[PEN-L:7384] Cuba Solidarity Evening NYC 11-18
The Brecht Forum presents An Evening of Solidarity with Cuba A Benefit for INFOMED-US Monday, November 18 at 7:30 pm A night of culture and friendship to welcome friends and supporters of Cuba's Ministry of Public Health, who are attending the annual conference of the American Public Health Association. Music followed by presentations by U.S. and Cuban representatives. Refreshments will be served. This event is endorsed by the Center for Cuban Studies, the Cuba Information Project, and IFCO. Admission is $15. The Brecht Forum and its projects, The New York Marxist School and The Institute for Popular Education, is located at: 122 West 27 Street, 10 floor New York, New York 10001 Phone: (212) 242-4201 Fax: (212) 741-4563 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //30
[PEN-L:7385] FW: BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1996 The average annual pay of workers in metropolitan areas rose 3.5 percent from 1994 to 1995, preliminary BLS data shows. In the nation's 311 metropolitan areas, the average annual pay was $29,105 in 1995, up from $28,125 in 1994. Average pay for the nation as a whole -- combining both metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas -- was $27,845 in 1995. San Jose, Calif., topped the list of metropolitan areas with the highest average pay. Jacksonville, N.C., reported the lowest average annual pay level among metropolitan areas (Daily Labor Report, pages 2,D-1). There are about 250 million child laborers working in developing countries, about three times more than previous estimates, according to a new study. The International Labor Organization attributed the jump in child workers to more accurate survey methods and the inclusion of workers under 10 years old, as well as economic forces that are driving more employers to rely on children (Wall Street Journal, page A2). In an article, "Home Health Care Opens Door to Abuses," USA Today (Nov. 11, page 11B) says that Labor Department predicts home health care will have the largest job growth of any industry, 1994 to the year 2005 The Wall Street Journal's column "The Outlook" (Nov. 11, page A1) says firms cut health costs, but cover fewer workers Just five years ago, employers' health care costs were increasing at double-digit rates. Now they are barely increasing at all. Unpublished Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that, during the 12-month period ended in September, employers paid just seven-tenths of a percent more to buy health care for their workers An accompanying graph shows percentage change in private employers health costs vs. wages and salaries, quarterly data, 1985 to the present; source is BLS. Job cuts caused by mergers fell 33 percent to 37,530 during the first 10 months of this year compared with the same period in 1995, according to the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray Christmas Inc. However, the trend reversed in October, when merger-driven layoffs rose 33 percent over last October (Washington Times, page B6). DUE OUT TOMORROW: Producer Price Indexes -- October 1996 Quality Changes for 1997 Model Vehicles
[PEN-L:7386] science
I had writtenThe important _caveat_ (which should also apply to the social sciences) is that science should be subject to more questions than Aronowitz lists. Sciences have to jump through more hoops that literary criticism does: is the theory in question consistent with known data, or at least more consistent with that data than are alternative theories? is the theory in question logically consistent or at least more logically consistent than the alternatives? is there any way to take the theory and look at, test, its implications in a new way that is not simply a restatement of the data that the theory was developed to explain or help us understand? Doug asks Uh, Jim, isn't that like a big caveat and stuff? yeah, but I don't expect that social science can or will be able to answer these questions, since the object of study (people, society) is much more difficult than that of, say, physics. But we should at least try. One problem in social science is the tendency for a theory to become totally nonfalsifiable (e.g., "you don't believe in the Oedipus complex? you must have one" or some versions of Chicago-school human capital theory). We have to be open to empirical, logical, and methodological criticism. But you knew that. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.
