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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

question everything

(47,444 posts)
Sat Aug 20, 2016, 01:53 PM Aug 2016

Nobel Prize-winning economist Stiglitz tells us why 'neoliberalism is dead'

Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and former adviser to US President Bill Clinton, says the consensus surrounding neoliberal economic thought has come to an end.

(snip)

Since the late 1980s and the so-called Washington Consensus, neoliberalism — essentially the idea that free trade, open markets, privatisation, deregulation, and reductions in government spending designed to increase the role of the private sector are the best ways to boost growth — has dominated the thinking of the world's biggest economies and international organisations like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

(snip)

Since the 2008 financial crisis, however, there has been a groundswell of opinion in both economic and political circles to suggest that the neoliberal consensus may not be the right way forward for the world. In the past few years, with growth low and inequality rampant, that groundswell has gained traction.

(snip)

Stiglitz went on to argue that one of the central tenets of the neoliberal ideology — the idea that markets function best when left alone and that an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth — has now been pretty much disproved. "We've gone from a neoliberal euphoria that 'markets work well almost all the time' and all we need to do is keep governments on course, to 'markets don't work' and the debate is now about how we get governments to function in ways that can alleviate this," he said. In other words, Stiglitz says: "Neoliberalism is dead in both developing and developed countries."

Stiglitz is not alone in his belief that neoliberalism has its problems, though his argument that the consensus is "dead" is somewhat more forthright than those of many others. In a blog post in May, three economists from the IMF — long one of the greatest champions of the neoliberal consensus — questioned the efficacy of some aspects of it, particularly when it comes to the creation of inequality.

(snip)

But since Cameron resigned following the UK's vote to leave the European Union, fiscal stimulus in the UK has started to gain traction once again as a viable means of stimulating growth. It is widely expected that Philip Hammond, the new chancellor under newly installed Prime Minister Theresa May, will announce some form of fiscal easing at the Autumn Statement — which will come at some point before the end of the year (last year's was in late November).

Across the Atlantic, both US presidential nominees, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, both favouring expanded government borrowing to fund infrastructure projects.

http://www.businessinsider.com/joseph-stiglitz-says-neoliberalism-is-dead-2016-8

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nobel Prize-winning economist Stiglitz tells us why 'neoliberalism is dead' (Original Post) question everything Aug 2016 OP
Fiscal stimulus is a completely separate issue from market regulation. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2016 #1
It's discredited but far from dead Warpy Aug 2016 #2

Warpy

(111,174 posts)
2. It's discredited but far from dead
Sat Aug 20, 2016, 02:11 PM
Aug 2016

It will take a massive collapse to put it into its coffin, but it will only lie there sleeping, ready to awaken under a new, shiny name some day in the future when a toady to the rich will rediscover it as a way to increase his masters' wealth at the expense of everyone else.

It's as old and evil as Satan and just as hard to kill.

It has merely been discredited by any rational person who has seen it as brutal and unsustainable. Men who want to hold onto fast money are far from rational, though, and will remain irrational until that money is wrested from them, usually by massive economic collapse but occasionally by war.

Let's hope it's the former.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Economy»Nobel Prize-winning econo...