RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Martin writes: "Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and former adviser to US President Bill Clinton, says the consensus surrounding neoliberal economic thought has come to an end."

Joseph Stiglitz. (photo: University of British Columbia)
Joseph Stiglitz. (photo: University of British Columbia)


Joseph Stiglitz: 'Neoliberalism Is Dead'

By Will Martin, Business Insider

20 August 16

 

oseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and former adviser to US President Bill Clinton, says the consensus surrounding neoliberal economic thought has come to an end.

Speaking with Business Insider after the launch of his latest book, "The Euro: How A Common Currency Threatens the Future of Europe" — which argues that the fundamental flaws with the euro and the broader European economy are causing huge problems for the continent and risk leading to its downfall — Stiglitz argued that neoliberalism, the dominant school of economic thinking in the West for the past 30 years or so, is on its last legs.

Since the late 1980s and the so-called Washington Consensus, neoliberalism — essentially the idea that free trade, open markets, privatisation, deregulation, and reductions in government spending designed to increase the role of the private sector are the best ways to boost growth — has dominated the thinking of the world's biggest economies and international organisations like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

The policies of Ronald Reagan and Clinton in the US and Margaret Thatcher in the UK are often held up as the gold standard of neoliberalism at work, while in recent years in Britain George Osborne and David Cameron's economic policies continued the neoliberal tradition.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, however, there has been a groundswell of opinion in both economic and political circles to suggest that the neoliberal consensus may not be the right way forward for the world. In the past few years, with growth low and inequality rampant, that groundswell has gained traction.

Stiglitz, who won a Nobel Memorial Prize in economics in 2001 for his work on information asymmetry, has been one of neoliberalism's biggest critics in recent years, and he says the "neoliberal euphoria" that has gripped the world since the 1980s is now gone.

Asked by Business Insider whether he thought the economic consensus surrounding neoliberalism was coming to an end, Stiglitz argued: "I can talk about this from the point of view of academia or even in policy circles. In academia, I think it has pretty well become rejected.

"The young students are not interested in establishing that neoliberalism works — they're trying to understand where markets fail and what to do about it, with an understanding that the failures are pervasive. That's true of both micro and macroeconomics. I wouldn't say it's everywhere, but I'd say that it's dominant.

"In policymaking circles I think it's the same thing. Of course, there are people, say on the right in the United States who don't recognise this. But even many of the people on the right would say markets don't work very well, but their problem is governments are unable to correct it."

Stiglitz went on to argue that one of the central tenets of the neoliberal ideology — the idea that markets function best when left alone and that an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth — has now been pretty much disproved.

"We've gone from a neoliberal euphoria that 'markets work well almost all the time' and all we need to do is keep governments on course, to 'markets don't work' and the debate is now about how we get governments to function in ways that can alleviate this," he said.

In other words, Stiglitz says: "Neoliberalism is dead in both developing and developed countries."

Stiglitz is not alone in his belief that neoliberalism has its problems, though his argument that the consensus is "dead" is somewhat more forthright than those of many others. In a blog post in May, three economists from the IMF — long one of the greatest champions of the neoliberal consensus — questioned the efficacy of some aspects of it, particularly when it comes to the creation of inequality.

"The increase in inequality engendered by financial openness and austerity might itself undercut growth, the very thing that the neoliberal agenda is intent on boosting," Jonathan Ostry, Prakash Loungani, and Davide Furceri argued. "There is now strong evidence that inequality can significantly lower both the level and the durability of growth."

"There are a lot of people thinking the same thing at this point, that basically some aspects of the neoliberal agenda probably need a rethink," Ostry told the Financial Times on the day the blog was published, adding: "The crisis said: 'The way we've been thinking can't be right.'"

The decline of neoliberalism

The decline of neoliberalism is also evident in the UK, where austerity has reigned since the accession of the Conservative Party to government in 2010. Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne presided over a period of record fiscal-deficit reduction created through a six-year programme of austerity.

But since Cameron resigned following the UK's vote to leave the European Union, fiscal stimulus in the UK has started to gain traction once again as a viable means of stimulating growth. It is widely expected that Philip Hammond, the new chancellor under newly installed Prime Minister Theresa May, will announce some form of fiscal easing at the Autumn Statement — which will come at some point before the end of the year (last year's was in late November). As Business Insider's Oscar Williams-Grut argued in mid-July, "Britain's age of austerity could be over."

Across the Atlantic, both US presidential nominees, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, both favouring expanded government borrowing to fund infrastructure projects. As Randall W. Forsyth argued in Barron's magazine last week:

"We are all Keynesians now, President Richard Nixon famously declared after his New Economic Plan was unveiled in 1971. The notion seems to be echoing now, with the two major parties' presidential candidates calling for increased government spending, notably for infrastructure projects."

Neoliberalism may not be completely dead, as Stiglitz argues, but it is certainly being challenged from many angles.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+101 # kyzipster 2016-08-20 11:00
I believe the Reagan Era ended when Alan Greenspan, the economic god of both parties, was completely discredited at the end of the Bush Presidency. I think this is the first article I've seen that has acknowledged it with such clarity, that was 8 years ago. We may be moving into a more progressive era, hard to tell. Naturally, Democrats are so entrenched, they can't step up to it. It does account for Sanders' surprising success.

I have to wonder though, how the millennials would react to paying what I paid for a pair of Levis in the 1970s. There was no such thing as a TJ Maxx. I'm not a fan of dirt cheap, poorly made products but I think that many spoiled Americans, even the most liberal, don't understand the issues fully. I also benefited from cheap college and middle class opportunity was more available. I think my parents' mortgage was 12% which was not considered high. You could draw 6 or 7% interest by keeping money in the bank, no need to risk the stock market. It will be very difficult to reverse course but at least we may not continue in the same direction.

"Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders' equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief." Alan Greenspan
 
 
+53 # wwway 2016-08-20 14:32
Even Greenspan said in his bio that he made a mistake with the "free market". You know he was a pal of Ayn Rand, right?
 
 
+19 # kyzipster 2016-08-20 15:12
Yeah, literally a pal.
 
 
+28 # Farafalla 2016-08-20 17:32
More like, acolyte of Ayn Rand
 
 
+24 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:02
Is there anyone over 25 that takes Rand seriously?
 
 
+20 # guomashi 2016-08-21 06:19
that would be paul ryan who makes all his interns read ayn rand as part of their job requirement
 
 
+7 # NAVYVET 2016-08-22 05:56
Did you mean "under 25"? I know not one single Millennial who considers Ayn Rand anything but a nutcase.
 
 
-6 # Depressionborn 2016-08-22 20:36
ya me.
Rand saw Russia revolution failure. she predicted it would come here in 2026. She was likely right. Sorry.

Few have actually read Atlas. They enjoy ignorance. It is bliss.
 
 
+15 # Doc Mary 2016-08-20 14:53
On interest: general rule of thumb is 6% is the natural interest rate on 30 year mortgages. A 12% interest rate would still show expectations of 6% inflation. Now, what does it say when the interest rate on a 3-year conventional mortgage is 3-4%?
 
 
+18 # kyzipster 2016-08-20 15:11
For one thing, it creates another housing bubble as we're seeing right now. Values are determined largely by the amount of a mortgage instead of actual cash value.
 
 
+49 # jdd 2016-08-20 15:50
The bubble is much larger than than housing, as the derivatives market has ballooned to over 2 quadrillion dollars worldwide. Stiglitz suggests a Keynesian solution but ignores the elephant in the room. Therefor the first step in an economic recovery is a return to FDR's Glass-Steagall, which will bring about an orderly banking reorganization and write down of the absurd paper value of those contracts. A return to Glass-Steagall was adopted as a platform plank at both party's conventions.
 
 
+24 # economagic 2016-08-20 21:27
"A return to Glass-Steagall was adopted as a platform plank at both party's conventions."

Yes, and if you believe either of them meant it you might be interested in some gorgeous ocean-front property I have for sale in NW Georgia, CHEAP!

What is needed today is a revised version of Glass-Steagall that not only separates "commercial banking" (aka "boring banking," taking deposits and making small loans of a few hundred grand and EVERYTHING else), PLUS some very sophisticated and adaptive regulations on what can be done in the "everything else" realm, as that can and will bring down the whole system even if they are not betting with depositors' money.
 
