I am curious as to your position on an annual 10% flat tax on wealth for all households and businesses. Understanding that it would never happen in a capitalist environment, would it not generate enough revenue to equitably fund our government?
It's not your book "Contending Economic Theories" It seems I remember a book that focuses more on Capital Volumes 2 and 3 that would be a nice companion with the actual texts.. Am I crazy? If I'm not, what is it? Thank you, Professor Wolff.
I live in Los Angeles and would like to attend similar lectures here. Are Prof. Wolff's ideas only availabe live in NYC?
Oxfam, mostly known from the inequality reports like "Eight men own the same wealth as the poorest half of the world", have published this paper with analysis of the causes of inequality. Very similar to your analysis. Also covering "The false assumptions driving the economy of the 1%" and "A human economy designed for the 99%". Unusual clear analysis pointing to the richest people/corporations and their anti-social ideology and use of power to maximizing their profits at the expense of the welfare for everybody else. Full text and summary available as pdf here: https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/economy-99 Perhaps you could also contact the author of the paper, Deputy Head of Research, Deborah Hardoon?
Hello Professor Wolff, I love your work & podcasts (although I am certainly not particularly educated in the area of economics). I often get into discussions with people during my daily life, and let them know that I’ve always felt that the "Master issue" (the issue controlling all of its sub-issues, representation of the populace in gov't, legislation, never-ending war, climate change, healthcare, unemployment, incarceration, immigration, civil rights, mental health issues / depression, etc, etc, etc... the list goes on forever) in this country is wealth/income inequality and distribution… generally letting others know that most of our populace are getting poorer, while only a very small percentage are getting fabulously wealthier. A couple people responded to me with this... "everyone is getting wealthier, but a small percentage are getting a lot wealthier, while most are getting only a little bit wealthier, or maintaining status quo". Well, I've researched that notion, and apparently it is part of the "fixed pie vs expanding/variable pie" debate (whether there is actually debate about this, I do not know). While researching this, I ran across an article, by Chelsea German, which seemed to me VERY UN-convincing, with respect to this supposed "debate", at this link: http://humanprogress.org/blog/senator-sanders-fixed-pie-fallacy So, two questions... one, what is your view of "fixed pie vs expanding/variable pie"?, and two, where can I find definitive research/documentation proving, what I’ve always figured MUST be true, that most people are getting poorer (some of the recent research of Gabriel Zucman seems to indicate this, of which I've read only tiny bits, and his work is so voluminous that finding specific data proving would be quite difficult, and time-consuming). I suspect that the answers to my questions are probably more difficult than I was hoping, as it probably involves some type of economic/financial comparison of different time periods, involving various ratios/multipliers/dividers/equations to try to account for inflation and other variables… but I’m hoping not, and that you can provide some definitive data/charts/etc (I also suspect that as one rises on the income/wealth scale, their ability to accept/believe that most people are getting poorer drops off precipitously… and it would not surprise me to find that there have been studies, psych research, etc on this.) Thanks very much for your time, and consideration. Bob
Stephanie McMillan points out that Dr. Wolff is not giving up the full skinny on Mondrogon. The Fagor group went bankrupt and was sold in 2013 after it could not respond financially to the eurocrisis. In addition, parts of Mondrogon cooperative were accused of hiring low-wage foreign workers in order to compete. McMillan claims that the cooperative model cannot successfully function imbedded in the larger global capitalist context without the added addition of armed struggle. I would like to see a debate between Professor Wolff and author Stephanie McMillan on this issue, one that will welcome new, young voices into the movement so long championed by Dr. Wolff.
Hello, Professor Wolff. My name is Timothy Sams. I'm developing a new Marxist Communal system of government that is based around the elimination and absence of any and all Ideologies concerning the materialistic object of Currency and the love that comes with. "Project New Jerusalem" gets its name and main inspirations from the concepts described of it within The Bible's book of Revelations. It challenges and questions Humanity's Love and Ideologies behind the existence of Currencies and the justifications that support them. "Project New Jerusalem" will be a modernized/furutized Reformation of Marxist Communal way of life where Humanity no longer operates on the fundamentals of business and profit, but instead will be founded in Knowledge, Resources, Strength, Technology, Morals, Principles, Simplicity, Efficiency, and Common Sense. My question is, "Can Humanity actually live without the Ideology/Love of Currency?" "Project New Jerusalem will not just prove Humanity can live without it, but also show how and why we should.
Why can't the United kingdom negotiate trade deals with the countries of Europe instead of negotiating trade deals with the European union? If they establish deals with individual countries, how will it effect the economy compared to having trade deals with the European union? Thank you.
Hi Richard Firstly, and I don't say this to be obsequious, I truly believe you to be sincere in your perspicuous presentations and therefore would like very much to discuss a solution with you. I am in the process of starting, structure to be decided, the ROC (revolution of conscience) with regards to ameliorating financial inequality in the UK, (and of course globally) caused by the nature of rapacious (crony) capitalism.
Are WSDE's different from worker coops? your book, a cure for capitalism's, promotes WSDEs and D@W promotes Worker Coops?
Is China using a long term economic strategy with the goal of undermining and eventually destroying capitalism by taking the system to its absolute and logical extremes in terms of economies of scale and extreme low cost pricing and production? In the book “Rare: A high States Race to Satisfy our Need for the Scarcest Metals on Earth” author and PhD of Chemistry Keith Veronese had this to say; “The government of China made a decision to play the “long” game in 1970- sell large quantities of rare earth metals at very low prices, prices low enough that the rest of the world would flock to this new and inexpensive supplier. Years of allowing outsiders to purchase at below-market value devastated the rare earth mining industry in other parts of the world, and by the turn of the millennium China’s mines were the only ones left standing.” “China beat the United States because its mines and processors could sell at a lower cost due to economies of scale and a government willing to set low prices to gain market share. This drove suppliers in other parts of the world out of business through a decreasing profit margin, much the same way the arrival of a large chain store closes the door of “mom and pop” specialty shops. When profits drop due to a changing market place, decreased demand, increased upkeep costs, or a number of other factors, it is often cost effective to cease mining operations at a location. It is not the place of these private corporations to mine any metal with the hopes of maintaining a healthy domestic supply and the best interests of the country if the monetary reward is not present”. -pages 40-41. “Rare: A high States Race to Satisfy our Need for the Scarcest Metals on Earth” by Keith Veronese While this is a general analysis of the rare earths market and how China has effectively cornered it….it seems you could replace the word “rare earths” in these snippets from his book with basically any product from electronics to chairs. What is the future outcome of the world economy if taken to its logical conclusion?
what's behind issues Special Drawing Right SDR and china join last October.
I notice you sometimes talk about mega-millionaire CEOs with a description of "Mr. X earns so many million dollars per year" etc. I hear MANY people make comments like this. I feel we should say "Mr. X RECEIVES $$$" rather than EARNS. It is not at all clear to me that these individuals truly earn the obscene amounts of money they receive. I've been reading George Lakoff...and I think this word matters! You don't have to agree, but I feel that if more prominent commentators used "receives" or some other word rather than "earns" it would help to change the perception that the all-knowing market determines the "worth" of participants by their salary with razor-sharp accuracy. I think the accuracy of the market is more in the range of the meat-axe! And, of course, markets can be manipulated by the powerful. Especially those who can pick friends to sit on the Board of Directors that grants their salary increase.