE. QUICK! CLOSE THE BARN DOOR. Imperfect Information for a More Imperfect Nation Economic theory is not mentioned in the Constitution. America is ruled by the Law of the Land. The Law of the Land begins with a statement of responsibility and purpose. Responsibility lies with We The People, not We the economists, We the corporations, We the business people, nor We the special interest. We the people established a constitutionally democratic republic. In its very structure, capitalism (the economic in vogue) is anti-democratic. In its very structure, the corporation is undemocratic. Businesses with employees, in their structure, are undemocratic. Capitalism has one requirement, capital; one goal, more capital. We the people have the responsibility and constitutional authority to regulate all parts of the national economic, all businesses, to preserve the constitutionally democratic republic. Business does not have a constitutional entitlement. Capital, which is fungible, does not have a national allegiance. We the people are fully responsible for the condition of the nation. To have more perfect information to ensure that more perfect nation and the condition we have put it in today, we the people have a responsibility to be informed about the legal structure of corporations at the time the Constitution was adopted. Of course, the task is not easy, is necessary and there were just thirteen states with corporate law to be understood. Also a citizen should be informed about the central bank and when and how it came into being in relation to the Constitution. Want to solve entitlements? Eliminate the existing legislated wage of poverty. Require a living wage and then some with which to engage in capitalism as a capitalist, not a debtor. And create government jobs where capitalism cannot. Seven million plus workers in this country have not lost their jobs. One cannot lose something one does not own. Want to solve health insurance issues so everyone is covered? Can you say NATIONAL NOT FOR PROFIT INSURANCE MONOLOPY UNDER STRICT REGULATORY OVERSIGHT? I know I can. Corporate officers, under SCOTUS authority, have a fiduciary responsibility to their stock holders. In a for profit insurance corporation the insured is forced to live with that responsibility and subordinate any fiduciary interest to that ruling. CLAIM DENIED. We the people are responsible for the condition the nation is in today. After Reagan bailed out the banks, we were told by THE TWO PARTIES THAT WE THE PEOPLE RE-ELECT IN SPITE OF THEIR RECORD that they had taken care of the problems in banking, changed the law, and that that would never happen again. Of course, those TWO PARTIES had already changed the laws regulating the banks following the last time the capitalism went into failure mode. And after TWO PARTIES last promise they allowed a consolidation of banking, brokerage and insurance which is now in failure. Can you say systemic? I can. We the people are responsible for the condition the nation is in today. Remember, a lot of Americans do not want to admit that we have become so stupid, or perhaps were never that bright. Instead of becoming informed, we'll be Einsteinian, We the people will continue voting TWO PARTIES and expecting change. I'm confident of that. We the people are responsible for the condition the nation is in today.
phiscal Avatar
phiscal
Posted: 03.03.10, 07:55 PM
Stiglitz is evidence for the theory that the American left and right are symmetrical. Stiglitz is the left's Ron Paul...outspoken, entertaining, but playing with a deck that's a few cards short. Wall St certainly should shoulder blame, but it is intellectually negligent to stop there. Everybody partied during the boom: realtors, Fannie and Freddie, the construction industry, the UAW, Wall Street, Main Street, presidents and Congresses, borrowers and lenders, rich and poor. Markets are to blame, but not free markets. Government intervention (which is often positive) played a large role in feeding the frenzy. Too Big To Fail and FDIC insurance made it rational for market participants (including first time homebuyers) to bet on the upside and discount the downside. Fannie and Freddie, stepchildren of very deliberate federal market intervention, grew to own and guarantee $5 trillion in mortgages against the advice of politicians and financial leaders Stiglitz undoubtedly disagrees of. Deregulation played virtually no role in the lead up to the collapse. The firms at the center were not deposit-taking institutions that would have been subject to Glass Steagall had it been in effect. The boom and bust is not without its positives. First, we went 25 years without a serious recession - five times longer than normal. So is it a surprise that when it finally hits, it hits hard? Further the boom pulled hundreds of millions of the world's poorest citizens out of poverty. Witness China. Hopefully they can hang on to their newfound wealth. In this presentation, Stiglitz is certainly not a seeker of truth, but a colorful partisan advocate.
Sokratez Avatar
Sokratez
Posted: 03.03.10, 07:44 PM
Quote: Originally Posted by adambl I wonder if free markets would work if we did have perfect competition and perfect information. I mean, perfect competition would lead to fair market prices, and perfect information would ensure people didn't take out unreasonable mortgages. Seems pretty sound to me. We depend on nature, so unless rain decides to go where prices for water are high, i doubt it. Your idea of "perfect information" would imply, that farmers can plan their future, because they already know how much rain there will be next year. The free market, like anything else we humans do, always has to react to reality. Capitalism will always go where the profits are, and it will serve the people only *if they can pay for it*. In nature things work very differently. You simply cannot buy rain. Sure, if you imagine that the system is perfect, then you can conclude that it works. That's a dirty little trick to confuse yourself. I wonder, if we'd live in a perfect world where everyone takes care of everyone else, where nothing belongs to anyone, because there is always enough to go around for everyone, i wonder if socialism would work in a world like that... See what I mean?
adambl Avatar
adambl
Posted: 03.03.10, 11:52 AM
I wonder if free markets would work if we did have perfect competition and perfect information. I mean, perfect competition would lead to fair market prices, and perfect information would ensure people didn't take out unreasonable mortgages. Seems pretty sound to me.
mcnamara Avatar
mcnamara
Posted: 03.03.10, 09:49 AM
Unfortunately he already got thrown out of the World Bank for his independent thinking. Can't see the Fed taking him on board.
Gnarlodious Avatar
Gnarlodious
Posted: 03.03.10, 07:48 AM
He should replace Geitner.
Advertisement

Advertisement