Alan Greenspan - Capitalism and the Economic Crisis
Uploaded by: ForaTv
Video Description:
Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2008/10/02/Alan_Greenspan_Markets_and_the_Judiciary
Former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan predicts that the current global economic crisis may revive the international debate between capitalism and socialism. ----- Alan Greenspan discusses Markets and the Judiciary at the Our Courts and Corporate Citizenship conference hosted by the
Sandra Day O'Connor Project. The conference explored the idea that without reliable courts, markets cannot flourish and that a lack of faith in the fair application of the law is an obstacle to market growth. - Georgetown University Alan Greenspan was from 1987 to 2006 the Chairman of the Federal
Reserve of the United States. He currently works as a private advisor, making speeches and providing consulting for firms through his company, Greenspan Associates LLC.
Share This Video:
Tags for this video: bailout business capitalists economics economy free government markets owned rescue socialism socialists state trade
Περισσότερα videos απο την κατηγορια: News
Αλλα Videos απο τον χρηστη: ForaTv
Comments for this video: Show || Hide
| Comments for this video on YouTube |
| IF their paid for, ... ( 4 days ago by mammuru) |
| IF their paid for, they're not really doing what is right, but what they need to do :) |
| I disagree. ... ( 4 days ago by ddaly1) |
| I disagree. Politicians are, by and large, corporate whores subject to their whims. I believe the heads of GE, exxon, boeing, etc. are more powerful. I believe Adam Smith's criticism of corporations was the disconnect between owners and management, which made them ineffecient in his view. |
| I think the only ... ( 4 days ago by ddaly1) |
| I think the only reason it survives IS social interventions. That is why most of the developed world, specifically Europe (especially Japan), has abandoned laissez faire economic policies for a more keynesian approach because by now it's understood that this approach (w/o govt intervention) will end in disaster and/or people simply won't tolerate it. |
| funny thing is even ... ( 4 days ago by mammuru) |
| funny thing is even Keynes would disagree. Japan is a perfect example its ridiculous high taxation brought them into the decade some economic depression. SAme thing with sweden since 1971 when taxes went up to 102%... The short term relief is mere policies they use to fix the problems that government created with their social plans. The actual claim that it is free markets fault is a scapegoat. Theres not even a sound theory to why such a thing would happen. how bout scotland? |
| I think we agree ... ( 4 days ago by ddaly1) |
| I think we agree that the economic theories of Freidman and Hayek haven't been apllied with great/complete orthodoxy/strict adherence, but unlike you I believe this is a good thing because the problems of today's capitalist system, specifically in the U.S., would be magnified if they were. Furthermore, I disagree with the foundation of their theory: that private vices (namely greed) yield public good (as this has been shown historically to be incorrect). |
| ITs always the ... ( 4 days ago by mammuru) |
| ITs always the other guy that is greedy...haha, yeah? historically proven? show some sources. if we say self interest. I bet you we find more proof that this is beneficial. From the time you work in a team, negotiate, look for a spouse, or try to improve your standard of living, self interest is what keeps us going up rather then down. So were still slaves, but the masters have changed? your happy about that as you find a new, but similiar scapegoat...Socialism + mathematical proof =nonexistant |
| Just look at the ... ( 4 days ago by ddaly1) |
| Just look at the paradigm shift occurring in Latin America over the last decade, as country after country rejects neoliberal economic policies with vast popular support, as they are strongly in favor of more democratic socialist reforms. |
| sure I think hayeks ... ( 4 days ago by mammuru) |
| sure I think hayeks road to serfdom explains this idea as how people look for a negative aim, the conspiracy theory and just go for it. The social intervention policies, as being proved mathematically and psychologically fail yet again. and the more they reject free market the more they get kicked in the ass and blaming free market |
| They've already ... ( 4 days ago by ddaly1) |
| They've already tried these economic policies (privatization, deregulation, opening markets to foreign investment i.e. the introduction of transnationals) with terrible results. As i said, this is why most of Latin America is making democratic socialist reforms. No one is talking about conspiracy theories, people just want economic policies that won't leave them starving, unemployed, or working in sweatshops (which has been increasingly prevalent during the neoliberal era). |
| actually during ... ( 4 days ago by mammuru) |
| actually during their privatization era they did quite well, its the next step which your talking about which was the era of hell. MOnetary policies and taxation that jumped into this. PLease before Peron in Argentina the standard of living was one of the highest in the world. If this is really the case as u say. Name the specific try reading Classical Liberalism in Argentina: A Lesson for the World" by Jacob G. Hornberger. You sure people actually knew difference at times between social& lazz? |
| uhm, the specific ... ( 4 days ago by mammuru) |
| uhm, the specific regulations that needed in place, the actual issue (specific not broad). is what I ment |
| Array ( 3 days ago by ddaly1) |
