Thanks, Lawry. But could you say a little more about the "ruble overhang"?
Not quite sure of what you're getting at.
Regards,
Ed
Sachs's mistake was, I think, greater and more technical: he failed to
understand how to deal with the ruble overhang, then estimated at about
half
the currency in circulation. Without first absorbing the ruble 'overhang',
hyper-inflation and all the misery that followed with it was inevitable.
Sachs was full of himself after Poland, and didn't bother to do his
homework
in Russia.
Cheers,
Lawry
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Weick
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 4:40 PM
To: [email protected]; Christoph Reuss
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Galbraith and economics ~ What should economists
do?
Chris, can't anyone ever be naive? Must everyone do things out of a
cynical
self-interest? What Sachs and a few senior Russian officials did at the
time was try to convert Russia into an ownership economy. Shares in the
state's productive assets were given to people on the assumption that they
would keep them as owners of important chunks of Russia. It didn't work
out
as intended. Sharp operators went around buying up the shares, often for
a
bottle of vodka, and the scheme was a total failure. The intentions were
good, if foolish.
Ed
Ed Weick wrote:
Geoffrey Sachs is a very good economist, but when I was in Russia in
1995,
he had become something of a bad joke among thinking Russians because he
was
associated with the privatization scheme that, in the light of
hindsight,
did far more harm than good. Out of their history, ordinary Russians
had
little understanding of "private" or "property". He thought he was
recommending the right thing and providing a better future for Russia
but
things couldn't work out that way.
Let's not parrot their hypocritical PR too hypo-critically. Sachs, Soros
& Co. know exactly what they are doing -- not to serve or even liberate
Russians but to plunder them (or "liberate" them from their money). But
of course they didn't tell Russians in advance "we come to plunder you"
but "we come to liberate you". Clever advertising uses half-truths.
What I've found is that people in bad social surrounds are able to
collectively find their own path to a more secure existence. In the
slums
of Sao Paulo, fundamentalist religion provided a basis for positive
association, collectively taking on projects to enhance the community
and providing welfare to those in need. In rural Costa Rica, the
cooperative movement underpinned by the Catholic Church was effective
in providing for peoples' needs and holding communities together.
And in the slums of Palestine it's called the Hamas approach.
I think that the most important task is to understand before you advise
and recommend.
And the most important task is to understand the real motives of the
advisors
in order to avoid getting duped by them.
Chris
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the
keyword
"igve".
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
