
Joseph E Stiglitz
Nobel laureate in economics, and Professor at Columbia University. His most recent book, co-authored with Bruce Greenwald, is Creating a Learning Society: A New Approach to Growth, Development, and Social Progress.
Nobel laureate in economics, and Professor at Columbia University. His most recent book, co-authored with Bruce Greenwald, is Creating a Learning Society: A New Approach to Growth, Development, and Social Progress.
The aftershocks of the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), while seemingly fading, are still reverberating around the world.
We desperately need free markets, but that means, above all, markets that are free from the stranglehold of monopoly and monopsony.
Anyone with any faith in the market economy knew that the supply issues would be resolved eventually; but no one could possibly know when.
In the name of taming inflation, central banks have set themselves on a path to cause a recession.
It is not left-wing extremism to note that the American economy has not been serving most Americans
Politically, the G7 and like-minded countries around the world have adopted a war footing to stop Russian aggression.
The United States appears to have entered a new cold war with both China and Russia.
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) first meeting in more than two years was markedly different from the many previous Davos conferences.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is showing promising signs of changing with the times.
Although Covid-19 has been hard on everyone, it has not been an “equal opportunity” disease.
The World Trade Organization was supposed to meet this week to consider a proposal that has been languishing for the past year:
Moves are afoot to replace or at least greatly weaken Kristalina Georgieva, managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) since 2019.
The world has finally awoken to the existential imperative of securing a rapid transition to a green economy.
There is so much to celebrate with the new year. The arrival of safe, effective Covid-19 vaccines means that there is light at the end of the pandemic tunnel (though the next few months will be horrific). Equally important, America’s mendacious, incompetent, mean-spirited president will be replaced by his polar opposite: a man of decency, honesty, and professionalism.
This year marked the 50th anniversary of the World Economic Forum’s flagship meeting of the world’s business and political elites in Davos, Switzerland. Much has changed since my first Davos in 1995.
As the world’s business elites trek to Davos for their annual gathering, people should be asking a simple question: have they overcome their infatuation with US President Donald Trump?
Judging by his appointment of a first-rate economist to his cabinet as Minister of Economy, Argentina’s new president, Alberto Fernández, is off to a good start in confronting his country’s economic problems.
It’s clear: we are living beyond our planet’s limits. Unless we change something, the consequences will be dire. Should that something be our exclusive focus on economic growth?
For four decades, the prevailing doctrine in the United States has been that corporations should maximise shareholder value—meaning profits and share prices—here and now, come what may, regardless of the consequences to workers, customers, suppliers, and
What kind of economic system is most conducive to human wellbeing? That question has come to define the current era, because, after 40 years of neoliberalism in the United States and other advanced economies, we know what doesn’t work.
Kirstjen Nielsen's forced resignation as US Secretary of Homeland Security is no reason to celebrate. Yes, she presided over the forced separation of families at the US border, notoriously housing young children in wire cages.
In the last few years, globalisation has come under renewed attack. Some of the criticisms may be misplaced, but one is spot on: globalisation has enabled large multinationals, like Apple, Google, and Starbucks, to avoid paying tax.
It's old news that large segments of society have become deeply unhappy with what they see as “the establishment”, especially the political class. The “Yellow Vest” protests in France, triggered by President Emmanuel Macron's move to hike fuel taxes in the name of combating climate change, are but the latest example of the scale of this alienation.
Just under 10 years ago, the International Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress issued its report “Mismeasuring Our Lives
All eyes are on the United States as November's Congressional elections approach. The outcome will answer many alarming questions raised two years ago, when Donald Trump won the presidential election.
In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, some economists argued that the United States, and perhaps the global economy, was suffering from “secular stagnation,”
What was at first a trade skirmish—with US President Donald Trump imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum—appears to be quickly morphing into a full-scale trade war with China.
The trade skirmish between the United States and China on steel, aluminium, and other goods is a product of US President Donald Trump's scorn for multilateral trade arrangements and the World Trade Organization, an institution that was created to adjudicate trade disputes.
In 1967, riots erupted in cities throughout the United States, from Newark, New Jersey, to Detroit and Minneapolis in the Midwest—all two years after the Watts neighbourhood of Los Angeles exploded in violence. In response, President Lyndon B Johnson appointed a commission, headed by Illinois Governor Otto Kerner, to investigate the causes and propose measures to address them.
I have been attending the World Economic Forum's annual conference in Davos, Switzerland, where the so-called global elite convenes to discuss the world's problems, since 1995.
Never has a piece of legislation labelled as both a tax cut and a reform been received with as much disapproval and derision as the bill passed by the US Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump just before Christmas.
