what is the most important contribution of Joseph Stiglitz to economics?
Q. it would also greatly help if you specify what he did to make him receive a Nobel prize
Asked by postnobill - Sat Jul 11 23:05:51 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well, it depends who you ask, but he got the Prize for his contributions to what is known as informational economics, or the economics of information, wherein he demonstrated the problems present in economic systems due to incomplete and misunderstood information amongst participants.
Answered by whodan - Sun Jul 12 03:16:01 2009
Q. it would also greatly help if you specify what he did to make him receive a Nobel prize
Asked by postnobill - Sat Jul 11 23:05:51 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well, it depends who you ask, but he got the Prize for his contributions to what is known as informational economics, or the economics of information, wherein he demonstrated the problems present in economic systems due to incomplete and misunderstood information amongst participants.
Answered by whodan - Sun Jul 12 03:16:01 2009
Nobel winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said that iraq war had a role to play in the slowdown of U.S?
Q. economy and is also hindering its economic recovery. Do u agree with this statement? what are the costs of war foe the U.S? What r Benefits? Support ur views with relevent facts?
Asked by ricky - Tue Jan 13 04:35:13 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well, duh. Money spent on weapons that go boom and aren't renewable has just disappeared. It can't go back and stimulate the economy. After 9/11, the US needed to do something to show its power in the world, and possibly scare off future attackers. And, I think they did a pretty fair job of that in the early war in Afghanistan. But then, it seems like someone said, "OK, while we are here, let's clean out Saddam Hussein, too, and prevent more Gulf Wars." Which may have been a good idea, but turned out to be terrible in practice. What's Joe got to say about the Afghanistan war? I think he's probably right about the war in Iraq; we over-extended ourselves.
Answered by Madame M - Tue Jan 13 06:51:43 2009
Q. economy and is also hindering its economic recovery. Do u agree with this statement? what are the costs of war foe the U.S? What r Benefits? Support ur views with relevent facts?
Asked by ricky - Tue Jan 13 04:35:13 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well, duh. Money spent on weapons that go boom and aren't renewable has just disappeared. It can't go back and stimulate the economy. After 9/11, the US needed to do something to show its power in the world, and possibly scare off future attackers. And, I think they did a pretty fair job of that in the early war in Afghanistan. But then, it seems like someone said, "OK, while we are here, let's clean out Saddam Hussein, too, and prevent more Gulf Wars." Which may have been a good idea, but turned out to be terrible in practice. What's Joe got to say about the Afghanistan war? I think he's probably right about the war in Iraq; we over-extended ourselves.
Answered by Madame M - Tue Jan 13 06:51:43 2009
Joseph Stiglitz, Do you think that his position, benefiting Latin America or underdeveloped countries?
Q. In his book, "Globalization and its Discontents", the approach of this Nobel Prize for Economics, notes: "Globalization has favored greater difference between rich countries and those in developing the number of poor has increased dramatically on a global scale, while the rich are becoming increasingly." "globalization favors the rich countries of hypocrisy by allowing them to force lower economic development to eliminate trade barriers from an economic policy unacceptable to the industrialized countries, or to maintain its front-tariff barriers to goods from developing countries, especially those in agriculture. " What do you think of these two points.?
Asked by aona - Mon Aug 4 12:37:23 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Stiglitz has had the opportunity to get an inside view of the mechanics of globalization. His points of view have a lot of credibility. He's most likely correct. Except for China and India, most other Third World countries have paid a high price for globalization. Their infant industries can't compete against First World multinational corporations, and their workforce often gets minimal wages for their labor.
Answered by Celeste - Mon Aug 11 16:02:17 2008
Q. In his book, "Globalization and its Discontents", the approach of this Nobel Prize for Economics, notes: "Globalization has favored greater difference between rich countries and those in developing the number of poor has increased dramatically on a global scale, while the rich are becoming increasingly." "globalization favors the rich countries of hypocrisy by allowing them to force lower economic development to eliminate trade barriers from an economic policy unacceptable to the industrialized countries, or to maintain its front-tariff barriers to goods from developing countries, especially those in agriculture. " What do you think of these two points.?
Asked by aona - Mon Aug 4 12:37:23 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Stiglitz has had the opportunity to get an inside view of the mechanics of globalization. His points of view have a lot of credibility. He's most likely correct. Except for China and India, most other Third World countries have paid a high price for globalization. Their infant industries can't compete against First World multinational corporations, and their workforce often gets minimal wages for their labor.
Answered by Celeste - Mon Aug 11 16:02:17 2008
globalization and its discontents, what countries are discussed in this book by Joseph Stiglitz?
