Tom Walker wrote that he (and Max) want to hear more about accounting. I
missed Max' post somehow and am only responding to Tom's desire to find the
missing link that
I'll call "labour accounting within capitalism".
Tom take a look at an old book, JM Clark's "Studies in the Economics of
Max Sawicky wrote,
I'd like to hear more
on the substance of the accounting issues, which
really get my juices flowing.
I'd like to hear more, too. It seems to me that there is a missing link that
I'll call "labour accounting within capitalism". Having done a literature
scan on accounting
At 01:15 PM 12/28/97 -0400, Tom Kruse wrote:
One of my ocncerns is the way bailouts are really cover for "lockins" into
free trade regimes, de-regulation, etc. So, concretely, what would a
bailout for S. Korea look like that:
- protects the most vulnerable small savers and small businesses
-
. . .
political end. Here's part of a recent column by the beloved Pat
Buchanan (NY Post, 11/29):
I'd like to note that on the level of op-ed
analysis, Buchanan's comments here are
unimpeachable. The only wrinkle in the quote is
the gratuitous, jew-baiting reference to Goldman
Sachs.
Daum[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 29, 1997 11:55 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: re: drawing a line
On: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 14:05:31 -0500, Doug Henwood
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Except that these international
On: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 14:05:31 -0500, Doug Henwood
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Except that these international bailouts, unlike the SL resuce,
don't cost U.S. taxpayers anything. The Treasury made a profit on
the Mexico bailout, and the Bretton Woods institutions are also
profit-makers.
I know
. . .
validating those threatened financial practices. Anyone here want to risk a
global deflation?
When it goes on a spree, big finance takes lots of hostages.
I wouldn't, but I don't think the authorities
would either, which ought to create opportunities
for concessions. That's why
From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
. . .
Except that these international bailouts, unlike the SL resuce, don't cost
U.S. taxpayers anything. The Treasury made a profit on the Mexico bailout,
and the Bretton Woods institutions are also profit-makers.
The question is how much
Thomas Kruse wrote:
One of my ocncerns is the way bailouts are really cover for "lockins" into
free trade regimes, de-regulation, etc. So, concretely, what would a
bailout for S. Korea look like that:
- protects the most vulnerable small savers and small businesses
- lets the big wasters take
James Devine wrote:
In a somewhat muddled op-ed article in today's L.A. TIMES, Perotoid Populist
Kevin Phillips had an interesting suggestion: that any bail-outs of "elite"
financial institutions be paid for by a tax on financial transactions,
rather than out of general revenues. He called this
A practical response to bailouts requires attention to something the left
generally hasn't been too interested in: accounting standards. The New York
Times article on the IMF's New Look contains two paragraphs that sum up the
contrast between the arcane practices that actually determine the
From: James Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a somewhat muddled op-ed article in today's L.A. TIMES, Perotoid Populist
Kevin Phillips had an interesting suggestion: that any bail-outs of "elite"
financial institutions be paid for by a tax on financial transactions,
rather than out of
And a note: it seems to me that a central part of a progressive "no bailout"
policy would be pointing to the record of how such bailouts "structurally
adjust" millions outside the US into ever greater instability, vulnerabilty
and lower wages. In fact, I would suggest that working out a
In a somewhat muddled op-ed article in today's L.A. TIMES, Perotoid Populist
Kevin Phillips had an interesting suggestion: that any bail-outs of "elite"
financial institutions be paid for by a tax on financial transactions,
rather than out of general revenues. He called this "privatizing."
Jim
From: Thomas Kruse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Max's drawing a line post is very timely, very to the point: we really must
hash out what a progressive position on bailouts should be. I agree that
these are the sorts of crises we will see more of. As evidenced by the NYT
article attached
Max's drawing a line post is very timely, very to the point: we really must
hash out what a progressive position on bailouts should be. I agree that
these are the sorts of crises we will see more of. As evidenced by the NYT
article attached below, the mainstream press also seems to see this as
16 matches
Mail list logo
