tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27946614.post5157220235675638305..comments2024-03-07T14:43:21.888-08:00Comments on Whatever I want to write about: We have met the enemy. It is us!Sriram Khéhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06907731254833435446noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27946614.post-73940775983562316072016-08-07T20:12:22.490-07:002016-08-07T20:12:22.490-07:00ahem ... it was supposed to be "tsk" and...ahem ... it was supposed to be "tsk" and not "task" ... tsk, tsk, tsk :( ;)Sriram Khéhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06724218458246880137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27946614.post-7232369195793082612016-08-07T20:11:12.793-07:002016-08-07T20:11:12.793-07:00Task, task, task ... you are so ideologically oppo...Task, task, task ... you are so ideologically opposed to Stiglitz that you are unfairly dissing him. <br />Stiglitz, you, and I are all on the same side. In his commentary he had included:<br />"Among the big winners were the global 1%, the world’s plutocrats, but also the middle class in newly emerging economies. Among the big losers – those who gained little or nothing – were those at the bottom and the middle and working classes in the advanced countries"<br />Stiglitz has never been opposed to trade per se, and neither have I been opposed to trade. I am mighty happy that big names like Stiglitz are in the same intellectual world of mine when we have been harping for a long time that the government's focus ought to be on compensating the losers--NOT on opposing trade/globalization.<br />Have a strong cup of tea and stop tearing your hair out ;)<br /><br />I don't need to formulate a social contract at all ... The general principles of my contract will pretty much follow the Rawlsian framework, which is why I had included that short summary-video on the "veil of ignorance" that is an important piece of Rawl's idea on how the contract ought to be written.<br /><br />The failure to address the concerns of those who lost in the process is why Trump and Bernie happened. The continuing failure to address that means that we will be in even more shit streets when the problems get even more complicated with the rapidly advancing automation. But, we humans are idiots and we will invite more trouble for ourselves by not constructively thinking through .., instead, we will engage in targeting the "others" be they Muslims or Chinese or whoever ... Sriram Khéhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06724218458246880137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27946614.post-11228291332475452892016-08-07T18:16:11.066-07:002016-08-07T18:16:11.066-07:00Stiglitz is in the same camp as Krugman and theref...Stiglitz is in the same camp as Krugman and therefore I have to take many a gulp before I write this comment - lest Trumpesque unparliamentary language creeps in :)<br /><br />Thanks for your own para on how globalisation has benefited zillions of people in India and China. Else I would have torn my hair (whatever is left) off) yelling to Stiglitz and co that when they rail against globalisation, they should at least refer to the map of the world and that "global" means other countries too - not just the one they live in.<br /><br />I am not going to let you off on this topic. Formulate the social contract as you think it best and write a series of posts on it . You can't just criticise the lack of a social contract without producing one. Its not that governments have not been seized of the problem. It is that if they present any new social contract, its not acceptable to a majority. No contract is acceptable and they lose elections - that is the problem.Rameshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11782192840421019943noreply@blogger.com