Originally posted by hdutton
reply to post by timidgal
You are not alone in your surprise at the content of some of these posts.
I have long thought our education system had gone down hill; I just did not think it could get this bad.
That's exactly what Professor Stiglitz mentioned. The education system, infrastructure and social security have all gone down the hill. Some of my
notes of his guest lecture on the financial crisis:
*Economic models need constant readjustment
*Crisis is caused by difference of ideologies (to fulfill self interest)
*Crisis could have been avoided if measures had been put into place
*Higher rate of GDP growth (US vs EU) was based on a bubble, not sustainable
*Trigger-down economics don't work (everyone benefits). Americans experienced no wealth of growth in last 12 years, everything went to top. Most
wealth in hands of few.
*Statistics don't support US claim 'land of the opportunities' most people have no equal opportunities
*Greenspan to congress: more debt, to repay debts in 10 years. Central banks are political and interfere all the time. Privatization of Fed = serving
*Inefficiency of health care system (17% of GDP) -> high mortality rates vs 8-10% for most other developed countries.
*True cost 3-5 trillion (instead of 2) of iraq war. Many soldiers coming back from iraq/afghanistan are disabled. close to a trillion dollars in
*Underinvestment in education.
*Hundreds of billions spend on weapons that don't work against enemies that don't exist (subsidizing the weapon industry)
*Investment in education technology and infrastructure would lead to a more productive society and labor force, which eventually will lead to higher
*A country's most important asset: people, requires investment, which leads to efficiency (Key success factor of China's growth: investment in people,
*High investment in people short-circuits the equity-efficiency trade-off
*Developing a competitive advantage not through low wages but through high investments - low wages are not sustainable.
*Manufacturing sector lost its competitive advantage and due to a shortage of service-based jobs, people are trapped. Social safety net necessary for
better entrepreneurial opportunities and hence, a stronger competitive position of the US (stimulates higher risk taking when backed by a safety net)
*Careful of deficit fetishism - there is another side on the balance sheet: austerity - likely to undermine the successes of the past and broader
social values. Austerity measures has not only social consequence but also an economic. Division leads to lesser ability to act cohesively. In the US,
there is no support for social cohesion (examples of public transport, parks) as the rich don't need it - they simply buy their own park.
*Brazil good example: from great inequality. People in top realized that this kind of society is not viable. Consensus on improving education, social
programs - reducing inequality, which enables their economy to boom. Works in Scandinavia too
*High taxes is key - to pay for good public goods -> leads to efficient public society (larger participation of labor force): Clinton raised taxes in
1993 - strong economic performance
Bush lowered tax on capital gains - saving rates went down to 0%
*Measures of wealth (GDP output) don't measure sustainability.
*Start charging corporations for public resources (stuff as timber almost given away for free to corporations)
*Provisions in tax stimulate investment abroad, rather than domestically.
*Discourage banks from speculating will lead to recovery of US economy, no incentive now.
*35 years of regulations worked, were given up because of strong economic growth. Financial sector: no need any longer. Irresponsible behavior as
edit on 29-6-2011 by Mdv2 because: (no reason given)