The Automatic Earth has an excellent post on this issue. here is an excerpt:
Essentially, as long as a company's stock can rise simply as a result of scores of workers being laid off, the term "recession" loses all functional meaning as a description of the overall economy. After all, this means that an increased shift of wealth from the poorer to the richer segments of society can, all by itself, end a recession. Those who lose their jobs and homes can be filed under the label "increased efficiency", and then forgotten.
The economist Max-Neef, who wrote Barefoot Economics, explains why economists have it so wrong by addressing their error ridden assumptions. Against traditional economics, Max-Neef writes:
1. The economy is to serve the people, not the people to serve the economy.
2. Development is about people, and not about objects.
3. Growth is not the same as development, and development does not necessarily require growth.
4. No economy is possible in the absence of ecosystem services.
5. The economy is a subsystem of a larger finite system -- the biosphere, hence permanent growth is impossible.
Finally, Robert Reich articulates why its time for change:
The Census Bureau reported on Sept. 16 that the number of Americans living in poverty hit a 51-year high in 2009, and income disparity has only grown more severe in economic hard times. It's led Robert Reich to conclude the time is now for tough medicine to narrow this gulf.
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/09/24/101118/robert-reich-income-gap-leading.html#ixzz10qAz9Ody