[PEN-L:7387] Urgent Appeal: Workers Dismissal (Indonesia) (fwd)
--- Forwarded Message Follows --- Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 18:16:15 +0800 (HKT) From: AMRC [EMAIL PROTECTED] URGENT APPEAL WORKER LEADER THREAT ON DISMISSION IN INDONESIA Dear people, We received an urgent appeal on a case of workers dismissal at the Indonesian garment factory Kolon Langgeng. We will act on the request for international solidarity by sending protestletters an ask our US and european partners to do the same. Please inform us about any new developments in this case. Do you have names and addresses of buyers or agents for the company in Europe or the US? We might be able to organise to do something to put pressure on them. Good luck with your struggle.Please give a message of solidarity to the workers. on behalf of the Clean Clothes Campaign in the Netherlands, Rik den Braber The Clean Clothes Campaign keeps on doing it! You can find more information at: http://www.xs4all.nl/~ccc/ Freedom for Muchtar Pakpahan! Read the appeal at http://www.xs4all.nl/~ccc/pakpan.htm --
[PEN-L:7388] FW: A real story : Woody Woodpecker ! (fwd)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 15:01:00 -0800 (PST) From: Williamson Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FW: A real story : Woody Woodpecker ! Matsushita Electric is promoting a new Japanese PC targeted at the Internet. Panasonic has developed a complete Japanese Web browser, and to make the system "user-friendly", licensed the cartoon character "Woody Woodpecker" as the "Internet guide." Panasonic eventually planned on a world version of the product. A huge marketing campaign was to have introduced the product in Japan last week. The day before the ads were to be released, Panasonic suddenly pulled back and delayed the product launch indefinitely. The reason: the ads featured the slogan "Touch Woody - The Internet Pecker." An American staff member at the internal product launch explained to the stunned and embarrassed Japanese what "touch woody" and "pecker" meant in American slang. -From EE Times, October 8, 1996
[PEN-L:7389] Re: science
Jim Devine wrote: yeah, but I don't expect that social science can or will be able to answer these questions, since the object of study (people, society) is much more difficult than that of, say, physics. But we should at least try. Difficult? Don't know about that; it's a lot easier to be an amateur sociologist (or economist even!) than amateur quantum physicist. Less predictable, maybe. But your position, Jim, sounds quite the opposite of what Aronowitz and the social construction crowd argues. To them, the truth claims of the "hard" sciences are no different from those of the "soft" ones (and no doubt my choice of words there betrays my phallogocentrism). Doug Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 phone: +1-212-874-4020 fax: +1-212-874-3137
[PEN-L:7390] U.S. Presidential Election Results; How The Argument Is Won And the
U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION RESULTS Unofficial results suggest a record low participation in voting for the U.S. presidential and congressional elections on Tuesday, especially among the working class and national minorities. Even commentators in the monopoly-media were dismayed at the continuing decline in voter participation, which strongly indicates that Americans are fed-up with the archaic political system. By boycotting the vote, a majority of the American polity were demonstrating their disgust with the present political system and their strong desire for democratic renewal. There are approximately 190 million eligible voters in the United States. Most media accounts put the percentage of those who voted at less than 49 percent of the total. The U.S. Committee for the Study of the American Electorate predicted that the final tally will be as low as 48.5 percent making it the lowest in U.S. history. Initial data from the individual states indicate that in 13 states voter participation dropped as much as 10 per cent from the 1992 presidential vote. The unofficial figures are: total number of the polity who boycotted the election = 97,850,000 (51.5 percent); total votes cast = 92,150,000 (48.5 percent); number of the polity who did not vote for U.S. imperialist chieftain Bill Clinton = 144,846,500 (76.2 percent); number of votes for Clinton = 45,153,500 (23.8 percent); votes for Republican Bob Dole = 38,703,000 (20.4 percent); votes for Texas billionaire Ross Perot of the Reform Party = 8,293,500 (4.4 percent). The 23.8 percent votes for Clinton is not far from what most ruling parties in Canada receive. Even though this represents an approval rating of less than one-quarter of the polity, it does not stop the ruling class from declaring that they have a "mandate" to do exactly as they please. This represents a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, using a political system and mechanisms that are firmly rooted in the nineteenth century. A modern political system where the working class and their allies hold political power would have a political process and mechanisms to guarantee that the people could participate in governance at all times. It would allow the people to select the candidates for political office and easily recall them if they were not responding to the wishes of the polity. In a truly democratic country where the working class and people hold power no person would be able to hold any office with less than 50 percent support of the polity. The present U.S. political system is a farce and a hollow shell that does not even do a good job of camouflaging the brutal dictatorship of the financial oligarchy. Even U.S. bourgeois commentators are disturbed, making comments such as "This tells us that we have a democracy in crisis in America;" and "We have progressively destroyed the impulse for civic engagement;" and open cynicism from Chief of Clinton's Staff, Leon Panetta, who said after the election, "Let us now deal with the issues" It is up to the huge U.S. proletariat to overthrow the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and lead the way for revolutionary changes to the U.S. political system. HOW THE ARGUMENT IS WON AND THE AGENDA SET In Germany and France the anti-social offensive is in full swing. To justify the attacks on the living standards of the working class, the arguments used in Europe and the world over are well-known: the "necessity to control the deficits and debts, live