Joseph Stiglitz on Free Markets and the World Economy

I don't see in any case why Stiglitz is selling himself to an "economic du jour" when he critics most of what's happening currently in the international areas, especially within trades. Now about China easy to blame as always but perhaps some are too quick in forgetting that first China was able to buy so much US bond because US was selling in order to manage their deficit, second hopefully it was China that buy that much as China is strong enough to bear the cost, and is now again growing up. If it was otherwise the consequences, in my opinion, would have been worse.
It's true that Stiglitz repeat himself, but as nothing change, there are not lot choice... US and EU still carry their heavy farm subsidies...and it's still regulator who don't believe in regulation in the head of the finance institution in private and public sectors. There been a shift but only a shift. Hence, it's hard to not repeat, I think this conference fit well with the film "inside job". Lets hope that we can learn from the past.

He is a true believer ----
Sad ------
Never let the facts get in the way of a big government--
Innovation; not do less with less beats small minded central planning.
Otherwise the USSR would be top dog and not a foot note---
So sad ---- All animals are equal!
Some are just more equal than others.
Seems to be: 'they knows better' mindset--
Stiglitz path to serfdom! VS Innovation and positive mindset!

This was not Stiglitz's best day. He's not particularly articulate and his style is hard on the ears. I stuck with the whole thing though.

More substantively, he comes across as someone who has turned off any notions of balance or objectivity a long time ago.

For instance, he makes the comment that the cheap money available during the boom was wasted on building houses when it could have been used to alleviate global poverty. Well, a very great deal WAS used to alleviate global poverty. Why does he think China was (and is) booming - largely thanks to the cheap money of the Greenspan years.

In short, he's seems to be a staunch leftist who is finally happy to have some evidence with which to bash free market types. But he simplifies and exaggerates his case. He presents it with so much emotion that he squanders credibility.

For the love of God, why is it that this guy is not on national TV?!!
And with all due respect,I hope the Tea Party movement is listening!

Viewed in the proper light it should be obvious that excessive wealth concentration alone... is actually a destroyer of wealth and erodes the field upon which the freedom of the individual is exercised.

A civilization is made of decisions... individual and group decisions in an incredibly complex interplay... and together these compose the social energy that makes it all go... or not.

*social energy: individual and collective decisions operating within the limits of available resources and natural law which (quite literally) result in the product you see as a civilization. A decision here is defined as an idea + an action. Decisions can be motivated by any number of factors. Technologies result from previous decisions thus becoming available resources. And decision here is defined broadly... everything from "Let's build a pyramid for the pharoah!" to "I've got a headache I think I'll lie down."

All we see that is a civilization can be most fundamentally defined as a product of decisions: ideas + actions.

Decision Technologies: Currencies and the Social Contract

Political and economic systems and designs are concerned with 'decision technologies'...

However, group decision in scaled social organisms must contend with biological drives that do not scale directly... especially the boundaries of biological altruism...

This suggests:

*that any social organism as a product of individual and group decisions

*that within a natural-human-community-size (Dunbar's Number) social organism, while some stratification exists, peer-to-peer interactions facilitated by proximity constrain excessive imbalances in power and decision rights

*that when the social organism extended beyond the size of a Dunbar's Number sized group the effects of biological altruism's boundaries (very real though very fuzzy and variable) drove and justified the rise of social classes and Authoritarianism... (hierarchical networks of networks)

*that representative systems employ designs to interrupt these hierarchies by introducing methods encouraging the mixing of personnel, their networks and their ideas.

*that other technologies (finance, marketing, communications, etc) and ideologies (Objectivism, neo-Conservatism, etc.) have worked simultaneously in the other direction... i.e. to justify and increase stratification

*that 'money' is a store of 'decision rights'... (imperfectly and regrettably) and that technologies are necessary to counter-balance the ability of concentrated money to distort collective decisions.

*that these 'decision rights' CAN be more equitably utilized in the political sphere by facilitating direct peer-to-peer capability for the co-ordination of very small amounts of money

*that this capability catalyzes a stable network and this network then offers additional opportunities for peer-to-peer empowered interaction fundamental for scaling decision and action

*that capability ENABLES responsibility (while necessity may demand it... only capability allows it)

On Creating Communities (Part 1)

An Essential Technology for Social Development:

The Individually-controlled/Commons-dedicated Account*

A self-supporting , Commons-owned neutral system of account for both political and charitable monetary contribution... which for fundamental reasons of scale must allow a viable micro-transaction (think x-box points for action in the Commons). The resultant network catalyzes additional functionality for co-ordination of other 'social energy' utilization. (If desired, also the most neutral and ultimately politically viable method for the public finance of elections.)

Empowering the Commons: The Dedicated Account

An Anthropologist with a focus on 'Technology and Social Innovation
for the Public Good'... and perhaps with something to offer...

Well informed and useful information for his audience.
However, I didn't really hear anything new, other than some technical details. Most of his presentation would be pretty much commonly known for anyone who reads and keeps up with current events here in the states, not counting extremists or Fox News only fans.
I happen to agree with him almost completely on his viewpoints.

Between legislated wages of poverty and the false market manipulation vis a vis illegal immigrants, America does not have a free market for labor. But that is what Americans should expect since America is a capitalist oligarchy, not a democracy.

Economists, even award winning economists, prostitute themselves for the economic du jour. It is more rewarding than being creative.