Wealth & Poverty Class 2: The Investor's View

[Uncle Joe]

Hello again, friends. Thank you for joining me for the second week of my Wealth and Poverty class. In today’s class, we begin to explore why such inequalities have soared since the late 1970s and early 1980s.

The questions we’ll focus on today are: How did the market for financial capital contribute to inequalities of income and wealth? Did the accepted purpose of the American corporation change over the last fifty years, and, if so, when and how? More generally, for whom should the corporation exist? Is there such a thing as “corporate social responsibility?”

You’ll find recommended readings below the video. Just click on the links.

(snip)

https://robertreich.substack.com/p/wealth-and-poverty-week-2?utm_source=url

Edit to add

Wealth and Poverty Class 1: What's happened to income and wealth in America over the past 40 years?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016313623

[OldBaldy1701E]

1. It's not just income and wealth Mr. Reich.

Basically, here is what happened in a nutshell. During the 1980s, our nation had a fundamental change in definition. We went from a society that had business as a part of it, to a business that has society as a part of it. Until that changes back, we are doomed as a nation.

[Uncle Joe]

2. Why do you believe he wasn't speaking to that corporate culture change and the laws/policies

that enabled it?

[OldBaldy1701E]

3. With all due respect.

What makes you think that I believe that? I did say, "it is not just..." which implies that I agree, but feel there is more than what he is saying. I have great respect for Mr. Reich, even as he is proven to be among the top income lecturers. Which means he is playing the same system he is complaining about. Take from that what you will. However, I feel that anyone who is successful in our current socioeconomic model is helping perpetuate the problem just by continuing to stay in that game, no matter what their 'public message' may be. Which makes it hard to listen to what they say since the hypocrisy (no matter how little of it there is) is hard to ignore. But, that is just my opinion.

[Uncle Joe]

4. Thanks for elaborating.

I've always thought most everyone is swimming in the same water to one degree or another so I tend to place more impetus on the message than the messenger.

The way I see it, Professor Reich (whatever his personal motivation) is doing the nation a service by offering these classes for free, both the economics and the history.

Thanks for your feedback.

[OldBaldy1701E]

5. He has done many services to our country.

And, he seems to be a decent human being. (It's funny, I searched and searched for a reference to his position because I did not know if I should refer to him as Doctor or not. He has several degrees, but I did not see a doctorate, so I just left it alone. But, he is a professor, so I really should start using that. He deserves it.) But, helping perpetrate the very system he seems to be railing against is a tough thing to overlook. Since we have little choice but to play the game or starve, I suppose I cannot be too bothered by this, but I feel that it is strange that one advocate for dismantling the system that is allowing him what can only be described as a 'decent living'. But again, that is just my opinion.

[Uncle Joe]

6. I agree he has done many services for our nation.

I also believe Robert to be a good person and professor.

I don't see his efforts at trying to "dismantle the system" so much as trying to make it more just and as for me I don't care who benefits from that.

I remember when they used to say "Al Gore lives in a big house, he must be a hypocrite."

As no one is without sin and we are all pretty much products of our environment, in my humble opinion such proclamations of personal hypocrisy are often just deflections from the critical issues said political leader is championing.

[OldBaldy1701E]

7. Of course. Thanks for the discussion. (n/t)

[Uncle Joe]

8. Thank you. n/t