 
+9 # jdd 2016-08-21 06:32
I am hardly suggesting it is a slam dunk, or that we can rest,as I have been agitating for its reinstatement for the last twenty years, so spare the lecture. We do not need a "revised version," or Hillary's "something better," as the Warren-McCain bill repeats the language of the 1933 FDR version, while the Republican plank calls for the exact 1933 law. Wall Street is freaked out and will go all out to stop it and the task for patriots, no matter who wins in November, is to see that we "sock it to 'em." Once Glass-Steagall is reinstated, (step one) the casino will loose tax=payer backing. If the rich want to gamble on risking ventures just fine, but once the derivatives bets are called in there will be a huge write-down, and much if not all, of Wall Street will go under. As long as the legitimate banking ("aka ' boring boring' ") institutions are able to function as the basis for a infusion of federal credit (step two) for a desperately needed infrastructure upgrade. Ala FDR.
 
 
+3 # maindrains 2016-08-21 14:04
One suggestion to cover the "everything else" that occupies creative financial types the world over is to specifically detail what IS allowed and assume everything else, even though not yet invented is not. That would stop the financial schemes dead.
 
 
-6 # Robbee 2016-08-20 17:40
Quoting kyzipster:
I believe the Reagan Era ended when Alan Greenspan, the economic god of both parties, was completely discredited at the end of the Bush Presidency. I think this is the first article I've seen that has acknowledged it with such clarity, that was 8 years ago. We may be moving into a more progressive era, hard to tell. Naturally, Democrats are so entrenched, they can't step up to it. It does account for Sanders' surprising success.

I have to wonder though, how the millennials would react to paying what I paid for a pair of Levis in the 1970s. There was no such thing as a TJ Maxx. I'm not a fan of dirt cheap, poorly made products but I think that many spoiled Americans, even the most liberal, don't understand the issues fully. I also benefited from cheap college and middle class opportunity was more available. I think my parents' mortgage was 12% which was not considered high. You could draw 6 or 7% interest by keeping money in the bank, no need to risk the stock market. It will be very difficult to reverse course but at least we may not continue in the same direction.

"Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders' equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief." Alan Greenspan

- for a decade or two, i referred to greenspan as "god"
 
 
+26 # economagic 2016-08-20 21:20
# kyzipster 2016-08-20 11:00

Hold on there, with the low prices of the 1970s. The consumer price index (CPI) more than doubled between 1972 and 1981. That means that on average, the prices of the things middle-class Americans typically buy increased by more than 100 percent in just nine years. To put that in context, it took until 2002 for them to double again, more than 20 years.

A 12% mortgage was considered VERY high for those who paid it (rates went above 17% at one point, compared to 4-5% until the inflation from Johnson's War began to set in c. 1968), and 6-7% interest on bank deposits did not even begin to keep pace with inflation in any but two of those nine years. Nothing like it has been seen before or since except in countries on the brink of a monetary meltdown.

But that is in the domain of monetary economics, another issue completely. What millennials might think about what you paid for jeans in the time of Moses (as far as they are concerned) is irrelevant.

Regarding the decline of the USian economy you are basically correct, regardless of whether the millennials know or care. The question is where we go from here. A good start would be to ride most of the economists out of town on a rail, because they believed or pretended to that neoliberal economic policies as described in the article actually made sense.
 
 
+13 # kyzipster 2016-08-21 00:05
Yes, the 1970s were much more complicated and hardly a wonderful time. I looked up rates the year my parents bought their house it was between 10 and 11%, I guess it was considered high but it was accepted, meaning there was no concept that it could get drastically lower, maybe hope for 9%. I also remember my grandmother, a retired union factory worker, living off of the interest of her CDs. Inflation was high and she was frugal. I knew many middle class families who got there through union jobs, many white collar people also with very secure jobs. It was actually shocking to hear about someone's parent getting laid off. I think there is a certain amount of morality that's been lost after so much shifted during the Reagan years. It was largely true that if you dedicated yourself to a company, you would be taken care of. Naturally much of that came out of the Labor Movement.

The relevance of the high price of jeans that were probably manufactured in California by union labor (yes, the time of Moses for sure), is in considering tariffs to bring some manufacturing back to the US. As Trump has suggested. Also consider the cost of a living wage for all and single payer health care as Sanders has proposed, and I support fully. Tariffs might have to be significant to even the playing field. People would likely go nuts with any intervention that might raise prices at Walmart no matter how beneficial over the long term. Considering how sensational the 'news' is.
 
 
+3 # kyzipster 2016-08-21 12:46
Something I found interesting in this election year was Sanders saying something along the lines that his tax proposals weren't extreme at all because we used to tax the very wealthy at 90% when Eisenhower was president.

I have a younger, liberal friend who thought it was a lie, it seemed so outrageous. It just didn't compute for him. That was partly the reaction in the media, even though it was a simple fact. This guy was born during Reagan's first term.

Even some of the most progressive people would resist going back to a more socialist society when it starts to impact a person personally. Paying more for energy, higher taxes, more for clothing and electronics. Like many hippies when they took on jobs and mortgages in the 1980s and became Reagan cheerleaders. I think we're stuck.
 
 
+6 # maindrains 2016-08-21 14:08
Its true that tax rates after WW2 were in the 90%+ range... but don't forget that would only be for the very top bracket of very high earners. Even they would pay the same lower marginal rates on the tranch of earnings below that 90%= rate so overall they would not be handing over actually 90%= of their total earnings. earnings
 
 
+1 # Floridatexan 2016-08-22 11:03
"Johnson's War" was really Eisenhower's war. Other than the gas wars when Carter was president (brought on by opposition to his misplaced support of the deposed Shah), the major hits taken by the main street economy were fueled by Reaganomics, accounting tricks that benefited the wealthy, and Reagan's ridiculous "Star Wars" program.
 
 
+49 # Skyelav 2016-08-20 13:10
This is from the "Yeah Right file," am I right? (Puns intended.) As long as they can find ways of getting us to buy from satelite countries like China, and invest in the neo lib's Mega Casino-on-stero ids, Wall Street, and ignore unemployment figures, the real ones, and keep us distracted with the Kardashians, and the NFL, there will be no change except in name alone in neo-libaral economics.
 
 
+11 # jdd 2016-08-20 19:02
You are sadly uninformed if you think that China is a "satelite" (sic) country. China's has drawn nearly half the world into its "one belt. one road" infrastructure and development corridor policy and is moving to integrate most of Eurasia into its plan. And there is nothing the US, short of war, can do to stop it.
 
 
+3 # Capn Canard 2016-08-21 15:04
Yes to much of what you've posted. The one thing I like to mention is that I can't see our current system doing anything to change it's ways. Sanders proposed remedies from the 1930s and the 1970s and it would've worked. But look how quickly Hillary refused to accept any of what Sanders proposed. Also, notice how the so-called liberal pundits are going to bat for Hillary despite her reluctance to accept those effective FDR style ideas.

We are in a massive fuster-cluck and I don't think the Dems or Repugs will do anything to change that. I just hope it doesn't turn violent.
 
 
0 # RLF 2016-08-24 10:59
Stigliz is still a believer in global free market and the crap being fed the US by Neos. I think he is clinging to policies that screw american workers. He needs to update his ideas and get out of the bubble.
 
 
+57 # Inspired Citizen 2016-08-20 13:20
But the candidate of neoliberalism, #CorporateClint on, is ahead in the polls.

The name of the first knife she will use to plunge into the backs of her supporters is "TPP," a neoliberal coup against democratic self-government Hillary called the "gold standard" of "free-trade" agreements.
 
 
+47 # lorenbliss 2016-08-20 15:31
Neoliberalism -- a maliciously clever,* deliberately deceptive name for economic fascism -- will not be "dead" until all its perpetrators are in their graves. And that will not happen until capitalism itself is buried.
_________
*I do not know the origin of the term "neoliberal." But as an editor and writer I do know semantics and psycholinguisti cs, just as, as a journalist, I am familiar with the bottomless evil of the One Percenters and their Ruling Class vassals. Hence I cannot doubt the term "neoliberal" was coined to serve at least three objectives: (1)- Disguising fascist economics by hiding their brutality beneath a term hitherto associated with humanitarianism ; (2)- Inflicting Orwellian confusion to make genuine debate difficult if not impossible (the dialogue thus squandered by its refocus on definitions rather than consequences); and (3)- Discrediting true liberalism, which is essentially a well-intentione d but doomed effort to achieve humanitarian goals without the dirty work of revolution necessitated by acknowledgement of capitalism's innate savagery. The operational strategy, poisoning genuine (Keynesian) liberalism with the toxic associations generated by neoliberalism, is (coincidentally or not), close kin to the strategy behind the One Percent's placement of Obama in the White House: beyond its immediate benefits to the capitalist agenda, discrediting African-America n political aspirations for at least a century if not forever.
 
