Skip Navigation

'Neoliberal capitalism' has contributed to the rise of fascism, says Nobel laureate

www.abc.net.au 'Neoliberal capitalism' has contributed to the rise of fascism, says Nobel laureate

The attacks on democracy and freedom "have never been greater in my lifetime," warns Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.

'Neoliberal capitalism' has contributed to the rise of fascism, says Nobel laureate

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/19046336

320

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
320 comments
  • workers that produce wealth and are essential

    You got it wrong - workers alone won't produce anything. You need everything: Workers, managers, accountants, capital, financial system, machines, supply chains, logistics, customer acquisition and so on. Each one of these parts is crucial - wealth is only produced if all those elements are correctly allocated.

    Half of these things are provided by separate companies, which have their own complex structures, that together create wealth producing market environment.

    "I'm a worker so I produce wealth!" Is a harmful simplification. Skilled worker without all that backend isn't worth a jack shit. This is why there're so huge wage disparities between poor and rich countries - workers may be equally skilled, but the backend that supports the work in the poor country simply doesn't exist.

    markets fail very often when the incentives and structure are not aligned with the socially desired outcomes.

    There're corner cases that cause issues - but this is why we have legal framework to fix them - antitrust laws, regulation of relations between employee-emplyer, consumer protection, green energy incentives and so on

    • I agree all of that is needed to produce products in a modern economy, but I disagree with the share of profit allocated to managers. The only reason the allocation of profit is so skewed is because the manageriat abuses their power. They are supposed to be enablers of productivity, not little tyrants.

      • You're missing the part of the picture: There are also workers with specific skill sets who are paid extremely well. You don't hear about them, because they don't complain.

        But the question is why? Why workers with certain skills really well paid, while others aren't?

        The answer is misalignment between availability of types of work, and availability of workers with appropriate skills.

        There's no magic solution that would fix this - core issue is education system that produces surplus of one type of skilled workers and not enough of other types. The end result are huge wages for rare skills, and very low wages for common ones

        Fixing that problem requires radical reform of how people pick their career patch and it would take many years for benefits to have impact.

        • No, I'm saying people need to be paid a living wage to keep the social peace. You may externalize that responsibility from your enterprise, but someone is going to have to address the mismatch between wages and cost of living.

          You want an economy that rewards the 10% best, that is good I guess...but the inevitable 90% of "losers" that are still essential for production will get out of your control if you keep punishing them and forcing them into a race they never win (particularly when the social elevator breaks and poverty becomes transgenerational)

          • someone is going to have to address the mismatch between wages and cost of living.

            Everything in "Cost of living" basket is delivered by the same economy that tends towards reduction of prices - assuming it's healthy competitive market. I believe that at least in case of US, housing market and Healthcare are particularly corrupted, which drags prices up.

            but the inevitable 90% of "losers"

            I don't believe there are 90% of "losers" if you said bottom 10-20% earners in the society, I'd might agree - there's always some percentage of people who can't make the ends meet.

320 comments