Tuesday, December 27, 2005
Paul Krugman, "For Richer..."
1) Princeton economist Paul Krugman gives an account of the relative income distribution of the wealthy and the rest of us in the USA over the last 100 years. What trends does he identify? Does any part of this story surprise you?
2) What does Krugman tell us about the trends in the pay rate of CEOs? Why do CEOs get paid so much more than they did 30-40 years ago? Krugman suggests it simply doesn't make sense to say they're doing their jobs that much better, given the economic performance of firms in the relative eras. So what's going on here?
3) Everyone knows you can't have capitalism without economic inequality. What Krugman shows is that even within the same country, you can have a very wide degree of levels of inequality while still retaining a capitalist economy. Why does the current high levels of inequality worry Krugman?
4) Krugman argues that globalization is at best a minor factor in the story of modern American inequality. What reasons does he give for this?
5) Krugman poses some difficult questions for how we should normatively evaluate economic growth. The fact that the GDP per capita of Sweden is about the same as the GDP per capita of Mississippi is, Krugman suggests, very misleading. Why?
6) What is the harm Krugman is afraid our current high levels of inequality will do to American society? Are his fears justified?
2) What does Krugman tell us about the trends in the pay rate of CEOs? Why do CEOs get paid so much more than they did 30-40 years ago? Krugman suggests it simply doesn't make sense to say they're doing their jobs that much better, given the economic performance of firms in the relative eras. So what's going on here?
3) Everyone knows you can't have capitalism without economic inequality. What Krugman shows is that even within the same country, you can have a very wide degree of levels of inequality while still retaining a capitalist economy. Why does the current high levels of inequality worry Krugman?
4) Krugman argues that globalization is at best a minor factor in the story of modern American inequality. What reasons does he give for this?
5) Krugman poses some difficult questions for how we should normatively evaluate economic growth. The fact that the GDP per capita of Sweden is about the same as the GDP per capita of Mississippi is, Krugman suggests, very misleading. Why?
6) What is the harm Krugman is afraid our current high levels of inequality will do to American society? Are his fears justified?
# posted by djw @ 5:24 PM 