 
+47 # Inspired Citizen 2016-08-20 15:46
Economic fascism is no exaggeration. The TPP will IMPOSE corporate power on our representatives in government which is the 9th characteristic of fascism on steroids.

https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
 
 
+24 # JohnBoanerges 2016-08-20 16:37
I'm all for the death of revolving door corporatism just please don't call that Devil-made-conc oction 'capitalism'. Death to all government-corp oration partnerships with evil limited-to-no liability for its misdeeds like big pharma that can kill people with impunity, like big banks that can steal billions and pay fines of millions, like Monstranto that can poison the earth and go on poisoning the earth (and go on ...).
 
 
0 # Depressionborn 2016-08-24 10:42
Quoting JohnBoanerges:
I'm all for the death of revolving door corporatism just please don't call that Devil-made-concoction 'capitalism'. Death to all government-corporation partnerships with evil limited-to-no liability for its misdeeds like big pharma that can kill people with impunity, like big banks that can steal billions and pay fines of millions, like Monstranto that can poison the earth and go on poisoning the earth (and go on ...).

yes, JohnBoanerges 2016-08-20 16:37
but how did it happen? when I grew up very little of it occurred. Something change after the war. Wht was it?
 
 
+12 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:23
Capitalism isn't the great evil, lorenbliss, any more than money is evil. (Remember, it is the LOVE of money which is evil; not money, itself. Capitalism is the economic and political system whereby a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. Since I once owned and ran a business, from which I profited handsomely, I'm not an enemy of private ownership and operation for profit.

The problem lies not with either private ownership or operation for profit, but with an owner whose sole interests are control and profit. Once upon a time, business owners, from small to gigantic, concerned themselves with the quality, competitive pricing, and value of their products for the money their business earned.

There still are some--there once were many more--business owners who willingly share the profit of their business with those who make that profit possible: its employees.

However, recent government policy--local, state, and federal--has encouraged business owners to feel that they are entitled to keep all profit from their buinesses, pay no taxes, and pay their employees as little as possible.

[continued]
 
 
+10 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:24
Government's position SHOULD be to oversee competition so that it is fair among competitors; to oversee employment so that all employees receive both a living wage and a reasonable share of businesses' profits, work reasonable hours, and work in safe, reasonable comfortable conditions; to oversee quality and claims of quality so that products are safe, will function as described, will last a reasonable time, and are replaced by their maker if defective.

But government has abandoned those controls. It is the abandonment of those controls that has been "evil", not capitalism.

Contributing to the "evil" has been the success business has met in convincing people that their chief role in life is to be consumers--not savers; not living within their means, or their ability to provide means; purchasers of every new gadget that comes along, without considering whether either its cost or its actual usefulness to them make it desireable for them to purchase, own, and maintain. People now are consumers more than earners, purchasers of vast quantities of goods they never or seldom use--items which cram garages, attics, basements, and even rented storage rooms, and eventually fuel yard sales or are dispatched to landfills.

[continued]
 
 
+13 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:26
Businessmen who once took at least some thought for their employees and their communities now claim they must look after their stockholders--a nd pay their executives outrageous sums of money, while depriving their employees and their communities of all but the most meagre support, and, often, while depriving their customers of all but shoddy goods and services.

Employees who once worked and saved for a house of their own, a new car, college tuition for their children, and their old age, now both cannot afford to save, and thoughtlessly spend their earnings for items they do not NEED, which will not enrich their lives or ensure their own or their children's futures.

Government, which once attempted to balance the needs of a healthy business community (which provided a living for a nation's citizens) and the needs of its citizens for an adequate income, their hope for a better life as time went by, and their hope for a better future for their children, now concerns itelf almost exclusively with increasing the profit of business owners, regardless of resultant damage to society, individuals, or the land we live on, the air we breathe, and the water we drink.

Government--at every level--sets aside nothing for emergencies, nothing with which to improve the future of all citizens, nothing with which to keep roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, public lands, and public buildings in good repair, good operating order, or, [continued]
 
 
+8 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:27
in due time, with which to remodel reburbish, or rebuild, nothing with which to conduct relations with other nations and governments, no modest amount for national security and defense.

Capitalism is not the evil: What is evil is the falure of government to balance the needs of its citizens and communities and infrastructure with the profit of business owners--especia lly those businesses which manufacture personal and military weapons and armaments and equipment--and the failure of citizens to compel government to function as it should, protecting both citizens and businesses.

Until that imbalance is corrected, the planet, societies, and billions of individual people will continue to languish, while business corrals more and more of the planet's money.
 
 
+1 # Robbee 2016-08-20 18:24
Until that imbalance is corrected, the planet, societies, and billions of individual people will continue to languish, while business corrals more and more of the planet's money.
- well put - where we differ is where we go from here
 
 
+11 # Inspired Citizen 2016-08-20 18:52
We need to change the rules on our One Party Planet.

http://therules.org/we-live-on-a-one-party-planet/
 
 
+16 # lorenbliss 2016-08-20 20:27
@Patriot. That "imbalance," as you label it, is the quintessence of the capitalist agenda. Given the limitless power of capitalism. what it assuredly is NOT is "the failure of government."

The historically obvious truth is no government -- no matter how well intentioned or how determinedly powerful -- can successfully resist the capitalists' ability to corrupt, subvert and (when corruption and subversion fail) to hire terrorists to achieve its eternally tyrannical goals and objectives. That's because what capitalism truly is -- its core purpose -- is the formal fostering and perpetuation of our species' most morally imbecilic impulses: greed, selfishness, imperialism, enslavement and sadistic retaliation against its opponents and cast-offs.

Look around you -- really look with your eyes wide open -- and tell me this is not so.
 
 
+4 # vicnada 2016-08-20 20:54
While I agree with Lorenbliss that "based on results" capitalism is the evil that seems unfixable at its core, I lay the blame for the failure exactly as Patriot indicates. Society is basically threefold in its makeup (as are we as human beings). There is the "economic sphere" which should be the only arena where capitalism's influence is paramount and there only insofar as it does not interfere with two other interpenetratin g spheres...the "political" and the "cultural". (This is a crude summation of what was elaborated originally early last century by Rudolf Steiner). (continued)
 
 
+7 # vicnada 2016-08-20 20:57
Patriot correctly points out that the political/legis lative sphere has lost its rightful place to secure the rights of workers against the overweaning greed of the capitalistic tendencies. There was once a time when we had strong unions and more courageous political leaders.
 
 
+5 # vicnada 2016-08-20 21:03
Bernie Sanders is the current herald of the change that is inevitable if we are to survive. But more and more evidence is coming from economists in the "cultural sphere" such as this article by Stiglitz where he clearly points to the pendulum swinging against the laissez-faire free-market zealotry cultivated in the Reagan administration and fully uncorked by Clinton's signature repealing Glass-Steagall.
 
 
+4 # vicnada 2016-08-20 21:14
In short, capitalism--by definition--is simply the manner in which human ingenuity transforms nature thereby releasing something more valuable which, when captured, becomes "capital". In itself, the process is not evil. It is part of our human development. But when this activity of WILL dominates all other human activity and over-powers the THINKING and FEELING that should be guiding it's activity, we devolve to our animal instincts...and all that results is destructive. Again, all of this was articulated very clearly by Rudolf Steiner as the "Threefold Social Order". Google it.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-08-21 18:58
Well put,vicnada. thanks for the butressing and clarifying argument.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-08-21 19:24
Lorenbliss, it is possible to find--and magnify--evil in any human endeavor or philosphy. The trick is to find ways to accommodate both the activity or philosophy, which may also contain or be associated with much good, so that there's a balance between evil and good.

In the US, in this period of our national life, we've failed miserably at both identifying such a balance--on many, many subjects--and at insisting that our government help us to create that balance, and to keep it steadily, firmly, securely in place.

Although I am by nature an idealist, I've learned to be both a pragmatist and a realist during the past 7 decades. You have, obviously, a very different view of the world than I do, doubtless accountable by comparing our experiences. But you may be making yourself unnecessariy unhappy by gloomily hunting for evil in every conversation, every facet of civilization, every study of history.

Humans have evolved enormously since we lived in caves--and I'll be the first to admit that we might be much better off without some of that evolution. But there is much in us that is noble, just as there is much that is ignoble.

However, I continue to search out things that make me smile, things that inspire me, things that give me hope. If you've passed beyond the comfort of such things, I am sad for you--not condescending or patronizing, just sorry that contemplating the world does not any longer often give you cause for joy or laughter or hope. Peace, my brother.
 
 
+6 # Activista 2016-08-20 22:35
"the failure of citizens to compel government to function as it should, protecting both citizens and businesses."
yes - excellent contribution by Patriot complementing Stiglitz - we are starting new businesses, we learn (education) to implement an idea - not to speculate on Wall Street to become millionaires.
Social Democracy and capitalism are VERY compatible - (Scandinavia) - totalitarian communism created poverty (CCCP).
 
