WEBVTT

NOTE The Confused Literature on Globalization

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.160
Well, if I'm to talk about the confused literature on globalization, I think one should first

2
00:00:07.160 --> 00:00:13.640
ask what is globalization, otherwise the rest of the talk might be confusing, or at least

3
00:00:13.640 --> 00:00:15.440
I would get confused.

4
00:00:15.440 --> 00:00:22.200
By globalization, it usually meant the fact that countries of the world have been coming

5
00:00:22.200 --> 00:00:28.840
closer together, especially in economics, as Suda Shinoi was discussing in her talk,

6
00:00:28.840 --> 00:00:34.240
The countries are more continually involved with trade with one another and there's all

7
00:00:34.240 --> 00:00:42.440
sorts of economic investments that countries have in each other, the multinational corporations

8
00:00:42.440 --> 00:00:49.480
and foreign investors spending a lot of money in various countries.

9
00:00:49.480 --> 00:00:55.000
Sometimes the term is also applied to political unions, but I won't be so much concerned

10
00:00:55.000 --> 00:01:04.000
I'll be concerned with that. In this talk, I'll be concerned almost entirely with the economic aspects of globalization.

11
00:01:04.000 --> 00:01:15.000
What I'd like to do is to discuss six recent books on globalization, at least some of which are partially confused.

12
00:01:15.000 --> 00:01:21.000
If I get through those in the allotted time, I have a couple more in reserve,

13
00:01:21.000 --> 00:01:27.800
I think I'll be able, the six I'll be discussing should take me to the end of the lecture.

14
00:01:27.800 --> 00:01:34.320
Now, the first two books I want to discuss I'll take together are both by Joseph Stiglitz,

15
00:01:34.320 --> 00:01:43.320
who was the winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2001. And the two books are Globalization

16
00:01:43.320 --> 00:01:50.240
and its Discontents. And then the second one, which came out just this year, is called Making

17
00:01:50.240 --> 00:01:58.960
and Globalization Work. Now the title, Globalization and its Discontent, of course, evokes the

18
00:01:58.960 --> 00:02:06.400
famous short book of Freud, Civilization and its Discontents. But I doubt that by entitling

19
00:02:06.400 --> 00:02:13.360
his book in that way, Stiglitz was intending to suggest that his book also consists of

20
00:02:13.360 --> 00:02:25.320
of Unfounded Speculation. Stiglitz is not an opponent of the free market. He's not

21
00:02:25.320 --> 00:02:34.320
a full-fledged socialist. On the contrary, he accepts the argument from information advanced

22
00:02:34.320 --> 00:02:40.800
by Friedrich Hayek that a socialist system couldn't work because no socialist planner

23
00:02:40.800 --> 00:02:46.800
could amass all the necessary information to determine what the proper prices of goods should be.

24
00:02:46.800 --> 00:02:53.800
In fact, Stiglitz himself is one of the great figures in the economics of information.

25
00:02:53.800 --> 00:03:03.800
However, although he supports the market economy to some extent, he by no means favors an unrestricted free market.

26
00:03:03.800 --> 00:03:04.800
Market.

27
00:03:04.800 --> 00:03:10.360
In fact, he thinks that the problem with globalization today, the principal problem with globalization

28
00:03:10.360 --> 00:03:19.440
today, is that the policies that have been advocated by the leading agencies promoting

29
00:03:19.440 --> 00:03:25.920
globalization, such as the International Monetary Fund, have been too much oriented toward the

30
00:03:25.920 --> 00:03:26.920
free market.

31
00:03:26.920 --> 00:03:28.520
They're too free market.

32
00:03:28.520 --> 00:03:32.960
We don't have enough government guidance and intervention.

33
00:03:32.960 --> 00:03:41.200
And he says, well, globalization could be a good thing, but it hasn't really had very

34
00:03:41.200 --> 00:03:42.200
good results.

