[PEN-L:7914] The situation in Norway (fwd)
Forwarded message: From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 19 15:25:22 1996 From: D Shniad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: 199612192325.PAA16663@fraser Subject: The situation in Norway (fwd) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam Lanfranco), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Perelman) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 15:25:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gentlemen, I signed off Labor-l and Pen-l before receiving this forwarded message. You might want to forward it to your respective lists. Happy holidays. Sid Shniad Forwarded message: From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 19 14:18 PST 1996 From: D Shniad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: 199612192218.OAA04515@fraser Subject: The situation in Norway To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D Shniad) Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 14:18:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 9497 THE NEW YORK TIMES INTERNATIONAL Dec. 13, 1996 Front Page WELFARE'S SNUG COAT CUTS NORWEGIAN COLD By YOUSSEF M. IBRAHIM OSLO, Dec. 9 - Suffer from rheumatism? The Norwegian state will send you to the Canary Islands for a month of therapy, all expenses paid. Husband walked out, leaving children to raise? Not to worry. As a single mother under the generous Norwegian welfare system, you will get special subsidies for the children and paid leave from your job so you can stay home and rear them. Take Dr. Sidsel Kreyberg, 42-year-old pathologist. When her husband left her in 1987, leaving her with two young children, she was immediately embraced by the state. For nearly eight years, until both children reached age 10, the state paid her a pension. Other support systems helped, including free day care, subsidized housing and vacations, and free medical and dental care. The Government also footed the bill for Dr. Kreyberg to fulfill her old ambition of getting a Ph.D. in epidemiology at the University Oslo. Now she is off welfare and has a better-paying job than before she went on. The other day, she stood in her living room overlooking a vista of snow-covered forests and the Oslo Fjord. She beamed at her daughter, Karoline, 12, and son, Karsten, 10, and proclaimed, "Look at the result." The entire world, it seems, is dismantling the welfare state, privatizing the public sector, downsizing government, reducing subsidies and cutting social programs that were once sacrosanct. From Europe to Africa, across most of Latin America and even in the once fabulously wealthy Arab oil countries, governments plagued by soaring budget deficits are everywhere embracing the free-market gospel preached in the 1980's by President Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of Britain. Everywhere, that is, except Norway. Buoyed by an unending gush of oil revenue and guided by a national commitment to egalitarianism, Norway's 4.35 million people are fattening the mother of all welfare states. Even business people -- including those who export pulp, paper, lumber, chemicals, fertilizers, aluminum and transport machinery to the globalizing world of dog- eat-dog capitalism -- join in their nation's adherence to social democracy. In Norway, where individual tax rates can climb above 50 percent, citizens benefit from a number of entitlements and a shrunken Workweek. Inflation is below 2 percent. The unemployment rate is the lowest in Europe. Economic growth in recent years has ranged between 3 percent and 5 percent. Oil exports are running at 3 million barrels a day, second only to Saudi Arabia's, and the petrodollars are feeding a budget surplus this year of $6 billion more than the Government's $61 billion expenditure. The Norwegian welfare cake, surely the sweetest in the world today, includes these ingredients: *Annual stipends of $1,620 for every Norwegian child under 17, which rise slightly for every other child as a family grows and rise still more if the family lives in a remote part of the country. *Retirement pay, equivalent to industrial workers' pensions, for all home- makers, even those who have worked outside the home. - ONE COUNTRY EATS CAKE WHILE THE REST OF THE WORLD DOWNSIZES - *Forty-two weeks of fully paid maternity leave. *Reimbursement for all medical costs exceeding $187 a year per individual. These benefits may be financed by oil, but they are undergirded by the national character. Norwegians, with their profoundly egalitarian persuasion, frown on wide disparity in income. This permits one of the highest personal-tax rates in the world and provides the Government with vast latitude for social engineering. "It is a sense of solidarity," a Western diplomat said. "High taxes enjoy a great national consensus because in a way it's like they see them as a way to be saved from themselves."
[PEN-L:7907] Norway's welfare state [fwd]
From: THE NEW YORK TIMES INTERNATIONAL, Friday December 13, 1996 Front Page (bottom) WELFARE'S SNUG COAT CUTS NORWEGIAN COLD By YOUSSEF M. IBRAHIM OSLO, Dec. 9 - Suffer from rheu- matism? The Norwegian state will send you to the Canary Islands for a month of therapy, all expenses paid. Husband walked out, leaving children to raise? Not to worry. As a single mother under the generous Norwegian welfare system, you will get special subsidies for the children and paid leave from your job so you can stay home and rear them. Take Dr. Sidsel Kreyberg, 42-year-old pathologist. When her husband left her in 1987, leaving her with two young children, she was immediately embraced by the state. For nearly eight years, until both children reached age 10, the state paid her a pension. Other support systems helped, including free day care, subsid- ized housing and vacations, and free medical and dental care. The Government also footed the bill for Dr. Kreyberg to fulfill her old ambition of getting a Ph.D. in epidem- ology at the University Oslo. Now she is off welfare and has a better-paying job than before she went on. The other day, she stood in her living room overlooking a vista of snow-covered forests and the Oslo Fjord. She beamed at her daughter, Karoline, 12, and son, Karsten, 10, and proclaimed, "Look at the result." The entire world, it seems, is dis- mantling the welfare state, privatizing the public sector, downsizing govern- ment, reducing subsi- [Picture #1. Poolside reading at Norway's health center in the Canary Islands.] dies and cutting social programs that were once sacrosanct. From Europe to Africa, across most of Latin America and even in the once fabulously wealthy Arab oil countries, governments plagued by soaring budget deficits are everywhere embracing the free-market gospel preached in the 1980's by President Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of Britain. Everywhere, that is, except Norway. Buoyed by an unending gush of oil revenue and guided by a national commit- ment to egalitarianism, Norway's 4.35 million people are fattening the mother of all welfare states. Even business people -- including those who export pulp, paper, lumber, chemicals, fertilizers, aluminum and transport machinery to the globalizing world of dog-eat-dog capitalism -- join in their nation's adherence to social democracy. In Norway, where individual tax rates can climb above 50 percent, citizens benefit from a number of entitlements and a shrunken Workweek. Inflation is below 2 percent. The Continued on Page A8, Column 1 IN WELFARE'S SNUG COAT, FEW FEEL NORWAY'S COLD Continued From Page Al unemployment rate is the lowest in Europe. Economic growth in recent years has ranged between 3 percent and 5 percent. Oil exports are running at 3 million barrels a day, second only to Saudi Arabia's, and the petrodollars are feeding a budget surplus this year of $6 billion more than the Government's $61 billion expenditure. The Norwegian welfare cake, surely the sweetest in the world today, includes these ingredients: *Annual stipends of $1,620 for every Norwegian child under 17, which rise slightly for every other child as a family grows and rise still more if the family lives in a remote part of the country. *Retirement pay, equivalent to in- - ONE COUNTRY EATS CAKE WHILE THE REST OF THE WORLD DOWNSIZES. - dustrial workers' pensions, for all home- makers, even those who have worked out- side the home. *Forty-two weeks of fully paid matern- ity leave. *Reimbursement for all medical costs exceeding $187 a year per individual. These benefits may be financed by oil, but they are undergirded by the national character. Norwegians, with their profoundly egalitarian persuasion, frown on wide disparity in income. This permits one of the highest personal-tax rates in the world and provides the Government with vast latitude for social engineering. "It is a sense of solidarity," a Western diplomat said. "High taxes enjoy a great national consensus because in a way it's like they see them as a way to be saved from themselves." Norwegians have a word for their anti-elitist views, Jantelaw, which means nobody should start thinking he or she is better than anybody else. Politicians have lost their jobs for forgetting this. The disdain for the trappings of wealth and power, which among other things restricts executive pay and mandates extensive workplace rules, meets surprisingly little opposition from business. Henning Holstad, owner and president of the Tiny Transport Company, says his after-tax annual pay is about double the $38,500 his workers average, compared with
[PEN-L:7905] deja vu: a trip in the (over)time machine
