[PEN-L:1985] Re: Are We are all Keynsians Now?
A propos to this point is Keynes' "Notes on Mercantilism, etc" in _The General Theory of Employment_, in which he chronicles the incessant suppression by the "ranks of orthodoxy" of theories of under-consumption. Particularly revealing is his discussion of the controversy about consumption between Malthus and Ricardo, and of the attempts by J.A. Hobson and A.F. Mummery to revive the controversy in 1889. Frank Durgin wrote, Future economic historians (if the world survives Russia's looming social upheaval) will surely marvel at the fact that some 65 years after Keynes showed the world that budget deficits could serve as an instrument for curing depressions, and a quarter of a century after Nixon declared "We are all Keynsian's now", those who were setting economic policy for Russia were prescribing ever progressively tighter monetary and fiscal policies. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:1987] Re: ...all Keynsians now?
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info. --64551A35A4E3CC61912DB82D "The history of the Weimar Republic was brief - just 15 years long. But it will forever remain a striking illustration of an implacable historical law: any attempt to reduce the giant task of democratic transformation of an imperial leviathan to the trivial problem of money and credits ends without fail in a world disaster." -- Alexander Yanov, in After Yeltsin: A Weimar Russia (1995) --64551A35A4E3CC61912DB82D--
[PEN-L:1989] BLS Daily Report
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --_=_NextPart_000_01BE39AE.00F5BD70 BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 1999 The manufacturing sector continued its slowdown in December, recording the lowest level of activity since May 1991, the National Association of Purchasing Management reports. Analysts had predicted the monthly index of manufacturing business activity would rise in December. ... (Daily Labor Report, page A-2)_Manufacturing activity slowed for the seventh straight month in December, as production slumped, factories eliminated jobs, and weak demand hurt prices. ... The index has been below 50 since June, which means the number of manufacturers that said business deteriorated was greater than the number of those saying it improved (Washington Post, page C1)_The manufacturing sector continued to contract last month, as a key index of industrial activity fell to its lowest level since the depths of recession nearly 8 years ago. Still, the largely gloomy report showed some signs of hope. A major reason for manufacturing's woes over the past year has been the Asian crisis, which has reduced exports. But the survey showed that, in December, export orders contracted at a slower pace than in November. ... (Wall Street Journal, page A2) After 10 years of study, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration sets standards for drivers of forklifts and other industrial trucks. OSHA says it will require drivers to receive in-class and on-the-job training before operating the machines. Drivers will also be re-evaluated every 3 years. ... Accidents involving forklifts are among the leading causes of workplace casualties, killing 110 workers in 1997 and injuring 95,000 others. ... (Wall Street Journal's "Work Week" feature, page A1). Temporary workers used to be at the low end of the workplace food chain, but, in today's fast-changing high-tech world, a growing number of techies are discovering that today's job market rewards rather than punishes workers who move frequently between jobs, mastering new skills in the process. In the high-tech world, temp workers can also avoid the problem full-time employees frequently face: That once hired, they don't move rapidly up the salary scale, and they don't get the job training needed to stay fresh in their specialties. ... (Wall Street Journal, page B1). The USA Today (page 4B) consensus estimate for the December unemployment rate is 4.5 percent, compared with 4.4 percent in November, and for average hourly earnings is a 0.3 percent rise, compared with a 0.2 percent increase in November. DUE OUT TOMORROW: Mass Layoffs in October 1998 --_=_NextPart_000_01BE39AE.00F5BD70 