- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine"
[*] In CAPITAL, Marx goes a long distance with the contrast between
"what's
good according to capitalist standards" (trading at value, equal exchange)
and how the system works in practice (exploitation in production).
Surely Marx's entire
Max, you should never have confessed to being teetotal. Helas, I drank the
whisky. I did toast your health several times so the feng-shui might have
done you some good. That's the only upside I can think of. Oh, and for being
good sports, I've just subbed you and Enrique to the CrashList where
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine"
In volume III, as he turns to the issue of how competition works and how
the participants perceive the system and act on those perceptions, he
drops
the assumption that commodities trade at value (so that there is unequal
exchange, the
If the Dow even gets back to where it was last Friday morning, I'll look for
other signs of the Second Coming like visions in the sky of Christ With His
Bankers.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "Max B. Sawicky" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Chrish Burford wrote:
I could not find the footnote, but Marx uses the word "assume" in the
sense
in which Jim uses it
Playing with words. The results already obtained include Marx's
logico-historical derivation of the _existent_, equal comodity exchange.
Mark Jones
In fact surely the entire burden of Marx's thesis in all 3 vols of Cap + TSV
and indeed in all his mature economics writing, is that profits MUST be
explained and CAN ONLY be explained on the basis of EQUAL commodity
exchange, not for eg according to Physiocratic notions about wheat harvests
or
Thanks for this, I've forwarded it to the crashlist but without attribution:
in future do you want me to forward it in your name, or would you like me to
sub you to the List?
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "Richardson_D" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dennis R Redmond wrote:
There
probably will be a tomorrow for this world-system, but it'll be
transacted in euros.
Living in the shadow of the dollar
Mark Milner, deputy financial editor The Guardian
Thursday April 27, 2000
How low can the euro go? ... Today the currency slumped to fresh
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
Dennis R Redmond wrote:
This is known as a buying opportunity of historic proportions. Some future
George Soros out there is going to make an unholy killing by snapping up
EUR and dumping USD.
Hey, Russia posted a whacking bal of payments
- Original Message -
From: "M A Jones" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2000 3:57 AM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L:18398] Re: Re: Re: Samir Amin: "Not a Happy Ending"
Hey, Russia posted a whacking bal of payments surplus last year and has
don
Jim Devine wrote:
shouldn't the large US current account deficit signal a fall in the US$
and
a rise in the Euro sometime in the near future?
Why?
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
Dennis R Redmond wrote:
The
Opposing Team is Daimler, Sony, Mitsubishi, Nokia, etc. and not just
Microsoft and Intel. We've got to think *past* the Wall Street Bubble, not
just against it.
Germans flock East for cheap sex and petrol
FROM ALLAN HALL IN CHEB, CZECH REPUBLIC
AS a boom town
Jim Devine wrote:
Eventually (in 1985-7), the dollar fell (in
inflation-adjusted terms, using the trade-weighted measure), due to the
large trade deficits (which had not yet turned into current-account
deficits) and due to a convergence of US interest rates with those of the
rest of the
- Original Message -
From: "Louis Proyect" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 3:32 AM
Subject: Forwarded from Anthony Boynton
Louis,
Not too long ago there was a discussion on your list (Marxism) about why
the Soviet Union fell
[of course, if you paid the proper price for the stuff you'd be lucky to be
even driving a Lada... Mark]
The Real Price Of Gas
Executive Summary
This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA)
identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles
and
Jay Hanson's energyresources list
(http://www.egroups.com/group/energyresources ) has turned into a good site
for tracking the fate of big oil, mainly because of the presence there of
authoritative voices like Colin Campbell and Jean Laherrere, 2 oil
geologists who last year singlehandedly
Franz Neumann, Behemoth
Alfred Soh-Rethel: Class Structure of German Fascism
ostensibly both about Germany in the 1930s, actually about planning in
conditoons of autarky/containment on the basis of fordist inddustry.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
I don't talk about US domestic matters much because I don't know them much.
But Nader is more than just that. He launched 'consumerism' in other
countries too, so I'm interested. I'm old enough to remember the hoo-hah
about vehicle safety in the 1960s and the susbsequent rise of consumer
groups +
discrete and insular minorities protected by the "C" were/are who
exactly? Blacks? American Indians? Women? Hispanics? Bankers?
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The comments about Jefferson and the Constitution are almost too silly to
discuss. J
Thanks for the clarification, Mine, I'll bear it in mind.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 12:54 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:19914] Re: Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1 (fwd)
Chris, I got you wrong. From this post, I learned much, and I am not joking.
All these years I tried to conceptualise the world in terms of forests, a
handy analogue for space/time continua. You showed a better way.
Here in England for example we have Epping Forest. This is a
small woody area
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "UP.secr. (MG!)" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 10:06 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:20248] MOBILIZE GLOBALLY ! (MG!) (2)
( 2. edition, after clarification and amendment on basis of
netters' comments
[The Royal Commission's extraordinary reporton Environmental Pollution
repays reading. Its proposals often smack of desperation. For example it
recommends a huge new wave of nuclear power stations, al;though even if
long-term safety issues could be addressed (at a time when Britain's
existing
Ken Hanly wrote:
Although I appreciate Jim Devine's argument for higher gas prices
there is a definite income bias involved. The relatively well off
can continue to drive their SUV's etc. while
the lower middle classes will be priced right out of the automobile
market. This saves oil
- Original Message -
From: "Carrol Cox" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 2:09 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:20795] Re: Reply to Carrol Cox
Yes I agree the house is on fire. So what do we do?
stop discussing rock music, waterfalls and brand imagery.
Mark
Unfortunately Rod does not understand what Yoshie is saying. It is simply
wrong to say "the problem is with the social system not with the technical
feasibility." The problem is precisely with technical feasibility and it is
mystification to argue anything else. If you think another social system
Brad deLong wrote:
Ummm
Brad, you may end being known as the man who put the 'um' in
'dumb'. Do you suppose Simon's bet with Ehrlich is safe ground for you
to stand on? You too, simply have no idea what the issue is.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
Max Sawicky wrote:
I just don't believe it. When fossil fuels become
sufficiently expensive, massive efforts will go into
developing alternatives. There will be a lot of money
to be made, coordination problems aside. To me
that's more likely than green consciousness leading
to
From your database of 1, you produced a profound sample, no? Now, however,
let's talk about fossil carbon and what it means and what it does, or else
stop wasting our time.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "Rod Hay" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Doyle Saylor wrote:
Greetings Economists,
Doyle, I don't think you should speak of/to the disabled like this.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
sday, June 28, 2000 1:26 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:20821] Re: Re: Re: Re:"We used 10 times as much energy in
the 20thcentury as in the 1,000
M A Jones wrote:
Unfortunately Rod does not understand what Yoshie is saying. It is
simply
wrong to say "the problem is with the social system no
Carrol Cox wrote:
you and Mark, so far as I can tell, have actually persuaded
just one person -- Me! You haven't had the tiniest effect on anyone else
as far as I can see. So what are you going to do with your one single
solitary convert -- you are going to swear at him for saying, let's see
- Original Message -
From: "Lisa Ian Murray" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 4:26 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:20801] Dematerialization, decarbonation, post-capitalism and
the entropy liberation front
to make the larger point that energy
markets are
Doug,
Obviously none of the desirable changes you and I and Mine hope for will
happen. But capitalism will collapse anyway. Prove me wrong. Address the
issues. And stop whingeing about how awful it will be; we know that.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message
Rod, I'd be happy to debate you but metaphysical assertions about 'infinite
energy' which are easily + demonstrably untrue, are not a basis for debate.
So yes, quit this silly non-debate.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "Rod Hay" [EMAIL
Rod Hay wrote:
Okay, Mark, please explain why no other energy technology is feasible.
This kind of thing is debated on Jay Hanson's list, where ex-vice presidents
of PV companies argue that PV's are the future and people answer them like
this:
From: Mark Boberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed
Entropy is of course a key concept in any meaningful discussion about
energy. The argument that energy supply is 'infinite' derives from the
neo-classical economics concept of substitutability. The argument does not
of course (for obvious epistemological reasons) take account of the bounded
Hans, do Hillier/Buttler have some secret parallel list where they hold the
*real* discussion, as opposed to the vacuous imbecilism of their
front-organisation, the marxist-leninist-take-me-for-an-idiot-list?
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From:
Doug Henwood wrote:
Does the revo also mean there won't be modern transportation,
chemical fertilizers, mechnized plowing and reaping, etc.? Then
there's truly no way to sustain a world population of more than, say,
a billion people, maybe fewer - meaning that at least 80% of us have
to go.
Growth of 0% is fine, but unfoprtunately it's not happening, especially in
the US, where the population may rise to 500mn by 2050 and not stop there,
either.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "Louis Proyect" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Doug Henwood wrote:
Speaking of neoclassicals, didn't Jevons worry about Britain running
out of coal?
And Jevons was right.
Today the British coal industry has all-but disappeared
and can never again, under any circumstances, be the energetics-base for
large-scale capitalist production.
Giving enemies a name is a sinister business, I agree. It is akin to
witchcraft, but then economics IS witchcraft. But sometimes it is
no more than pulling a bearskin off a
shaman and revealing a poor trembling actor inside
(I do not mean Doug of course).
A hundred years ago, bitter battles
- Original Message -
From: "Harald Agerley" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "ENVTECSOC - csf" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "ENVINF-L"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; "ELAN - csf" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "ecol-econ"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; "ECOFEM . CSF" [EMAIL PROTECTED];
"BIOREGIONAL - CSF" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "EP - CSF"
[EMAIL
Ken Hanly wrote:
How does it follow from this example that dams
have no benefits or that you do not ignore the benefits?
Ken, according to the US DoE the contribution of new hydropower planned or
commissioned by US utilities under green power marketing initiatives is 0.0%
of the total (which
David, where I was wrong in the way I answered Lou, and I've been thinking
about it for hours, was in the absurdly uncomradely way I dismissied Nader -
uncomradely to Lou, that is. If he feels and people I respect feels there is
some point to promoting Nader, then it's crass for someone to arrive
Jim Devine wrote:
if there's no _reason_ for the exponential increases, they're worth
forgetting.
Well, the increases in oil and energy consumption are matters of fact, of
history. The problem is (a) explain and (b) propose effective policies
against.
Albert Bartlett seemed to assume that
Yes, I used the wrong tone in speaking of Nader.
Let us hope you are right about him.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL
Doug Henwood wrote:
Mark, when you first brought this up a year or two ago, I made a
point of tracking down interviewing some oil "experts." All, except
your pals at Petroconsultants in Geneva, think this point of view is
hogwash.
Doug, I sometimes track down experts who are knowledgeable
Max,
Undoubtedly baseball was the right choice.
It was Samuelson who said something about 'the planet doesn't need
resources; resources are infinite' (can't remember the exact quote, can't be
bothered to look it up. He was talking about oil + substitutability at the
time, the idiot). Morris
You have Yeltsin here? Cool.
Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "GBK" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 1:45 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:20935] Re: Re: Re: energy crises
But I do keep receiving messages!
This time
50 matches
Mail list logo
