But in each new transformation, it creates new, complicated
contradictions.  One could confidently predict that this will eventually
come apart, just don't put a date on it -- even if it is 50 years hence.

What we do know is that much of capitalism is typically shelved during
crisis.  Planning during the 2 World Wars & the lack of gouging during
emergencies, such as earth quakes and floods.  The end of that sort of
response to crises is one of the things I appreciated in Klein's book.
I wish that I knew more about how that shift occurred.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sandwichman
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 10:41 AM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Naomi Klein: Beware of Obama's Chicago School
ofEconomics boys

On 6/15/08, Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Capitalism gets in trouble now and then. Financial crises,
recessions,
> whatever. But it gets out of them too. It's just part of normality. I
don't
> see what the point of emphasizing that cyclicality is. If anything, it
> supports an effort to stabilize the system, not transform it. It's the
rest
> of capitalist normality - polarization, alienation, environmental
> destruction - that is the real problem.

The trouble with "normality" is that it's never the same.

Capitalism gets out of each spot of trouble by transforming itself a
somewhat different version each time. It sheds some of the old bugs
and adds some new features. In my view, this has included several
major overhauls. I offer the observation that there has been an
internal logic to the nature and sequence of the major overhauls.

Furthermore, I would argue that the key innovations of the first three
upgrades originated in production and those of the next three
originated in circulation. Thus financial innovation has driven
economic expansion for 150 years. That's an impressive record, but in
comparison to the big picture a mere two human life-spans.

After about three decades of the neoliberal fix, the system is ready
for some big changes. Otherwise, there won't be the propulsion for
sustained periods of expansion. The strategy of successive
Fed-sponsored bubbles has a short shelf life. After a few episodes,
investors (speculators) learn to factor in those expectations in ways
that evade tedious detours through the real economy.

-- 
Sandwichman
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to