35
00:03:42.200 --> 00:03:49.920
And he said one example of this is there are enormous numbers of people in the world who

36
00:03:49.920 --> 00:03:55.000
are extremely poor in spite of the fact that globalization is supposed to be advancing

37
00:03:55.000 --> 00:04:01.600
very rapidly and we're supposed to be growing economically worldwide, but there are an awful

38
00:04:01.600 --> 00:04:07.520
and a lot of poor people. He says, according to the World Bank definition of poverty, I

39
00:04:07.520 --> 00:04:14.160
should say Stiglitz himself was the vice president and chief economist of the World Bank for

40
00:04:14.160 --> 00:04:20.160
several years. According to the World Bank standard, someone counts as extremely poor

41
00:04:20.160 --> 00:04:31.160
if he's living on less than $2 a day, and extremely poor if he's living on $1 a day.

42
00:04:31.160 --> 00:04:50.160
Now, Gibbs figures, say, for 2004, the world population is about 6.5 billion. He said 40 percent of the world population is poor by that definition, and 877 million are extremely poor.

43
00:04:50.160 --> 00:04:57.160
Now, I shall ask you to take note of those figures, because I'll be mentioning them a bit later in connection with another writer.

44
00:04:57.160 --> 00:05:03.160
Right, but he said globalization isn't working very well because look at all the very poor

45
00:05:03.160 --> 00:05:04.160
people.

46
00:05:04.160 --> 00:05:10.680
Now, why is it that there are so many poor people if the economy of the world has been

47
00:05:10.680 --> 00:05:14.520
developing so much, we've had tremendous increases in productivity.

48
00:05:14.520 --> 00:05:17.400
Why is it that there are so many poor people?

49
00:05:17.400 --> 00:05:24.000
He ascribes a good deal of responsibility to a policy pursued by the International Monetary

50
00:05:24.000 --> 00:05:25.000
Fund.

51
00:05:25.000 --> 00:05:29.320
He calls his policy the Washington Consensus.

52
00:05:29.320 --> 00:05:35.680
The International Monetary Fund, as you know, was founded after the famous Bretton Woods

53
00:05:35.680 --> 00:05:42.800
meeting with John Maynard Keynes, the principal British delegate to that meeting.

54
00:05:42.800 --> 00:05:50.680
When the IMF was set up, according to Stiglitz, most things about it were quite good.

55
00:05:50.680 --> 00:06:10.680
The purpose of the fund was that if economies weren't doing very well, the IMF would loan them a lot of money so that they could pursue proper Keynesian policies of increasing spending to get the country out of the economic dole jumps.

56
00:06:10.680 --> 00:06:24.680
He said, obviously the thing to do, we know this very well from economic theory, is if there is a recession or depression, the government should just start spending a great deal of money right away to get us out.

57
00:06:24.680 --> 00:06:32.680
Now it's odd that Stiglitz is generally regarded as one of the world's greatest economic theorists.

58
00:06:32.680 --> 00:06:36.680
In fact, many people regard him as the greatest theorist of his generation.

59
00:06:36.680 --> 00:06:47.680
and Yet, in both of these books, he gives extremely crude analyses of concepts. He doesn't deal with any of the criticisms in advance of the Keynesian policies.

60
00:06:47.680 --> 00:06:54.680
But he says that the problem is that the IMF doesn't follow the Keynesian policies anymore.

61
00:06:54.680 --> 00:07:01.680
The Washington Consensus View is one of austerity, that the government should really look at

62
00:07:24.680 --> 00:07:32.960
We try to privatize as much as possible, should engage in free trade and other horrible policies

63
00:07:32.960 --> 00:07:41.720
like that, instead of pursuing the truth that was brought to us in 1936 by John Maynard

64
00:07:41.720 --> 00:07:43.320
Keynes.

