Now Stiglitz makes more trouble!

Max Sawicky sawicky at
Thu Jan 27 09:18:00 PST 2000

. . . Stiglitz's fatal speech was a bewdy, I reckon. He couldn't bring himself to go quite where he was heading with it, mind - but then he had invested thirty years of his life in the sort of thinking that did the damage in the first place, and it wouldn't be fair to expect a middle-aged man consciously to undo the raison d'etre of a whole career in one blow.

He did pose questions that even the born-again institutionalist in him . . .

Actually Stiglitz' present posture is not a radical departure from his work, IMO, which has always used neo-classical methods to demonstrate basic problems in the nostrums founded on a narrow application of neo-classical theory. The main difference I would say is his transition from theoretical to applied, and from academia to the outside world, leading naturally to an explicit political role.

If all academics had his theoretical vision, the profession would look radically different from its present incarnation.


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list