We care about freedom from hunger, unemployment and poverty — and, as FDR emphasized, freedom from fear. People with just enough to get by don’t have freedom — they do what they must to survive. And we need to focus on giving more people the freedom to live up to their potential, to flourish and to be creative. An agenda that would increase the number of children growing up in poverty or parents worrying about how they are going to pay for health care — necessary for the most basic freedom, the freedom to live — is not a freedom agenda.

Champions of the neoliberal order, moreover, too often fail to recognize that one person’s freedom is another’s unfreedom — or, as Isaiah Berlin put it, freedom for the wolves has often meant death to the sheep. Freedom to carry a gun may mean death to those who are gunned down in the mass killings that have become an almost daily occurrence in the United States. Freedom not to be vaccinated or wear masks may mean others lose the freedom to live.

There are trade-offs, and trade-offs are the bread and butter of economics. The climate crisis shows that we have not gone far enough in regulating pollution; giving more freedom to corporations to pollute reduces the freedom of the rest of us to live a healthy life — and in the case of those with asthma, even the freedom to live. Freeing bankers from what they claimed to be excessively burdensome regulations put the rest of us at risk of a downturn potentially as bad as the Great Depression of the 1930s when the banking system imploded in 2008.

51 points

More capitalism to save us from capitalism

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

I would lay quite good odds most of the problems you’re laying at the feet of capitalism are caused by GOP socialism, like the article’s discussion of when the GOP just handed the banks gobs of tax dollars in welfare.

To be clear, I’m attacking the GOP here, not socialism itself. I’m just also tired of people complaining about capitalism while decrying problems caused by corporate welfare.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Nah, capitalism is my problem, the thing that automatically segues into dystopia

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Well of course! The only possible discourse we can have about the topic is if we assume capitalism is the best and only political economic model we can have.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The bureaucracy is expanding to deal with the needs of the expanding bureaucracy

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Democracy requires Socialism.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Idk, “new, progressive capitalism” just sounds like a fancy term for neoliberalism

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Exactly. “Capitalism could use a new coat of paint.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Joseph Stiglitz is a professor of economics at Columbia University and winner of the 2001 Nobel Memorial Prize in economics.

His newest book is “The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society.”

Amid another election season, our impulse to debate American democracy through a single political lens is understandable.

But we’d be better served considering a second closely related question too: Which economic system serves the most people?


The original article contains 69 words, the summary contains 69 words. Saved 0%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

permalink
report
reply
-2 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 331K

    Comments