 
+1 # siamdave 2016-08-23 05:52
Socialism and capitalism are about as compatible as democracy and authoritarianis m - capitalism is, more or less by definition, hierarchical decision making, whilst (real) socialism, based on cooperation of various kinds, is fundamentally democratic. The longer version here - http://www.rudemacedon.ca/drh/12d-capitalism.html
 
 
0 # kyzipster 2016-08-24 12:16
I think there are societies that prove that socialism and capitalism can work well together. Switzerland is considered one of the most Libertarian countries in the world, absolute socialism as defined by conservatives in the US, conservatives who claim to identify with Libertarian views. Germany is the #3 exporter in the world with a high standard of living, careful government planning made that happen. (They were #1 prior to the 2008 crash, even ahead of China)

A healthy amount of socialism can keep the excesses and abuse of corporate power in check, at least within the borders of a nation. Globalization has created some tough issues.

It's about balance. I'm a far left liberal, even a socialist, but I have no desire to live in a communist country.
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-08-20 21:37
Quoting Patriot:
Capitalism is the economic and political system whereby a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.


Yes, that is the definition I recall from 8th-grade Civics nearly 60 years ago. The real world is not so simple, and we have learned a great deal more about it in those 60 years. It is fair to make a firm distinction between privately owned business, at least up to some scale, and capitalISM per se.

Historically "capital" meant "producers' goods," but economists themselves began muddying the definition in the mid-19th century. While most card-carrying economists today will still recite that definition, almost any time they use the word "capital" most of them mean "money," even though they acknowledge that money is capital only in the banking/financi al industry.

Since "-ism" is usually take to mean a belief in or worship of something, defining capitalISM in that sense sheds a good deal of light on what lorenbliss and I and myriad others are saying.
 
 
+2 # Activista 2016-08-20 22:48
capitalism allows small businesses - bakery, flower-shop, car repair -
communism - alternative state and party owns everything - and consequences are constant shortages (ex Soviet Union and countries under its dominance).
Capitalism works fine in Scandinavia - with free education at ANY level, national healthcare, comfortable pensions.
What these cultures do not have is greed - money culture - like we have here in the USA (and would say that for most low middle class the money obsession is the sickens)
 
 
+5 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:09
I believe there is tremendous greed in places like Scandinavia.

The difference is that those govts make it pretty pointless to act on it
 
 
+7 # kyzipster 2016-08-21 01:22
Greed is a universal human trait but the morality of the collective can have a big impact on an individual.

I've seen a documentary of Scandinavians interviewed on some of these issues, it's amazing compared to the collective mentality in the US, the lack of resentment of others, a belief in the greater good.
 
 
+5 # Activista 2016-08-21 15:31
Compared to American "Money Culture" - where greed and poverty is common - Scandinavia is much better place.
And statistics/valu es reflect it.
There is also much fear propaganda that controls our politics (FOX news).
 
 
+3 # Skyelav 2016-08-21 18:07
[quote name="Activista "]Compared to American "Money Culture" - where greed and poverty is common - Scandinavia is much better place.

Yes Activista. I find in Europe people generally feel they have enough. Last night on that quiz show where they guess what the audience says in response to a question,the question asked was "what did the 100 people asked say when asked from one to ten how satisfied are you with what you have?" The participants said "ten" and "seven" respectively. The number picked by the audience was "zero".. It made my heart stop. BTW when I came back from my trip to Europe I went to Maine for a month of study and came away thinking the people in Maine have the same attitude as the Europeans I met. I did not find that anywhere else in the US.
 
 
+1 # Activista 2016-08-22 14:39
Sorry for generalizing to all USA. In 1968 with $20 in my pocket and 6 month old son I started in Maine ( South Paris) in furniture factory on the night shift for $1.60 per hour. People there were very friendly and hospitable - we did not have to lock our door.
All what we saved was spent on the child medical care - we did not need it, but my wife was accustomed to go to the doctor when the son coughed.
There I observed that 20 year old had a car (mustang) - impossibility in Eastern Europe - but he did have missing teeth (dental cost in the USA) - also impossibility in Europe where dental care is free.
 
 
+9 # kyzipster 2016-08-21 01:18
They also don't have a military budget that takes 40 cents of every tax dollar by some estimates.
 
 
+3 # Skyelav 2016-08-21 18:08
Nor do they need the military budget Kyzipster. They don't seem to be imperialists or whatever we are doing for the 1%. I bet their corporations and health care isn't dependent on the stock market either. My how do they survive?
 
 
# Guest 2016-08-21 18:03
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+2 # Patriot 2016-08-21 20:40
Economagic, your school system was more advanced than mine. My definition came from consulting a dictionary this afternoon. (smile)

Here's another, for "ism": a distinctive practice, system, or philosophy, typically a political ideology or an artistic movement.

Somehow, I sense that you and lorenbliss think I'm unaware of the massively evil practices and plans of at least some contemporary huge businesses. I assure that not only am I aware of them, but also I had the misfortune to learn that even very small businesses can be run evilly.

You've written some interesting comments lately to help all of us consider the distinction between fact and opinion--that every opinion, if properly supported by facts and sound logic--is as valid as every other opinion, especially when none can be proven. (For example, our myriad range of opinions about the relative merits of HRC, DJT, and Stein, especially our opinions about the sort of presidency we might expect from them. You're correct: We're all just guessing; we'll have to wait and see whether any of us is correct.)

I understand, far better than I can convince you I do, just how easily capitalism can become a society's overriding evil. However, while I regard the world realistically (according to my available information) and therefore am often skeptical, yet I'm also all too aware of a sort of self-fulfilling -prophecy philosophy that can prevent us from seeing any glass as BOTH half full and half empty.
 
 
+9 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:06
The problem is corporatism, not capitalism
 
 
+1 # siamdave 2016-08-23 05:48
'corporatism' is just the current manifestation of capitalism. And it very much is the great evil of the day, and the great problem - explained in more detail here - http://www.rudemacedon.ca/drh/12d-capitalism.html
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2016-08-23 09:48
Gandhi said the earth has enough for everyone's need but not everyone's greed.
 
 
+3 # Texas Aggie 2016-08-20 22:35
Dr. Joe Stiglitz has a recent article on the meaning and decline of neoliberalism in readersupportednews.com

Joseph Stiglitz: 'Neoliberalism Is Dead'
 
 
+3 # NAVYVET 2016-08-22 06:46
Thank you, Loren! WHO WROTE THIS?? It's brilliant. I was raised in the Keynesian years, and have long been seething over the term "neoliberal"--a nd also "neoconservativ e". Genuine liberals and genuine conservatives (a word related to "conservation") are worth listening to. "Neo" has been added to disguise the radical fascists of both, and of course to discredit liberalism's traditional humane empathy and conservatism's wise "look before you leap" caution. Avoid "Progressive" if you fear endless progress. "NeoCon" actually means NeoConfederate in the US, a metaphor for the white supremacist South, who hide behind phony "Christianity"- -the same Manichaean dualism that drummed up the Crusades.

My undergrad degree was in Linguistics and I've been a devotee of Linguistics ever since--not a fan of Chomsky (although I do like his political views) but an admirer of George Lakoff, who understands the twists of semantics--and warns us against the spinmeisters. It is time to drop both Neos and call these bozos what they are: RADICAL ANARCHISTS. They are greedy fanatic oil-igarchs who use fascist tactics, including police state murder and a Sixth Extinction of all life, to make & keep foully-gained wealth.

PLEASE attend one of Bernie's "Our Revolution" events this Wed. evening, to start stopping the spin doctors who have turned the United States into the Untied Snakes, and are killing us in their snake pit.
 
 
-1 # Depressionborn 2016-08-23 19:09
mr. editor lorenb:

do you really think a farmer should not own his own farm, or that a store owner should not own his hardware? how puzzling. Are you for real or a joke.
 
 
+12 # jdd 2016-08-20 19:53
It is more than that. The TPP is a desperate attempt to create an anti-China economic alliance intended as a complement to the Obama-Hillary "pivot to Asia" military encirclement plan.
 
 
+51 # PeacefulGarden 2016-08-20 13:24
No way! Neoliberalism is a cranky half dead senior citizen monster that is living in a luxury senior care center with all of its money tightly locked away as it clings to its savings account numbers like an insect. It eats expensive lobster meals, that it cannot even taste any more, and the rest of us pick through the scraps left in the senior care centers trash cans...

The senior citizen Neoliberalismo monster is a giant brain that is well connected, but has dementia. It just won't fucking die....

and it has found a home in the Republican/Demo crat establishment.. . who pushes it around in a wheel chair and wipes its ass.
 
