TPMtv Talks with Joseph Stiglitz, Part II

[mikeblaze2e]

what is going on in here

[mikeblaze2e]

dude he looks like my uncle LOL just like my uncle

[SuntzuMocro]

@mikeblaze2e the only difference, he is smart.

[mikeblaze2e]

@SuntzuMocro Difference lol, you just make no sense :]

[mikeblaze2e]

@SuntzuMocro Get lost poor guy, learn English that's first :] Don't bugg me anymore you lost soul :] Stop crying

[SuntzuMocro]

@mikeblaze2e who said "he" was referring to Dr.Stiglitz? do you think low of your uncle?

[xpressivist]

i agree with stiglitz's analysis of and some of his proposed solutions to the economic woes we're all in right now. but i don't think that more government role and regulation is needed. how would the government regulate the economy? and who would regulate the regulator?

[flyhead2]

You regulate by letting the banks go bust and firing the shitheads who wish to enslave tax payers for decades. Natural law.

[percipience62]

This is excellent.

I have no idea why big banks are being bailed out in this way. We have had decades of massive privatised profits, why are the commensurate losses being socialised ?

Stiglitz is absolutely right. Bankruptcy and temporary nationalisation is the answer. To allow these institutions to get away with what theyve done is not a moral hazard, its a moral disaster. Where is the reward for those who acted with caution and propriety ?

[Antoshik81]

Don't get fixated on ethnicities, A: it's a bad tone and B: analytically not sosmart either.

[badonkadonk34]

Great Vid! Thanks

[Bacchant33rd]

Taxes on the rich are good for America.

When the top tax rates were truly high from 1950 to 1978, American income at all levels grew at about the same pace.

But when progressivity was lost in the 80s, the income of the poor began falling, while that of the rich continued growing.

Personal income tax rate for the top bracket in 1945 was 91%, from 1946 - 63 was 88%,from 1964-81 was 70%, from1981 - 86 was 50%, in 1988 was 28%, and in 1991 was 31%.

[averageworkinggal]

How Ignorant. Progressivity was never lost, in fact it was increased by the Bush tax cuts since the lower marginal rates were cut more than the higher marginal rates. When Reagan fixed the tax code in the 1980s tax revenue doubled as predicted correctly by the Laffer Curve due to incentivized economic activity and the rich paid a much greater portion of the income tax since deductions were reduced with the rate reductions.

Today the Top 1% pay 40%.

Top 5% 60%

Top 10% 70%

Bottom 50% 3%

[Bacchant33rd]

If we look at income Growth by Quintile, we find that from 1950-1978, the income growth of the lowest 20% grew 138%, the income of the 2nd 20% grew 98%, the income of the 3rd 20% grew 106%, the income of the 4th 20% grew 111%, and the income of the highest 20% grew 99%.

Whereas from 1979-1993 the income growth of the lowest 20% grew -15%, the income of the 2nd 20% grew -7%, the income of the 3rd 20% grew -3%, the income of the 4th 20% grew 5%, and the income of the highest 20% grew 18%.

[averageworkinggal]

None of your concocted numbers have anything to do with tax policy.

It all has to do with the world rediscovering capitalism and competing with the US.

The post WW-2 US economic monopoly ended.

It began in the 1960s and has progressed since.

Global competition drives down prices, but also drives down wages.

It is the creative destruction that is change.

You have to realize that the only constant is change and get ahead of the curve.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

The Federal Reserve IS the largest taxer in America - you sited you lost 25% of your entire life's work to them -- That is highway robbery! AND the real sick Part is that is IF you use the CPI -- Else it is close to 45% of your life's earning have been devalued in nominal dollars.

25%+ of your life's earnings Gone to Inflation and Those on fixed incomes suffer the greatest under and Tax increases. If you care about taxes then use your voice to speak out against the Great Taxer in America

[averageworkinggal]

Wrong.

My whole life work would never have earned anywhere near what it earned if the economy had not grown to the size it did with elastic monetary policy from the Fed.

The banking system prior to the Fed was uncoordinated, chaotic and non-elastic and thus prone to credit crunches and crashes.

You want to trade off employment and growth for prices.

I want a better balance between those tradeoffs.

That requires the Fed.

The Fed is here to stay.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

you did not earn more -- it is purchasing power that you need!!... not money worth less and less each year. You only have more in nominal dollars but when it takes 5.5 to 9 times to equal what one dollar did in 1970 ---

I cannot believe you are foolish enough for the government to deface your money and then cry about taxes --

The fed is not federal and they have no tangible reserves only a printing press --

they stole 25%+ to 45% of your money since 1970

[averageworkinggal]

Nonsense on that "It's Private" drivel..

The Fed is authorized by Federal Statute, so it's totally Federal.

Section 12 United States Code, chapter 3.