65
00:07:43.320 --> 00:07:51.080
I should say also that in characterizing the views of the opponents of Keynes, Stiglitz

66
00:07:51.080 --> 00:07:57.800
again doesn't display much sophistication. He says that opponents of Keynes believe that

67
00:07:57.800 --> 00:08:06.800
demand and supply are always in balance so that all unemployment is necessarily voluntary.

68
00:08:06.800 --> 00:08:14.800
Now obviously the opponents of Keynes wouldn't believe, say, if the government has minimum

69
00:08:14.800 --> 00:08:22.320
and Wage Legislation or unions have enforced certain restrictions on wages, that unemployment

70
00:08:22.320 --> 00:08:28.240
is voluntary in those circumstances, but somehow Stiglitz omits that.

71
00:08:28.240 --> 00:08:35.280
Now if one looks, however, at what Stiglitz says in his books, how he describes various

72
00:08:35.280 --> 00:08:43.720
events, what he himself says about the events of the world from his perspective, knows a

73
00:08:43.720 --> 00:08:57.000
What he says actually doesn't at all correspond to his diagnosis of the situation.

74
00:08:57.000 --> 00:09:04.120
One of the chief examples he gives to show that globalization isn't working very well

75
00:09:04.120 --> 00:09:13.640
is that in the East Asian countries in 1997, 1998, there was an economic collapse in Thailand,

76
00:09:13.640 --> 00:09:18.580
in South Korea, Indonesia. These countries have been doing very well, but there was a

77
00:09:18.580 --> 00:09:26.240
collapse. What brought about the collapse? Well, as he himself mentioned, what happened,

78
00:09:26.240 --> 00:09:31.720
say, in Thailand, there was a collapse in the financial system because speculators on

79
00:09:31.720 --> 00:09:41.360
money had suddenly decided the money of Thailand was going to fail, and they withdrew their

80
00:09:41.360 --> 00:09:49.680
Money from it and took it elsewhere, causing collapse in the Thailand monetary system, and

81
00:09:49.680 --> 00:09:57.480
also in the other countries there have been very heavy firms that engage in very speculative

82
00:09:57.480 --> 00:10:03.120
borrowing from banks, and the lenders just withdrew, thought these firms were going to

83
00:10:03.120 --> 00:10:10.480
fail in demand and payment of their money, and investors withdrew capital very rapidly

84
00:10:10.480 --> 00:10:18.920
from these countries causing a downturn. Now, readers familiar with the Austrian view will

85
00:10:18.920 --> 00:10:25.920
not fail to notice that what Stiglitz is describing is entirely in accord with the Austrian view

86
00:10:25.920 --> 00:10:33.600
of the business cycle that expansion of bank credit can in certain circumstances lead to

87
00:10:33.600 --> 00:10:42.600
and Economic Crisis, and yet, what happens here, this is certainly not, this expansion

88
00:10:42.600 --> 00:10:46.960
is certainly not something, a free market policy, on the contrary, one can only have

89
00:10:46.960 --> 00:10:55.840
such expansion if we have a monetary system that allows fractional reserve banking in a

90
00:10:55.840 --> 00:11:02.400
free market monetary system of, say, a golden commodity standard, one couldn't have just

91
00:11:02.400 --> 00:11:10.560
The process Stiglitz is describing, yet he says that these financial collapses, which

92
00:11:10.560 --> 00:11:16.600
seems to be one of just what the Austrians have been talking about, it shows the fault

93
00:11:16.600 --> 00:11:23.840
of the free market, that shows the dangers of not following proper Keynesian policy,

94
00:11:23.840 --> 00:11:30.480
whereas what he seems to be describing is rather the failures of the Keynesian policy

95
00:11:30.480 --> 00:11:42.240
that's a very inflationary policy. There's been currency speculation and speculative loans,

96
00:11:42.240 --> 00:11:48.360
all sorts of things that wouldn't be in place if there were a genuine free market society.

