Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

n2doc

(47,953 posts)
Sat Jan 19, 2013, 09:39 PM Jan 2013

Joseph Stiglitz- Inequality Is Holding Back The Recovery

The re-election of President Obama was like a Rorschach test, subject to many interpretations. In this election, each side debated issues that deeply worry me: the long malaise into which the economy seems to be settling, and the growing divide between the 1 percent and the rest — an inequality not only of outcomes but also of opportunity. To me, these problems are two sides of the same coin: with inequality at its highest level since before the Depression, a robust recovery will be difficult in the short term, and the American dream — a good life in exchange for hard work — is slowly dying.

Politicians typically talk about rising inequality and the sluggish recovery as separate phenomena, when they are in fact intertwined. Inequality stifles, restrains and holds back our growth. When even the free-market-oriented magazine The Economist argues — as it did in a special feature in October — that the magnitude and nature of the country’s inequality represent a serious threat to America, we should know that something has gone horribly wrong. And yet, after four decades of widening inequality and the greatest economic downturn since the Depression, we haven’t done anything about it.

There are four major reasons inequality is squelching our recovery. The most immediate is that our middle class is too weak to support the consumer spending that has historically driven our economic growth. While the top 1 percent of income earners took home 93 percent of the growth in incomes in 2010, the households in the middle — who are most likely to spend their incomes rather than save them and who are, in a sense, the true job creators — have lower household incomes, adjusted for inflation, than they did in 1996. The growth in the decade before the crisis was unsustainable — it was reliant on the bottom 80 percent consuming about 110 percent of their income.

Second, the hollowing out of the middle class since the 1970s, a phenomenon interrupted only briefly in the 1990s, means that they are unable to invest in their future, by educating themselves and their children and by starting or improving businesses.

more (excellent read)
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/19/inequality-is-holding-back-the-recovery/

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Joseph Stiglitz- Inequality Is Holding Back The Recovery (Original Post) n2doc Jan 2013 OP
Now we just need leadership that will act on this... income and wealth inequality is poison. Agony Jan 2013 #1
A place to put neo-liberals and neo-conservatives. hay rick Jan 2013 #2
k and r nashville_brook Jan 2013 #3
K&R Dr. Stiglitz wanted to be an adviser to the President, but was turned down flatly. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #4
Wait, ProSense Jan 2013 #6
Only in your bizarre world, Prosense. Other people can disagree on one point or another, Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #7
K & R Quantess Jan 2013 #5
Excellent article. Thanks for posting, n2doc. n/t pampango Jan 2013 #8

Agony

(2,605 posts)
1. Now we just need leadership that will act on this... income and wealth inequality is poison.
Sat Jan 19, 2013, 10:47 PM
Jan 2013

"""
Market forces don’t exist in a vacuum — we shape them. Other countries, like fast-growing Brazil, have shaped them in ways that have lowered inequality while creating more opportunity and higher growth. Countries far poorer than ours have decided that all young people should have access to food, education and health care so they can fulfill their aspirations.

Our legal framework and the way we enforce it has provided more scope here for abuses by the financial sector; for perverse compensation for chief executives; for monopolies’ ability to take unjust advantage of their concentrated power.
"""
"""
As Mr. Obama’s second term begins, we must all face the fact that our country cannot quickly, meaningfully recover without policies that directly address inequality. What’s needed is a comprehensive response that should include, at least, significant investments in education, a more progressive tax system and a tax on financial speculation.

The good news is that our thinking has been reframed: it used to be that we asked how much growth we would be willing to sacrifice for a little more equality and opportunity. Now we realize that we are paying a high price for our inequality and that alleviating it and promoting growth are intertwined, complementary goals. It will be up to all of us — our leaders included — to muster the courage and foresight to finally treat this beleaguering malady.
"""

neo-liberals and neo-conservatives both need to be put in their place.

hay rick

(7,521 posts)
2. A place to put neo-liberals and neo-conservatives.
Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:16 PM
Jan 2013

The sidelines.

Stiglitz is one of the good guys.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
4. K&R Dr. Stiglitz wanted to be an adviser to the President, but was turned down flatly.
Sun Jan 20, 2013, 04:23 PM
Jan 2013

He and Krugman and a host of other economists with a track record of being right have all been actively ignored while we are held hostage to a political commitment to doing the same things over and over.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
6. Wait,
Mon Jan 21, 2013, 09:24 AM
Jan 2013

"He and Krugman and a host of other economists with a track record of being right have all been actively ignored while we are held hostage to a political commitment to doing the same things over and over. "

...you were dissing Krugman here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2226642

Here's Krugman on the Stiglitz piece:

Inequality and Recovery

Joe Stiglitz has an Opinionator piece arguing that inequality is a big factor in our slow recovery. Joe is an insanely great economist, so everything he says should be taken seriously. And given my political views and general concerns about inequality, I’d like to agree.

But — you knew there was a “but” coming — I’ve thought about these issues a lot, and haven’t been able to persuade myself that this particular morality tale is right.

It’s worth noting that two of Joe’s four points aren’t really about the current recovery. He argues that high inequality is causing huge waste of human talent, because the poor and increasingly the middle class lack access to good education; and I agree. He also argues that inequality fosters financial crisis, and I agree with that too.

But we’re talking about the financial crisis aftermath, not the crisis itself. What role does inequality play?

- more -

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/inequality-and-recovery/
 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
7. Only in your bizarre world, Prosense. Other people can disagree on one point or another,
Mon Jan 21, 2013, 11:32 AM
Jan 2013

and still be in support of the person or idea they disagree with. In the other thread you refer to, I merely point out that wealth has, IMO, created something of a blind spot in one aspect of Dr. Krugman's opinion piece. That doesn't make me a "Krugman hater", except to the Presidential cultists.

I think either Drs. Krugman or Stiglitz would have been incalculably better advisers than the Wall Street welfare queens the President did pick to fill those positions, and that the whole nation would be in far better shape today if he had.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Joseph Stiglitz- Inequali...