The Fed is a federal system of Reserve Banking, so it's totally federal.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

think of it this way -- you had a jar that you put $30,000 dollars in in 1970 ---

what could you have bought with that $30,000 in 1970? a really nice house... I mean a nice one

What if you opened that jar in 2009 --- what could you buy with that same $30,000? a Trailer?

The Fed IS the Largest Taxer in the USA. Inflation is The Greatest Tax you will ever pay and in 6-9 months from today you will see the full effects of it the Fed Running Full steam --

[averageworkinggal]

The Fed is the largest mechanism of supporting economic growth in this country since it can supply a money supply that elastically supports dynamic growth in the economy.

A Gold Standard is a drag on a growing economy and has large fixed costs.

At least 2.5% of GDP is consumed just in maintaining a Gold Standard according to Milton Friedman's calculation.

The problem with you Gold Std. weinies, it that you've stopped thinking, and are no longer objective thinkers.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

How is devaluing your money supporting economic Growth?

Backing our current fiat currency with a tangible asset was in place until 1971 -- You Belive all we need is a printing press?

If Printing more money to create wealth was a real solution why are there poor people in Zimbabwe? They have a printing press.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

Why does the federal Reserve pay Taxes on their property? No other Federal agencies do? Are their employees under civil service? WHY? they are privately OWNED

Does Congress control the Fed? No ....Do The American People vote in its members? NO Why? It is Private

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

Watch Ben Bernanke say inflation is a tax and The Fed can change the money supply as they see fit

watch?v=D4yBrxmEOkY "inflation is an unfair tax" --Bernanke "I couldn't agree with you more"

[averageworkinggal]

Since your premise is not caused by tax policy, it can't be cured with tax policy.

Trying to impose punitive, redistributive taxation only impedes wealth creation, stagnates productivity, growth and standards of living.

It only drives more jobs away to low tax havens.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

there is no such thing as a bush tax cut when he raised the money supply by 80% --- Look at the M1 money from 2000 -- 4.136 Trillion (took 224 years to get that high) -- Look at it in 2008 7.756 Trillion almost doubled it it 8 Years ---

There is no bigger taxer then the Federal Reserve -- Even if you use the CPI (which is flawed in governments favor) one US dollar in 1970- now take $5.50 to have the same purchasing power -- that is an increase of 550% or a tax of 550%

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

In nominal terms the money supply is up from 592 billion from 1970 to over 8.2 Trillion as of January 2009 - this is an increase of about 14 times 1400% - but lets say it is more like 900% since our population is up 50% from 1970

It doesn't matter how you look at it.

fighting over tax brackets while you allow the Federal Reserve to devalue our currency at a rate of

550% CPI - over 38 years = 14.5% devaluation PER YEAR

or in nominal dollars

Up 900% / 38 years = 23.7% PER YEAR is BS

End the FED

[averageworkinggal]

So you are admitting that you one of maybe only one in the US that is such a poor performer that your income since 1970 has not risen such that you suffered an effective tax increase of 550%.

Try improving your job performance and be more productive so that you income might increase.

My income increased at least 20 fold since 1970 which is an increase of 2000% which means that I am 1500% better off than I was in 1970.

[Patriot4Liberty1776]

YES my point exactly! The Fed stole 25% of your income over that time and you seem to be OK with the Devaluation of your Currency. Did you pay a larger tax ever in your life? Nope Were you even ever told your dollars are now worth less each year? No

What are those to do who are on fixed incomes or disabled? Surely you see the degenerative nature this hidden tax has on the Old and Poor who have no safe haven of trying to maintain wealth while the Fed manipulates our Currency.

End the FED

[bodah44]

i hope there's more of this interview also its good to hear Josh's voice again, seems like he's to busy for video nowadays

[whatisbestinlife]

Stiglitz and Krugman should be running the Treasury and the Fed.

Instead, Wall Street insiders and true-believers like Geithner are put in charge.

Geithner's appointment was a terrible choice that is going to have long-term negative consequences for everyone.

Obama is not providing visionary and bold leadership. He's doing exactly what Wall Street insiders want him to do.

[PeterPancrease]

I second that

[bodah44]

yep I couldn't agree more when it comes to economics I'm afraid Obama's time at Chicago Uni seems to have had a very bad effect

[cat00012000]

Bankers own us. Get over it. They fucked up, and now we're gonna pay. What's the solution? There is none. Slowly the government will gain more power over them, but that will just give us new problems. Such is life.

[loosh89]

He is not the first to say that our current procedure in bailing out wall street is not being done correctly, in fact it was clear a majority of wall street feels the same way. But who has a better idea?

[SubmarinerAndroid]

Let incompetent, reckless financial institutions fail. What about that idea? Meanwhile we can fund infrastructure, single-payer healthcare, etc. But fuck the banks.

[bodah44]

if you watch the first video I think your'll find he does have a better idea, let the banks fail, bancruptcy doesn't mean the loss of the assest only a loss for the shareholders, watch part 1

[ut00ba]

first

(sorry, thumbs down me please)