 
+21 # velobwoy 2016-08-20 13:44
Lol!! Spot on, PG
 
 
+27 # jimmyjames 2016-08-20 13:47
Quoting PeacefulGarden:
No way! Neoliberalism is a cranky half dead senior citizen monster that is living in a luxury senior care center with all of its money tightly locked away as it clings to its savings account numbers like an insect. It eats expensive lobster meals, that it cannot even taste any more, and the rest of us pick through the scraps left in the senior care centers trash cans...

The senior citizen Neoliberalismo monster is a giant brain that is well connected, but has dementia. It just won't fucking die....

and it has found a home in the Republican/Democrat establishment... who pushes it around in a wheel chair and wipes its ass.


I love your analogies! You are SO right on!!
 
 
+23 # goodsensecynic 2016-08-20 14:19
As a "senior citizen" (a septuagenarian "pre-boomer" who still works full-time, doesn't live expensively and still wipes his own ... etc.), I am not now and never have been enticed by the toxic ideology of neoliberalism.

Sorry for being hypersensitive to PeacefulGarden' s "microaggressio n," but I reject utterly the explicit ageism in this post.

I also question the reliability of someone who accuses others of "keeping all its money tightly locked away" while also eating "expensive lobster meals." Somehow that's just an incompetent economic calculation on PeacefulGarden' s part.

Upon reflection, moreover, I'm willing to wager a sizeable number of table scraps that PeacefulGarden is not half as "peaceful" and not much acquainted with the tranquility of an idyllic "garden" as the pseudonym supposes.

In fact, the cranky tone, offensive language, and stereotyping of the previous post reminds me that "dementia" does not automatically kick in at 65 and that older people are under no moral obligation to "just fucking die"; but, unbridled anger and abject stupidity are hazards that can be found in abundance in any age bracket.

Of course, PeacefulGarden may say that the attack was not aimed at ALL senior citizens or, perhaps, that it was just intended as "sarcasm" - but I've heard too much of that crap lately from Herr Drumpf (who seems to be PeacefulGraden' s rhetorical role model, and I ain't buying it.
 
 
+19 # PeacefulGarden 2016-08-20 15:37
I love you goodsensecynic. Don't worry. It is just a joke. I am 59. So, I see it coming over the horizon.

Please, it really is a joke. My account name is a joke too. I keep telling accounts on this site who expect some Zen like calmness from me, that there is nothing peaceful about a garden. As every gardener knows, deep in the soil are creatures fighting constantly in a state of war to eat the "plants" who in turn fight back with chemicals and evolution. Even the air contains birds who will pummel each other for neoliberal rights to that blueberry bush.

That said, your final paragraph about my symmetrical position with "the donald", has cause me to drop my lobster, check my bank account, and indeed, shit my pants...

A gardener is a socialist, and if you were as hypersensitive as you say you are, you would understand my rant as nothing but a rant against Margaret Thatcher who apparently thought WWI was/is (is she alive?) still going on in the 80s.

Neoliberalism is on its last legs, and what Stiglitz, whom I have utter respect for, will never open the door to predicting what the next phases are- as we watch this monster cough, spit, hack, and do every bypass surgery and transplant it can to continue its glorious exploitation of the poor.

Remember, it is a joke.... the correlation is just a joke... it is not about you...
 
 
+11 # economagic 2016-08-20 21:52
With apologies to lorenbliss (and even to goodsensecynic) , I get it. Your initial comment defines "neoliberalism" in terms of a cartoonish stereotype of the worst conceivable actual senior citizen, a trope common in editorial cartooning. I can picture exactly what you describe in tomorrow morning's paper, I should be so lucky (to have a paper with such astute cartooning).

I turned 70 this year and I know both the occasional superannuated fat cat who fits your description (at least by reputation) and the "demented neoliberal monster" you are parodying. I suggest to your detractors that they re-read your comment, and note that you are not characterizing senior citizens as a group as neoliberal monsters, but rather personifying the all too real neoliberal monster as a quasi-fictitiou s and totally unhinged senior citizen. You guys are both too smart to miss that elegant take-down, which is funny specifically because it equates the neoliberal monster with a fictitious person we know to be demented in ways that no human ever is.
 
 
+2 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:12
As a professional writer I can tell you that humor, sarcasm, cynicism don't come across the screen
 
 
-2 # Nominae 2016-08-21 13:17
Quoting PeacefulGarden:

Please, it really is a joke. My account name is a joke too.

Remember, it is a joke.... the correlation is just a joke... it is not about you...

Oh ..., so you are kidding ..... well, then, you must not be very good at it. If you were any good at it, we would *ALL be laughing.

Attempts at humor that must be *explained are *obviously very poorly constructed.

For instance, Mark Twain had no trouble communicating "humor, sarcasm, and cynicism" via the written word even though the man wrote well over 100 years ago. Even now, his works are not sold accompanied by "user's manuals" compiled to warn the reader of passages wherein Twain will be "attempting" humor, satire, cynicism, et. al. When properly done, those elements *require no "spoiler alerts" and certainly no enlightening explanation.

Of course, Mark Twain was *famously good at what he did.

We are not ALL *similarly blessed.

Really - I'm not kidding. ;-D
_
 
 
+1 # NAVYVET 2016-08-22 07:06
If you aren't amused by Peaceful Garden, then try to develop a sense of humor. I am 80 and I'm laughing at Peaceful Garden's satires and admiring her/his use of language.

Read Andy Borowitz. That should help. Or, as I've done, renew your subscription to MAD Magazine.
 
 
# Guest 2016-08-20 15:49
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+12 # PeacefulGarden 2016-08-20 16:37
If you were in a state of bliss and 76 you would laugh at my post. Your anger is telling.

....whatever deities ?

I am lost in the storm of your upset. The post is not about you. It is about Margaret Thatcher, who, was all about Empire.

I will repeat, I am 59, and I will be a senior pretty soon. And, I will laugh at myself... at my utter return to infancy, and I will give every fucking penny I have to my children, immediately.

Now, you go and get me taken off this site. Please. I would love to see that happen. It would make my day, blissful loren?
 
 
+7 # bardphile 2016-08-20 18:08
I'm 67, and I think I "got" your original tone. That said, I wonder if there might be just a tad of guilt behind the defensiveness of "good" and "bliss." I can honestly say that I worked hard and managed my resources carefully to get where I am, which is a lower-middle-cl ass-house-paid- for-but-not-muc h-money existence, lower than my parents, but doing alright. Still, we three were lucky to get in on the end of the post WWII boom as the wave that lifted our parents flattened out and receded. Our kids have it rougher, and I hate to contemplate the world we're leaving to our grandchildren. Some of the young folks are pissed, and they have reason. Stick around, PG. The site needs you.
 
 
-11 # lorenbliss 2016-08-20 18:52
@PeacefulGarden : Dissemble as you like, rationalize as you choose, the breathtakingly malevolent ageism in your initial post and the fawning approval of it by so many other posters is a perfect example of why and how we elderly 99 Percenters are among capitalism's favorite targets for the slow-motion genocide of austerity.

That your sociopolitical and economic understanding is so shallow you cannot grasp the manifest hatefulness of your words is a also perfect example of why capitalist governance -- fascism whether personified by Hillary the Horrible or Donald the Dunderhead -- inevitably triumphs in the U. S. and indeed always will prevail.

I too damn Maggie Thatcher, an unequivocal fascist. But to use ageist imagery to damn her is like using racist imagery to damn Barack the Betrayer, who is unquestionably the most tyrannical president of my lifetime.

The difference -- the only significant difference -- is that racial imagery has become unacceptable, while it remains not only acceptable but abominably praiseworthy (witness the above) to portray elders as people who "just won't fucking die" and disabled elders as implicitly subhuman creatures dependent on someone "who pushes it around in a wheel chair and wipes its ass."

I dwell in senior housing, am physically disabled, and I see people every day who are the wheelchaired, incontinent victims described by your sociopathic imagery. As you will eventually learn, old age inflicts such horrors on us all.
 
 
+8 # PeacefulGarden 2016-08-20 22:45
Yes, it is something I will learn. But,

"old age inflicts such horrors on us all"

is where you bathe yourself in pity, is where you remain a child, and have learned nothing from life. Look around yourself at the wonder and beauty of the care around you, the center that is available to you, and find your bliss.

I hope you do not become the victim of you own mind-stream. The first thing you should do is laugh at yourself. Perhaps the imagery of a dependent infant would have done better; "just won't fucking stop crying"? and then... you could call me a Nazi for portraying infants as...

