I met Jeffrey Sachs a few times in my diplomatic career, in Warsaw, Accra and Vienna and certainly found him interesting and intelligent. But I do not think I ever before saw him this unguarded and engaging his heart just as much as his mind. Can anyone find a transcript?
Allowed HTML - you can use:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Wasnt Sachs the author of neoliberal shock therapy applied to economies in S America and in former Warsaw Pact countries, with dreadful consequences?
It might be a bit early to get a transcript since the video was only uploaded 2 days ago. Anyway, I can’t find one. Not very helpful I’m afraid. Listening to the video now.
@Mike Cobley
To an extent. Personally, I think Sachs’s view is that you need some “shock therapy” in economic reform (sometimes to ensure that the reform process becomes irreversible, sometimes because it seems to work best – eg countering hyperinflation), but that taken too far, it is disastrous. Russia being a prime example.
But I’d be interested to hear what he thinks now, but to my eye he has never been hostile to the Gradualism advocates. He certainly appreciates that market economies need certain insitutions in place to support them, and that building them can take time.
@Mike Cobley.
Indeed. Just chat to some of my Russian friends and ask them how they feel about Mr Sachs
and the chaos and misery his ‘shock therapy’ caused.
“I am going to put it very bluntly: I regard the moral environment as pathological. And I am talking about the human interactions . . . I’ve not seen anything like this, not felt it so palpably.”
“They have no responsibility to pay taxes; they have no responsibility to their clients; they have no responsibility to people, to counterparties in transactions,” he said. “They are tough, greedy, aggressive and feel absolutely out of control in a quite literal sense, and they have gamed the system to a remarkable extent.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/top-economist-jeffrey-sachs-says-wall-street-is-full-of-crooks-and-hasnt-changed-since-the-financial-crash-8594779.html
China’s PMI came in low last night, so the dominoes may be poised for…..whatever
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-next-72-hours-are-going-to-be-insane-2013-4#ixzz2RyhAdOXe
Can’t see the video at the moment, but Sachs has always been passionate. His book, The End of Poverty, especially by normal academic standards, is extremely so.
He correctly outlines the problem,and how it ocurred. But offers no solution.
The western financial system,full of the scum he talks about and protected by politicians,has benefited the developed world at the expense of the poor for decades.
We have benefited from cheap food,medecine,clothes,baubles,toys electric toys,cheap labour etc,etc.
All paid for with western funny money,created by bank lending secured on over valued assets (usually property).
We are all part of a massive Ponzi scheme.
The correction to a fairer system will be devastating to us.
Fact, Geoffrey. And we still keep on buying stuff. Ultimately “the market” turns on what we want, or can be induced to want.
Because it’s off topic I’ve just posted the following breaking news link on the suspect Boston marathon arrest feed.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2013/04/the-official-tsarnaev-story-makes-no-sense/comment-page-2/#comment-405986
But Geoffrey, aren’t mosy of us busy payinh off interest of said funny money.
Without interest we coild afford to pay more and have improved quality.
The markets just pump money in and out increasing profits. Is there real value in any of the major companies. I think not.
The real value is in our ability to labour, to build and create, Resources are not infinite so at some point there will be a decline.
What we should be doing is strikingly obvious, thats nurturing growth of the planet and all natures gifts.
We have sun, rain, and air and manpower;
Stupidiity is infectious.
Bankers’ found a way of creating funny money,(or magic money as it came to be known).
The people were happy,they were so happy that they said to these bankers’ take what you want,do as like, we don’t care, just so long as we can have our magic money.
Then one day,some people started to ask,can this magic money money be real?or is it just a trick?
They went to the bankers and asked to have their savings back,but the bankers said they were sorry,they could’nt give it back.
So the people were angry and said “you lied!””you cheat!” “Thieves!” etc etc.
Then,the bankers saw how angry the people were,and they went to the politicians and pleaded with them “We did everything you asked,we gave the people all they could want…and now they are angry and want to chop off our heads!,help us or we will all go down the toilet!”
And the politicians knew that they had no option,they were in with the banks and must say that all is ok,and magic money will work again,just be patient and give us a chance,and don’t worry we’ll punish all those horrible bankers.
Don’t worry we are in charge now!…………………………
Lets see what happens now.
Mike Cobley: Wasnt Sachs the author of neoliberal shock therapy applied to economies in S America and in former Warsaw Pact countries, with dreadful consequences?
He hasn’t used the term shock therapy, and when he entered each of those countries – Bolivia, Poland, Russia they were already economically and socially in severe crisis. Iraq they weren’t. Naomi Klein is far less than perfect in her account how the neoliberal doctrine conquered the world.