97
00:11:48.360 --> 00:11:56.880
Again, another example he gives is that in Russia, he said, well, after the collapse

98
00:11:56.880 --> 00:12:01.880
In the course of communism, the economy didn't improve at all.

99
00:12:01.880 --> 00:12:10.880
In fact, the productivity of the economy in Russia is less than it was under at least some years of the communist period.

100
00:12:10.880 --> 00:12:14.880
So he said, well, doesn't this show how bad the free market is?

101
00:12:14.880 --> 00:12:21.880
Because the free market is supposed to be much better than socialism, communism, but in fact, it's not doing as well.

102
00:12:21.880 --> 00:12:24.880
It's not that he wants to bring back communism.

103
00:12:24.880 --> 00:12:30.880
The shows, again, we have to have the government coming in and intervening.

104
00:12:30.880 --> 00:12:37.880
But what he describes in the book is, again, a situation where when the Soviet government privatized,

105
00:12:37.880 --> 00:12:47.880
what happened was the government gave industrial plants and all sorts of property to businessmen,

106
00:12:47.880 --> 00:12:49.880
people who were friends of those in power.

107
00:12:49.880 --> 00:13:19.880
and Power, sometimes people in government just took over and privatized certain property themselves, and then there were no laws putting in place property rights, so the new owners, putting that word in quotation marks, engaged in what is called asset stripping, they tried to convert their new property into cash as fast as possible and get the money out of the country because they knew their alleged titles weren't secure.

108
00:13:19.880 --> 00:13:39.880
and, again, one thing that happened was when the property was allegedly privatized, then it became subject to local groups, government groups who would try to seize it or get, extort money from the owners and put it under regulation.

109
00:13:39.880 --> 00:13:47.880
So, again, this is not at all a situation of a free market. It's on the contrary one of a government intervention of a chaotic kind.

110
00:13:47.880 --> 00:13:55.200
Kind, and yet Stiglitz gives us a key example showing the failures of the free market.

111
00:13:55.200 --> 00:14:04.680
Now there are, in the two books, there are some useful chapters. For example, Stiglitz

112
00:14:04.680 --> 00:14:11.880
has what I thought was an excellent discussion of the problem of dumping in foreign trade.

113
00:14:11.880 --> 00:14:20.440
Now, people who favor tariffs will sometimes say, well, free trade may be alright if there's

114
00:14:20.440 --> 00:14:28.280
fair competition, but what happens if, say, one country deliberately sells goods below

115
00:14:28.280 --> 00:14:34.280
cost in order to drive our producers out of the market, just so that once they're driven

116
00:14:34.280 --> 00:14:40.520
out of the market, then they can raise prices and get a monopoly on trade, meanwhile the

117
00:14:40.520 --> 00:14:44.920
The people in our country will have lost their businesses and jobs.

118
00:14:44.920 --> 00:14:51.240
Now, as Stig was pointing out, here he's making a point similar to that that Murray Rothbard

119
00:14:51.240 --> 00:14:55.920
made in his discussion of transitory pricing in Man Econ and State.

120
00:14:55.920 --> 00:15:02.880
It really doesn't make much sense to say that a business is going to sell below cost.

121
00:15:02.880 --> 00:15:05.640
That isn't a good way of making money.

122
00:15:05.640 --> 00:15:11.440
It was like the old story where someone told a friend of his that he was selling below

123
00:15:11.440 --> 00:15:12.440
cost.

124
00:15:12.440 --> 00:15:17.120
And someone asked him, well, how can you make any money if you do that?

125
00:15:17.120 --> 00:15:22.160
He said, well, I make it up in volume.

126
00:15:22.160 --> 00:15:28.920
But now if it's counter to that, well, then the businesses could, if they sell below cost,

127
00:15:28.920 --> 00:15:34.360
they'll have a loss at first, then they'll make it up by raising prices later.

128
00:15:34.360 --> 00:15:39.680
______ points out there's no real cases where that's ever been shown to have happened.

129
00:15:39.680 --> 00:15:40.680
People talk about it.

130
00:15:40.680 --> 00:15:41.680
It's never been shown to have happened.

131
00:15:41.680 --> 00:15:45.160
But at this point, what he's saying has been made by other authors, but what I thought

132
00:15:45.160 --> 00:15:52.120
he's especially good at is that he says that he points out, again, based on his knowledge,

133
00:15:52.120 --> 00:15:58.000
expert knowledge from his—he was also on the Council of Economic Advisories under President

134
00:15:58.000 --> 00:16:05.120
Clinton, that in actual cases where people claimed, in case of dumping, what happens

135
00:16:05.120 --> 00:16:14.240
is, he says, this is just really a trick by business groups to, that what they do is they'll

136
00:16:14.240 --> 00:16:19.520
say that various countries such as China are engaged in dumping, but their estimates of

137
00:16:19.520 --> 00:16:22.400
cost are artificially high.

138
00:16:22.400 --> 00:16:29.640
I think there was one case where there were golf carts being made in one of the Asian countries,

139
00:16:29.640 --> 00:16:34.720
I think in China, and they calculated, they said it was dumping because the costs in this

140
00:16:34.720 --> 00:16:39.280
country were less than the cost of producing the golf carts in Canada, so the fact that

141
00:16:39.280 --> 00:16:45.440
they were selling them at these lower costs showed they were selling below cost, and of

142
00:16:45.440 --> 00:16:48.280
course that doesn't follow at all.

143
00:16:48.280 --> 00:16:58.240
Now, I want to next turn to two books by another economist, the Indian economist Jagdish Bhagwati,

144
00:16:58.240 --> 00:17:05.640
who, although is not a Nobel Prize winner, is usually in the front running in the list

145
00:17:05.640 --> 00:17:10.280
when people are saying who is going to be getting the Nobel Prize. He's a name that

146
00:17:10.280 --> 00:17:17.940
very often figures. Two books by him I want to consider, one called In Defense of Globalization

147
00:17:17.940 --> 00:17:20.620
and the other is free trade today.

148
00:17:20.620 --> 00:17:27.660
I should say Baguati has very different views from Stiglitz,

149
00:17:27.660 --> 00:17:30.780
but he's like Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia

150
00:17:30.780 --> 00:17:31.700
University.

151
00:17:31.700 --> 00:17:36.300
So I imagine department meetings in that university,

152
00:17:36.300 --> 00:17:40.220
economics department meetings, aren't entirely congenial.

153
00:17:40.220 --> 00:17:47.260
Now, what Baguati is largely, although not entirely

154
00:17:47.260 --> 00:17:52.420
in the books, defending a free trade and free market policy.

155
00:17:52.420 --> 00:17:56.540
And what makes his books unusual is this,

156
00:17:56.540 --> 00:18:04.020
that economists, neoclassical economists, unlike Austrians,

157
00:18:04.020 --> 00:18:07.500
have a particular model of the economy

158
00:18:07.500 --> 00:18:09.060
that they're very concerned with,

159
00:18:09.060 --> 00:18:12.900
in which they try to come up with conditions for efficiency,

160
00:18:12.900 --> 00:18:21.900
The defined efficiency is in this way that an economy is efficient if there can't be a Pareto superior change.

161
00:18:21.900 --> 00:18:29.900
Pareto superior change is a change of some kind that would make at least one person better off and no one worse off.

162
00:18:29.900 --> 00:18:40.900
So what the neoclassical economists do is try to come up with conditions, specify conditions for what's called Pareto optimality where you can't have such changes.

163
00:18:40.900 --> 00:18:59.900
So what Bhagwati and others tried to do at one time was to say, even though free trade usually works best, one can come up with examples where free trade isn't always the efficient course of action.

