Happy new year, everyone! Lawry
On Jan 1, 2013, at 10:20 PM, Ray Harrell wrote: > you scratch my ____ I'll........... > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell > Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 9:54 PM > To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' > Subject: Re: [Futurework] Nobel Prize -- was Re: [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you > gotta watch dem machines... > > Arthur, when are you going to nominate me for the Nobel Prize? > > Keith > ============ > > Keith your very presence on this list is a prize for all of us who take the > time to read and think about your postings. > > Arthur > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 9:54 AM > To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION > Subject: [Futurework] Nobel Prize -- was Re: [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you > gotta watch dem machines... > > At 03:27 30/12/2012, AC wrote: > > Krugman’s Nobel was in a very conventional aspect of economic theory. He > made certain breakthroughs. Don’t know whether that makes him qualified to > comment on this and that. The NY Times likes him. And that apparently is > good enough. > > See below > http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/press.html > Patterns of trade and location have always been key issues in the economic > debate. What are the effects of free trade and globalization? What are the > driving forces behind worldwide urbanization? Paul Krugman has formulated a > new theory to answer these questions. He has thereby integrated the > previously disparate research fields of international trade and economic > geography. > > (KH) As far as I can see (below) Krugman's approach supplies nothing new -- > bog standard economic history. Everything he describes is after the event -- > after the fact of urban centres. Why did they occur? Where did they occur? > When did they occur? He doesn't seem to answer those. > > Well, I'll tell you. Almost all major conurbations lie at what were > previously major ports (even if they're not so busy today), The remainder are > on rivers. In times past they all had many manufacturing areas and developed > major warehousing (for stuff made in the interior of the country) and > financial sectors. (Clerks alone were many thousands strong in all large > trading port-cities. Until WW2 every Bill of Sale needed to be hand-written > three times [there was no other adequate copying method]. One copy went to > the merchant's own bank [wherever it was in the world], another copy went to > the counterparty's bank [wherever that was], and the last copy went to a > merchant bank in the City of London which acted as an honest broker between > the two parties (who might be on opposite sides of the earth and, if it's a > first contract between them, couldn't trust one another). > > Take this cluster of major trading ports back to the late middle ages -- the > 17th century, say. There was no globalized trading system. There were four > smaller ones. 1. The low European countries and the Mediterranean; 2. The > Mediterranean based on Venice-Florence-Genoa 3. The Arab based on the Red > Sea; 4. The Indian based on the Indian Ocean; 5. The Chinese based on > South-East Asia and islands. > > The merchant adventurers of the last three systems had lateen (steerable) > sails on their boats and could tack against the wind if necessary and cross > oceans. 3 and 4 were not ready culturally. Chinese merchants, already too > rich for the Emperor's liking, were forbidden to use their lateen sails. > However, when Vasco da Gama and Christopher Columbus decided to use lateen > sails in order to cross oceans, they opened the whole world and spelled the > end of the five previous systems. > > The ports that these sailing ships chose had to be able to offer safe water > to, usually thousands of boats of all nationalities and sometimes for weeks > if storms raged. This further consolidated them as cosmopolitan cities where > many languages were spoken. Most of them in Europe became free cities or > city-states -- far more powerful, financially and militarily than the country > around them. > > The above, then, are the true beginnings of the globalized trade system we > have today. As we have more and more automation and as factories can become > smaller and smaller, the bulk of tomorrow's manufacturing will also take > place in the megacities. > > Arthur, when are you going to nominate me for the Nobel Prize? > > Keith > > > > Krugman's approach is based on the premise that many goods and services can > be produced more cheaply in long series, a concept generally known as > economies of scale. Meanwhile, consumers demand a varied supply of goods. As > a result, small-scale production for a local market is replaced by > large-scale production for the world market, where firms with similar > products compete with one another. > > Traditional trade theory assumes that countries are different and explains > why some countries export agricultural products whereas others export > industrial goods. The new theory clarifies why worldwide trade is in fact > dominated by countries which not only have similar conditions, but also trade > in similar products – for instance, a country such as Sweden that both > exports and imports cars. This kind of trade enables specialization and > large-scale production, which result in lower prices and a greater diversity > of commodities. > Economies of scale combined with reduced transport costs also help to explain > why an increasingly larger share of the world population lives in cities and > why similar economic activities are concentrated in the same locations. Lower > transport costs can trigger a self-reinforcing process whereby a growing > metropolitan population gives rise to increased large-scale production, > higher real wages and a more diversified supply of goods. This, in turn, > stimulates further migration to cities. Krugman's theories have shown that > the outcome of these processes can well be that regions become divided into a > high-technology urbanized core and a less developed "periphery". > > > From: [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Weick > Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:57 PM > To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you gotta watch dem > machines... > > What I've liked about the many columns and few books by Krugman that I've > read is that, like me, he doesn't like the growing income gap between the > rich and poor, the growing power of money, the hollowing out of the economy > by the application of technology and the export of jobs, and the growth and > disenfranchisement of the poor. While he is an economist, a Nobel laureate > at that, I see him more as a commentator who is pointing at growing problems > that need attention and consistent work even if they are very difficult to > resolve. > > Ed > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Arthur Cordell > To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION' > Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:33 PM > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Ottawadissenters] Hey,you gotta watch dem > machines... > > But through his incessant trumpeting of outdated solutions he blocks > innovative thinking, new ideas. Yes he asks some questions but seems to fear > going down the road to possible solutions. > > Arthur > > > From: [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael gurstein > Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 1:51 PM > To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you gotta watch dem > machines... > > But then all we have is the neo-lib conventional wisdom Economics 101 echo > chamber… At least he asks a few of the right questions… > > M > > From: [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell > Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 10:44 AM > To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you gotta watch dem > machines... > > Let’s put Krugman out to pasture. He is becoming repetitive and boring. > > From: [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sally Lerner > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 3:13 PM > To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you gotta watch dem > machines... > > Yes, the bit tax, and basic income as well. Let's put Krugman in the loop. > Sally > From: [email protected] > [[email protected]] on behalf of Arthur Cordell > [[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 12:11 PM > To: [email protected]; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME > DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you gotta watch dem > machines... > Seems like Krugman is finally beginning to move away from his learned dogma. > Perhaps he has been reading Keith’s postings. In any event time to think > about policies for a digital economy and time to think again about the bit > tax as a way of distributing the productivity of a highly automated economy > so as to maintain effective demand. > > Arthur > > > From: [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Weick > Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 7:05 AM > To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION'; > [email protected] > Subject: [Ottawadissenters] Hey, you gotta watch dem machines... > > > Krugman's piece in this morning's NYTimes appears to take us well into the > realm of science fiction. But then maybe it isn't fiction any more? > > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/28/opinion/krugman-is-growth-over.html?hp&_r=0 > > Ed > > __._,_.___ > > Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional > Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) > Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully > Featured > Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe > > __,_._,___ > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
