Did anyone else watch this?
From time to time I check in on the real world to see what absurdities are being pushed.
Stiglitz says in here that R&D would take place (he gives a few high level examples) even if the government tax rate was 80%...of course it is all about equality.
In what world does an economist say things like this?
Propaganda concerning technical abstractions aimed at the profane is getting bluntly political in its nature and further and further from reality.
DemoCrAcYEqUaLiTYDemoCrAcYEqUaLiTYDemoCrAcYEqUaLiTYDemoCrAcYEqUaLiTYDemoCrAcYEqUaLiTY
Just in case anyone comes across this thread tomorrow...or any day after that...here's the link to the full interview playlist (as opposed to simply the Daily Show home page):
Joseph Stiglitz Extended Interview
As to the subject of the OP, interestingly enough, Simon Black actually recently quoted Stiglitz in a post titled "Quite possibly the dumbest thing I’ve heard an economist say".
haha
People eat that shit up though. I don't get it.
Aristophanes:What a wonderfully redundant post, JJ. =P
=P
redundant? The OP was a link to "www.dailyshow.com". I guarantee that Stiglitz interview won't be there on that front page for long. I just thought people might want a direct link, as opposed to having to go search around to find what you were talking about.
Just because you go back after I post the link and edit your original post doesn't mean I was repeating anything you posted.
:EDIT:
And coming back and removing your comment after I call you out on it doesn't change history either.
Just because you go back after I post the link and edit it doesn't mean I was repeating anything you posted.
Chill out ma'am.
You edited your post as well. all I did was respond. Notice that I took down the comment you quoted after you posted something about the OP...
You need to get laid.
Aristophanes:Just because you go back after I post the link and edit it doesn't mean I was repeating anything you posted.haha
To quote my Captain Picard friend, "That's right."
And coming back and removing your comment after I call you out on it doesn't change history either.Chill out ma'am.
I don't get it.
You edited your post as well. all I did was respond.
I added a new paragraph to my post. I didn't go back and change a link so that I might accuse a post someone else already made of being redundant.
Notice that I took down the comment you quoted after you posted something about the OP
You took it down after a I called you out on your bs.
lol Thursday girl is already on her way actually. It's kinda funny you should bring that up...apparently we're trying something new tonight. (I think that means she's bringing her friend, but hope could be biasing my judgement on that one. I'll keep you posted if you're really that interested.)
I'm thinking of doing an undergraduate econ research project on "How the hell internet threads get derailed."
Notice that I took down the comment you quoted after you posted something about the OP You took it down after a I called you out on your bs.
hahahaha
yea, detective. I edited my post as you edited yours... It had nothing to do with you "calling me out." haha. Whatever you need to tell yourself, though.
Wheylous: I'm thinking of doing an undergraduate econ research project on "How the hell internet threads get derailed."
I may have trolled a guy into the mental hospital once. It all depends on how genuine the emails that were forwarded to me were. I will volunteer for your study.
What the
let me correct the title. "Joseph Stiglitz lies" . In all seriousness, Stiglitz is the probably the most fiendish economist there is onpar with Delong. And worse than Krugman.
Did you listen to Stiglitz on EconTalk?
His main assertion is that the middle class has become poorer since the so-called "free-market" policies implemented during the Regan years. To support this assertion he cites two statistics: (1) median house-hold income has remained fairly stagnant and (2) median 'net worth' has fallen. Russ Roberts responded by pointing out the fact that (A) house-holds have been shrinking over time and that actual individual income, in real terms, has been rising (he even ignored the torrential amount of innovation that has occurred since 1980, which constitute real increases in the standard of living) and that (B) net-wealth was hit especially hard because of the recent housing collapse. Stiglitz had a hard time responding to these issues, and it was extremely obvious that he was cherry-picking statistics that helped his argument and ignoring the ones that do not.
He also claimed that institutionally there was no problem with big government and that the public-choice arguments are irrelevant. The problem was not the system, according to Stiglitz, but rather those put in charge of the system. He went as far as to criticize, for example, the hard-core, leftist Keynesians on Obama's economic council during the crisis. He, of course, knew that the 860 billion dollar stimulus was too low, and that it wouldn’t get the job done.
So basically, we cannot remedy our problems by changing the system (since the system is perfect) and we cannot remedy it by even placing those who share Stiglitz's philosophy in power (since they aren't as competent as Stiglitz himself). Our only chance is to place Stiglitz in charge of everything! To crown him emperor of Earth!
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
Stiglitz had a hard time responding to these issues, and it was extremely obvious that he was cherry-picking statistics that helped his argument and ignoring the ones that do not.
Of course. Sowell talked about this exact fallacy/exaggeration regarding median income statistics vis-à-vis housing in his Basic Economics. The way you wrote this it seemed like you pulled the story right outta the book!
If I had a cake and ate it, it can be concluded that I do not have it anymore. HHH
Our only chance is to place Stiglitz in charge of everything! To crown him emperor of Earth!
I'm not sure if that's what Stiglitz really thinks, but it certainly reminds me of Jeremy Bentham's implicit call to be placed at the head of his proposed panopticon prison system, basically making him dictator of Britain.
Well, he never explicitly said it, but he finds no major issue with the system and merely faults those in power (many of which share his exact philosophy).
I must say that DeLong is still useful for something. At least he sided with Mankiw and criticized Republicans who were tooting the nationalist horn against outsourcing during the Bush administration.
Someone should examine the amount of patents issued in correlation with tax rates, because I'm sure you see huge amounts in times of no taxes.
I guess you may have a point, but wasn't Stiglitz a higher-up in the IMF and World Bank at one point in his career? Those were certainly avenues to put his agenda into action.