At a little past noon on October 7, 1978, Frank Schiff of the Committee for Economic Development addressed a conference on Work Time and Employment convened by the U.S. National Commission for Manpower Policy. Assembled at the Capitol Hill Quality Inn in Washington, D.C., the conference attendees were indeed a quality collection of noted academics, high level civil servants, and influential spokespersons for business and labor. Schiff was responding to a paper on "Policies to Reduce Fixed Costs of Employment" that had just been presented by Robert Eisner. Speaking of the goal of accomodating individual preferences for worktime and leisure, Schiff remarked, "To achieve this goal, Professor Eisner places major stress on employment subsidies and tax credits, essentially to offset the effect of public policy and institutional work arrangements that create a bias against flexible work arrangements. This is clearly one possible approach, but it should be emphasized that it is by no means the only way to deal with the problem. Other possible options include direct efforts to reduce the existing institutional biases against flexible work time patterns -- for example, by relating the cost of particular fringes more to hours worked than to the number or employees, or by relevant changes in the computation of experience ratings." Schiff's remarks were, admittedly, not delivered in scintillating prose and the topic may seem somewhat obscure and technical. One slight amendment would clarify what Schiff was saying: instead of referring to the "biases against flexible work time patterns", Schiff could have better identified the problem as "public policy and institutional biases *in favour of* overtime and unemployment." In spite of that small point of obfuscation, Schiff's comment stands out from the 445 page conference report as such profound good sense that it no doubt was quickly and profoundly forgotten by all and sundry in attendence. Perhaps even by Schiff. In the 18 years since that prestigious Washington, D.C. conference, much has changed but the institutional bias in favour of overtime has remained. Perhaps the best known effort to redress the imbalance was a bill to increase the overtime penalty of the FLSA from time and a half to double time, introduced by Democratic congressman John Conyers in the late 1970s. The logic against Conyers bill, however, was impeccable: it was countered that the measure would increase labour costs and therefore wouldn't achieve its intended job creation effects. Conyers' bill went nowhere. But to give a bit more context on the timing of the Work Time and Employment conference, it should be remembered that in July 1978, the Bonn Summit of the G-7 had taken place at which President Jimmy Carter affirmed the U.S government's top priority of fighting inflation. The next year, 1979, Paul Volcker was appointed chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. The fight against inflation uber alles had begun in earnest. Because unemployment was seen as an indispensible tool for fighting inflation (NAIRU), the idea of removing institutional biases in favour of unemployment never caught on. Let us return for a moment to that October day in 1978 and indulge in a bit of economic science fiction. Imagine that Frank Schiff's comment about *removing the institutional biases* had seized the imagination of the conferees. Imagine that reporters from the major news media were in attendance at the conference and Schiff's offhand suggestion became the subject of front page feature stories and soul-searching editorials. Imagine that a national debate broke out in the United States about the nature of work and the illegitimacy of government regulations that prolonged work beyond the desires of individuals. Imagine the emergence of a mass labor/civil rights movement demanding the freedom to work for as many or few hours as one desired and insisting on the repeal of all legislation that enforced excessive work. Imagine the victory of this labor/civil rights movement. What would our social, economic and political landscape be like today -- 18 years later -- if Frank Schiff's spark of common sense had fallen on the dry tinder of citizenship rather than on the damp soil of econometocracy? Regards, Tom Walker ^^ knoW Ware Communications | Vancouver, B.C., CANADA | "Only in mediocre art [EMAIL PROTECTED] |does life unfold as fate." (604) 669-3286| ^^ The TimeWork Web: http://mindlink.net/knowware/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:7913] An insult to Burns?
This is a public response to private mail sent to me. Ordinarily, I would agree with you, but what in the hell does Peter Burns think that he is trying to accomplish by asking me these sorts of questions. Do you think the average person is going to have the sort of grasp of pricing theory minutiae that a professional economist has? One of the reasons I get steamed by these sorts of questions from Burns, Rosser, Mitchell, etc. is that they smack of academic insider knowledge. This is what these people do for a living. I could throw around computer programming concepts with a bunch of people who haven't been doing it for 28 years like me and they would say, "Wow, how does he know all that". Simple. I know all that computer stuff because I am paid to do so. If I was paid to read literature on pricing theory in particular and economics in general for the last 28 years, I would sound as smart as the people on this list. But less academic insider knowledge would make this a more relevant site. I don't need to remind you of that, do I? Well, I guess maybe I do. Mitchel Cohen, the author of the Z Magazine post, is somebody I know quite well and who I've argued with in the past about the same exact issues. I couldn't resist the opportunity to challenge his ideas about Che Guevara. He is an amateur like me. He makes his living selling poems on the subway. Can you dig that? But to butt heads with a professional economist about pricing theory. Forget about it. clip don't be so unfair to Peter Burns. He's not an economist as much as a activist socialist Jesuit who's interested in such issues of how capitalism can be replaced by a planned economy that _actually_ works and in responding to critics of planning such as Hayek. In any event, personal insults should not appear on this list.
[PEN-L:7916] Re: Che and Cuba
So, in other words (or pedantically if you like), you still haven't got the foggiest? So much for "rigorous accounting and control methods". Oh well, let us know if you're any further ahead in 2 and a half years' time. Peter __ Reply Separator _ Subject: [PEN-L:7910] Re: Che and Cuba Author: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] at SMTPLINK-LMU Date:12/19/96 1:17 PM Louis: This is one of the reasons I delete most PEN-L messages unread from my incoming mail. I resubscribed because I am always interested in what Sid Schniad, Doug Henwood, Patrick Bond and Jim Devine have to say. What I have zero interest in is the sort of abstract textbook questions that people like Burns, Rosser and all the other contributors to academic journals specialize in. Unless you re-phrase the question in terms of "How did the Cubans manage their economy during the 1960s through the 1980s given the existence of Soviet aid..." In other words, you need to flesh the matter out by reference to history and politics. (That of course is the Marxist approach.) This sort of question smacks of the sort of sterile chit-chat that Burns would have with the guy who sits down the hall and teaches Microeconomics 103. It doesn't interest me whatsoever. I feel stupid now even opening up Burns' email and expecting something interesting with a heading like "Che and Cuba." He might as well have put a heading on it like "Gomulka and Poland" or "Hoxha and Albania". What a pedantic bore he is. At 12:40 PM 12/19/96 -0800, you wrote: Question for Louis Proyect: How do the central planners know which relative prices to set for all the goods and services in the economy? Peter
[PEN-L:7906] [Fwd: Re: Article in the Guardian Weekly] (fwd)
Comments: Authenticated sender is [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sid Shniad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 10:19:19 + Subject: Re: Article in the Guardian Weekly Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear Sid, First of all, I would like to thank you for your interest in our publication The World Credit Tables 1996; creditors' claims on debtors exposed. You can order a copy for 25,-. If you would like to do this, please let us know (by e-mail for example). If you would like to have more information on the Credit Tables or Eurodad, I suggest you visit our internet homepage: http://www.oneworld.org/eurodad/index.html I hope this information is usefull for you. Hope to hear from you soon. Kind regards, Michiel van Voorst Project assistant Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 12:53:52 -0800 From: Sid Shniad [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: TWU To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Article in the Guardian Weekly Hello. My name is Sid Shniad. I'm the research director for the Telecommunications Workers Union in Vancouver, British Columbia. This morning I saw reference to a Eurodad study, quoted in a back issue of The Guardian Weekly. According to the article, Eurodad has published a study of the net gains that Britain and other countries have made as a result of extending foreign aid. I would dearly love to get a copy of this study. Can you please let me know how I would go about getting it? Thanks for the help.
[PEN-L:7920] Cuba-Algeria Firestorm
Dear PEN-Lers: I am saddened that Louis Proyect left PEN-L, because his comments regarding Cuba and Algeria were rather illuminating. I am not familiar with the Algerian case, but Proyect's contrasting of the Cuban and Algerian experiences made me think of various leftist movements in Latin America (see endnote) and what actions either were taken or could have been taken to placate international capital and the U.S. government in particular. Still, I was taken aback by Proyect's strongly negative reaction to Peter Burns, as I thought that his question was within the bounds of friendly discussion. It is, in my opinion, also within the bounds of friendly discussion to answer "I don't know" or "I'd rather not answer that question because I don't want to engage in a debate about market socialism." It's too bad that this particular discussion came to a halt as it did. Over the past several months, there have been a number of really good discussions on PEN-L, all featured with collegial respect and some real substance to boot. Best wishes, Steven Zahniser ENDNOTE: In addition to Cuba, one could consider Chile under Allende, Nicaragua under the Sandinistas, Guatemala during its 10 "golden" years [hopefully more are coming soon, given the country's new peace accords], and Bolivia immediately following its revolution.
[PEN-L:7910] Re: Che and Cuba
Louis: This is one of the reasons I delete most PEN-L messages unread from my incoming mail. I resubscribed because I am always interested in what Sid Schniad, Doug Henwood, Patrick Bond and Jim Devine have to say. What I have zero interest in is the sort of abstract textbook questions that people like Burns, Rosser and all the other contributors to academic journals specialize in. Unless you re-phrase the question in terms of "How did the Cubans manage their economy during the 1960s through the 1980s given the existence of Soviet aid..." In other words, you need to flesh the matter out by reference to history and politics. (That of course is the Marxist approach.) This sort of question smacks of the sort of sterile chit-chat that Burns would have with the guy who sits down the hall and teaches Microeconomics 103. It doesn't interest me whatsoever. I feel stupid now even opening up Burns' email and expecting something interesting with a heading like "Che and Cuba." He might as well have put a heading on it like "Gomulka and Poland" or "Hoxha and Albania". What a pedantic bore he is. At 12:40 PM 12/19/96 -0800, you wrote: Question for Louis Proyect: How do the central planners know which relative prices to set for all the goods and services in the economy? Peter
[PEN-L:7902] Russia To Repay Tsarist Debt -Reply
This and the previous post on Southern Africa are interesting. Thanks. Finally, here in Jo'burg, there appears to be some movement from the NGO sector -- 3 000 organisations in a national coalition -- combined with earlier pronouncements by a few left trade unionists and small political parties, to attack the repayment of the $20 billion apartheid foreign debt. This isn't enough of a critical mass yet to put it on any kind of public agenda, but it is nevertheless promising that the progressive petty bourgeoisie are waking up to the balance of payments constraint which remains the main excuse for our usurious interest rates (the highest in SA history still). Was in a little provincial town last week, near the Zimbabwe border, where the local NGOs invited my institute to give a rap on the World Bank. Extremely encouraging, that even without any Bank lending to date and an obscure Bank role in policy formulation, local activists have a sense of the upcoming mugging and are getting organised to confront it. A few weeks ago I posted some material on the "Campaign Against Neoliberalism in South Africa" (when Camdessus paid a visit); the campaign is now seeking funding ($20k for a small secretariat) so if anyone has any ideas we'd be grateful to hear from you privately. Ciao, comrades!
[PEN-L:7917] Goodbye
I'm out of here. It only took two days to remind me why I got off the first time. Burns et al wanting to have another debate about market socialism. Good grief. Talk about being in a rut. What's next? Another thread on the LTV? Jim Devine sending me private mail telling me to be collegial. I'm collegial over on the Marxism list where professors are kept in line. Did I tell you that we have a candidacy program for Professors over there? You can only join in the discussions there if you promise not to refer to articles or books you've written. The first time you refer to something that you wrote for some obscure academic journal, you're shown the door. Have a happy 1997 everybody, Louis Proyect
[PEN-L:7908] Norway and oil
Oil seems to have brought nothing but tragedy to most people in countries where it was recently discovered. Norway is an exception. How much have the ordinary Nigerians or Mexicans benefitted from oil? The Wall Street Journal recently had an article decrying the squandering of oil resources in Norway. I sent Trond the reference. I no longer have it, but in fact, Norway seems to be the only country where the windfall has been used well. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7903] suspending pen-l
I know it's impolite to write to this address for this, but can somebody tell me how to suspend my pen-l list over the holiday so that my mailbox doesn't jam up? Many thanks, Paul Cheney
Re: [PEN-L:7919] Re[2]: Re: Che and Cuba
On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The fact of the matter, though, is that despite many great achievements, which I laud and support, the Cuban economy is in considerable trouble. All countries which have tried to institute a centrally planned economy have 1) generally not produced a very high standard of living for their own work forces, and 2) not succeeded in building a type of society that is generally attractive to workers, or a (net) credit to the cause of socialism, in other countries. Perhaps, we should stress --foremost-- that Cuba has been burdened by an American blocade all these years. Also, Cuba has had to redirect resource patterns that had been established over the centuries of colonial rule and the decades of crass exploitation that followed independence. Furthermore, the island nation has had to invest substantial resources into the development of military defense capabilities --such as they might be-- burdened as Cuba has been by the spectre of Yankee (or Yankee-directed) invasion. At least, this should be the point of departure for any honest discussion about the merits of "socialist development." In the spirit of such considerations I can excuse Louis Proyect for being... short-tempered. But, then, I'm a generous guy:-) Regards, ___ | Dennis Grammenos[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Departments of Geography| | Russian and East European Studies | | University of IllinoisPhone:(217) 333-1880 | | Urbana, Il 61801 Fax: (217) 244-1785 | ---
[PEN-L:7909] Che and Cuba
Question for Louis Proyect: How do the central planners know which relative prices to set for all the goods and services in the economy? Peter
[PEN-L:7904] Re: suspending pen-l
I know it's impolite to write to this address for this, but can somebody tell me how to suspend my pen-l list over the holiday so that my mailbox doesn't jam up? Many thanks, Paul Cheney Since others may have the same question, I will respond to all: To suspend your mail send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] which says: SET PEN-L MAIL POSTPONE To receive your mail again, send another message to listproc which says: SET PEN-L MAIL ACK -- Jerry
[PEN-L:7918] Re: An insult to Burns?
Louie, still dishing up the "i'm just an ordinary guy who knows
better than anyone what is radical and just goes about being one
in an unassuming ordinary way" talk, i note.
the list is called pen-l. progressive ECONOMISTS net list. got it.
it is not unreasonable that economists might talk about things that relate
to their ambit. the real debate i suppose is whether they are progressive.
so talking about computer programming (although it would interest me) would
seem a bit odd on pen-l.
Ordinarily, I would agree with you, but what in the hell does Peter Burns
think that he is trying to accomplish by asking me these sorts of
questions. Do you think the average person is going to have the sort of
grasp of pricing theory minutiae that a professional economist has? One of
the reasons I get steamed by these sorts of questions from Burns, Rosser,
Mitchell, etc. is that they smack of academic insider knowledge. This is
what these people do for a living.
I could throw around computer programming concepts with a bunch of people
who haven't been doing it for 28 years like me and they would say, "Wow,
how does he know all that".
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:7912] Toilet Seats
The front page of the (U.S.) Wall St. Journal today had a glowing report on how wonderful it is for U. S. companies when they can make money in export markets. Specifically, the article was about American Standard capturing 40% of the sit-down toilet seat market in China (where there is apparently increasing demand for Western Style toilets) and its winning over Chinese production (because there is no "protectionist" legislation) and its main Japanese competitor, Toto. While the article was mainly a pedesterian "free markets are won by the 'brave, strong and free'" piece and slanted against protectionist legislation in Asia, I could not help but vaguely recall a major collusion case involving American Standard, Olsonite, and some other U. S. firms in the 80's. I don't remember the details or even if the government won its case but I do remember something. The WSJ did note that the manufacturing for the "U. S." firm was done in Malaysia but missed out on the collusion irony (isn't collusion a form of infant industry protection). There is another possible irony as well. I have never seen "traditional Chinese squat toilets" so it is quite possible that the sit down variety is a "step up"; but isn't the western sit down toilet one of the more inefficient of possible designs. I seem to recall that the seat should be slanted one way or the other to aid alimentary efficiency. Peace, Jim Westrich Institute on Disability and Human Development University of Illinois at Chicago (Interviewer:) Your comments bring up a lot of class issues. Are you a Marxist? (Stephen J. Raphael:) Well I suppose I am a bit of a Karl Marxist. I am also a bit of a Groucho Marxist. But mostly I'm a Bernard Marxist.
[PEN-L:7919] Re[2]: Re: Che and Cuba
Louis writes: Peter, your problem is that you are not really interested discussing real countries in the real world. It is much more convenient to discuss abstract models. Louis, a few points. I am not an economist, professional or otherwise. I am someone with an interest in socialist political economy, and in particular how it could be viably implemented with beneficial results for the mass of ordinary people in real countries around the real world. I spoke in front of TV cameras not so long ago in support of the delivery of computer supplies to Cuba, sponsored by Pastors for Peace after some of their number went on a fast to pressure the US government, etc. I went to Cuba for a couple of weeks 2 summers ago, and am very interested in the economic realities on the ground there and elsewhere. The fact of the matter, though, is that despite many great achievements, which I laud and support, the Cuban economy is in considerable trouble. All countries which have tried to institute a centrally planned economy have 1) generally not produced a very high standard of living for their own work forces, and 2) not succeeded in building a type of society that is generally attractive to workers, or a (net) credit to the cause of socialism, in other countries. Unless you can persuade working class people how a socialist economy would succeed for them better than capitalism, socialism has no hope of political success. So my question was prompted not in the least by a taste for academic pedantry, but by a strong personal interest in how successfully to win people over to socialism. One question which even only mildly informed people are going to ask is, "Hasn't central planning of the economy been a disaster everywhere it's been tried?" You're going to say, the USSR didn't really have a planned economy, etc. OK. But the question then becomes, "How come *attempts* to centrally plan an economy keep ending up in a mess?" As a socialist, I accept the need for planning in some aspects of economic life--education, health, social services, macroeconomic policy (particularly with respect to aggregate investment and its broad composition). But it is my understanding, based on the *concrete realities* of *actual historical attempts* to institute widespread economic planning by nominally socialist governments--NOT on the Hayekian or other academic critiques--that these experiments have on the whole not been successful. Certainly not successful enough to convert the masses to fervent support for socialism. Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7915] Re: Che and Cuba
On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, in other words (or pedantically if you like), you still haven't got the foggiest? So much for "rigorous accounting and control methods". Oh well, let us know if you're any further ahead in 2 and a half years' time. Peter Louis: Peter, your problem is that you are not really interested discussing real countries in the real world. It is much more convenient to discuss abstract models. Countries like Cuba and Nicaragua during the Sandinista era have had to grapple with a whole set of problems that are much more urgent than whether or not a loaf of bread is optimally priced or not. Moreover, one could argue that a market-free economy did very nicely in Cuba given the following set of figures: Availability of Basic Goods and Services per Capita 1958-1978 (1958 = 100) Food Beverages Clothing Housing Education Health 1958 100 100100 100100 1962 99 52107 173105 1968 102 52107 173105 1972 110 90103 224120 1974 120 95103 275151 1976 123 100103 363175 1978 125 100104 446202 (from Claes Brundenius, "Growth With Equity: The Cuban Experience (1959-1980)", World Development Vol. 9, No. 11/12(1981) pp. 1083-96 Comments: 1. Decline in clothing figures can be explained by the fact that a lot of raw material for the textile industry was imported from the US and needed to be replaced by local inputs, a structural transformation that was long and difficult. 2. Lack of growth in housing is because priority for the construction industry was given to building infrastructure, schools and industrial plants. 3. Gains in health took place despite the fact that 1 out of 3 doctors left Cuba in the first 3 years of the revolution. The infant mortality rate in Cuba, up until the recent economic crisis, was one of the lowest in the developing world. 4. The illiteracy rate in Cuba went from 23.6 percent to 3.9 percent in less than one year. This was corroborated by UNESCO and described as a feat unequaled in the history of education. In 1979 compulsory schooling embraced 92 percent of all children between 6-16 years old, and more than 1/3 of the total population was attending some form of school. -- Why are you so preoccupied with the problem of pricing? Do you think that Cuban socialism was falling apart from the inner contradictions of state planning boards not knowing how to place a price-tag on a pair of shoes or a bottle of aspirin? Is this Cuba's problem? No, Cuba could have handled planning quite well. Right now I am contact with people involved with the Infomed project. They are getting computers to Cuba for use by the Ministry of Health. Cubans are very computer-literate. I trust that if it wasn't for the US blockade and the collapse of the Soviet Union, they would be doing quite nicely, central planning and all. You are not interested in talking about the living, concrete reality of Cuba. You would much prefer to chatter over the Hayekian critique, the transformation problem, etc. Yawn. Excuse me if I decide to join in. There are other economists on this list who would be thrilled to discuss these issues for the very first time on the history of PEN-L.
