Nobel Prize winning economist Joe Stiglitz:
Progressive Capitalism Is Not an Oxymoron
“Standards of living began to improve in the late 18th century for two reasons: the development of science (we learned how to learn about nature and used that knowledge to increase productivity and longevity) and developments in social organization (as a society, we learned how to work together, through institutions like the rule of law, and democracies with checks and balances).”
Capitalism in crisis: U.S. billionaires worry about the survival of the system that made them rich
Capitalism in crisis: U.S. billionaires worry about the survival of the system that made them rich
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/capitalism-in-crisis-us-billionaires-worry-about-the-survival-of-the-system-that-made-them-rich/2019/04/20/3e06ef90-5ed8-11e9-bfad-36a7eb36cb60_story.html
Why American CEOs are worried about capitalism
https://www.ft.com/content/138e103a-61a4-11e9-b285-3acd5d43599e
The Win-Win Fallacy
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/the-win-win-fallacy/569434/
How to Prevent Winner-Takes-All Democracy by KAUSHIK BASU
Why American CEOs are worried about capitalism
https://www.ft.com/content/138e103a-61a4-11e9-b285-3acd5d43599e
The Win-Win Fallacy
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/the-win-win-fallacy/569434/
How to Prevent Winner-Takes-All Democracy by KAUSHIK BASU
Cornell University economist Kaushik Basu notes:
“The benefits of winning an election have become so large that political parties will stoop to new lows to clinch a victory. And, as with corporations, they can do so with the help of data on electoral preferences and behavior, and with new strategies to target key constituencies.
This poses a dilemma for well-meaning democratic parties and politicians. If a “bad” party is willing to foment hate and racism to bolster its chances of winning, what is a “good” party to do? If it sticks to its principles, it could end up ceding victory to the “bad” party, which will do even more harm once it is in office. A “good” party may thus try to forestall that outcome by taking a step down the moral ladder, precipitating a race to the bottom. This is the problem with any winner-takes-all game. When second place confers no benefits, the cost of showing unilateral restraint can grow intolerably high.”
The Economist review of Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas
“He produces worrying case studies that illustrate his theme of companies creating big social problems and then offering sticking-plaster solutions in the form of philanthropy. For example, Purdue Pharma has an impressive record of providing grants that “encourage the healthy development of youth by reducing high-risk behaviours such as substance abuse”. But one reason that the company can afford such largesse is that it has made a fortune from marketing OxyContin, a drug that, thanks to over-prescription, is at the heart of America’s opioid epidemic.”
The Economist review of Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas
“He produces worrying case studies that illustrate his theme of companies creating big social problems and then offering sticking-plaster solutions in the form of philanthropy. For example, Purdue Pharma has an impressive record of providing grants that “encourage the healthy development of youth by reducing high-risk behaviours such as substance abuse”. But one reason that the company can afford such largesse is that it has made a fortune from marketing OxyContin, a drug that, thanks to over-prescription, is at the heart of America’s opioid epidemic.”