Eddie-g: But I’d be interested to hear what he thinks now
He regularly says, writes he’s satisfied with what he’s done in the late eighties & 1990. In Bolivia he and his colleagues prevented a civil war. Look at, he says, the fine economic performance of Poland. I dislike that answer because a concerned expert should go deeper than that.
Beaston: Just chat to some of my Russian friends and ask them how they feel about Mr Sachs
and the chaos and misery his ‘shock therapy’ caused.
Too many Russians are not only misfortunate but also utterly graceless. If I were to suffer a personal disaster, I would think twice before blame it on a marginalised nerdish foreign adviser amidst a cesspit of Russo-American corruption, because that’s what Sachs was there before he quit. He didn’t stay for long.
Eddie-g: Sachs has always been passionate. His book, The End of Poverty, especially by normal academic standards, is extremely so.
His passion on the subject of that book has apparently ceased.
‘End of Poverty’ Author Jeffrey Sachs Sued
The lawsuit comes from two film producers, Patrick Aluise and Loren Duffy, who say they purchased an option on the book for $50,000 and spent significant expenses developing it, but Sachs repudiated his alleged obligations.
“From the formation of the agreement through February 2011, AE made repeated efforts to obtain the cooperation from Sachs, to which AE was entitled under the agreement and which was necessary for the development and production of the film. These efforts were constantly met with delay, deflection to other people and, ultimately, silence. After numerous efforts by AE over many years, in March 2011, Sachs finally repudiated his obligations under the agreement in a letter from his attorney. As a result, AE lost not only the money it had already spent in its efforts to make the film but lost the opportunity to make the film at all.”
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/end-poverty-jeffrey-sachs-documentary-lawsuit-314618
A notable omission from his hour-long speech was aid, traditionally a Sachs staple. The subject finally came up when a member of the audience asked him what he would tell western leaders to do to support development in Africa. […] [H]e could at least say: “In the absence of the real changes required, let’s at least give aid.” He didn’t, which brought his appearance to a disappointing conclusion.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2011/dec/09/convergence-limits-aid-jeff-sachs
Geoffrey: He correctly outlines the problem,and how it ocurred. But offers no solution.
He offers solutions in his Price of Civilization (2011).
Craig
Thanks for posting this video. Max Keiser has been saying the same thing for years now and did report Sach’s ‘change of heart’ having seen the ‘light’ some time ago. The message is the same as that promoted on the interent by Economists such as Prof Keen ia Oz and Stieglitz in the US; even R4 Today programme 2 days ago allowed a Trent Uni economist on air with the same message. What really irks me is that the investigative elements of the MSM are staying well away from these truths…disgraceful. I have written to my MP time after time over last 2 years to ask when UK Glass/Steaghal type- legislation is going to be implemented…might as well talk to the wall based on the prevarications I have seen in the press and in parliament. One would have hoped that separating Retail banking from Investment banking would have occured immediately it became apparent the system was corrupt in 2008…not a chance! Sachs is right about Wall St and its off-shoot City of London …. they are unregulated criminal cess-pits. Move your money to the mutuals!
“Too many Russians are not only misfortunate but also utterly graceless. If I were to suffer a personal disaster, I would think twice before blame it on a marginalised nerdish foreign adviser amidst a cesspit of Russo-American corruption, because that’s what Sachs was there before he quit. He didn’t stay for long.”
They were determined to break everything – trade patterns, institutions, and industries. Breaking does not imply reform. Look at the example of Soviet agriculture. Collective farms that were broken apart and privatized immediately went bust. Many people in the regions starved to death. Today, those surviving collective farms outproduce the private agricultural entities (the whole industry is trying to catch up to where it was a century ago).
The eggheads from the USA took part in this because – once their partners were in power – they shed all of their democratic credentials and behaved like Bolsheviks. Putin has even accused some of them (Jonathan Hay, Andrei Shleifer, and the rest of those who profited from these captive privatizations) of working for the CIA. Who knows if that’s true? It is true that economists (social “scientists” to put it generously) should not themselves be billionaires.
Levantine:Why does’nt he just tell us his solution,rather than pointing out the obvious.
Greenmachine:You can’t split the banks,they would’nt be viable. No banks no state either. (because without the banks in the UK,the state would not be viable).
Small problem……………..but we can pretend,I suppose,and discuss it anyway.
Values and ethics, what have I been saying.
Don’t worry all that money means more welfare checks, right.