Q. can you give me a list of all the countries discussed in the book, and a brief summary of how the IMF and WB affected them
Asked by Tom Z - Sun Jul 13 01:32:32 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Joseph Eugene "Joe" Stiglitz (born February 9, 1943) is an American economist and a member of the Columbia University faculty. He is a recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal (1979) and the The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (2001). Former Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank, he is known for his critical view of globalization, free-market economists (whom he calls "free market fundamentalists") and some international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In 2000 Stiglitz founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue (IPD), a think tank on international development based at Columbia University. Since 2001 he has been a member of the Columbia… [cont.]
Answered by Ronnie @ BinBrain.Com - Mon Jul 14 06:02:45 2008
Q. can you give me a list of all the countries discussed in the book, and a brief summary of how the IMF and WB affected them
Asked by Tom Z - Sun Jul 13 01:32:32 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Joseph Eugene "Joe" Stiglitz (born February 9, 1943) is an American economist and a member of the Columbia University faculty. He is a recipient of the John Bates Clark Medal (1979) and the The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (2001). Former Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of the World Bank, he is known for his critical view of globalization, free-market economists (whom he calls "free market fundamentalists") and some international institutions like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In 2000 Stiglitz founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue (IPD), a think tank on international development based at Columbia University. Since 2001 he has been a member of the Columbia… [cont.]
Answered by Ronnie @ BinBrain.Com - Mon Jul 14 06:02:45 2008
Joseph Stiglitz: Banks, insurers are The forces behind the fiscal meltdown...?
Q. Joseph Stiglitz: Banks, insurers are The forces behind the fiscal meltdown...?
Asked by BASTA CASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Mon Feb 15 14:54:23 2010 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. where you see fiscal meltdown you will alway see two arsonists: - government - and banks.
Answered by RockIt - Mon Feb 15 15:00:25 2010
Q. Joseph Stiglitz: Banks, insurers are The forces behind the fiscal meltdown...?
Asked by BASTA CASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Mon Feb 15 14:54:23 2010 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. where you see fiscal meltdown you will alway see two arsonists: - government - and banks.
Answered by RockIt - Mon Feb 15 15:00:25 2010
Why didn't 0bama provide enough stimulus money to offset state cuts to education?
Q. "It made no sense to start new road programs when you're laying off teachers," says Nobel Prize economist Joseph Stiglitz.
Asked by The Face of Democracy - Mon Feb 8 14:25:25 2010 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Because Hussein wants our youth to be stupid.
Answered by Lame Duck 0bama - Mon Feb 8 23:34:59 2010
Q. "It made no sense to start new road programs when you're laying off teachers," says Nobel Prize economist Joseph Stiglitz.
Asked by The Face of Democracy - Mon Feb 8 14:25:25 2010 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Because Hussein wants our youth to be stupid.
Answered by Lame Duck 0bama - Mon Feb 8 23:34:59 2010
New estimates for the cost of the Iraq war are up to 2 trillion dollars. Is this too much, or not enough?
Q. A study by Nobel Laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard budget expert Linda Bilmes estimates the cost of the Iraq War at between $1-2 trillion (the White house originally estimated costs of 100-200 billion.) The study expands on budgetary estimates by including costs such as lifetime disability and health care for the over 16,000 injured. It also analyzes costs to the economy, including the economic value of lives lost and impact of factors such as higher oil prices that can be partly attributed to the conflict in Iraq. Is 2 trillion too much money to spend for the war against Iraq, or is it not enough?
Asked by mansion7 - Thu Jan 12 12:15:25 2006 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. it is to much money for a war that should of never been fought. i know that sadam housian is not a good person. but he did not bomb us. bin laden did. why arent we spending 2 trillion on a war with the guy who bombed us not with the guy that bushs daddy should have already gotten rid of. guess the apple dont fall far from the bush family tree.
Answered by little debbie - Thu Jan 12 12:25:49 2006
Q. A study by Nobel Laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz and Harvard budget expert Linda Bilmes estimates the cost of the Iraq War at between $1-2 trillion (the White house originally estimated costs of 100-200 billion.) The study expands on budgetary estimates by including costs such as lifetime disability and health care for the over 16,000 injured. It also analyzes costs to the economy, including the economic value of lives lost and impact of factors such as higher oil prices that can be partly attributed to the conflict in Iraq. Is 2 trillion too much money to spend for the war against Iraq, or is it not enough?
Asked by mansion7 - Thu Jan 12 12:15:25 2006 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. it is to much money for a war that should of never been fought. i know that sadam housian is not a good person. but he did not bomb us. bin laden did. why arent we spending 2 trillion on a war with the guy who bombed us not with the guy that bushs daddy should have already gotten rid of. guess the apple dont fall far from the bush family tree.
Answered by little debbie - Thu Jan 12 12:25:49 2006
"Handouts" to the poor - The big republican accusation to Democrats - will it fly?
Q. With 7.1 million people officially unemployed in America (this is only a small subset of the number who are actually unemployed). With the war in Iraq expected to cost over 1.1 Trillion dollars by Nobel Prize winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz. With the number of people who are HIV+ in America being double what it was in 1986... With 2,160 out of every 9,000 high school seniors not finishing to graduate this year... How could promising NOT to raise taxes be concievable for Republicans to claim? How do Republicans plan to deal with domestic issues? If you take the idle threat of terrorism out of the equation - what else are republicans bringing to the table? Spouting rhetoric about "socialism" will not likely get you "best… [cont.]
Asked by rabble rouser - Tue Sep 18 17:22:25 2007 - - 11 Answers - 0 Comments
A. As near as I can tell, the same Republican pols who have done nothing but rubber stamp Bush's every whim, have no plans at all,either they think everything is just ducky, or all they have to do is wave a flag and make fools of themselves calling every tentative solution to our problems "socialist' or 'communist'. If our country isn't running well whose fault is it? Bush put in place a bunch of incompetent cronies, that's a start, hes fed us a bunch of baloney on almost every front, that's two. Now we are told we aren't smart enough to do what everyother industrialized country on earth can do...take care of our sick and elderly. Since the average working man has had no help from the Republicans, the only thing we can do is go Democrat.
Answered by justagrandma - Tue Sep 18 17:42:00 2007
Q. With 7.1 million people officially unemployed in America (this is only a small subset of the number who are actually unemployed). With the war in Iraq expected to cost over 1.1 Trillion dollars by Nobel Prize winning economist, Joseph Stiglitz. With the number of people who are HIV+ in America being double what it was in 1986... With 2,160 out of every 9,000 high school seniors not finishing to graduate this year... How could promising NOT to raise taxes be concievable for Republicans to claim? How do Republicans plan to deal with domestic issues? If you take the idle threat of terrorism out of the equation - what else are republicans bringing to the table? Spouting rhetoric about "socialism" will not likely get you "best… [cont.]
Asked by rabble rouser - Tue Sep 18 17:22:25 2007 - - 11 Answers - 0 Comments
A. As near as I can tell, the same Republican pols who have done nothing but rubber stamp Bush's every whim, have no plans at all,either they think everything is just ducky, or all they have to do is wave a flag and make fools of themselves calling every tentative solution to our problems "socialist' or 'communist'. If our country isn't running well whose fault is it? Bush put in place a bunch of incompetent cronies, that's a start, hes fed us a bunch of baloney on almost every front, that's two. Now we are told we aren't smart enough to do what everyother industrialized country on earth can do...take care of our sick and elderly. Since the average working man has had no help from the Republicans, the only thing we can do is go Democrat.
Answered by justagrandma - Tue Sep 18 17:42:00 2007
what are the real cost's of war?
Q. Bush first said $60 billion, that was a lie. Congress has already spent $ 357 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan. IN addition to the defense spending of $400 billion a year. Nobel Prize winner and economist, Joseph Stiglitz projects war cost at $1 to $2 trillion. We spent $800 billion in Viet-Nam. We had $1 trillion in VA benefits in addition for the Viet-Nam war. We as a nation learned nothing. It is fact that Guerrilla warfare can not be won. It is also fact that "democracy" is not a gift to be given by our 2587 dead service men. We have 15,000 wounded. The 300,000 dead civilians in Iraq are in fact "liberated" from Saddams rule. That number will go to 500,000 dead in the civil war in Iraq over 5 years. BTW, war will cost working class… [cont.]
Asked by jl_jack09 - Mon Jul 17 15:17:24 2006 - - 7 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The real costs of this war are staggering. 1.Medicare, homeland security, education, national parks and any other program which benefits our citizens...all receiving humongous cuts to finance the war. 2.We are so far in the hole financially that our great grandchildren will still be paying off this fiasco. 3.Our former friendly nations around the world have definitely cooled because of this senseless war. 4. We have become a rallying point for arab zealots. 5. We have lost, maimed, and mentally distroyed our own soldiers, as well as tens of thousands of Iraqis..and so,.families in both countries. 6. We destroyed the Iraqi infrastructure and haven't rebuilt it. Today only 40% of electricity has been restored to where it was before we… [cont.]
Answered by Bobbie - Mon Jul 17 16:20:46 2006
Q. Bush first said $60 billion, that was a lie. Congress has already spent $ 357 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan. IN addition to the defense spending of $400 billion a year. Nobel Prize winner and economist, Joseph Stiglitz projects war cost at $1 to $2 trillion. We spent $800 billion in Viet-Nam. We had $1 trillion in VA benefits in addition for the Viet-Nam war. We as a nation learned nothing. It is fact that Guerrilla warfare can not be won. It is also fact that "democracy" is not a gift to be given by our 2587 dead service men. We have 15,000 wounded. The 300,000 dead civilians in Iraq are in fact "liberated" from Saddams rule. That number will go to 500,000 dead in the civil war in Iraq over 5 years. BTW, war will cost working class… [cont.]