164
00:18:59.900 --> 00:19:08.900
One example of such a case is not one that Badwadi himself came up with. It's an old example. It's the so-called terms of trade argument.

165
00:19:08.900 --> 00:19:22.900
As you know from neoclassical theory, a monopolist, by raising his price above the competitive price, can get extra profits for himself.

166
00:19:22.900 --> 00:19:34.900
Now, of course, Austrians don't accept this view. Murray Rothbard in the Man Economy and State has a classic discussion at this point showing that there's no way to distinguish the market price from the so-called competitive price.

167
00:19:34.900 --> 00:19:38.900
But in the neoclassical view, you can have such a distinction.

168
00:19:38.900 --> 00:19:48.860
Now, supposing there are a number of producers of a certain item in a country, if the government

169
00:19:48.860 --> 00:19:59.160
imposes an export tax on this item, it can have the result that all the businesses taken

170
00:19:59.160 --> 00:20:06.380
together will act as a monopoly when considering foreign customers.

171
00:20:06.380 --> 00:20:15.180
So by imposing the export tax, all the business taken together will have certain monopoly

172
00:20:15.180 --> 00:20:16.180
gains.

173
00:20:16.180 --> 00:20:22.980
And it's claimed, according to this argument, it would show that a tariff would actually

174
00:20:22.980 --> 00:20:29.740
be a better economic policy from the point of view of that country than complete free

175
00:20:29.740 --> 00:20:30.740
trade.

176
00:20:30.740 --> 00:20:35.100
As I say, Bhagwati, although he didn't develop that argument, was famous for coming up with

177
00:20:35.100 --> 00:20:43.600
argument showing exceptions to free trade from this point of view, except for these neoclassical assumptions.

178
00:20:43.600 --> 00:20:49.300
So what he does in these two books is rather to argue against his own previous views.

179
00:20:49.300 --> 00:20:55.900
He said, well, there may be such cases, but they really don't amount to very much.

180
00:20:55.900 --> 00:21:05.000
It's not worthwhile going after them, trying to come up with them, because they're really not going to get you much gains.

181
00:21:05.000 --> 00:21:16.300
and also you can show that if you do want to intervene, there are other ways to intervene than tariffs that really are even more efficient.

182
00:21:16.300 --> 00:21:30.000
But these two points aren't the main point he stresses in the book, it's rather this, that he says that these points would show that these experiences with free trade aren't so good,

183
00:21:30.000 --> 00:21:50.000
The next point he makes, which I think is the key point in the two books, is he says if there are alleged gains from interferences with trade, then businesses that will benefit from these gains will spend a lot of money trying to get these gains.

184
00:21:50.000 --> 00:21:56.040
This is a case, of course, what Gordon Tullot calls, invented the concept, although not

185
00:21:56.040 --> 00:22:03.160
the phrase, calls rent-seeking, that if there is some benefit available by government interference,

186
00:22:03.160 --> 00:22:07.660
people spend a lot of money trying to get this benefit for themselves, and the money

187
00:22:07.660 --> 00:22:14.960
they spend is really what economists term a deadweight loss. It's not productive. So

188
00:22:14.960 --> 00:22:24.160
It turns out that there's a lot of money invested in this rent-seeking, so it's a big drain

189
00:22:24.160 --> 00:22:33.800
on the economy, and so by having complete free trade, we avoid this whole problem altogether.

190
00:22:33.800 --> 00:22:45.460
I should say that Baguady, who does not suffer from the vice of false modesty, is very anxious

191
00:22:45.460 --> 00:22:50.440
to say that what he's talking about should not be called rent-seeking.

192
00:22:50.440 --> 00:22:56.560
He has some other term for it, something like profit-seeking, because he wants to say that

193
00:22:56.560 --> 00:23:02.040
his concept is not the same as Gordon Tulloch or Ann Kruger's concept.

194
00:23:02.040 --> 00:23:12.040
He has a very different concept, but I must say, although I'm not an expert at all on this field, it seems quite a distinction without a difference to me.