My uncle and I just went through the "just won't fucking die" thing. He, in his 70s, had leukemia, I was the only one who really cared for him, drove him, watched golf on tv with him (barf), fed him when he could actually eat, and yep, I cleaned him. We joked about it, because he was just that fucking strong. He and I said no to endless blood transfusions. And, yep, I look just like him and probably have the same gene pool. So it is coming for me, and I better laugh.
 
 
-9 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:17
You must fertilize that garden of yours with bullshit.

You are the vilest poster I've ever encountered here.
 
 
-3 # tigerlillie 2016-08-20 22:07
"I will repeat, I am 59, and I will be a senior pretty soon. And, I will laugh at myself... at my utter return to infancy, and I will give every fucking penny I have to my children, immediately." --PeacefulGarden

Just a joke, huh. And you plan to laugh at your "utter return to infancy?" What will happen if you find yourself sharp and alert, say, but trapped in a decrepit body that just won't die, condemned to the tender mercies of aides in a Medicaid nursing home?
I am pretty sure you will not be laughing then. Your "joke" and laughter is offensive to a huge percentage of ordinary people, guilty of no crime, condemned to a wretched and inhumane old age. It is not funny. You may think you have accumulated enough funds that you are sitting pretty, but life can change on a dime.
 
 
+1 # PeacefulGarden 2016-08-20 22:57
"condemned to the tender mercies of aides in a Medicaid nursing home" ?????

I am lost in your words. Honestly. Look at your sentence.

You think I have enough funds. Life has changed on a dime for me. Sitting pretty?

At this point, I am getting angry at these posts. Perhaps another elderly account will "me too".

And, fuck you, all I can do is laugh at my penniless state. You think I am sitting pretty? You think I am some teenager, working for the donald?

Well, now, I better get in my brand new bm fucking w, go get some plastic surgery, pull up to my glorious mansion with priceless art in it, and call my broker to get me some more "jokes".

Get the "jokes"? More "jokes"?
 
 
-9 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:18
Why don't you just tuck your tail, and slink off to some pile of shit you'll be welcome at.

You serve no purpose
 
 
-4 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:15
When someone legitimately criticizes your very poor attempt at sarcasm, more sarcasm is not the best way to explain it away.

Try apologizing.

I doubt you can
 
 
+19 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:35
PeacefulGarden created a metaphor, for pete's sake. Are all of us oldsters THAT thin-skinned? If so, shame on us!

(I have a right to take herorhis side; I'm almost 70 myself; I thought the metaphorwas pretty good.) And Peaceful Garden has apologized for any offense. Ejection wholly uncalled-for.
 
 
+12 # jifster 2016-08-20 20:39
Nicely said, Patriot! I'm sorry lorenbliss is in such unhappy circumstances, but he still needs to lighten up. (And btw, I'm older than all you guys.)
 
 
-6 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:20
The easiest excuse for someone supporting evil is to blame on that person's mindset.

Try applying that to any group of bigots and tell us how it works out.

Pointing out assholes doesn't make one an asshole
 
 
-4 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:19
Not all metaphors are equal.
 
 
-5 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:11
Not too much ageism and jealousy is there?
 
 
# Guest 2016-08-21 17:51
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
+2 # Skyelav 2016-08-21 17:55
[quote name="PeacefulG arden"]No way! Neoliberalism is a cranky half dead senior citizen monster that is living in a luxury senior care center with all of its money tightly locked away as it clings to its savings account numbers like an insect.

OMG it sounds like the retirement down the street from mine! Love the images, thanks...sort of. LOL
 
 
+24 # jimmyjames 2016-08-20 13:24
Remember the "Buy American Act"? Might not be a bad time to bring that back and create some real decent paying jobs for Americans...
 
 
+22 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2016-08-20 13:41
Quoting jimmyjames:
Remember the "Buy American Act"? Might not be a bad time to bring that back and create some real decent paying jobs for Americans...
Before Americans will "Buy American," the prices for goods manufactured overseas must be on a par with goods manufactured in the USA. That they are not is why WalMart succeeds. The average consumer thinks s/he's getting basically the same quality from WalMart's Asian goods as from the stuff made in the US that costs twice as much.

Sadly, for most of us, at least initially, that means massive tariff increases so that EVERYTHING is priced relative to its value instead of relative to the slave labor wages paid in some other countries vs the somewhat fairer wages paid in the US. As soon as sticker shock sinks in, the sheeple will see that their salaries are WAY behind the times, unions will pick up members and contracts, and exorbitant salary increases for the top of the food chain will cease to go unchallenged.

Yes there will be labor unrest but with the blindfolds off and the emperor's nakedness exposed, we should be able to achieve a balance between the interests of the shareholders, the employees, and the customers instead of the current system so grotesquely skewed to benefit the shareholders and management.
 
 
+5 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:39
Matter of fact, jimmyjames, I thought that government's buying things NOT made in the USA was illegal, just as making purchases by any means other than open bidding for the contract to supply was once illegal. I surmise that both practices no longer are bound by law.

Do we any longer make, in this country, ANYTHING we must have, should we ever need to defend our country and ourselves against outside attack? Please, someone tell me that we're not terrorizing the rest of the people on this planet with things they've made for US!
 
 
+6 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:42
Diane, are we making ANYTHING here any more? Not clocks, watches, linens, tableware or kitchen utensils--not even much of our food. (I'm an inveterate label-reader.) Do we make shoes, print books or magazines, weave cloth or cut from it clothing?
 
 
+3 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:22
We make billionaires in shuffling paper
 
 
0 # bettysdad@yahoo.com 2016-08-21 00:23
A few years ago the Air Force put out a bid for AMERICAN made blue oxford shirts.

The got no bids
 
 
+19 # dipierro4 2016-08-20 13:32
..."We are all Keynesians now, President Richard Nixon famously declared after his New Economic Plan was unveiled in 1971. The notion seems to be echoing now...."

In the early Reagan years, Tip O'Neill famously said something like, "I miss Richard Nixon." Seeing how things have developed since then -- and the two people most likely to be the next President -- Mr. O'Neill has turned out to be prescient beyond one's imagination.
 
 
+27 # jimmyjames 2016-08-20 13:55
A small point to make, but I'm going to make it anyway. Speaking of Nixon, I still remember how he was going to reduce the government. What began as a way to reduce government employees turned out to be a way to increase spending to the private sector. That philosophy continues unabated to this day, getting worse every year. The cost of government gets more expensive every year - not because of civil servants who work for the taxpayer, but because of private corporations who contract with the government for profit. We are getting less services every year, costing more money than ever before. The recent situation with private federal prisons is just a glaring example. It is rampant all over the federal (and State) governments.
 
 
+33 # Elroys 2016-08-20 14:01
Why has it taken so long for the corruption and extreme greed of "free market fundamentalism' to be "officially" discredited when so many of us non-economists with some common sense have known this since the Reagan days, when we knew that supply side was just bullsh*t, when we knew that that the system was being rigged for the wealthy elite with little to no care about the middle class. It is truly hard to understand why so many Americans voted to screw themselves so that the wealthy lowered their own taxes and shifted the tax burdens to those in the middle class and to really screw those yet unborn. It is just incredible that so many choose ignorance over using their brains (of which there is an equal distribution). Is it time to wake up yet or shall we remain in this stupor of insanity for another decade or two?
 
 
+25 # mstocker 2016-08-20 14:13
"Neo-libralism" may be dead but the momentum from all the damage will be with us for generations. All of the accumulated wealth afforded by the "deregulated market" bought advantages for those who gamed the system most efficiently.

This is because all of the comments above still bend around the idea that we are consumers living in an economy. Until we deeply understand that we are Citizens living in an Society we will continue to be plagued with differing ideas about how to re-jigger the ways that money flows and is distributed - without regard for the "currency" of a living society - which is measured in terms of quality of life, not in terms of 'financial security.'

We have just begun to see the misery that awaits us - with the 'sharing' and 'gig' economies displacing human functions. It may seem cool that you can order your dinner on an ap and pick it up without speaking with a person, or you can order a cheap ride from someone in a new car in just a few minutes. But the displaced cashier, or cab driver, or assembly position will only increase the disparity in wealth - and the consequent compromise in life quality for huge sectors of the already-struggl ing population.

This will not be very fun for a lot of people - who will all be trying whatever they can to get food in their mouth. Neo-liberalism is dead because it really won't matter in the ensuing chaos.
 
 
+5 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:45
mstocker, you said it better and more briefly than I. WELL DONE!!
 
 
+5 # bardphile 2016-08-20 21:39
Yes, indeed.

Recent news item: Uber is looking to replace its drivers with driverless cars. Even the sharing economy is vulnerable to automation.
 