Asked by jl_jack09 - Mon Jul 17 15:17:24 2006 - - 7 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The real costs of this war are staggering. 1.Medicare, homeland security, education, national parks and any other program which benefits our citizens...all receiving humongous cuts to finance the war. 2.We are so far in the hole financially that our great grandchildren will still be paying off this fiasco. 3.Our former friendly nations around the world have definitely cooled because of this senseless war. 4. We have become a rallying point for arab zealots. 5. We have lost, maimed, and mentally distroyed our own soldiers, as well as tens of thousands of Iraqis..and so,.families in both countries. 6. We destroyed the Iraqi infrastructure and haven't rebuilt it. Today only 40% of electricity has been restored to where it was before we… [cont.]
Answered by Bobbie - Mon Jul 17 16:20:46 2006
Globalization can or cannot work?
Q. I have the book by Joseph E. Stiglitz Making Globalization Work" The same author has written two books The Roaring Nineties and Globalization and Its Discontent. How is this possible that in the book Making Globalization Work" the reviewers have commended the book on the back cove about the other book. I.E "Globalization and Its Discontent". Is he forcing himself to state that we cannot do this but then on the second thought from the Thomas Friedman s The World is Flat he is trying the trip of the Indian contraries and tell us, Look fellows. We can do it. I do not know how, but we can if we try. I mean the books contradict one another. The Roaring Nineties is fine but the other doesn t make any sense except trying a think tank fro… [cont.]
Asked by Firozali A M - Mon Aug 20 02:22:40 2007 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. i use to be a complete one worlder but , what Ive seen in the last 20 years has truly soured my on the ideal we are not ready for it, until we feel we are people of the world and not just man made boarders
Answered by TheDude - Mon Aug 20 02:30:31 2007
Q. I have the book by Joseph E. Stiglitz Making Globalization Work" The same author has written two books The Roaring Nineties and Globalization and Its Discontent. How is this possible that in the book Making Globalization Work" the reviewers have commended the book on the back cove about the other book. I.E "Globalization and Its Discontent". Is he forcing himself to state that we cannot do this but then on the second thought from the Thomas Friedman s The World is Flat he is trying the trip of the Indian contraries and tell us, Look fellows. We can do it. I do not know how, but we can if we try. I mean the books contradict one another. The Roaring Nineties is fine but the other doesn t make any sense except trying a think tank fro… [cont.]
Asked by Firozali A M - Mon Aug 20 02:22:40 2007 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. i use to be a complete one worlder but , what Ive seen in the last 20 years has truly soured my on the ideal we are not ready for it, until we feel we are people of the world and not just man made boarders
Answered by TheDude - Mon Aug 20 02:30:31 2007
Gota love those JEWS...check it out!!?
Q. Comparison of Arab and Jewish Nobel Prize Winners Arab/Islamic Nobel Prize Winners From a pool of 1.4 billion muslims which are 20% of the world's population (2 out of every 10 people) Literature 1988 - Najib Mahfooz Peace 1978 - Anwar El-Sadat 1994 - Yasser Arafat * 2003 - Shirin Ebadi Chemistry 1999 - Ahmed Zewail Physics Abdus Salam * NOTE: Norwegian, Kaare Kristiansen, was a member of the Nobel Committee. He resigned in 1994 to protest the awarding of a Nobel "Peace Prize" to Yasser Arafat, whom he correctly labeled a "terrorist." Jewish Nobel Prize Winners From a pool of 12 million Jews which are 0.2% of the World's Population (2 out of every 1,000 people) Literature 1910 - Paul Heyse 1927 - Henri Bergson 1958… [cont.]
Asked by Bob - Sun Jul 19 17:57:35 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. first, i agree with rachel. is there a question here? or, are you just raging? second, why was this posted in the 'weather' category? third, the nobel prize(s) are awarded by a christian (as in evolved from a judeo-christian origin) committee of people from a christian nation. altho they do / are willing to award to anyone in the world, regardless of race, color, creed, political affiliation, etc. there is a natural inclination to overlook anyone from the islamic - and to a certain extent, sikh, buddhist, shinto, taoist, etc. - religions. it's probably not a concious or acknowledged bias, but it probably exists. (threat of terrorist activity has become a very real and significant factor in modern times!) so, altho there may have… [cont.]
Answered by pandyman - Sun Jul 19 19:19:32 2009
Q. Comparison of Arab and Jewish Nobel Prize Winners Arab/Islamic Nobel Prize Winners From a pool of 1.4 billion muslims which are 20% of the world's population (2 out of every 10 people) Literature 1988 - Najib Mahfooz Peace 1978 - Anwar El-Sadat 1994 - Yasser Arafat * 2003 - Shirin Ebadi Chemistry 1999 - Ahmed Zewail Physics Abdus Salam * NOTE: Norwegian, Kaare Kristiansen, was a member of the Nobel Committee. He resigned in 1994 to protest the awarding of a Nobel "Peace Prize" to Yasser Arafat, whom he correctly labeled a "terrorist." Jewish Nobel Prize Winners From a pool of 12 million Jews which are 0.2% of the World's Population (2 out of every 1,000 people) Literature 1910 - Paul Heyse 1927 - Henri Bergson 1958… [cont.]
