Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/02/19/S...
Economist Joseph Stiglitz argues that the Obama stimulus package was "badly designed and not enough." Comparing the current recession to the Great...
Economist Joseph Stiglitz argues that the Obama stimulus package was "badly designed and not enough." Comparing the current recession to the Great Depression, Stiglitz criticizes the package's lack of attention to state budgets.
-----
At a recent community forum on the economy, Professor Joseph Stiglitz argued in favor of temporary bank nationalization, calling it "not that big of a deal" and essential to changing incentive structures. "When the economy recovers, you privatize again," he said. - Columbia Business School
Joseph Stiglitz was chief economist at the World Bank until January 2000. Before that he was the chairman of President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics in 2001. He is currently a finance and economics professor at Columbia University. He is the author of Globalization and Its Discontents and The Roaring Nineties.
Like to rate videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Like to share videos with friends?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
okay, here is a starting point - go look up the year of the biggest growth in US GDP and then figure out why it happened. When you have done that, we can have an intelligent discussion - primarily because you will actually be speaking with knowledge at that point.
Well, I can only find data as far back as 1947 right now, so why don't you tell me what it is.
Since 1947, it was 2008 that had the biggest spike. But remember that GDP is a nominal value, whereby if you have more dollars in an economy it will be larger, not necessarily more wealthy. Also, GDP unfortunately usually includes government spending which doesn't do much to represent prosperity, but rather represents a larger burden on society.
It's 1942 - 19% growth because of government spending for WWII. Ever hear how wars are good for an economy? They are actually talking govt spending when they say that. GDP, incidentally, is reported in nominal as well as real terms. And perhaps you are not fully aware of how govt spending works but consider that you are a contractor and the govt hires you to build roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, etc. If the govt. "spends" $1 million on that project - that is $1 million in income for you.
That actually does indeed represent prosperity for you as a member of that economy - regardless of whatever your "economic guru" might be telling you. Now that also represents govt debt - no questions. However, during a recession if the governmnent does not step up and spend more creating income for individuals, who will? Businesses are too scared in a recession and so are consumers. The govt. IS THE ONLY CHOICE when times are tough. During good times, the govt. needs to get out of the way.
You are confused in your analysis because you do not make the distinction between good times and bad. It makes all the difference. Read a couple of serious books on macroeconomics and learn something before you form strong opinions.
The problem with the $1 million dollars I earn from a government contract is that money has to come from elsewhere in the economy. It's like taking a bucket of water from the deep end of a pool and pouring it in the shallow end.
WWII was followed by a sharp recession. War is bad for the economy, and good for certain profiteers. War could also be good for unemployment if there is a draft. But that is not real employment, not the kind we want.
Also, if government spending is so beneficial during a downturn, why did the Depression last for more than a decade despite all the government spending and contracts being handed out? I think, from what I can tell, that the Depression was prolonged by Roosevelt not prevented by him. He didn't prevent anything. In fact, the Depression didn't end until after he was dead. Now if this is the course you want to take now, 10 years of a terrible economy, fine go ahead and support the stimulus measures.
I suggest you study the great depression in greater detail since you have the facts all wrong on it. I am afraid that I cannot spend much more time on chatting with you. Good luck and get a solid education - it will really help you with your future.
Ok, I hope that wasn't a simple way of dodging the question: Why did the Great Depression last for more than a decade (it wasn't really over until after the war) even with all the government spending? Is this the type of history we should repeat? Throw money at our problems, and hope they go away? And if the don't, do we just throw more at em until we hit World War III? Sounds like bad advice to me.
Look up the fact that Hoover was President until 1933 and only after him did Roosevelt take over. Then look up the duration of the Great Depression. After you have done that, look up the vastly different economic policies implemented by the two Presidents and what impact they had. When you are done with that - look up "Hooverville." And when you are done with that, come back and I will gladly answer all your questions.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Since 1947, it was 2008 that had the biggest spike. But remember that GDP is a nominal value, whereby if you have more dollars in an economy it will be larger, not necessarily more wealthy. Also, GDP unfortunately usually includes government spending which doesn't do much to represent prosperity, but rather represents a larger burden on society.
Just make your point already, enlightened one.
GDP, incidentally, is reported in nominal as well as real terms. And perhaps you are not fully aware of how govt spending works but consider that you are a contractor and the govt hires you to build roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, etc. If the govt. "spends" $1 million on that project - that is $1 million in income for you.
Read a couple of serious books on macroeconomics and learn something before you form strong opinions.
The problem with the $1 million dollars I earn from a government contract is that money has to come from elsewhere in the economy. It's like taking a bucket of water from the deep end of a pool and pouring it in the shallow end.
WWII was followed by a sharp recession. War is bad for the economy, and good for certain profiteers. War could also be good for unemployment if there is a draft. But that is not real employment, not the kind we want.