We currently have a national system of leading indicators that does not include or count important things that can be counted. We need one that does.
Akin to the suffering of middle class and poor families in these difficult economic times, the one percent are struggling as well behind their gilded ...
If we get it right, a bold new framework for global development next year, together with agreement at the UN climate talks in Paris, could provide the impetus for a transition to a more equal world -- a world without the scourge of poverty and climate change.
The situation is worsened by the ability of the rich to skew the system to protect the flow of more wealth to the already wealthy. A complex society requires complex regulation. Ideally, laws and regulations manage the economy for the benefit of society as a whole.
While sincere efforts to help the poor should be encouraged, we should also realize that our current economic policies are doing much to harm the poor. First, we should realize that the decision to maintain high rates of unemployment is having a devastating impact on the well-being of millions of low and moderate income workers and their children.
If you work hard, you should make enough to live a good life and provide a better one for your kids. That's a conviction worth fighting for and a sentiment that rings true for most people, not just in Seattle but everywhere.
Income inequality is a topic that hovers over our economy like the mother ship from Independence Day. It has a national impact as well as individual impacts to millions of Americans.
A widespread notion that the sole responsibility of corporations is to make money for the owners is a major factor supporting the trend of increasing wealth at the top levels of society, at the expense of every one else.
Occasionally I run into people who want to argue that the increase in inequality is just the benign outcome of "just desserts" as economist Greg Mankiw frames it. It may boost those at the top, but not at the expense of others. By this metric, not so.
A new report by Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz for the Roosevelt Institute suggests that paying our fair share of taxes and cracking down on corporate tax dodgers could be a cure for inequality and a faltering economy.
Who would've ever thought, after years of relentless cost-cutting in the halls of Washington, that the federal government actually spends our money on important stuff? Who would've thought that wars cost money, and tax cuts cost money, and maintaining our infrastructure costs money?
The main message coming from my book, Capital in the Twenty-first Century, is not that there should always be a deterministic trend toward ever rising inequality; it's that we need more democratic transparency about wealth dynamics.
I was listening to an interview with Tim Geithner this weekend, and after going through his new book, they asked him where he thought the economy was headed. "I don't believe forecasts," he said, which sounded smart to me.
The International Monetary Fund's First Deputy Managing Director David Lipton recently spoke about the global economy at the Aspen Institute in Washington, D.C. We sat down with Lipton before the Washington Ideas Roundtables Series event, where he discussed income inequality and his big idea for addressing it at an international level.
Every contract for managing pension fund money should be posted on the web and show in plain language the exact fee structure. That way anyone in the country can examine it and assess whether a particular government is overpaying.
Put simply, Warren represents the strongest counterweight to the influence of moneyed interests over our political process.