 
+1 # kyzipster 2016-08-21 00:46
You're right about the chaos for sure and the future is unpredictable. I have a bit of hope though with the shift in priorities of the younger generations coming up. It can go far beyond clever ways to get a ride or some food delivered. I've seen sincere and effective efforts to turn away from corporate dependence, mortgages, material possessions, owning a car etc. It's not 100% for very many but many collectives are forming and they're birthing new ideas for a better society. It's largely off the radar of the media.
 
 
+19 # goodsensecynic 2016-08-20 14:31
I only hope Stiglitz is correct.

The problem is that people like the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adelson, Bill Gates and the irate wannabe Herr Drumpf control the levers of business, government and the corporate media.

As long as they remain dominant, daffy "free market fundamentalism" will live on and economic equity, social justice and authentic democracy will remain suppressed or aspirational at best.

Alas, along with Mark Twain (from a very different part of the political spectrum), neoliberal ideologues can still say that news of their demise is exaggerated. And, if the current presidential race between the billionaire bailouts of Herr Drumpf and the neoliberal orthodoxy of Hillary Clinton are reliable indicators, there's life in the monster still.
 
 
+7 # lfeuille 2016-08-20 17:42
You forgot Hillary.
 
 
+13 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:48
Ergo, since no good can come of voting for either of them, let's ALL vote for Jill Stein and every other progressive or moderate candidate on our ballots. We have absolutely nothing to lose, if we'll all just stop swallowing the propaganda that a third party can't win.

The only thing that can defeat us is if our votes are stolen. Now, what shall we do about THAT??!!
 
 
+2 # Skyelav 2016-08-21 18:21
Volunteer as poll watchers. Picket. Protest. The suffragettes are watching us and they are ashamed we let things get this far out of hand.
 
 
+4 # kyzipster 2016-08-20 18:06
No doubt that's true but there's more life in the monster on the right. Trump is campaigning on $10 trillion in tax cuts with a belief in trickle down mythology to pay it off. He's campaigning against the estate tax, promoting more deregulation to stimulate the economy, etc. His hot air about tariffs has been narrowed down to renegotiating trade deals down the road, no specifics of course.

The GOP's Holy Grail is their 'Fair Tax', eliminating income tax and the IRS and instituting a national sales tax, shifting even more of the tax burden on to the masses. They've already pulled it off at the state level where they dominate, the effects are very disturbing. They will never be satisfied until they see all of their extremist ideas come to fruition. Allowing them to dominate government will result in more destruction.

At least the Democrats might be in tune enough to not move further off the cliff even if they are incapable of reversing course a bit.

I'll now enjoy all of my thumbs down as a badge of honor.
 
 
+2 # Skyelav 2016-08-21 18:23
Sorry the Hildabeast et al are not interested in shifting left.
 
 
+20 # turtleislander 2016-08-20 14:33
Please, hammer several wooden stakes into the heart of the neo-liberal economics vampire. It has killed, tortured and destroyed more happiness than many actual wars. Which of course, it has been complicit in creating as well. But I don't think the vested interests will take this better-late-tha n-never discrediting with a light heart. The current corporatists are a talentless bunch of pretenders. They wont lay down and die quietly as much as one might wish them to.
 
 
+10 # torch and pitchfork 2016-08-20 14:36
"or you can order a cheap ride from someone in a new car in just a few minutes. But the displaced cashier, or cab driver, or assembly position will only increase the disparity in wealth - and the consequent compromise in life quality for huge sectors of the already-struggl ing population."

I recently read that Uber is going into partnership with car manufactures to develop self driving vehicles. It's good to know that the current "non employees" driving under the banner of Uber will help finance this.
 
 
+22 # wwway 2016-08-20 14:37
I remember when Democrats told Americans what the consequences of Republican economic and social policy would be. They got slapped down when Americans voted Republican...en ter the neoliberals to keep skin in the game. Now that Republican social and economic policies have born horrible tasting fruit, Democrats are getting the blame. Americans aren't much wiser today. Don't know what it will take but Bernie has gotten farther along only because Americans are waking up. Hope Democrats keep the fire to the feet of their electeds! We need more Bernies and Warrens. Where are they?
 
 
+14 # jpmarat 2016-08-20 14:47
When you're desperate for someone to HATE, you may even scour nursing homes for seniors to despise, usually poorly cared for, not selecting from the lobster tank. Trickle Down, Voo Doo, Zombie "economics" can't be killed for failure because it is camouflage for concentrating wealth, NOT promoting general growth. We need tax rates on individuals, estates, etc., that will finance stimulation AND de-concentrate wealth-&-Power.
 
 
+8 # Patriot 2016-08-20 17:50
For that, we need another whole set of actors in Washington and in our state capitals. Throw the bums out! Elect Greens, Progressives, and if necessary, moderates!!
 
 
+16 # willsud24 2016-08-20 14:52
That's the problem with economists, politicians and the business-class in general, they're only concerned with what creates profits and what WORKS. Markets may work to some extent, but no one is accounting for the human factor or the environmental factor. No one cares about the quality of life for the WORKER.

The success and expansion of markets has been at the exploitation of the worker. People are working longer and harder and it's more difficult to make ends-meet. That's in America, in other countries populations are being exploited as slave and/or child labor.

Suicide is up, depression has skyrocketed, personal debt is up and career dissatisfaction is at an all time high. On top of that, freedom is at a 50-year low.

Not to mention the fact that neoliberalism and market driven decision making is collapsing our environment and causing the 6th mass extinction.
 
 
+10 # Doc Mary 2016-08-20 14:57
Is neoliberalism dead? God, I hope so. But I'll believe it when I see it.

I've always thought the greatest fallacy was the assumption that economic growth was an unassailable goal for economies, period. (Economic growth is real growth/populati on) You can say the New Deal didn't get us out of the Great Depression (it didn't; spending for WWII did) - but at least it alleviated suffering. And THAT should be the FIRST goal of economic policy.

With growth as the sole measure of the value of particular economic policies, you're missing distribution of income and wealth, unmet opportunities (in human capital, for example), environmental impact, etc. It's okay as a first pass at "what might happen if we did this" - but it is NOT a substitute for values.
 
 
+9 # jimbo 2016-08-20 15:30
Why the surprise? Search through Ike's comments, he foretold the take over of the party by those who have bestowed on us these failures we now need to overcome. I find it hugely ironic those republicans I no long call friends are republicans because their fathers and grandfathers were Eisenhower Republicans. Their authoritarianis m extended to the name, not what it stood for.
 
 
+15 # REDPILLED 2016-08-20 16:07
If neoliberalism is dead, neither corporate party seems to have gotten Stiglitz's memo.
 
 
+5 # dquandle 2016-08-20 17:30
Hillary's gonna turn it into a zombie to have it terrorize the world throughout her term in office
 
 
+2 # JohnBoanerges 2016-08-20 16:22
How can any person maintain that free trade was taking place under a tyrannical regime of top-down regulation? Brussels controlled all - and taxed the Hell out of all to the financial benefit of unelected uber-paid bureaucrats - and Stiglitz was handed a Nobel while not being able to see the nose on his tax-payer paid face. F all central planners - him included - that mess with the lives of others. I have fantasies about all control freaks and incurable diseases.
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-08-20 22:01
Stiglitz' Nobel (NOT!) was for other work entirely, which seriously undermines the application of textbook market theory to the real world. He and another Nobel Laureate (Amartya Sen) also chaired a commission a few years ago, appointed by the president of France, that concluded that GDP is a lousy measure of anything important (with which its creator Simon Kuznets would have agreed).
 
 
+11 # Jim Rocket 2016-08-20 16:45
It seems obvious, now, that neo-liberalism is a scam. It's a fancy way of dressing up short-term greed. It's going to be a very difficult train to stop but I do think it's the central problem with our society right now.
 
 
+10 # A_Har 2016-08-20 16:50
I'm always glad to see Stigliz's articles here. He makes no excuses for bad policies and tells it LIKE IT IS.
 
 
+3 # ericlipps 2016-08-20 17:43
Joseph Stiglitz has unwittingly created a new energy source. Ronald Reagan must be whirling in his grave fast enough to be used as a dynamo. I'm sure he'd be deeply offended at being called a liberal, "neo" or otherwise. The same, I'm sure, is true of Margaret Thatcher.
 
 
+2 # Patriot 2016-08-20 19:08
Good shot, eric!
 
 
+8 # jsluka 2016-08-20 17:51
Neoliberalism may be dead, but it staggers on as Zombie economics, with no real end in sight.
 