within our needs, suppress labor costs to be competitive in the global market and of course there is no alternative to cutbacks." The European twist is that certain "economic targets must be met in order to qualify to have the new 'euro' as their currency." The discussion never gets around to capitalism itself and its demand for new sources of capital and places to invest in order to satisfy its drive for maximum profit. The media attempts to convince the people that there "must" be a greater union of Europe, and that this greater economic union "must" have a unified currency, and in order to have a unified currency each member state "must" meet certain targets for deficit and debt reduction. Highly-paid economists play a central role in creating this fiction. For weeks the German media has been full of the following tale: "Germany will fail to make the grade for European monetary union on two counts, according to a forecast by the country's six leading economic institutes. The assessment sent politicians and central bankers into a spiral of panic The institutes believe that...the public deficit will reach 3.5 percent of gross domestic product, significantly higher than the 3 percent benchmark set by the Maastricht treaty for single currency candidates. Public debt will exceed the 60 percent of GDP prescribed by Maastricht. That would, in effect, derail the whole European monetary union project An additional US$12 billion would have to be saved in order to meet the
[PEN-L:7391] Re: science
Jim Devine wrote, yeah, but I don't expect that social science can or will be able to answer these questions, since the object of study (people, society) is much more difficult than that of, say, physics. But we should at least try. Doug Henwood replied, Difficult? Don't know about that; it's a lot easier to be an amateur sociologist (or economist even!) than amateur quantum physicist. Less predictable, maybe. To which I reply, It is extremely difficult to be a specialist in a field where anybody who picks up a smattering of the conventional wisdom can consider themselves an amateur expert. That's probably what drives scientists into obscure specialties and drives sociologists and economists to strive for opacity. Regards, Tom Walker, [EMAIL PROTECTED], (604) 669-3286 The TimeWork Web: http://mindlink.net/knowware/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:7392] Re: hard soft science
Years ago, I used to hear the (perhaps apocryphal) story of Max Planck talking to Keynes. Seems that as an undergraduate Planck was undecided between physics and economics. He chose physics on the grounds that economics was "too difficult" --i.e., too many variables. Larry Shute At 12:09 PM 11/13/96 -0800, you wrote: Jim Devine wrote: yeah, but I don't expect that social science can or will be able to answer these questions, since the object of study (people, society) is much more difficult than that of, say, physics. But we should at least try. Difficult? Don't know about that; it's a lot easier to be an amateur sociologist (or economist even!) than amateur quantum physicist. Less predictable, maybe. But your position, Jim, sounds quite the opposite of what Aronowitz and the social construction crowd argues. To them, the truth claims of the "hard" sciences are no different from those of the "soft" ones (and no doubt my choice of words there betrays my phallogocentrism). Doug Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 phone: +1-212-874-4020 fax: +1-212-874-3137
[PEN-L:7393] Slate, Krugman, etc.
In case anyone was wondering, SLATE published my letter about
Paul Krugman's trashing of the Kuttner/Robert Reich/James
Galbraith school of economics. Their edited version of my letter
wasn't too far from what I said (which raises my respect for
SLATE). Krugman and Galbraith had a bigger debate (which is quite
interesting) in the more central pages of SLATE. In addition,
they e-published my additional letter. Here it is, in the edited
form:
Devine Response
I would like to clarify a point I made in an "E-Mail to the
Editors" that SLATE published last week. My e-mail responded
to Paul Krugman's "Economic Culture Wars," a polemic
against more "literary-minded" economists like James K.
Galbraith. Krugman responded to my e-mail in his "Dialogue"
with Galbraith ("Who's the Real Economist?").
The point I tried to make in my e-mail was that Krugman
confuses mathematical rigor with science. I have no criticism
of the former (and use it myself), except to note that many
important issues cannot be quantified. Instead, I believe we
need a version of the "serenity prayer": Economists need the
skills to do quantitative research, the knowledge needed for
qualitative research, and the wisdom to know when each is
appropriate and what its limits are.
Science, on the other hand, involves avoiding a dogmatic
attachment to any method of analysis. It also entails being
open to reading and respecting ideas one disagrees with. This
involves, among other things, avoiding criticizing someone's
book without reading it simply because the author is a lawyer
and not an economist, as Krugman has done with Robert
Reich's The Work of Nations.
A scientific attitude also involves eschewing the
glorification of the self-appointed and self-promoting academic
pecking order of "Big Name" schools and authors. This kind
of glorification might be justified if economics were actually
like physics, with a clear ability to predict the behavior of our
subject matter so that we could objectively decide which
economists were better than others. Having attended two Big
Name schools, I know that we can't take anybody's work for
granted. Some of these Nobel Prize winners don't want to deal
with empirical reality at all.
My irritation with the adulation of Big Names does not
arise from my lack of fame, or from my working at a small
university (which gives me freedom from "publish or perish": I
can write what and when I like, rather than having to "crank it
out"). On the contrary, it comes from my experience with many
colleagues who have jumped from fad to fad, from rational
expectations to New Keynesianism (a k a monetarism), without
any kind of historical perspective, just an eye to what the
economics celebrities are saying. It surprises me to see a Big
Name economic journalist like Krugman following this trend,
and, further, using it to discourage dissent within the
profession.
in pen-l solidarity,
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ.
