Joseph Stiglitz: Innovation should focus on quality of life, not just productivity

Stiglitz: Wrong innovations caused downturn

Published: 16 Mar 2013 at 14.59
Online news: News

Many of the innovations that led to productivity increases in manufacturing ended up playing a role in the economic downturn that began in 2008, says economist Jopseph Stiglitz.

The result has been years of instability and inequality caused by a slowdown in global employment, the Nobel laureate said in an address at Dhurakij Pundit University in Bangkok on Saturday.

For a long time, he said, many countries have been focusing disproportionately on innovation in the wrong areas, such as saving labour.

This article is older than 60 days, which we reserve for our premium members only.You can subscribe to our premium member subscription, here.

Your comments

spiceman
Post : 3,482
Send message

Discussion 14 : 19 Mar 2013 at 15.4614
Post this to my Facebook
The goal in business is to maximize profit, and you can't do that by treating your employee cruelly or senselessly trashing the environment. It's been my philosophy to make my employees happy, and in turn, they make my customers happy. And the last thing I want is to be caught in a PR nightmare over environmental issue in the evening news.
Like dislike 0 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
mutley
Post : 183
Send message

Discussion 13 : 19 Mar 2013 at 09.4813
Post this to my Facebook
One only has to listen to the words of the CEO of a Canadian auto parts company on moving the operation from Canada to Mexico. "As CEO, my first remit is to make money and money has no heart, soul, conscience or homeland." Yes Disc. 11, it's a race to the bottom!
Like dislike 0 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
onlyasking
Post : 456
Send message

Discussion 12 : 17 Mar 2013 at 17.1412
Post this to my Facebook
D 11 Unforunately in the real world everything is not equal, some countries have lower costs to produce raw materials not due to lower labour cost, for example in Thailand sugar can be produced much cheaper than in the EU and US due to weather conditions and sugar cane vs sugar beet. Due to these non labour factors some countries have comparative advantages which it should use to generate economic growth and import products and services its has a comparative disadvantage to produce. But again in the real world the EU and US will rather subsidise their sugar farmers and pass on the higher price to consumers.
Like dislike 2 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
robertt
Post : 75
Send message

Discussion 11 : 17 Mar 2013 at 05.4511
Post this to my Facebook
Stiglitz is just plagiarizing Karl Marks, all things being equal, the cost of materials, manufacturing and transport, the only competitive edge a nation has is the cost of labour, and production will move to the countries where labour is cheapest. It’s a race to the bottom!!
Like dislike 1 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
spiceman
Post : 3,482
Send message

Discussion 10 : 17 Mar 2013 at 04.1510
Post this to my Facebook
In a capitalistic society, the environment will be as clean or dirty as the people want it to be. Do people buy goods & services from companies that protect or pollute the environment? So, it is up to, we, the people, which are you and me, and not the crooked politicians, OK?
Like dislike 4 people liked / 1 people disliked this comment
abbub
Post : 2,030
Send message

Discussion 9 : 17 Mar 2013 at 00.049
Post this to my Facebook
Buck D7:

Keeping people in lifelong debt by convincing them to continue to buy more & more commodities is one way of making sure they will fight for the few jobs available and work at low wages

Debt is the way the wealthy manage to control the workers.

And banks are very good at convincing us we need to keep our money safe for 2% interest and then loaning that same money to us at huge interest rates.

In fact banks do not have the money. It is a fiction between conniving banks. If everyone took out their money tomorrow all banks would go bust.
Like dislike 8 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
BRRMBOB
Post : 22
Send message

Discussion 8 : 16 Mar 2013 at 23.528
Post this to my Facebook
I suppose he's ready to face the wrath of the right. As usual they will attempt to destroy the messenger and ignore the message.
Like dislike 5 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
bucktoui
Post : 82
Send message

Discussion 7 : 16 Mar 2013 at 23.187
Post this to my Facebook
D3 His analytic idea(not assumption) covered wider spectrum than what you had said, and it is criticized by Republican as Socialist's idea. But the fact is the fact, no matter how much the rich is trying to have poor people and their followers think otherwise. In your thought might be only unjustified spread the wealth like Communist, but I think what he said 'if the bottom ones (majority of people) didn't have spending power who will buy the products?' You can not have poor people using credit card like Ronald Reagan's policy which is already historically proven wrong.
Like dislike 5 people liked / 1 people disliked this comment
DavidHill
Post : 3
Send message

Discussion 6 : 16 Mar 2013 at 20.546
Post this to my Facebook
Jopseph Stiglitz is debateably the best economist in the world when it comes to a sustainable world order. Indeed what he states I 100% agree with as innovation has been used for the wrong uses and not the greater enhancement of the human experience. For as the world continues on its unsustainable development mechanism and as natural resoures depletion meets head-on with ever increasing global population, the present capitalist system is a recipe for conflict through protecting borders and a sovereign state's natural resources.

Dr David Hill
World Innovation Foundation
Like dislike 9 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
Worzel
Post : 172
Send message

Discussion 5 : 16 Mar 2013 at 19.005
Post this to my Facebook
Disc 3 ACR; I think what is being suggested is that rather than the Luddites losing their jobs due to automated machinery replacing them, that they could have kept their jobs and remained employed to the detriment of the employers desire to maximize profits.

Look at what a superfluous item an iPhone 5 is. It serves no purpose over its predecessor yet was a source of lost jobs as manufacturing moved to China solely for increased profits. Profits for a company actually unable to spend it cash reserves.

Or as Dr Spock said, 'The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few'.

The profit motive and debt usury are the issues here.
Like dislike 16 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment

1 2 Next Last

Joseph Stiglitz: Innovation should focus on quality of life, not just productivity | Bangkok Post: business

Stiglitz: Wrong innovations caused downturn

Most Viewed

Apple 'losing innovation magic'

Forum

Your comments

Sign in once and access every part of the website at your convenience!