A great figure.

Sarcastic and enthusiastic.

Will be missed.

Sad news, indeed. Wrote some important books.

I'm a big fan of The Rolling Stones, John Kenneth Galbraith, and one other person. Thanks for starting this thread at this site, I'm obviously not the only one with this combination!

i got 6 of his books. great reading. a great man. will still be read in a 100 years

he was a distant relation of mine....

As he made it to a ripe 97, Gazza, I hope you share more than a few of his genes!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-04-30 20:41 by cc.

thanks

he wasnt really related (as far as I know), but as we share the same surname and are both argumentative and cantankerous, I just like to kid myself....

It took me sometime to realize why I know Galbraith: I wrote a paper on him and other cold war liberals for a class a few months back. I appreciated his concern for the third world, that unfortunatly has gone unoticed as of late. Its ashame that his legacy as a respected man, will undoubtly be tarnished by the conservative pundits.

I have my students read "The affluent society" every semester...

He represented the liberal consensus of mid-century. Nowadays, "liberal" is a derogatory term. It's funny: the people who get called liberal, like Clinton, are further to the right than Galbraith was.

cc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's funny: the people who get called
> liberal, like Clinton, are further to the right
> than Galbraith was.

You're absolutely right (no pun ;-) I never understood why Kerry was labeled a 'liberal'.

i think i have to agree with Congressman (now president) Santos on the tv show The West Wing. during his run for president, his opponent tried to negativly label him a liberal, and Santos responded: Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things.
It may only be a television show, but the character of santos is correct. I am an unabashed liberal, who is not afraid to admit it and defend it. I appreciate the work of Galbraith, Schlesinger Jr, Weschler and other liberals. To this day, Galbraiths The affluent society, which he updated in the mid 90s to "The good society", is a relevant book and needs to be read by all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-05-01 05:43 by Happy Jack.

Happy Jack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i think i have to agree with Congressman (now
> president) Santos on the tv show The West Wing.
> during his run for president, his opponent tried
> to negativly label him a liberal, and Santos
> responded: Liberals got women the right to vote.
> Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote.
> Liberals created Social Security and lifted
> millions of elderly people out of poverty.
> Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the
> Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals
> created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air
> Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives
> do? They opposed them on every one of those
> things.
> It may only be a television show, but the
> character of santos is correct. I am an unabashed
> liberal, who is not afraid to admit it and defend
> it. I appreciate the work of Galbraith,
> Schlesinger Jr, Weschler and other liberals. To
> this day, Galbraiths The affluent society, which
> he updated in the mid 90s to "The good society",
> is a relevant book and needs to be read by all.

It figures a liberal would get his ideas from a television show.
Pretty much everything you mentioned is wrong.
African-Americans the right to vote? Vetoed by Democrats.
Segregation? Vetoed By Democrats.
Social Security? Good idea, but a change in the system to have
people control the money they earn? Vetoed by Democrats.
I assume you think the govenment knows what's best to do
with the money you earn.
Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act? Passed in the Nixon administration.
Your buddy Galbraith's ideas are responsible for the most of Johnson's
Great Society which is the biggest waste of money this country has seen.
NO resutls. Nothing. School vouchers? No way, according to liberals (you)?
Medicare? What good has that done? Is medical care better or worse
since the government got involved? If you think gas prices are high,
imagine what they would be if Kerry and Gore got their way and wanted
an extra 50 cent to $1 tax on gas. Well, those are your folk.
Galbraith is an interesting read, but did you read Milton Friedman?
Probably not. By they way, how much should I pay in taxes?
Maybe you should ask your hero President Santos.
After all, he knows. To quote "Network": "He's on television, dummy."

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> thanks
>
> he wasnt really related (as far as I know), but as
> we share the same surname and are both
> argumentative and cantankerous, I just like to kid
> myself....

Feeling slightly dissapointed. However, the introduction of the word 'cantankerous' fully makes up for it!

----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."

"Shit!... No shit, awright!"

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> thanks
>
> he wasnt really related (as far as I know), but as
> we share the same surname and are both
> argumentative and cantankerous, I just like to kid
> myself....


I thought I had part of the explanation of your being smart !!! Anyway, Galbraith 87 " Economics in perperstive" should be read by every student in economics in correlation with F.A. Hayek 42 : " Road to Serfdom".

tomk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> African-Americans the right to vote? Vetoed by
> Democrats.
> Segregation? Vetoed By Democrats.

The problem here is your assumption that the Democrats have always been the "liberal" party, or that the late-twentieth-century version of the term "liberal" means the same thing in all eras. The Dixiecrats were clearly not liberal. We might call them "populist," however. The current Republicans cater to this ideology.

> Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act? Passed in the
> Nixon administration.

An example of the changing times. Many actions during Nixon's administration appear "liberal" to us today. He was not necessarily happy about these measures, but (at these moments) was responding to the will of the people, which was liberal, contrasted with today.

Thank you CC, you saved me time from having to point out that democrats and liberals have always been linked, this is far from the truth. Oh and it should be noted that several of those democrats that vetoed segragation and civil rights, later became republicans. DONT TWIST MEANINGS. yes i borrowed something from a TV show, but only because it is relavant. Santos never said democrats supported those measures, he said "liberals", and he said "conservatives" vetoed them, not republicans.

Hope this comment will not be too stupid, as I am not a US citizen and neither well informed about your politics. However, I remember two little things of my political science degree about USA

1) A liberal, in the classic sense of the term, is to be considered as a leftist in America. He/she wants to share the welfare, but without state interference. See for instance this short definition of Cambridge dictionary :

liberal (POLITICS) adjective : (of a political party or a country) believing in or allowing more personal freedom and a development towards a fairer sharing of wealth and power within society

By contrast, the old leftist parties in Europe support a strong state intervention. That is why "liberal" has a very different meaning in Europe. The liberal is seen as a rightist in EUrope because he/she opposes the state interference, no matter the final purpose is to share the welfare.

2) "The Dixiecrats were clearly not liberal" - I agree - Until the late 50's, some South states almost always choosed a Democrat majority because the Democrats were seen as the best option to fight the "Northen" federal power, ie the state (see point (1) ). But this choice had little to do with a leftist point of view, ie reallocate the welfare.

I hope I didn't say too many silly things in one thread....

No, you didn't to the extent that I am not a US citizen, but from the "old european countries" outlined by GWB. The Liberal definition you provide us from Cambridge is clearcut. My only curiosity would be that you refer to "the old leftists parties" in Europe. That notion of old/new is bizarre. Lets's rock and God Bless America.

Happy Jack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i think i have to agree with Congressman (now
> president) Santos on the tv show The West Wing.
> during his run for president, his opponent tried
> to negativly label him a liberal, and Santos
> responded: Liberals got women the right to vote.
> Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote.
> Liberals created Social Security and lifted
> millions of elderly people out of poverty.
> Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the
> Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals
> created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air
> Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives
> do? They opposed them on every one of those
> things.
> It may only be a television show, but the
> character of santos is correct. I am an unabashed
> liberal, who is not afraid to admit it and defend
> it. I appreciate the work of Galbraith,
> Schlesinger Jr, Weschler and other liberals. To
> this day, Galbraiths The affluent society, which
> he updated in the mid 90s to "The good society",
> is a relevant book and needs to be read by all.

Liberals started the Civil War....oops.


Yes, it was liberal democrates from the South...remeber South Carolina took the first shot at Ft. Sumter

the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!

Studied him in college as an Economics major in the late 1970's. Later, when I had a family to support, I realized just how wrong he was.

What does your family have to do with "the good society"? The family is the bourgeois excuse for any number of questionable decisions.

Happy Jack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you CC, you saved me time from having to
> point out that democrats and liberals have always
> been linked, this is far from the truth. DONT TWIST MEANINGS.


Nor should Republicans and conservatives be linked.
I used to be a hardcore liberal, so I know all the tricks of the trade.
I'm a conservative, and I'm willing to call off
the war on drugs. Is that Conservative? Don't Twist meanings, remember?
We've got to get rid of this welfare state.
CC wrote " The family is the bourgouis excuse for any number
of questionable decision." What the hell does that mean?
Bourgeois? What is this, the 19th century or Billy Bragg sleevenotes?

I would just like to say that I've said all i wish to say and so I am backing out of this discussion unless something really catches my attention. Im not gonna bicker because everyone thinks they are right in politics, and thus its a no win situation.
Tomk i do agree with the fact that Republicans and conservatives should not be linked. I am reading a book right now that actually is discussing the liberal republicans of the northeast US. Its called "the guardians", I recommend it. However, like conservatives in the Democratic party, Liberals in the republican party have all but been driven out.Even those "liberal" republicans have to talk a conservative line to get respect by the party base, im thinking Mitt Romney, Olympia Snow, Pataki, Guilianni (i always misspell his name), which if you notice are all northeast republicans. This is my final word on this topic.John Kenneth Galbraith, was along with his fellow cold war liberals a brilliant man. Whether his ideas hold up or not today is very debatable, as this thread is showing. However I still prefer his ideas to those of Hayek, and to the supply-side economics, better known as "reaganomics" (shudders).

I think this might be one of the topics that bv doesnt want us to be speaking about. I dont think Galbraith owned Sticky Fingers.

As Meg Thatcher once said "the facts of life are conservative".


I couldn't agree more.

andrew9148 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think this might be one of the topics that bv
> doesnt want us to be speaking about. I dont think
> Galbraith owned Sticky Fingers.


I think he owned BB with SFM more than SF with BS or Bitch.