195
00:23:12.040 --> 00:23:24.040
But regardless of how it's to be termed, I think he's right that this is a very good point against this kind of economic interference.

196
00:23:24.040 --> 00:23:38.040
Now, the last books I want to consider are also two books by another of them, by these two, again by another Indian economist, Deepak Lal, who is a professor at UCLA.

197
00:23:38.040 --> 00:23:48.040
The two books are one, I believe, I unfortunately wasn't here present at the lecture, but I believe one of them, Jeff Herbiner, I've been told he's talked about it, is called,

198
00:23:48.040 --> 00:23:56.040
in Praise of Empires, and the other, which has just come out, is called Reviving the Invisible Hand.

199
00:23:56.040 --> 00:24:03.040
Now, what I especially liked about Reviving the Invisible Hand, which I think is the better of the two books,

200
00:24:03.040 --> 00:24:14.040
is that Lowe directly responds to some of the points that Stiglitz raised in his criticisms of the free market

201
00:24:14.040 --> 00:24:20.320
and his defense of the status guidance of globalization.

202
00:24:20.320 --> 00:24:26.320
You'll remember that I gave some very frightening statistics

203
00:24:26.320 --> 00:24:29.960
from Stiglitz on how prevalent world poverty is.

204
00:24:29.960 --> 00:24:33.480
And Stiglitz was saying, well, if we have so many poor people,

205
00:24:33.480 --> 00:24:36.960
how can it be the case that free market globalization's working?

206
00:24:36.960 --> 00:24:38.960
Obviously, something's wrong.

207
00:24:38.960 --> 00:24:42.840
Well, Lal contends that these, although he certainly

208
00:24:42.840 --> 00:24:44.840
He admits there is a great deal of poverty in the world.

209
00:24:44.840 --> 00:24:53.840
Raoul contends that the statistics the World Bank people have used are based on false methods of collection.

210
00:24:53.840 --> 00:24:59.840
He says it's based on his own experience as someone who was working for the Indian government,

211
00:24:59.840 --> 00:25:03.840
engaged in collecting data of various kinds.

212
00:25:03.840 --> 00:25:11.840
In some cases, when people were asked to do surveys of how many people were poor,

213
00:25:11.840 --> 00:25:25.840
They would simply fill out the forms that they'd had from the previous years, so no wonder the number of poor people isn't decreasing because they're just filling out the same figures they used in previous years.

214
00:25:25.840 --> 00:25:49.840
Of course, this evidence is partly anecdotal, but Lau also points out that in some cases, the figures have been exaggerated because the calculations are using figures from two different sets of data to come up with who the poor people are,

215
00:25:49.840 --> 00:26:02.840
So that they're taking the rich, who are the more well-off people from one way of looking at it, and who are the poor people from a different way, and they're kind of amalgamating the two in a way that's unacceptable.

216
00:26:02.840 --> 00:26:16.840
Now, Lal also challenges Stiglitz on the basic point he makes, where Stiglitz says his theoretical argument of the market is imperfect.

217
00:26:16.840 --> 00:26:35.240
As I mentioned, neoclassical economists tried to develop the exact mathematical conditions under which we can show that the economy is Pareto-efficient in the way I explained it.

218
00:26:35.240 --> 00:26:50.240
The most important, the key work there was, of course, the famous paper by Kenneth Arrow and de Bruy, showing the exact mathematical condition under which a market economy is efficient.

219
00:26:50.240 --> 00:27:02.240
Now, what Stiglitz is famous for in economic theory is that he said, well, if these conditions that Arrow and de Bruy have specified, he said they're very strict conditions.

220
00:27:02.240 --> 00:27:20.240
for example, they require perfect markets in all commodities. If we don't have some of these conditions satisfied, then, he says, we can show that the market isn't Pareto-efficient. We can come up with Pareto-superior changes.

