Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Dems need to dump neo-liberal economics [View all]
muriel_volestrangler
(106,503 posts)17. A bit harsh - the author is a former Chief Economist at the World Bank, and a winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics
I think that economically, what he says (which is only in very broad terms) would indeed be better for most people in the USA, and the world; the problem is how to get there, given the political systems we have. They still give greater power to profit than to needs, and voters understandably want to obtain wealth so that they can thrive in the system we currently have.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
61 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Nixon coined the phrase "supply side economics" mocking these mostly Orange County Republicans
underpants
Nov 2024
#28
So they elected someone who will destroy everything for everyone. Yeah, that makers sense. Not.
onecaliberal
Nov 2024
#3
And we're gonna hand it all over to them knowing they're going to take a sledge hammer to it.
CrispyQ
Nov 2024
#32
I am beginning to wonder if articles from the Guardian belong in the Creative Speculation Group. nt
taxi
Nov 2024
#4
A bit harsh - the author is a former Chief Economist at the World Bank, and a winner of the Nobel Prize for Economics
muriel_volestrangler
Nov 2024
#17
Bill is a lot like Donald in a lot of ways. Women, and the trend to adlib on stage for hours and the belief that they
LiberalArkie
Nov 2024
#20
And they both appear to be the same in theory at least. Neither one seems to be in favor of "The Great Society"
LiberalArkie
Nov 2024
#22
You may be right, but if so, we better figure out how to enjoy losing more. New leaders/advisors are needed...
dutch777
Nov 2024
#33
Insult for Democrats ("money in politics" ) but Democrats aren't and won't ever be socialists.
betsuni
Nov 2024
#11
Yes, absolutely. Can't afford eggs. I still just SMH at this statement. And, I only get eggs a couple of times every
SWBTATTReg
Nov 2024
#52
They picked it because eggs are expensive. The reason however is bird flu.
onecaliberal
Nov 2024
#53
When you only buy like 2 dozen eggs over six months like I do, no particular reason why, they are not expensive.
SWBTATTReg
Nov 2024
#54
I buy a lot of them because my husband is diabetic and we use eggs for his morning protein. Egg whites as well.
onecaliberal
Nov 2024
#55
The word socialist is so thoroughly intertwined with Russian misery and breadlines and oppression
summer_in_TX
Nov 2024
#60
Just another billionaire supporting a child rapist and his fascist agenda:
onecaliberal
Nov 2024
#46
So what is the alternative? What should Clinton and Obama have done? (Real question).
LAS14
Nov 2024
#47
It's complicated, just think about all the economic policy that came before them.
Passages
Nov 2024
#58