7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA
310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way
and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
[PEN-L:7394] more science!
After I unconsciously channeled with Max Planck (thanks Larry!) to say that I thought that physics is easier than social science, Doug wrote: Difficult? Don't know about that; it's a lot easier to be an amateur sociologist (or economist even!) than amateur quantum physicist. Less predictable, maybe. It's the last meaning I was using. Physics is more predictable, meaning that the efforts to understand the world are easier. It is also easier to stuff into idealized mathematical models[*] without ultraviolence to the object of study. (Third, physicists can usually productively assume that they're not part of the object of their study.) Because of its relative predictability and the appropriateness of formalization, Physics has made much more progress (both empirically and mathematically) than any of the social sciences. This in turn means that there's much more to know to become a physicist, making amateur physics almost impossible. Doug continues: But your position, Jim, sounds quite the opposite of what Aronowitz and the social construction crowd argues. To them, the truth claims of the "hard" sciences are no different from those of the "soft" ones ... I thought I already said I agree with them that I was willing to agree with Stanley A. that physics was subject to the criticism that its nature was deeply affected by the societal environment. For instance, though I really know nothing about physics, I would hypothesize that in bourgeois society, there is a certain ideological attraction of Newtonian physics -- with its image of atomistic billiard-ball interaction -- that delayed the development and acceptance of Einsteinian and quantum-mechanic physics, which put greater emphasis on interconnectedness. That would be an interesting question for an expert to look into... (Did Einstein's socialism open his mind in a way that helped him get beyond Newton? what was it that closed his mind to quantum physics?) [*] "idealized mathematical models" is quite a redundant phrase, no? in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
[PEN-L:7395] Re: more science!
At 2:38 PM 11/13/96, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought I already said I agree with them that I was willing to agree with Stanley A. that physics was subject to the criticism that its nature was deeply affected by the societal environment. Of course physics and all the other "hard" sciences are affect by the social, political, and cultural environment. These things determine what get funded, what research gets done, and how people interpret experimental evidence. On the other hand, there are real limits to such social constructions. In his hoax piece, for example, Sokal describes conditions under which pi would be a variable - something that was obviously music to the ears of the social constructionists. But it ain't true, obviously. Or read the first paragraph or two of Sokal's piece, which claims that physical reality doesn't exist - more music to the social constructionists. Ain't true either. That Social Text fell for the hoax was funny, but it also revealed some serious intellectual problems with the social constructionists' position that they have apparently still not acknowledged. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:7396] Re: hard soft science
Keynes told the story in his essay on Marshall, essays in bio. Laurence Shute wrote: Years ago, I used to hear the (perhaps apocryphal) story of Max Planck talking to Keynes. Seems that as an undergraduate Planck was undecided between physics and economics. He chose physics on the grounds that economics was "too difficult" --i.e., too many variables. Larry Shute -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7397] RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Web site enhancements.
The R.P.E. Web site now includes tables of contents for all issues and more links to other relevant sites. Further suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Paul Z. * Paul Zarembka, supporting the RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Web site at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka *
[PEN-L:7398] Re: RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Web site enhancements.
Paul, I checked out the Research web site. Looks quite good. But here are some suggestion about the preamble/introduction. The first line does not sound right. There is some composition problem here. How about something like: The research is a Marxist journal that encourages social analysis on the basis of Marxist theory. If you like you could add, centering on Marxist categories of mode of production and class struggle, but I would suggest leaving it out. No need to give a stark theoretical position in the very first line and narrowing the audiance considerably. Second line: It is International in ... empirical work(s). Your original has work there. I think it should be works. Next sentence is fine. Next sentence: The Research is a refreed annual(journal)[I don't know whether the word journal should be there or not], and is published in hard cover by JAI press. It has been in regular print since 1977. It specializes in publishing long and serious research papers up to 50 pages in print (on occasion, even longer). On two previous occasions it has published special volumes on particular topics with guest editors. In the end, with the information for writers, you should also add information for subscription and its price. The reat looks fine. I guess it could be made more sexy, but I don't know how. May be there should be more spaces (those hands, I mean) for going to other places or going back to the original first page. But it's not a big deal. Talk to you later. ajit At 08:47 PM 11/13/96 -0800, you wrote: The R.P.E. Web site now includes tables of contents for all issues and more links to other relevant sites. Further suggestions are welcome. Thanks, Paul Z. * Paul Zarembka, supporting the RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Web site at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka *
