Joe Stiglitz: Why the world economy's malaise continues

Fri Jan 15 13:52:44 CST 2016

Ish,

You are full of shit.  If you think you think you're slick, you are a fool,
probably a narcissist.

You never tried to explain anything, probably because you don't know
anything, but spout on anyway because you so need to be considered an
authority.  But the P-list has genuinely smart people in its ranks who
called your bluff.  Blowhard pronouncements are SO annoying. They beg for
blowback.  You really are not that smart to have painted yourself into a
blowhard's corner.  That shit won't fly here.

I am making my response to you public because I owe you no allegiance of
confidentiality.

David Morris

On Friday, January 15, 2016, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:

> David, I've tried to explain this to you several times; I've given up.
> It's too painful for both of us.
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:04 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','fqmorris at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> It's easier to take pot-shots at Krugman or Keynes that is is to espouse
>> a cogent economic theory.
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rpmahnke at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> If what you're talking about is what's in that Japan Times piece, it's
>>> nonsense. If not, you haven't tried to explain.
>>>
>>> It's easy to explain where the shortfall in demand came from: the shock
>>> in 2007. Demand has never recovered. If you want to say we have too much
>>> supply, you need to explain how that could be. One can do this in a
>>> particular sector (say, cars or housing). But what's your story about the
>>> global economy?
>>>
>>> Sent from an iPhone; pls xcse typos.
>>>
>>> On Jan 14, 2016, at 23:28, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ishmailian at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Krugman is shooting away at his favorite target, the idiots on the Right
>>> who argue, mostly from some puritan ideology and not from any economic
>>> theory, that belt tightening is the best way to feed the poor. Though he
>>> sets his favorite theory against their favorite theory, the piece is not
>>> economics but politics.
>>>
>>> And, while he is absolutely correct, his piece has nothing to do with
>>> what I am talking about.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 2:06 AM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ishmailian at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, he's right about the war on demand, but I'm not talking about
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com
>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rpmahnke at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It's a little dated, but this post is still quite relevant,
>>>>> apparently:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/24/the-war-on-demand/
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:19 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','fqmorris at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's what I thought.  A very biased author without a story,
>>>>>> confusing everything in order to attack excess debt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thursday, January 14, 2016, Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That piece (the Japan Times op-ed from 2012) is gobbledegook.  In
>>>>>>> the right circumstances, it makes a lot of sense to talk about a bubble
>>>>>>> creating over investment in certain areas, leading to an excess of supply
>>>>>>> over what a market in equilibrium (not a bubble) will demand.  Arguably,
>>>>>>> you have had this situation in the auto industry, where national
>>>>>>> governments subsidize their own makers. But to say that this is happening
>>>>>>> across the global economy is nonsense, a slick label without a story behind
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The author says there is "excess labor"?  What does that mean?  Too
>>>>>>> many people have been born?  Persuaded to enter the economy instead of
>>>>>>> loafing in unemployment.  You have high unemployment because there aren't
>>>>>>> enough jobs, which is to say there is insufficient demand for the labor we
>>>>>>> have.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The author also talks about excess capacity.  How does he know the
>>>>>>> problem is excess capacity instead of absent demand?  "Prices of digital
>>>>>>> home appliances are going down at an accelerating speed, and a new model is
>>>>>>> sold at a 50 percent discount within six months of its launch. This is
>>>>>>> proof that the global economy is in excess supply."  If you think that's
>>>>>>> proof of anything other than sloppy thinking, I have a bridge to sell you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> His third problem is excess debt, and there the reason for this
>>>>>>> piece is clear.  The author is hostile to fiscal stimulus, and clearly has
>>>>>>> reasoned backwards to attack the case for it.  The case for stimulus, and
>>>>>>> what we could do about the secular stagnation, can be another conversation,
>>>>>>> but the only way to read this piece and to think that it rebuts what
>>>>>>> Stieglitz wrote is to have started with that as a belief and to have
>>>>>>> searched for confirmation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:19 PM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe this will help?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/11/05/business/excess-supply-not-lack-of-demand-weighing-on-the-global-economy/#.VpganfkrIb1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Mike Weaver <mike.weaver at zen.co.uk
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's not really about production, it's about distribution.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 14/01/2016 22:12, David Morris wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does the article say deceased demand isn't the cause of over
>>>>>>>>> supply?  Since I can't read it...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:08 PM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OK, but if demand is not declining, the price level is not
>>>>>>>>>> increasing, the story is supply. That's the story, Gerry.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Lack of demand is one of the basic causes of over-supply (glut),
>>>>>>>>>>> and that lack of demand might be caused by any number of things, like lack
>>>>>>>>>>> of money (liquidity). Overproduction (exceeding demand) might be another
>>>>>>>>>>> cause.  Cheap money would not be one of its causes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Robert Mahnke <
>>>>>>>>>>> rpmahnke at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When demand exceed supply, how do you distinguish between "a
>>>>>>>>>>>> supply story" and a demand story?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:31 PM, ish mailian <
>>>>>>>>>>>> ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry about that; I thought it was a free article. It's an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> excellent article. And yes, it is focused on China, but the overproduction
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not just a China story.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The super capacity that was built to meet the expected super
>>>>>>>>>>>>> demand of the developing and emerging growth economies, in China and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> elsewhere, is the story, a supply story.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:07 PM, David Morris <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This article is behind a paywall, but if the first two
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sentences portend its content, then it seems to be saying that a glut of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chinese goods is slowing growth.  More demand would be the solution to this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem.  Lack of demand is its cause.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:56 PM, ish mailian <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it's true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.wsj.com/articles/glut-of-chinese-goods-pinches-global-economy-1433212681>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wsj.com/articles/glut-of-chinese-goods-pinches-global-economy-1433212681
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Robert Mahnke <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rpmahnke at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you say that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:37 PM, ish mailian <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The world is not not suffering from too little demand but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with too much supply and with too much capacity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:00 PM, David Morris <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The economics of this inertia is easy to understand, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there are readily available remedies. The world faces a deficiency of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aggregate demand, brought on by a combination of growing inequality and a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mindless wave of fiscal austerity. Those at the top spend far less than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those at the bottom, so that as money moves up, demand goes down. And
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> countries like Germany that consistently maintain external surpluses are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributing significantly to the key problem of insufficient global demand.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At the same time, the U.S. suffers from a milder form of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fiscal austerity prevailing in Europe. Indeed, some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 500,000
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/07/08/263588/the-conservative-recovery-continues-2/> fewer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are employed by the public sector in the U.S. than before the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. With normal expansion in government employment since 2008, there
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would have been two million more.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Robert Mahnke <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rpmahnke at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-stiglitz/world-economy-2016_b_8908560.html?utm_hp_ref=world>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-e-stiglitz/world-economy-2016_b_8908560.html?utm_hp_ref=world
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160115/81c2d79c/attachment.html>