>You are probably right that one should not pay attention to those who are
>seeking to push their own 'party' ...
I was kidding. You did it very gently.
>On the other hand, if any of us feel we have a solution to the
>impending crisis (however misguided or wrong that feeling or solution may
>be), it would surely be a bit silly not to push it or talk about it.
Of course. You have my tactical support short-term, even if it's a bit painful to
my heart to read your website. Don't expect me to support your 3rd stage
policies, though.
>There is an opportunity on the site to put forward your own
>ideas and criticisms, etc.
That would be explicit support to do it myself, isn't it?
>As far as IPRs are concerned, I am not
>aware of any specific proposal on the site.
Read your own site better!
http://www.simpol.org/section2.html
"Further changes including alterations to the financial (debt-money) system
could also be included along with a complete reappraisal of capitalism's
incorrect assumption that natural resources, land and ->intellectual property<-
should accrue solely to the benefit of their owners.
Any such changes would not, however, mean that such resources were to be
controlled by the state but that their owners would become trustees of those
assets on behalf of society as whole."
>After
>all, those countries only imposed capital controls when faced with the
>direct threat of imminent economic crisis such as the South American or
>South-East Asian crises and therefore had little to lose by taking that
>action. Those circumstances can hardly be compared to the economies of
>the major industrialised countries who face, and are unlikely ever to face, any
>such threat.
Many people have another opinion on the USA.
>capital controls can be imposed only in the exceptional case when the
>consequences of imminent economic crisis effectively mean the country
>concerned has less to lose by imposing such controls than by not doing so:
>i.e. when it is the lesser of two evils.
Obviously.
>Barring a financial crisis of truly
>global proportions, such a situation is unlikely ever to arise for the G-7.
And this is the kind of crisis which awaits us IMO. I would also add "Barring a
progressive government"! True, if capitalist bootlickers stay in office, there's
not much point in capital controls!
You have posted many quotes from people I don't know and who could be
capitalists bootlickers AFAIK. Anyway, no quotes of authority will change my
mind on some of the important issues I addressed in my previous post, like
about your desire to "restore" democracy.
>"It's ambitious and provocative. Can it work? Certainly worth a serious
> try."
>Noam Chomsky
It's amazing on how many issues this man can position himself. Did he write
this himself or is it from one of his aides?
>...
>Editor-in-Chief - Foreign Policy. USA
That looks very much like a capitalist bootlicker, eventhough I'm not sure.
There's surely interesting articles in this paper, though.
>...
>Dr. Aidan Rankin
>'New European' (European Business Review) - UK.
No doubt here, I guess.
>... To share
>is to live."
>
>Emilio Jos� Chaves
Good old Emilio, always so sweet and positive. There you have your only
good point as far as I'm concerned, eventhough I often disagree with him.
Bye,
Julien
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
