My response to Gil continues...
Gil:
Ajit continues:
Gil Claims:
the claim that "[i]ncomes are determined by...socio-historical
factors (including class struggle" can be expressed with equal legitimacy in
the Walrasian framework. Reason: in that framework, income distribution
depends
The National Alliance for Democracy and Reunification, in a
statement on March 9, branded the reamendment of the labor law
agreed to by the ruling and opposition parties of south Korea as
the second retrogressive revision and declared it could not
accept it.
According to Seoul radio
D Shniad wrote:
Then you apply the coup de grace: "No one disputes that there's lots of
furious, pointless, even destructive speculative activity going on. How,
precisely, is it malignant, though? Merely describing its magnitude is not to
make the case."
Forgive me, but aren't we quibbling a
From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
D Shniad wrote:
What follows is a response to Doug's call to specify a bit more what we're
talking about when we compare the relative magnitude of financial
speculation to that of trade and other economic activity. (Caveat: I don't
work with or have access
Antonio Callari wrote:
Doug, your reaction to
Steve, in addition to being unfair to him--for I don't think he wrote what
he did in the sectarian spirit you imputed to him--is unfair and
problematic in that it turns into an attack on the journal as a whole. And
the level of your critique is
Michael Perelman wrote:
Whether you agree with RM, postmodernism, Leninist,
Trostskyist, or Stalinist politics is not as important as getting
something real done when, as in the U.S., Clinton and the Republicans
can sit down in a room and negotiate a budget, leaving Dick Gephart to
represent the
Jim Devine writes:
This fits with an insight that Alan Freeman suggested as one part of a
longer paper he presented at the recent ASSA/URPE conference: when Marx (or
Freeman) talks about "objective conditions," he is not talking about "the
forces of production" (as the technological
At 10:57 AM 5/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
"And another thing!," he hectored
In its mad search for mathematical rigor, economics as a discipline has
gotten horribly cut off from the rest of intellectual life. Shouldn't
radical economists do something about that? Try to engage with what's going
on
According to the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), over
650 million children are living in conditions of extreme poverty.
Releasing the report, UNICEF Executive Director Carol Bellamy
said: "Contrary to what the world might expect, the poor are
getting poorer, the number of poor is
Michael--
Your piece on US Steel was interesting. Thanks. It raised a bunch of
questions, though:
You describe one view of production (unit cost-minimizing) as "industrial"
and the other (revenue maximizing through rents) as "financial." While
the classification has some aesthetic appeal
On Fri, 2 May 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (**excerpts only** below):
Isn't it important to look at specific sectors of the economy rather
than just the overall amount of foreign control?
I agree, but the tendency has been to look only at sectors with high
foreign control and
The thread on globalization seems to be very valuable. Much like the
debates about the mode of production in developing countries in the 60s,
it has important implications for political action.
The Rethinking Marxism debate, in contrast, seems to serve no other
purpose other than reopening old
Antonio Callari:
For you to use the example of the plenaries to
typecast the journal is simply to give free reign to the instincts you, and
orthers, to attack! attack! attack! Attack who? us? for not having had
balanced plenaries? Where is the public attack on other conferences that
also do not
"And another thing!," he hectored
In its mad search for mathematical rigor, economics as a discipline has
gotten horribly cut off from the rest of intellectual life. Shouldn't
radical economists do something about that? Try to engage with what's going
on in other social sciences and in
Marshall Feldman wrote:
Perhaps one should go back before 1980. Most arguments re. globalization
allude to a transition in the SSA/MSR c. 1969. So comparing 1960 and
1997 might be more to the point.
What then becomes the non-globalized Other of this model? The crisis years
1929-45? The period
Question:
What are the classic/standard references on the question
"What are workers' interests"? (That is, beyond work
of Lukacs, Gramsci, Poulantzas) Is there any good recent
discussion of this question?
Thanks.
Eric
Revolutionary workers are most interested in the abolition of wage labor
Question:
What are the classic/standard references on the question
"What are workers' interests"? (That is, beyond work
of Lukacs, Gramsci, Poulantzas) Is there any good recent
discussion of this question?
Thanks.
Eric
..
Eric Nilsson
Department of Economics
California State University
San
I'm sorry that I started a discussion of the Rethinking Marxism conference.
Not having been there, I didn't know that people were so sensitive about
it. Worse, I didn't realize that it would open the Jerry vs. Louis debate.
Anyway, I think that pen-l has said enough about that conference --
At 09:47 AM 4/28/97 -0700, you wrote:
subscribe
There we go again! One of the points Steve Cullenberg made was that we can
hardly afford to be fighting about these things. For example, we in RM,
both personally and as a group notice when other conferences exclude us, or
are not balanced in their plenaries, etc. Yet, as far as I know, none of
Isn't it important to look at specific sectors of the economy rather
than just the overall amount of foreign control?
In the late sixties and early seventies there was a concerted effort by
the left nationalists such as Watkins and Laxer to call attention to the
degree of US and
I am sorry to clutter the entire list with what is a personal message, but
I do not have Cheryl from Ganisville's e-mail address, nor was I smart
enough to writer down her last name before I carelessly erased the e-mail
message she left me.
So Cheryl, I am not ignoring you. I was just
Michael addressed the 20s and 30s and Tavis jumped to the 80s and 90s. I
want to insert the 60s.
In the mid 1960s European steel makers, and I think the Japanese,
were building capacity with new technology, the BOF. US steel companies --
and as I recall, specifically United States
I understand that, in part, the steel companies stuck with their old
technology to avoid having to scrap existing equipment. I don't think
that there were few greenfield investments.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 916-898-5321
E-Mail
Tavis Barr wrote:
Michael--
Your piece on US Steel was interesting. Thanks. It raised a bunch of
questions, though:
You describe one view of production (unit cost-minimizing) as "industrial"
and the other (revenue maximizing through rents) as "financial." While
the classification
I have been wondering why consumption has kept up so well despite
stagnant or falling wages for the overwhelming majority of workers. (Of
course, rising debt ratios have helped.) An interesting insight comes from
the Chase Financial Digest:
"Overall, it's the higher-income families that
D Shniad wrote:
Michael, isn't your example a definitive refutation of the notion that
tech change is incremental? (Seems that way to me.) This is consistent
with my experience.
Generally, you are correct. As Doug's old buddy, Larry Summers, noted,
at this point in time, technical change
Enough to keep wages down.
In a message dated 97-05-02 20:30:44 EDT, you write:
What is
the correct number of idle workers?
It is interesting that in the first year following the raise in minimum wage
unemployment is at its lowest level in decades. maggie coleman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems to me there are some significant differences in the global
economy, though the data are probably somewhat unreliable. For example,
the World Bank (1995) reports the following percentages for exports of
goods and nonfactor services as a fraction of GDP:
1970 1993
What follows is a 1600 word briefing paper on the $251 million lawsuit
filed by the Ethyl Corporation against the Canadian government. Ethyl used
its right to sue national governments established in NAFTA (and included in
the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI)) to sue
There's an old joke about the professor who always gave the same
questions on exams. When asked about this he said "The questions are
always the same; it's only the answers that change."
My question: What are the questions?
Cheers,
John Charles Pool
PS: For starters the unemployment rate hit
Speaking of which, I went to see "Children of the Revolution" for May Day.
Did anyone else see it? If so--what did you think? maggie coleman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 97-05-02 04:09:49 EDT, you write:
Subj: [PEN-L:9802] May Day
Date: 97-05-02 04:09:49 EDT
From: [EMAIL
On Wednesday, May 7th, 5:30pm, the editors and staff of Monthly Review Press
will host a reception for Doug Dowd to celebrate the publication of his new
book, BLUES FOR AMERICA: A CRITIQUE, A LAMENT, AND SOME MEMORIES. Please
join us at 122 West 27th Street, 10th floor, NYC, (212) 691-2555.
Sid Schniad's and Doug Henwood's figures on speculation
and foreign investment in the world economy, and Bill
Burgess's on Canada were interesting. I'd always had the
impression Canada was more neo-colonised than New
Zealand. However you might like to consider these figures
for New Zealand:
A
I agree: (buut):
In a message dated 97-05-02 13:57:57 EDT, you write:
"And another thing!," he hectored
In its mad search for mathematical rigor, economics as a discipline has
gotten horribly cut off from the rest of intellectual life. Shouldn't
radical economists do something about that?
This financial and industrial distiction is somewhat simplistic, even
though the verdict appears to be the former for US Steel. True US Steel
was dominant but there were other big players. True USS led oligopoly was
more effective in price stability (upward rigid) and high financial
returns,
Doug Henwood wrote:
Michael, I appreciate your call for comradely amity, but these are serious
issues that need to be discussed. Is this "sorry fix" we're in a function,
even in part, of a bad set of theories that have led to bad political
mistakes? Since a great deal of "postmodernism"
I seem to remember reading that the official Canadian unemployment
statistics do not take into account certain groups; specifically, I believe
that either 'status Indians' or people living on reserves are not included
in the unemployment rate. Is this true? If it is, why is it done like
after quoting my remark on something Alan Freeman said, Marsh Feldman writes
I don't think this gets quite out of the woods.
Marsh, I didn't know I was in the woods. More importantly, which woods am I
in (or do you think I'm in)? the overdeterminist/pomo woods? the
INTERNATIONAL CONFEDERATION OF FREE TRADE UNIONS (ICFTU)
ICFTU ONLINE...
110/970425
INDONESIA AND VIETNAM: MORE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST NIKE
Brussels, April 30, 1997 (ICFTU OnLine): In a factory in the
outskirts of Jakarta which makes shoes for the US multinational
Nike, 10,000
40 matches
Mail list logo
