Peter wrote:
>The first two have to be altered simultaneously and fairly quickly; the
>third, by its nature, takes more time. I think insufficient thought has
>been given in most shock therapy programs to two major issues: what are
>all the unemployed supposed to be doing when they lose their jobs in the
>SOE's, and how long will it take before firms are able to hold their own
>in world markets, so that trade opening and convertibility can be
>sustained?
>
>A socialist approach, IMO, would use temporary public service
>employment, etc., to deal with unemployment, and it would only very
>gradually open the economy to competition -- and even then leave scope
>for managing the current account in the long run. (This is in relation
>to macro adjustment -- obviously a socialist approach to transition
>itself would be much more substantial and far-reaching...)
the problem is that the IMF and its allies oppose such programs and use the
subject country's external indebtedness as leverage to impose simplistic
neoliberal solutions.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