 
-1 # willsud24 2016-08-20 19:30
I watched a documentary where Stiglitz pointed out all of capitalism's faults, shortcomings and the disasters that it causes. Despite the atrocities of capitalism, as the documentary went on, Stiglitz went on to say that it's the only system that human beings should use and is in our best interest.

That documentary told me all I need to know about Stiglizt. Even though he has some tolerance for Marxism and socialism, he is still a capitalist apologist and reformist.

When the arguments over slavery were taking place, there three groups:

1. Regressive: Slavery is fine as it is.

2. Apologist and reformist: Slavery should remain, but we should reform it and make life better for the slaves.

3. Abolitionist: Slavery is immoral, in-humane and wrong. We should end slavery.

Stiglitz is a neoliberal reformist, but he still supports neoliberal capitalist principles. Nuff' said....
 
 
+4 # economagic 2016-08-20 22:19
Sorry, the confusion lies in the failure to make the distinction between private business and capitalISM that I outlined in my reply to Patriot near the middle of this thread. This is not a fatuous distinction. State Socialism and State Capitalism are identical. Private capital (in the sense of money) in control of the state is fascism, as bad or worse.

A meaningful discussion of possible alternatives can't even begin in the confines of 1500 characters, but I am certain that Stiglitz understands this distinction even though he neglects to make it explicit. I have not read any recent comment on policy or economic structure from him, but I strongly suspect that he is thinking of a heavily regulated form of capitalism, with regulation proportional to the size of the firm, strict anti-trust laws, steeply progressive taxation, and no "too big to fail."

My preference would be an economy based on cooperative enterprise (by definition non-profit as that term is typically used). But only rigid ideologues oppose all private ownership today, and that does not include Stiglitz.
 
 
+2 # Patriot 2016-08-21 20:55
economagic, is the Sherman Anti-Trust law dead? If so, was it replaced by anything helpful? I assume it must be, since--isn't it 6-people/entiti es now control virtually all news dissemination in the US.
 
 
-1 # Activista 2016-08-22 15:06
"That documentary told me all I need to know about Stiglizt. Even though he has some tolerance for Marxism and socialism, he is still a capitalist apologist and reformist."
Sorry, I escaped Marxism/Sociali sm dictatorship - aka dictatura of proletariat ..
censorship, political prisoners, state like a prison with a wall around. Talking about a slavery in large.
 
 
+6 # crowtower 2016-08-20 19:34
You don't suppose that western consumptive civilization being unsustainable has anything to do with the failure of neolibralism or for that matter, the early onset of abrupt climate change?
 
 
+5 # willsud24 2016-08-20 19:54
We can only pray that people are waking up to that reality, but the question is, is it too late?
 
 
+2 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-21 03:29
I'm a simple person. I did the best I could to get through this piece and most of the comments. Willsud24, thanks for the info on the documentary. It helped. Someone here mentioned the concept and reality of "society" rather than "economy" which I'm getting a little tired of. Thank you, too.

From now on, perhaps I should just avoid pieces like this.
 
 
+4 # Allanfearn 2016-08-21 07:05
So neoliberalism, having flown its course of ever-decreasing circles, has reached the position that inequality hinders growth.
Well it's a start. But what will it take for neoliberals to swallow the idea that it might just be wrong - full stop?
 
 
+2 # Logic 2016-08-21 09:52
his whole article is a bunch of baloney.

Neoliberalism is fully empowered.

PROOF
In the last eight years I have had accounts in three local banks that failed. They were folded into very large banks.

The big banks got ZIRP funds, that is, gov loans at almost zero interest rate. So the big banks could operate at very low cost of capital.

The local banks had to get their operating funds the usual way, by paying interest to people who deposited money. They were competing with larger banks that got free money.

So we have favoritism. The big banks were funded by the gov to gobble up the little banks.

I will know neoliberalism is dead when I can get 3% from a local bank.
 
 
+1 # Logic 2016-08-21 09:56
Correction

I meant to type
"This" whole article is a bunch of baloney. , not "his"

I did not mean to pointedly criticize an individual.
 
 
0 # Reid Barnes 2016-08-21 10:32
It is generally understood (even by both Republicans and Democrats) that the financial collapse in 2008 occurred as a result of the U.S. residential real estate market collapse. Although residential mortgage backed securities were considered the most conservative investment that could be made by a financial institution, it was the residential real estate market collapse that placed these investments, mortgage backed securities, at risk on a grand scale.

The size of the U.S. residential real estate market is enormous. It was probably the largest single market in existence, ever, at the time. Money was supplied through government backed lending, especially loans either guarantied or ultimately purchased by Fannie and Freddy. When someone buys a house and there is a closing, the buyers pay the purchase price, but where did all that money come from to buy the house? Demand is measured in terms of actual buyers; where did actual buyers come from with enough money to drive the price of houses in a market as enormous as the U.S. housing market to a tipping point followed by collapse?

When there was a buyer, it meant someone got a loan. Before a lender lends they make sure the loan will be paid back. When the government guarantees a loan, that makes the lender sure, and that seals the lender's decision. If a loan originator can originate a loan and sell it to an investor, they do it. The investors that drove the housing demand to the peak were named Fannie and Freddy.
 
 
+3 # Skyelav 2016-08-21 17:59
[quote name="goodsense cynic"]As a "senior citizen" (a septuagenarian "pre-boomer" who still works full-time, doesn't live expensively and still wipes his own ... etc.), I am not now and never have been enticed by the toxic ideology of neoliberalism.

Sorry for being hypersensitive to PeacefulGarden' s "microaggressio n," but I reject utterly the explicit ageism in this post.

Good comedy comes from deep anger. As they say, "if you want to ruin a great dinner party, invite a couple of comedy writers." I'm 75 proud to say, and have dementia in the family and other infirmities best left unmentioned and I think Peaceful took the horrors of deep infirmity and the terror of ageing with no money left and made a good point. She or he may come to my dinner party any time.
 
 
+2 # Cdesignpdx 2016-08-21 22:48
Can someone explain why M1 financials are no longer being reported? It's the value of actual assets that can be converted to cash. I would like to know why, either under Reagan or Bush 1, reporting it was banished. I speculate that its report exposed an unbalanced asset to debt (spending) ratio. Professor Stiglitz?
 
 
+4 # NAVYVET 2016-08-22 07:17
For reasons I won't psychoanalyze since I don't know the people and am not a qualified psychiatrist, some have taken an intended satire too literally. We need Peaceful Garden, and also need Loren Bliss, Goodsensecynic, and all the others that chimed into this brouhaha. I like people with firm convictions--bu t stimulating reading that becomes personally insulting sounds dogmatic and is hurtful to all of us.

I certainly do lose my temper sometimes, and need forgiving--but so far as I know the only ones I've ever answered with scathing remarks have been OBVIOUS trolls, or, as I prefer to call them, "agents provocateurs", a few no doubt paid by the enemies of our 99+++%. At least I hope they were!

It's just as obvious that these (temporary I hope) opponents are NOT trolls, but add a lot to our conversations. I know it's hell to get old on Soc.Sec. & alone, being now closer to 81 than 80--and my former baby boy turned 45 today, far away in Cal. I woke up as usual with atrial fibrillation, on Coumadin, bone-spur arthritis in my back, eyes blurry from pre-diabetes, one cancer removed, with losses of memory. The corneas of my eyes & both knees are artificial (but I brag about being a Bionic Woman). As Mom used to say, "It's tough being in your 80s, but the alternative is a lot worse."

I love you all! Let's all stay alive as long as possible, writing and fighting for justice! Pete Seeger, whom I was lucky to know, never quit, and he was the gentlest soul I ever met.
 
 
+2 # PCPrincess 2016-08-22 10:57
Absolutely agree with you that we should save our scorn for those who PURPOSEFULLY attempt to antagonize or quash the discussions here. I admit to cringing at the bashing that Peaceful Garden was taking and, I can say that I would most assuredly feel defensive if I had read posts directed at me that said things like, "You serve no purpose".

That being said, I am urging myself to allow those people who felt discriminated against to have those feelings, even if I may not have felt the same.

I will attempt to communicate rather than assume and I will wait and count to ten before posting.
 
 
0 # chapdrum 2016-08-22 19:25
What is it with these bold assertions that neoliberalism is dead, or that the GOP is dead?
Appreciate Stiglitz's contributions, but really, on what grounded basis are these claims made? The Democratic "presidential" candidate is a neoliberal, as is her chief flunky Ken Salazar.
So's Bill. So's good ol' Chelsea, and sooo many others.
The Repugs seized upon gerrymandering in such a way that even if HRC wins, the House will not go Democratic, for a very long time.
 
 
0 # siamdave 2016-08-23 05:45
- not dead at all, Joe, just 'mission accomplished' and upgrading to neofascism
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN