======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================
In today's New York Times there is an article discussing the suggestions of
various thinkers on what might
sustain a growing economy in the future. (David Segal, "Some Very Creative
Economic Fix-Its") Here is what one New York University economist had to say:
_____________________________________
Perhaps we are entering the era of the self-starter. Prof. Andrew aplin of New
York University thinks so. He begins with the premise that in the coming global
economy some people will succeed and others will not, and income inequality
will grow. While it’s noble to focus on how to spread wealth around, he says
that it might be wiser to think of ways the poor and middle class could cater
to the economy’s biggest winners.
“Unfortunately, there will be income inequality,” he says, “but enough people
will make money that those who don’t would do well, in as much as they
understand the needs of that group.”
He says he expects a rise in what he call “artisanal services,” like cooks,
nutritionists, small-scale farmers. He sees services emerging that aid the
wealthy at the intersection of health and genetic science. He imagines a rise
in technology services, too — experts who keep clients current about technology
which can advance their interests in business, in the media, on search engines
and so on.
Professor Caplin worries that this concept might be caricatured as “cater to
the rich.” But he suggested that this country could use a lot more
non-judgmental thinking about the future of the United States economy. Any
argument on that subject that starts with the word “should,” he said, is not
nearly as useful as one that starts with “could” and has a firm grasp on “is.”
“If you start with ‘should’ you get arguments where nobody makes any sense and
where you can claim that some people are good and other people are bad,” he
said, referring to recent skirmishes over Fed policy, deficits and other
contentious topics. “With that sleight of hand you’ve ensured that you will not
discuss anything of substance. You’ve just lined up two camps to fire at one
another.”
__________________________________
Is it time to take all neoclassical economists into the woods and shoot them?
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