b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQWAAwAOzwcBAAYADgAzADQAAwBVAQEggAMADgAAAM8HAQAG gAEAEQAAAEJMUyBEYWlseSBSZXBvcnQAkAUBDYAEAAICAAIAAQOQBgD0CQAAHEAAOQDw i48Brjm+AR4AcAABEQAAAEJMUyBEYWlseSBSZXBvcnQAAgFxAAEWAb45rgAI g/8tzaVJEdKIjgDAT4x4MQAAHgAxQAENUklDSEFSRFNPTl9EAAMAGkAAHgAw QAENUklDSEFSRFNPTl9EAAMAGUAAAgEJEAExBwAALQcAAE0LAABMWkZ1 Ekrizv8ACgEPAhUCpAPkBesCgwBQEwNUAgBjaArAc2V0bjIGAAbDAoMyA8UCAHDccnESIAcTAoB9 CoAIzx8J2QKACoENsQtgbmcxODAzMwr7EvIB0CBCgkwF8ERBSUxZB/AARVBPUlQsIFQoVUVTGMBZ GYBKQVBOVUFSGQA1GYAxDjka8AqFCoVUaGUgaQOBdWYA0HQIcRbgIH8R8BygBbEFoAIwC4AKUGQo IGl0BCBzFMB3ZN8ekAOgC4AYsAWQZQbQBJDXGYAVMAWhZBzidBwRHoFDB5AFQGxldmUDIG+kZiAc kWl2HjB5HRC3C4AfUAXQYSIgGuExGYD5IHJOYR3AAiAHQBPQBBDcb2MHMCOiIXJQCHARse8iQR0A IqAj0GcfYAnwBUDFFTBwFNFzLiAT0CPRfnkg8AQgEcAeEBOQCYBp3xygHgEgcgRgAjBoJzAe8c0N sHghchxMYnUiQQeQ6wQgIbd3CGBsHhAFEBHwmx76JtAuLUAm4ChEC3DtKQFMAaAFsVImcxmACrDD JfAT0C0yKV8vciWx/xx5Ibggsh4QAhAFwCByEfAnIUAo0R0QdHILcGdovwVAKLMe/CVQJ8EEcHUh weMkoR5wdW1wCYAZgByC/wWwCJAEICFQB3ALgCOQHgFwam9iczRBKUArsGW4YWsgDbADgR4QaAhw /wVAE5AoEAeQLSUcAik0JUF/KpAJ4TpxHoEaoBhgIkRK5nUq4BmAd2goEDKAB4D/BiIgchxgH3Ip jASQPMIjkP8dEAtwHhAqpw2wKDAFEAWw/TbTdzRhCcE20THCA5E87O0gcG8sQT7weRziHjAeIM81 cANgIUAeEChXJVA8MDcW4B1QA6BQQrAutkMx7y9kHA8dHyBgbx2DMsBGsA8goCVQMxU0Q2Ega2W/ KRkpMSqwMrAHMSGoZiFQ/wMgSEEeMiC7IkQgcg2wBTD+aAQgIYEf0SrxJJIq4ArAMSkBOCB5T6Er NyAFwEDxJDADoPsxokZbJwQgK8AHkUPRMcT/CrAg8VAiOjggciQQBzADoP8FAQCQN1E8JDpCFTE0 0B4B8ylgJoZCdQVAMeMIcCFA/yIhUwQ+ohmAHwtbNCFwCyD/PmJIdh4BPsFJ8DEzBcAKsPdN4wOR HwFOQ9Es6kQwTEH3UOAJ0QVASghhI9Euxi9Q/RssQQGAPWEXAFAVIYEg8Ah1ZHkjJE9jY3W/CrAj pQYQTCAiETeCSDfQ8mwycUFkNqEEADKxNPR/EgAeUQGQKUALEQQgMaJk7wUQV0FOozGhazaAAYAr EX03kW8gcQXASukysDTQa/Emwk9TSFSwQvEEIENhxwPwTEEVMHF1aRUwawfPSEFO8msxHvEtY0kB bEX7cSAgcS03IW2hC3EqYw3A/wWwRjBUUWlyIEUAwURhORJ/GLBrJW8TB0AkMDpxH8EtWyEwB0B1 NtMhMXIiIDN7UBQtJUFnED8QJiFuwW6+dgbwIfBHAWvJb7FhKLHnIFU30CAjY2EqsFcCIZD/F5wK ICuxa+ALUSJxe8BcUG9ooTYxF50ZgGtRAUbyMd9lkX1yPmIfARrhNzdzC4DqakbUORqwMIKAbJQ5 JidifyPRVrEiV2vRIFf5CeBrIkwRI5A+QS7GRaD/JtAbLR9gJoEKwCuigKR74f9II3ZBPsEgdTZg bHJCckYw/314AhAEcB2AEcALgBmAKqD3XWQdUGpweVaxRpAg8HEw/UFxZ0byPDAy8HIABZAygP99
[PEN-L:1990] Re: Re: RE: Re: a question
Former Fed Gov. Lawrence Lindsey, a fervent supply-sider, for arguing for an across-the-board 10% tax cut to "put $70 billion in the hands of consumers," to spur them to keep buying more while saving less ( The Wall Street Journal, December 9), notwithstanding consumer debt and defaults being at all time highs. It sounds like a typical Keynesian idea to me. Are we seeing dialectics at work? Are these traditional labels inoperative in a new conceptual synthesis? Is this postmodern Monetarism or deconstructed Keynesianism? This is standard supply-side economics of the sort that Reagan pushed, with a regressive tax cut being touted as somehow unleashing supply-side growth. In practice, however, it would have a demand-side (Keynesian) effect, just as Reagan's tax cut did in the 1980s. (The rising government deficit, along with easing monetary policy promoted recovery from the 1982 recession.) Also, the supply-siders claim that the 1964 tax cut was successful for supply-side reasons. But the weakness of the Reagan-Laffer-Kemp supply-side mechanism means that in practice, it's Keynesian economics, with a more regressive tilt. There is a lot of rumbling in the globalized Street that the major reason the Asian, Russia, Brazilian crises did not caused a sustained panic in the stock market was that practically all government economists have turned Keynesian. Is that an accurate assessment? I don't know about the government economists, but the IMF sure isn't Keynesian. I think that this refers to Alan Greenspan taking the lead in pushing down interest rates, to be followed by W. Europe, along with Japan's weak expansionary policies and the like. I guess Greenspan is a Keynesian (broadly speaking), because he's a fine-tuner with faith in his own power to steer the economy. As usual, the answer depends on what you mean by "Keynesian." There was a c-span program on the 1968 election moderated by Kevin Phillips on New Years eve, with Pat Buchanan, Nixon's press secretary in the campaign and others. The consensus was the Nixon was a liberal, with Keynesian economics and abandoning the gold standard, opening to China, Detent, arms control, free trade, etc. Nixon was definitely more liberal than Clinton. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:1988] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug writes: Ok, the adjustments to the CPI so far have lowered it by 0.4 points, and here we've got another 0.2. It looks like the Boskinites have won. Last time I said that, people disagreed, but I'm going to say it again. Not to minimize the bad news concerning this reestimation, but the good news, as Dave Richardson pointed out awhile back, is that lower measured inflation rates mean that the Fed is less likely to get pressured to step on the brakes. BTW, Doug, I didn't see you at the economics convention. I still owe you a beer (or four). I guess I'll have to send you a cyber-beer. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:1983] Are We are all Keynsians Now?
Following is a message I posted on David Johnson's Russian List (JRL). [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think it may be of interest to those Pen-ers who are interested in developments in Russia. #5 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank Durgin) Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 Subject: Re Mark Jones It was highly enlightening to read Mark Jones comments on JRL 2530. I think we should all give him his due. He has been right all along in predicting it would end in tears. And I am afraid events will prove him right in his dire prediction that 1999 will end in blood. If he seems to shout, its because he has to. Most of us have proven to be quite hard of hearing. Mark said that a child could have foreseen it all. I would suggest that a chimpanzee could have foreseen it. A chimp would have noted that every time he punched the "tighter monetary and fiscal policy" button, his cage got colder, the human misery index went up a few notches, and the economy sank deeper into oblivion. What a chimpanzee would have figured out with a couple of punches, the Gaidars, Chernomyrdins, Krienkos and the IMF sages still haven't figured out after almost eight years of continual punching that same old "tight money -tight budget" button. Future economic historians (if the world survives Russia's looming social upheaval) will surely marvel at the fact that some 65 years after Keynes showed the world that budget deficits could serve as an instrument for curing depressions, and a quarter of a century after Nixon declared "We are all Keynsian's now", those who were setting economic policy for Russia were prescribing ever progressively tighter monetary and fiscal policies. At the end of 1997, Russia's GDP was down by over 50% from the pre-reform level. In 1998, according to the IMF's "World Economic Outlook", it fell another 5.7%, and in 1999 will fall another 8.3%. Unemployment continues to rise, and, as many reports posted on the JRL have shown, the numbers of sick and hungry men, women and children sleeping in the streets, or huddled in unheated and unlighted houses is rapidly growing Yet the response to this is the tightest budget since 1992. The budget for 1999 calls for expenditures of some 570 billion rubles, a sum equal to less than 15% of GDP. In USA dollars that's $30 billion, a figure considerably less than the some $90 billion Americans spend every year on Alcoholic Beverages and the some $50 billion they spend on Tobacco Products. The deficit is planned at some 2.5% of GDP. By way of contrast the US Budget deficit in the 1980's and early 1990 averaged over 4% of GDP. As Michael Gordon has pointed out, when the debt servicing costs are excluded, Government revenue will exceed spending by 1.7% of GDP. The budget will thus have pronounced deflationary effects. Compare Russia's government spending of 14.7% of GDP with government spending as a percent of GDP in 1992 of over 50% in Sweden, over 45% in Belgium, Holland Norway, Luxembourg and Denmark, and some 30% in Japan and the US. The IMF's hackles are being raised by the Primakov plan to borrow from the central bank (what the opponents of the plan call "print money") and thus expand the money supply, which had fallen by more than 8% since Jan of 1998. Russia's money supply (M-2) as a percent of its GDP is the world's lowest. In Sept. of this year was equal to 14-15% of GDP. Contrast that with the US where money supply is equal to about 50% of GDP and still expanding. Compare it with that of many of the other industrialized nations of the world where it runs some 80% of GDP. Money is the lifeblood of any economy. Shrink the US money supply to 15% of GDP and slap on the Russian Central Bank rediscount rate of some 80% and overnight you'll precipitate a Yeltsin-Gaidar type depression in this country Seventy to eighty percent of all transactions in Russia are now conducted via barter. There are huge backlogs of unpaid wages (80% of that backlog being in the private sector), and when wages do get paid, they are just as often as not paid in kind. Companies carry out transactions via barter and pay taxes and wages with goods, not to avoid taxes, but simply because of the scarcity of money - they just do not have it to pay out. The creation of new money is an every day occurrence here in the US and throughout the capitalist world. Every time a bank makes a loan, it creates new money. When it grants a construction loan it creates the money without which the construction project could not and would not have been carried out. When it makes a consumer loan it creates the money without which a car or house would not have been purchased and consequently manufactured, thereby producing employment for the workers, profits for the company and tax revenue for the government. The IMF's insistence that the root of Russia's problems is its inefficient system of tax collection is all backwards. It is not a high tax harvest that produces vibrant economies; it is vibrant economies that produce
[PEN-L:1994] Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug Henwood wrote, sounds like the Fed is worried about the stock market, now that the crisis period in Asia is fading. The president of the Atlanta Fed gave a speech the other day that evoked bubblish fears, though in that careful way Fedsters do. I was wondering when someone was going to notice. What's the market up so far this year? 5%? Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:1991] Re: electric utility deregulation
Tom L wrote: Dear Pen-L, I'm curious if anyone in California has any comments about their personal experiences with electric utility deregulation. I understand that your electric bills have gone up due to deregulation. Any other effects? Your email pal, Tom L. Tom, I can tell you more than you could want to know about Calif. It is not accurate that bills have gone up due to de-reg. The law, AB 1890 mandated a 10% reduction for small customers. It is not disputed, even by the utilities, that rates would have gone down roughly 15% if de-reg had not occured. So in that sense rates are now higher than they would have been absent de-reg. But technically, rates are down. The Calif deal is widely understood to be a windfall for the incumbent utilities. Perhaps we can talk off-line about it. I'm just back from NY where my paper, finally taking form, argued that electric power -- even generation -- MUST be publically controlled, and best controlled by public owership. In other words, de-regulation can't work, even though it appears that there are many, many, separately owned power plants. My thoughts are getting clearer all the time, though perhaps not to my audience. A full publication should come this spring. Gene Coyle
[PEN-L:1992] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Jim Devine wrote: Not to minimize the bad news concerning this reestimation, but the good news, as Dave Richardson pointed out awhile back, is that lower measured inflation rates mean that the Fed is less likely to get pressured to step on the brakes. I'm way out of touch here in southwestern Virginia this week, but it sounds like the Fed is worried about the stock market, now that the crisis period in Asia is fading. The president of the Atlanta Fed gave a speech the other day that evoked bubblish fears, though in that careful way Fedsters do. BTW, Doug, I didn't see you at the economics convention. I still owe you a beer (or four). I guess I'll have to send you a cyber-beer. 'Cause I'm way out of town this week. How's the convention? I heard there was a party for the Long Term Capital guys. Doug