221
00:27:20.240 --> 00:27:32.240
He says, especially in cases where we have, say, one person in an exchange knows more than another, a case of what they call asymmetric information.

222
00:27:32.240 --> 00:27:42.240
So Stiglitz said, if whatever we have, such a case of marketing imperfection, then there's theoretically a case for government interference.

223
00:27:42.240 --> 00:27:49.640
Interference. Now, Lau quotes very effectively, I think, a devastating quotation from a paper

224
00:27:49.640 --> 00:27:56.120
that Stiglitz wrote with Greenwald in 1986. It was one of the key papers in Stiglitz's

225
00:27:56.120 --> 00:28:04.160
career. And Stiglitz said something like this. He said, well, we're not considering in this

226
00:28:04.160 --> 00:28:10.440
paper any inefficiencies that would result by competitions among people to get, say,

227
00:28:10.440 --> 00:28:17.440
The government would say, well, we've got an inefficiency here, so we're going to grant certain people subsidy.

228
00:28:17.440 --> 00:28:22.440
What if you had businessmen spending resources trying to get the subsidy?

229
00:28:22.440 --> 00:28:24.440
So Stiglitz said, we're not going to consider that.

230
00:28:24.440 --> 00:28:32.440
He said, it could be argued that by not considering this, we haven't really shown any that the market is,

231
00:28:32.440 --> 00:28:41.840
If this is, by not considering this, we haven't really shown any, that the market is, that there is some case that the market is inefficient.

232
00:28:41.840 --> 00:28:49.040
But he just passes that by. So, Lau is pointing out that Stiglitz has really given away his whole case here.

233
00:28:49.040 --> 00:28:55.440
But I don't think the book, the book contains much more than an attack on Stiglitz.

234
00:28:55.440 --> 00:29:03.280
I just have mentioned a couple of key points that I think are very valuable, one Lyle makes.

235
00:29:03.280 --> 00:29:09.120
He adopts, although not entirely, something of an Austrian view of the business cycle,

236
00:29:09.120 --> 00:29:17.800
but he says, what if you don't accept this? What if you think that the market economy

237
00:29:17.800 --> 00:29:24.400
will periodically lead to recession? He says, even if you think that, then it's still the

238
00:29:24.400 --> 00:29:28.400
This is the case that the market does better than other systems.

239
00:29:28.400 --> 00:29:34.400
Sometimes a business, say you have periods where large numbers of businesses fail,

240
00:29:34.400 --> 00:29:38.400
this is sometimes a very painful process and people have to readjust,

241
00:29:38.400 --> 00:29:41.400
but it's still, the economy is still growing.

242
00:29:41.400 --> 00:29:49.400
And if we look, say, at Thailand, it's doing better than countries like,

243
00:29:49.400 --> 00:29:57.280
say, other countries such as North Korea that didn't have depressions, it's better to have

244
00:29:57.280 --> 00:30:04.120
ups and downs if you're growing fast enough than to have sort of a level growth if the

245
00:30:04.120 --> 00:30:06.980
growth is slow.

246
00:30:06.980 --> 00:30:16.360
Lao also, I think Brie, in a call said, well, makes it at some point, if, say, we can't,

247
00:30:16.360 --> 00:30:22.000
We're not able to negotiate free trade with other nations. Other nations insist on retaining

248
00:30:22.000 --> 00:30:29.680
their tariffs and the best policy for a nation to follow is unilateral free trade. This is

249
00:30:29.680 --> 00:30:42.480
a key point that I think many are less inclined to accept the conclusions of sound reasoning

250
00:30:42.480 --> 00:31:12.480
The Theory of Money and Credit

251
00:31:12.480 --> 00:31:22.480
I think is a case where the cure is worse than the disease, but in spite of this failing, I think that he's the best of the three authors I've mentioned.

252
00:31:22.480 --> 00:31:23.480
Thank you very much.