Asked by Bob - Sun Jul 19 17:57:35 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. first, i agree with rachel. is there a question here? or, are you just raging? second, why was this posted in the 'weather' category? third, the nobel prize(s) are awarded by a christian (as in evolved from a judeo-christian origin) committee of people from a christian nation. altho they do / are willing to award to anyone in the world, regardless of race, color, creed, political affiliation, etc. there is a natural inclination to overlook anyone from the islamic - and to a certain extent, sikh, buddhist, shinto, taoist, etc. - religions. it's probably not a concious or acknowledged bias, but it probably exists. (threat of terrorist activity has become a very real and significant factor in modern times!) so, altho there may have… [cont.]
Answered by pandyman - Sun Jul 19 19:19:32 2009
You think Socialism will kill the economy & job growth? Did you realize...?
Q. The Iraq War just blew a hole in the economy? "The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit. The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," he said. That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history, he said." -Professor Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University, Nobel Laureate. For those of you worried about jobs and considering voting for McCain, I would think twice before voting… [cont.]
Asked by NONAME - Tue Oct 28 09:36:58 2008 - - 24 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Thank you- oh and the republicans have already killed the economy and job growth- so there is no where else for us to go but up!
Answered by Heidi B - Tue Oct 28 09:39:35 2008
Q. The Iraq War just blew a hole in the economy? "The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit. The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," he said. That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history, he said." -Professor Joseph Stiglitz, Columbia University, Nobel Laureate. For those of you worried about jobs and considering voting for McCain, I would think twice before voting… [cont.]
Asked by NONAME - Tue Oct 28 09:36:58 2008 - - 24 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Thank you- oh and the republicans have already killed the economy and job growth- so there is no where else for us to go but up!
Answered by Heidi B - Tue Oct 28 09:39:35 2008
Why are so many people claiming the Geithner plan will simply transfer wealth from tax payers to banks?
Q. Similar to a massive fraud... Two weeks ago, I posted an article showing how the Geithner-Summers banking plan could potentially and unnecessarily transfer hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth from taxpayers to banks. The same basic arithmetic was later described by Joseph Stiglitz in the New York Times (April 1) and by Peyton Young in the Financial Times (April 1). In fact, the situation is even potentially more disastrous than we wrote. Insiders can easily game the system created by Geithner and Summers to cost up to a trillion dollars or more to the taxpayers. Here's how. Consider a toxic asset held by Citibank with a face value of $1 million, but with zero probability of any payout and therefore with a zero market value. An… [cont.]
Asked by _______ - Wed Apr 8 16:35:44 2009 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
Q. Similar to a massive fraud... Two weeks ago, I posted an article showing how the Geithner-Summers banking plan could potentially and unnecessarily transfer hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth from taxpayers to banks. The same basic arithmetic was later described by Joseph Stiglitz in the New York Times (April 1) and by Peyton Young in the Financial Times (April 1). In fact, the situation is even potentially more disastrous than we wrote. Insiders can easily game the system created by Geithner and Summers to cost up to a trillion dollars or more to the taxpayers. Here's how. Consider a toxic asset held by Citibank with a face value of $1 million, but with zero probability of any payout and therefore with a zero market value. An… [cont.]
Asked by _______ - Wed Apr 8 16:35:44 2009 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
Why aren't the Democratic Congress & the White House urgently tackling the crisis in jobs creation?
Q. Paul Krugman, a Nobel-prize winning economist, and Joseph Stiglitz, another Noble prize winning economist, both have called for the US government to pick up slack demand in the economy by running the risk of large-scale deficit spending. The government just has to go fairly deeply into debt and use the money to create generous federal jobs programs, these and other economists have warned, or the American unemployment rate will stay high for years to come. And when nearly 15 million Americans are unemployed, and millions of additional people are "under-employed" and unable to work as many hours a week as they want, there just won't be enough money in the pockets of consumers to stimulate a healthy demand for goods and services again. … [cont.]
Asked by Andy F - Sun Jun 13 20:47:31 2010 - - 9 Answers - 0 Comments
A. It's unfortunate isn't it. It's why I challenge the notion that being a so-called "independent" or "centrist" is the way to go. People on the street demand "compromise" and want both sides to "work together", but then you end up with half measures that don't solve the problem and leave everyone with a bad taste in their mouth. There may be multiple sides to every issue, doesn't mean they're all equal.
Answered by Blue_MD - Sun Jun 13 20:53:32 2010
Q. Paul Krugman, a Nobel-prize winning economist, and Joseph Stiglitz, another Noble prize winning economist, both have called for the US government to pick up slack demand in the economy by running the risk of large-scale deficit spending. The government just has to go fairly deeply into debt and use the money to create generous federal jobs programs, these and other economists have warned, or the American unemployment rate will stay high for years to come. And when nearly 15 million Americans are unemployed, and millions of additional people are "under-employed" and unable to work as many hours a week as they want, there just won't be enough money in the pockets of consumers to stimulate a healthy demand for goods and services again. … [cont.]
Asked by Andy F - Sun Jun 13 20:47:31 2010 - - 9 Answers - 0 Comments
A. It's unfortunate isn't it. It's why I challenge the notion that being a so-called "independent" or "centrist" is the way to go. People on the street demand "compromise" and want both sides to "work together", but then you end up with half measures that don't solve the problem and leave everyone with a bad taste in their mouth. There may be multiple sides to every issue, doesn't mean they're all equal.
Answered by Blue_MD - Sun Jun 13 20:53:32 2010
Does the Obama WH subscribe to the George Soros school of economic thought?
Q. Large swaths of economics are going to have to be rethought on the basis of what's happened." So said Larry Summers, President Obama's chief economic adviser, in an interview in the weeks after the markets crashed a year ago. Yet to a remarkable degree, economic thinking hasn't changed very much at all. (Click here to follow Michael Hirsh). Now financier George Soros is announcing a $50 million effort to speed things along. This week Soros is gathering some of the leading practitioners of the market-skeptic school, who were marginalized during the era of "free-market fundamentalism," among them Nobelists Joseph Stiglitz, George Akerlof, Michael Spence, and Sir James Mirrlees. He's also creating an "Institute for New Economic Thinking"… [cont.]
Asked by _______ - Wed Oct 28 13:19:56 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Damn that Soros. If only we had a limited government that couldn't be used by that guy. Soros is also spending a bunch of money to promote the need for carbon restrictions. If people like him get their way we'll never have a free market again.
Answered by The fed up matthew - Wed Oct 28 13:39:15 2009
Q. Large swaths of economics are going to have to be rethought on the basis of what's happened." So said Larry Summers, President Obama's chief economic adviser, in an interview in the weeks after the markets crashed a year ago. Yet to a remarkable degree, economic thinking hasn't changed very much at all. (Click here to follow Michael Hirsh). Now financier George Soros is announcing a $50 million effort to speed things along. This week Soros is gathering some of the leading practitioners of the market-skeptic school, who were marginalized during the era of "free-market fundamentalism," among them Nobelists Joseph Stiglitz, George Akerlof, Michael Spence, and Sir James Mirrlees. He's also creating an "Institute for New Economic Thinking"… [cont.]
Asked by _______ - Wed Oct 28 13:19:56 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Damn that Soros. If only we had a limited government that couldn't be used by that guy. Soros is also spending a bunch of money to promote the need for carbon restrictions. If people like him get their way we'll never have a free market again.
Answered by The fed up matthew - Wed Oct 28 13:39:15 2009
There is now a link between the Iraqi war and and the current Banking crisis :?
Q. "Professor Joseph Stiglitz : The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict ". How much more proof do we need to pull our troops out ? Don't talk to me about surges and excuses like that. We shouldn't be there in the 1st place. There was no Al Quaeda in Iraq before we invaded. There was/is no link between Iraq and 9/11. The FBI/CIA confirmed this. There were no weapons of mass destruction. 80,000 + civilian casualties. Can I give you any more proof ? Andy: does "BS" = "Bear Stearns" or the bad version ? "Scott B": Give me one (1) good reason for invading and/or the consequence of the Iraqi war? Please. David S: I regret every loss of life. 9/11 was a sin and a tragedy. The people who commited that crime will pay one way… [cont.]
Asked by Teacher - Tue Mar 25 15:57:28 2008 - - 15 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I completely agree - I bantered back and forth with two other Y!A guys the other day who absolutely refused to accept simple facts. Some people just believe what the idiot in the oval office yaks about - just pray that McCain (who publicly stated that he supports the war) doesn't get elected or we can count on four more years there and a few trillion more dollars down the toilet while our economy flat-lines.
Answered by Victor - Tue Mar 25 16:05:05 2008
Q. "Professor Joseph Stiglitz : The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Cost of the Iraq Conflict ". How much more proof do we need to pull our troops out ? Don't talk to me about surges and excuses like that. We shouldn't be there in the 1st place. There was no Al Quaeda in Iraq before we invaded. There was/is no link between Iraq and 9/11. The FBI/CIA confirmed this. There were no weapons of mass destruction. 80,000 + civilian casualties. Can I give you any more proof ? Andy: does "BS" = "Bear Stearns" or the bad version ? "Scott B": Give me one (1) good reason for invading and/or the consequence of the Iraqi war? Please. David S: I regret every loss of life. 9/11 was a sin and a tragedy. The people who commited that crime will pay one way… [cont.]
Asked by Teacher - Tue Mar 25 15:57:28 2008 - - 15 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I completely agree - I bantered back and forth with two other Y!A guys the other day who absolutely refused to accept simple facts. Some people just believe what the idiot in the oval office yaks about - just pray that McCain (who publicly stated that he supports the war) doesn't get elected or we can count on four more years there and a few trillion more dollars down the toilet while our economy flat-lines.
Answered by Victor - Tue Mar 25 16:05:05 2008
If Congress didn't repeal the Glass-Steagall Act in Nov. 1999, where would our economy be now, 10 years later?
Q. This question is really for finance, econ, and/or policy geeks. What evidence is there to suggest how things would have moved forward in a different direction? Should discussion focus more on Glass-Steagall as a pivotal moment rather than the details of CLOs? Collateralized loan obligations are the same as collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) except for the assets securing the obligation. CLOs allow banks to reduce regulatory capital requirements by selling large portions of their commercial loan portfolios to international markets, reducing the risks associated with lending. (Source: I was thinking about this after reading the Vanity Fair article by Joseph Stiglitz: "In November 1999, Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act… [cont.]
Asked by Seth H - Tue Oct 13 12:59:20 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. With respect to the current recession, the repeal of Glass-Steagall was more symbolic (well, minor factor) than a major factor. For example, about half the sub-prime mortgages that helped create the bubble were made by non-banks that wouldn't be regulated by Glass-Steagall anyway. Similarly, the Glass-Steagall said nothing about the trade in derivatives, such as securitized mortgages or credit default swaps, because they hadn't yet been invented then. Congress explicitly chose not to regulate these banking activities, which created the basic bomb that the sub-prime crisis set off. Also, the Glass-Steagall Act was not being enforced by the Fed even before the repeal. So my feeling is that if the feeling of Congress had been to not… [cont.]
Answered by simplicitus - Sun Oct 18 03:50:48 2009
Q. This question is really for finance, econ, and/or policy geeks. What evidence is there to suggest how things would have moved forward in a different direction? Should discussion focus more on Glass-Steagall as a pivotal moment rather than the details of CLOs? Collateralized loan obligations are the same as collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) except for the assets securing the obligation. CLOs allow banks to reduce regulatory capital requirements by selling large portions of their commercial loan portfolios to international markets, reducing the risks associated with lending. (Source: I was thinking about this after reading the Vanity Fair article by Joseph Stiglitz: "In November 1999, Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act… [cont.]
Asked by Seth H - Tue Oct 13 12:59:20 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. With respect to the current recession, the repeal of Glass-Steagall was more symbolic (well, minor factor) than a major factor. For example, about half the sub-prime mortgages that helped create the bubble were made by non-banks that wouldn't be regulated by Glass-Steagall anyway. Similarly, the Glass-Steagall said nothing about the trade in derivatives, such as securitized mortgages or credit default swaps, because they hadn't yet been invented then. Congress explicitly chose not to regulate these banking activities, which created the basic bomb that the sub-prime crisis set off. Also, the Glass-Steagall Act was not being enforced by the Fed even before the repeal. So my feeling is that if the feeling of Congress had been to not… [cont.]
Answered by simplicitus - Sun Oct 18 03:50:48 2009
Is a 3 TRILLION dollar war considered 'redistribution'?
Q. According to Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, the Iraq war is costing us $3 trillion dollars - enough to pave the entire U.S. highway system with 23.5 karat gold...three times over! He also blames part of the economic mess on the war: "The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit." "The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," he said How come the very same people who are screaming Socialism about Obama, don't care that McCain wants to continue a war that could've paid for everyone's college education in the United… [cont.]
Asked by NONAME - Tue Oct 28 09:09:28 2008 - - 9 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well, while the rich are benefiting from the war (and everyone else suffers), it's also the rich who are paying for it with exorbitant income taxes. So, to be fair, I wouldn't call it redistributionist. Unfair? Yes. Unjust? Yes. Murderous? Yes. Unpatriotic? Absolutely. But not redistributionist.
Answered by Deo Gratias - Tue Oct 28 10:25:16 2008
Q. According to Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, the Iraq war is costing us $3 trillion dollars - enough to pave the entire U.S. highway system with 23.5 karat gold...three times over! He also blames part of the economic mess on the war: "The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit." "The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system," he said How come the very same people who are screaming Socialism about Obama, don't care that McCain wants to continue a war that could've paid for everyone's college education in the United… [cont.]
Asked by NONAME - Tue Oct 28 09:09:28 2008 - - 9 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well, while the rich are benefiting from the war (and everyone else suffers), it's also the rich who are paying for it with exorbitant income taxes. So, to be fair, I wouldn't call it redistributionist. Unfair? Yes. Unjust? Yes. Murderous? Yes. Unpatriotic? Absolutely. But not redistributionist.
Answered by Deo Gratias - Tue Oct 28 10:25:16 2008
Which book of these is the easiest to read/understand?
Q. As xcredit, our teacher said we can read one of these books and answer some questions. I am wondering which one is the easiest to pick. If you've only read one of those, then please tell me how it was to read. Thanks. 1-Jared Diamond: Guns, Germs and Steel 2-Benjamin Barber: Jihad vs. McWorld 3-Martin Wolf: Why Globalization Works 4-Joseph Stiglitz: Globalization and Its Discontents 5-Amy Chua: World on Fire 6-Samuel Huntington: Who Are We? By the way, two weeks to read the book. (i am a VERY slow reader), and English is my second language, but i am almost fluent. thanks again.
Asked by Sky Star - Tue Nov 11 10:05:15 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I read Guns, Germs, and Steel and would NOT recommend it to anyone who values their time. I am a fairly fast reader, but this book was so monotonous that it took 3 times as long as it would if it were another book. Unless you are looking forward to reading 13000 years of history condensed into 1 book, I do not recommend that one. Also, if you do not understand the background behind human history, such as evolution theories or ice ages, natural selection and the like, it can be difficult to understand **The entire book was not a bad book. I just wasn't advanced enough to understand it. Some of the ideas presented by Jared Diamond are fascinating, so if human history is your thing, you might be pleasantly surprised**
Answered by Jay - Tue Nov 11 10:17:15 2008
Q. As xcredit, our teacher said we can read one of these books and answer some questions. I am wondering which one is the easiest to pick. If you've only read one of those, then please tell me how it was to read. Thanks. 1-Jared Diamond: Guns, Germs and Steel 2-Benjamin Barber: Jihad vs. McWorld 3-Martin Wolf: Why Globalization Works 4-Joseph Stiglitz: Globalization and Its Discontents 5-Amy Chua: World on Fire 6-Samuel Huntington: Who Are We? By the way, two weeks to read the book. (i am a VERY slow reader), and English is my second language, but i am almost fluent. thanks again.
Asked by Sky Star - Tue Nov 11 10:05:15 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I read Guns, Germs, and Steel and would NOT recommend it to anyone who values their time. I am a fairly fast reader, but this book was so monotonous that it took 3 times as long as it would if it were another book. Unless you are looking forward to reading 13000 years of history condensed into 1 book, I do not recommend that one. Also, if you do not understand the background behind human history, such as evolution theories or ice ages, natural selection and the like, it can be difficult to understand **The entire book was not a bad book. I just wasn't advanced enough to understand it. Some of the ideas presented by Jared Diamond are fascinating, so if human history is your thing, you might be pleasantly surprised**
Answered by Jay - Tue Nov 11 10:17:15 2008
Obama? A Socialist? Really?
Q. A recent poll shows that 55% of likely voters said that the word "socialist" describes Obama and his policies. The 21st Century Democrats said, "You and I know [that] is not the case." I only wish it were! I wish Obama had pressed for single-payer national health care. I wish Obama had nationalized Citicorp and Bank of America, rather than bail them out. I wish he would have favored breaking up the rest of the big banks so they couldn't destroy our economy. I wish he would have forced any banks taking federal bailout money to freeze foreclosures for at least a year and freeze interest rates on mortgages and credit cards. I wish Obama would have proposed redistributing income from the wealthy to those who really need it by raising… [cont.]
Asked by JJ - Wed Jul 21 21:46:01 2010 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. So, in other words, you would like us to be like the old Soviet Union, wait in line for a few groceries, multiple families living in one room apartments, on and on. And, at the very least, all of his policies are socialist
Answered by toorie - Wed Jul 21 21:53:01 2010
Q. A recent poll shows that 55% of likely voters said that the word "socialist" describes Obama and his policies. The 21st Century Democrats said, "You and I know [that] is not the case." I only wish it were! I wish Obama had pressed for single-payer national health care. I wish Obama had nationalized Citicorp and Bank of America, rather than bail them out. I wish he would have favored breaking up the rest of the big banks so they couldn't destroy our economy. I wish he would have forced any banks taking federal bailout money to freeze foreclosures for at least a year and freeze interest rates on mortgages and credit cards. I wish Obama would have proposed redistributing income from the wealthy to those who really need it by raising… [cont.]
Asked by JJ - Wed Jul 21 21:46:01 2010 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. So, in other words, you would like us to be like the old Soviet Union, wait in line for a few groceries, multiple families living in one room apartments, on and on. And, at the very least, all of his policies are socialist
Answered by toorie - Wed Jul 21 21:53:01 2010
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'Stiglitz, Joseph'
Thu Jul 29 06:21:22 2010 [ refresh local cache ]
[Hide]▼
project-syndicate.org
unknown
Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:03:38 GM
Joseph. E. . Stiglitz. is University Professor at Columbia University and a Nobel laureate in Economics. His latest book, Freefall: Free Markets and the Sinking of the Global Economy, is now available in French, German, Japanese, ...
[Hide]▲
