Thursday, May 30, 2013

Amazing: Joe Stiglitz Talks about Incentives Distorting Economists' Views; The Pot Calls the Virgin Oil Black

Below Joesph Stiglitz attacks free market economists by claiming they do so only because it is in their special interest to do so. He advocates government intervention in the economy--an area where it appears he has made a comfortable living for himself,

He was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Bill Clinton, worked at the World Bank as chief economist. He founded the Initiative for Policy Dialogue, with support from crony capitalists foundations, including the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations. He chaired the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, initiated by President Sarkozy of France.
He chaired the Commission of Experts on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System which was convened by the President of the United Nations General Assembly. And, in 2010, he acted as an advisor to the Greek government.

Compare this with free market advocates Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, who struggled through most of their careers to even get decent academic positions, never mind business gigs.

Who exactly would be in a position to be corrupted, Mises and Rothbard or the favorite of world government bodies, Stiglitz?

And what exactly is the ad hominem implied attack on business cycle theory? If he really sees a problem with the theory, why doesn't he tell us, rather than the ad hominem stuff?

(ht Cordination Problem)


  1. He has to attack the ABCT, his Nobel is underpinned on the basis that information asymmetry has nothing to do with intervention and/or money supply.

    "Market failure" is on the basis of bad information based on things other than the above in Stiglitz's world...he never even addressed that excess money might distort information/markets further in his Nobel work.

    If he did, it would have attacked his own attempt/argument to justify market regulation & intervention de facto as a result...nullifying everything(including his Nobel).

    He's not being honest, that's obvious. The tin foil hat claims of ulterior motives directed towards guys that didn't accumulate near the wealth he has from being aligned with the interventionists is laughable.

  2. I need a puke bucket, you can smell a socialist anytime they talk about the great depression. Banks need to fail, in time, along side the theory of Keynesian theft economics. Lets go bitcoin, lets go!!!!