| Bolivia, Ecuador, & Venezuela are specific examples of places where neoliberal economic policies have been disastrous and are now making a shift to the left. But this is an epidemic, affecting countries throughout Latin America after the debt crisis. The amount of people living in poverty in Latin America increased from 136 million in 1980 to 196 million in 1990; the number of poor reached 220 million by 2002, with almost 100 million people living in extreme poverty (from ECLAC). |
| Specifically, ... ( 3 days ago by ddaly1) |
| Specifically, formerly nationalized industries are privatized so sectors of the economy that previously provided the country with money for social services no longer do. As markets are opened to big transnationals, small businesses are left unable to compete and people have to work in sweatshops instead. Tariffs are eliminated that previously protected small-scale farmers who are forced to abandon their crops because theyre displaced by U.S. agribusinesses, etc., etc. etc. |
| But I guess you ... ( 3 days ago by mammuru) |
| But I guess you cant explain what actually happens with a postive economic answer yeah? the many misconceptions of on social part being overrun after one that is more radical. The more radical call the socialist party capitalist, and everyone in the world agrees. Tell me, what party caused the poverty in either bolivia, equador, or venezuela? :) The junta in venezuela? You forget the miracle of Chile, and the miracle of Japan which you so quickly are to judge :). But yeah, give specific exampl |
| I have read a lot ... ( 3 days ago by ddaly1) |
| I have read a lot about this and Chile under Pinochet being a free market miracle is a myth. In 1973, under Allende, the unemployment rate 4.3% (he was assassinated in 1973). After 10 years of Pinochet and his Chicago school experiments, in 1983, unemployment rose to 22%, real wages declined by 40%, the banks he had privatized defaulted (all this aside from his atrocious human rights record). (continued..) |
| As desperate ... ( 3 days ago by ddaly1) |
| As desperate Chileans rioted, Pinochet had to reverse many of the Chicago school economic policies: restoring minimum wage, giving unions collective bargaining rights, and start a public works program to create 500,000 jobs. Most significantly, throughout his reign, the copper industry stayed nationalized (how could Chile be a free-market miracle when its biggest export industry is run by the state!) (look into it my friend) |
| Furthermore, the ... ( 3 days ago by ddaly1) |
| Furthermore, the increasing poverty in Latin America was caused by corrupt, greedy, power-hungry leaders who were best suited to follow the economic policies dictated to them by the IMF (whose afformentioned laissez faire policies caused increased social inequality, poverty, unemployment, etc.). |
| I also forgot to ... ( 3 days ago by ddaly1) |
| I also forgot to mention, poverty doubled (20% to 40%), from '73 to '83 under Pinochet's more laissez faire/ Chicago school influenced policies. |
| the Inflation was ... ( 2 days ago by mammuru) |
| the Inflation was stabilized. Yeah in 1983 they had a recession, and i suggest you read a bit about fixed exchange rates. They actually didnt do as friedman had. So your basically talking about 3 years which are the affect of those dangerous social policies, it was contrary to what friedman wanted. Child mortality fell from om 82.2/1000 to 20/1000. Standard of living is higher, and the GDP is increasing by 7% contra to all the other socialist countries in latin america. |
| Power hungry? the ... ( 2 days ago by mammuru) |
| Power hungry? the power hungry leaders want more power...something socialist always claim they want. More of us more of us. while free market claim is less of us. Dictated by the IMF? you do understand that the reforms of banking, is a big process that needed help? you do realize such thing takes time to reform? and when you have people running around looking for a scapegoat. A little push is good, whats wrong with IMF? |
| Actually not 40% ... ( 2 days ago by mammuru) |
| Actually not 40% but 50%. They should have listened to friedman then keep their social and unstable policies such as the fixed exchange rate and De castro policies, read Two Lucky People by Friedman to see WHY it fell :) rather then just say that it did, therefore it doesnt work :) |
| Pinochet kept the ... ( 2 days ago by mammuru) |
| Pinochet kept the el Ladrillo and the country is no longer strong socialist but free market. Thanks to these policies, chile is one of the richest countries in latin america. Have you ever studied how monopolies work and how expensive they are? how they always overprice and has a culture of a "fat firm" ? Also you do realize that friedman didnt support Pinochet much? They are globalized and the economys strong backbone is international trade (Free market? :) ) Im guessing your talking (cont) |
| The problem with ... ( 2 days ago by ddaly1) |
| The problem with the IMF is they always have preconditions (SAPs) that go along with their loans (which always include deregulation and privatization). These preconditions lead to increased poverty, instability, destruction of the environment. Water privatization in Bolivia is a good illustration of the disasters this can cause. There is a really good book by Joseph Stiglitz (Globalization and its Discontents) that talks about how terrible the policies of the IMF have been. |
| The backbone of ... ( 2 days ago by ddaly1) |
| The backbone of their economy was always the copper industry which stayed nationalized. If the people of Chile were so pleased with the countrys free market reforms why did they elect a moderate socialist, Michelle Bachelet, for President in 2002? |