Jay
‘What we should be doing is strikingly obvious, thats nurturing growth of the planet and all natures gifts.
We have sun, rain, and air and manpower;’
Yes!
Earth institute out of Colombia University, gave us all the Social sciencea now the home of Global Earthly remonstration.
That Television in the corner of everybodys room has the power to influence the masses.
Its individual attitudes of the masses that make the difference, I wish them luck at the Earth Institute.
Market Forces so I’m told- lets see.
As the questions start (just under 15 mins in)he says something like ‘I ‘d like to hear from those who can explain how I got this wrong’.
I’d take that as a mea culpa for the market fundamentalism he espoused, and inflicted on Russia, 20 years ago.
His slagging off of the likes of Lawrence Summers, Robert Rubin, Hank Paulson & Goldman Sachs really seems heartfelt. He does seem to have had a Road to Damascus moment about the ‘Washington consensus’ at some point.
My old Russian Politics teacher at LSE, Peter Reddaway, co-authored one of the best critiques of Sachs’ ‘shock therapy policy here-
http://www.amazon.com/Tragedy-Russias-Reforms-Bolshevism-Democracy/dp/1929223064
The hounding of a decent whistleblower, a solicitor at HMRC
The sinister HMRC investigation of the Goldman Sachs whistleblower
HMRC used Ripa powers when Osita Mba exposed a ‘sweetheart’ tax deal. We should all worry about the ethics of this
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/30/hmrc-investigation-whistleblower-osita-mba
and the present of £20m of OUR money to Goldman Sachs by Hartnett of the HMRC.
Judges to rule on HMRC’s tax deal with Goldman Sachs
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22369147
You can’t split the banks,they would’nt be viable. No banks no state either. (because without the banks in the UK,the state would not be viable) (Geoffrey)
Without the banks, the state would not implode on a regular basis, either. And without the banks, speculating on imaginary or nonexistent assets would be a lot harder. The economic model needs to change. She’s getting old, tired and selling herself to all sorts of nasty old perverts on the corner of the High Street.
There is widespread demand for solutions to the present crisis – which is far from having run its course – but most of them envisage a continuation of trading promises of promises of future unearned wealth, and ever-increasing ‘growth’.
The planet will not stand this. Resources are finite, the climate is getting worse….etc. Solutions have to embrace the entire physical system, not just the economic one, and that is why they are so hard to find, and so unimplementable when they are found. Mercilessly mocking people who want to get/are getting rich, might be a start. Not buying the latest electronic and automotive crap…iow reducing demand…would also help.
“Could we really have liquidity if we didn’t ahve fractional reserve banking.” Of course.
Inconvenient truth: If you earn more than 23K, you’re in the top 1% of the world’s earners. So most of us here are bloated capitalists, then. We’ll need to take a bloody big hit to be in any kind of morally acceptable position on this one….
“I have waited for 5 years now to see one figure on Wall St. speak in a moral language and I’ve not seen it once.”
One has to say that some of the things said in this presentation were plainly obvious to anyone that has put even a small amount of effort into understanding how the our economic system is run or indeed how the planet is run.
Sadly, one has to say that one has very little confidence that people like Mr. Jeffrey Sachs will actually be able to supply the answer. Todays “economists” are ‘tinkerers’ – a wee bit of regulation here, a bolstering of regulation there etc.
I’m afraid it not peachy at all.
The most surprising thing about the crisis of 2008 is that it did not happen earlier.
The Uk government response to the consequences of the greed,dishonesty and ineptitude of the banks was to take over their liabilties (Northern Rock,HBOS etc,etc),and in the process taking on more debt than it had done in the past 500 years (as a per centage of GDP).
All this has done is to buy us time there has there been no attempt to solve the underlying problem
Guess who advised the government?….bankers,of course!
Economists say what they are paid to say.
Who pays economists?….financial istitutions,the state or quasi state organisations.
By the way what is “fractional reserve banking”?
Lending money you haven’t got. Ingeniously, this money then appears on the credit side of the bank’s ledger. Alice In Wonderland stuff.
Thanks,Komodo,and I presume “liquidity” equals “sufficient dosh to keep us in the style we have become accustomed to”.
That, and “sufficiently large amounts of dosh swilling randomly round the system to prevent anyone from examining whether it exists in any exchangeable sense”
But that’s higher Economics.
And now we have “Quantative easing”,which is Goldman Sachs for: “I’m awfully sorry I can’t pay your social security money next month,but don’t worry I’ll just print something up now,oh and no need to pay your taxes either!!”
Those econonmists!!!