A year ago, I predicted that the most distinctive aspect of 2017 would be uncertainty, fueled by, among other things, Donald Trump's election as president in the United States and the United Kingdom's vote to leave the European Union.
Fifteen years ago, I published Globalization and Its Discontents, a book that sought to explain why there was so much dissatisfaction with globalisation within the developing countries.
One of the important powers of any US president is to appoint members and heads of the many agencies that are responsible for implementing the country's laws and regulations and, in many cases, governing the economy.
Although America's right-wing plutocrats may disagree about how to rank the country's major problems—for example, inequality, slow growth, low productivity, opioid addiction, poor schools, and deteriorating infrastructure—the solution is always the same: lower taxes and deregulation, to “incentivise” investors and “free up” the economy.
Under President Donald Trump's leadership, the United States took another major step toward establishing itself as a rogue state on June 1, when it withdrew from the Paris climate agreement. For years, Trump has indulged the strange conspiracy theory that, as he put it in 2012, “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make US manufacturing non-competitive.” But this was not the reason Trump advanced for withdrawing the US from the Paris accord. Rather, the agreement, he alleged, was bad for the US and implicitly unfair to it.
Donald Trump has thrown a hand grenade into the global economic architecture that was so painstakingly constructed in the years
The likely victory of Emmanuel Macron in the French presidential election has elicited a global sigh of relief.
Today, a quarter-century after the Cold War's end, the West and Russia are again at odds. This time, though, at least on one side, the
Trump sees the world in terms of a zero-sum game. In reality, globalisation, if well managed, is a positive-sum force: America gains if its friends and allies — whether Australia, the EU, or Mexico — are stronger. But Trump's approach threatens to turn it into a negative-sum game: America will lose, too.
Donald Trump grasped the spirit of the time: things weren't going well, and many voters wanted change. Now they will get it: there will be no business as usual. But seldom has there been more uncertainty. Which policies Trump will pursue remains unknown, to say nothing of which will succeed or what the consequences will be.
On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump will be inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. I would hate to say “I told you so,”
The problems posed by the disaffected Americans – resulting from decades of neglect – will not be solved quickly or by conventional tools. An effective strategy will need to consider more unconventional solutions, which Republican corporate interests are unlikely to favour.
Change entails risk. But the Trump phenomenon – and more than a few similar political developments in Europe – has revealed the far greater risks entailed by failing to heed this message.
It's been a quarter-century since Japan's asset bubble burst – and a quarter-century of malaise as one “lost decade” has followed another.
In response to asymmetric shocks and divergences in productivity, there would have to be adjustments in the real (inflation-adjusted) exchange rate, meaning that prices in the eurozone periphery would have to fall relative to Germany and northern Europe.
The failure of globalisation to deliver on the promises of mainstream politicians has surely undermined trust and confidence in the “establishment.” And governments' offers of generous bailouts for the banks that had brought on the 2008 financial crisis, while leaving ordinary citizens largely to fend for themselves, reinforced the view that this failure was not merely a matter of economic misjudgments.
For 200 years, there have been two schools of thought about what determines the distribution of income – and how the economy functions.
The World Trade Organization was supposed to meet this week to consider a proposal that has been languishing for the past year:
Moves are afoot to replace or at least greatly weaken Kristalina Georgieva, managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) since 2019.
The world has finally awoken to the existential imperative of securing a rapid transition to a green economy.
There is so much to celebrate with the new year. The arrival of safe, effective Covid-19 vaccines means that there is light at the end of the pandemic tunnel (though the next few months will be horrific). Equally important, America’s mendacious, incompetent, mean-spirited president will be replaced by his polar opposite: a man of decency, honesty, and professionalism.
This year marked the 50th anniversary of the World Economic Forum’s flagship meeting of the world’s business and political elites in Davos, Switzerland. Much has changed since my first Davos in 1995.
As the world’s business elites trek to Davos for their annual gathering, people should be asking a simple question: have they overcome their infatuation with US President Donald Trump?
Judging by his appointment of a first-rate economist to his cabinet as Minister of Economy, Argentina’s new president, Alberto Fernández, is off to a good start in confronting his country’s economic problems.
It’s clear: we are living beyond our planet’s limits. Unless we change something, the consequences will be dire. Should that something be our exclusive focus on economic growth?
For four decades, the prevailing doctrine in the United States has been that corporations should maximise shareholder value—meaning profits and share prices—here and now, come what may, regardless of the consequences to workers, customers, suppliers, and
What kind of economic system is most conducive to human wellbeing? That question has come to define the current era, because, after 40 years of neoliberalism in the United States and other advanced economies, we know what doesn’t work.