With some deft repartee, the film was criticized on this list for
the alternative it offers. Something having to do with Hawaiian shirts. The
film actually critiques the now mainstream solutions of more or less
Keynesian vintage, the reregulation nostrums now also fast becoming
mainstream, etc. It makes the following simple two points: (1) that these
mainstream solutions (like those of their predecessors in the New Deal) all
leave in tact corporate structures with their decision-making boards of
directors responsible to the tiny numbers of major shareholders, and (2)
that such boards have the incentives to evade, weaken, or undo those
solutions when and where they constrain profits and also the resources
(corporate profits) to realize those incentives. Perhaps, the film aims to
suggest, the failure to control let alone prevent capitalism's instability
as expressed in crises large and small (and the immense social costs
thereof) has something to do with exempting that structure of enterprise
from question, let alone radical transformation. The film offers a brief
sketch of an alternative structure of enterprise and reasons why it would
not have made key decisions leading to this latest capitalist crash.
Granted, there is not much about Hawaiian
Shirts, but then again, the film has something to say.Rick Wolff -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: pen-l Digest, Vol 397, Issue 1 Send pen-l mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of pen-l digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: new bail-out proposal (raghu) 2. Re: News Alert: Dow Leaps 497 Points on Enthusiasm Over Treasury Plan (Jim Devine) 3. W. Europe = Hell (Jim Devine) 4. flex-time kaput? (Jim Devine) 5. Law and Order: AEA (Max B. Sawicky) 6. Re: Law and Order: AEA (michael perelman) 7. Re: Law and Order: AEA (michael perelman) 8. Re: Law and Order: AEA (Bill Lear) 9. Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (ravi) 10. Re: Law and Order: AEA (Robert Scott Gassler) 11. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (Jim Devine) 12. Re: Law and Order: AEA (Jim Devine) 13. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (ravi) 14. neoclassical theory of work [was Law and Order: AEA (Jim Devine) 15. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (Jim Devine) 16. RE: Law and Order: AEA (Max B. Sawicky) 17. bancor? (Jim Devine) 18. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (ravi) 19. Re: Law and Order: AEA (michael perelman) 20. Re: Law and Order: AEA (Jim Devine) 21. Re: computer question regarding proxy servers (ravi) 22. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (Jim Devine) 23. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (ravi) 24. Re: Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada (Bill Burgess) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:49:23 -0700 From: raghu <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] new bail-out proposal To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 8:26 AM, michael perelman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Also, it allows Obama to avoid being labeled as a socialist. Other than > that, it sounds stupid. I disagree. On its own terms, the plan makes a lot of sense. We should soon find out if the banks have a mere liquidity crisis (which this plan should resolve) or a deeper insolvency crisis which should lead to nationalization. Treasury has clearly learned from the failure of Paulson's TARP: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/mar2009/db20090322_44722 2.htm "This approach is superior to the alternatives of either hoping for banks to gradually work these assets off their books or of the government purchasing the assets directly," Treasury said in a briefing paper. "Simply hoping for banks to work legacy assets off over time risks prolonging a financial crisis, as in the case of the Japanese experience. But if the government acts alone in directly purchasing legacy assets, taxpayers will take on all the risk of such purchasesalong with the additional risk that taxpayers will overpay if government employees are setting the price for those assets." -raghu. -- Plankton lobbyist: "NUKE THE WHALES!" ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:21:52 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] Re: News Alert: Dow Leaps 497 Points on Enthusiasm Over Treasury Plan To: Pen-l <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 If the Obama people were smart, they would ignore this surge rather than seeing it as a needed endorsement for the Geithner plan. The stock market people need someone (Obama, Geithner) to act like the adult in the room, making the financiers take their medicine (going against their short-term interest). The Geithner plan does not involve acting like an adult. Instead, it's just another version of the "give the finance guys what they want" approach (deregulation, Paulson's various plans). As spoiled brats, the stock market people are cheering the fact that they're going to be spoiled some more. Of course, the mainstream media will see this stock surge as wonderful, as a good sign of recovery, etc. This plan is a new version of "regulatory forbearance" (not enforcing regulations so that zombie financiers an continue to shamble onward) that will raise the cost of the bail-out to taxpayers and likely the rest of the world. > Breaking News Alert > The New York Times > Monday, March 23, 2009 -- 4:05 PM ET > ----- > > Dow Leaps 497 Points on Enthusiasm Over Treasury Plan > > Wall Street reignited a two-week rally on Monday, fueled by > the government's plan to help banks remove bad assets from > their books. The government's program would tap money from > the government's $700 billion financial rescue fund and also > involve help from the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit > Insurance Corporation and the participation of private > investors. The Dow Jones industrial average closed up nearly > 500 points, or 6.8 percent, and the broader Standard & Poor's > 500-stock index rose more than 7 percent. The Nasdaq rose > more than 98 points or 6.7 percent. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:59:50 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] W. Europe = Hell To: Pen-l <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 from the Washington POST, known for its objective (cough cough) approach: Thank God America Isn't Like Europe -- Yet TOOLBOX Resize Print E-mail Yahoo! Buzz Save/Share + Digg Newsvine del.icio.us Stumble It! Reddit Facebook myspace NewsTrust COMMENT washingtonpost.com readers have posted 364 comments about this item. View All Comments ; POST A COMMENT You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register Why Do I Have to Log In Again? Log In Again? CLOSE We've made some updates to washingtonpost.com's Groups, MyPost and comment pages. We need you to verify your MyPost ID by logging in before you can post to the new pages. We apologize for the inconvenience. Discussion Policy Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem. Discussion Policy CLOSE Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post. Who's Blogging ; Links to this article By Charles Murray Sunday, March 22, 2009; Page B02 Do we want the United States to be like Europe? The European model has worked in many ways. I am delighted whenever I get a chance to go to Stockholm or Amsterdam, not to mention Rome or Paris. There's a lot to like -- a lot to love -- about day-to-day life in Europe. But I argue that the answer to this question is "no." Not for economic reasons. I want to focus on another problem with the European model: namely, that it drains too much of the life from life. The stuff of life -- the elemental events surrounding birth, death, raising children, fulfilling one's personal potential, dealing with adversity, intimate relationships -- occurs within just four institutions: family, community, vocation and faith. Seen in this light, the goal of social policy is to ensure that those institutions are robust and vital. The European model doesn't do that. It enfeebles every single one of them. Drive through rural Sweden, as I did a few years ago. In every town was a beautiful Lutheran church, freshly painted, on meticulously tended grounds, all subsidized by the Swedish government. And the churches are empty. Including on Sundays. The nations of Scandinavia and Western Europe pride themselves on their "child-friendly" policies, providing generous child allowances, free day-care centers and long maternity leaves. Those same countries have fertility rates far below replacement and plunging marriage rates. They are countries where jobs are most carefully protected by government regulation and mandated benefits are most lavish. And with only a few exceptions, they are countries where work is most often seen as a necessary evil, and where the proportions of people who say they love their jobs are the lowest. Call it the Europe Syndrome. Last April I had occasion to speak in Zurich, where I made some of these same points. Afterward, a few of the 20-something members of the audience came up and said plainly that the phrase "a life well-lived" did not have meaning for them. They were having a great time with their current sex partner and new BMW and the vacation home in Majorca, and they saw no voids in their lives that needed filling. more dreck at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/20/AR2009032001 779.html -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:17:56 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] flex-time kaput? To: Pen-l <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 from SLATE: >The [Washington POST] fronts a look at how "flex time," which seemed to be all the rage just a little while ago, is slowly disappearing. When the economy was good, employees were eager to snap up options to telecommute or work different hours to balance their work and family obligations. The anecdotal piece says workers are now giving up these types of perks out of fear that they could give employers a good excuse to lay them off, and many are scared to even bring up the topic during such hard economic times. One expert says there's a "silent fright" among workers that is reminiscent of how women used to feel like they had to hide their family from employers. "That's what it feels like we're returning to. Work as many hours as you possibly can. Make yourself indispensable. Don't ever complain. Don't ever ask for anything," she said.< -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:26:30 -0400 From: "Max B. Sawicky" <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: "'Progressive Economics'" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <000001c9ac84$24bbae70$6e330b...@net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/not-as-authentic-as-i t-seems/#more-4445 Schleifer, Weitzman, Rafael Robb . . . ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:09:32 -0700 From: michael perelman <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed More Stephen Cheung, from my Manufacturing Discontent Greg Clark proposed that "factory discipline [was] successful because it coerced more effort from workers than they would freely give .... The empirical evidence shows that discipline succeeded mainly by increasing work effort. Workers effectively hired capitalists to make them work harder" (Clark 1994, p. 128). Greg Clark was referring to the sort of theory earlier proposed by Clark Nardinelli, who, presumably in all seriousness, declared that children in the factories would voluntarily choose to have their employers beat them. In his words: "Now if a firm in a competitive industry employed corporal punishment the supply price of child labor to that firm would increase. The child would receive compensations for the disamenity of being beaten" (Nardinelli 1982, p. 289). Does any parent seriously believe that children would make such a calculation? Similarly, Steven Cheung maintains that riverboat pullers who towed wooden boats along shore line in Pre-communist China agreed to hire monitors to whip them to restrict shirking (Cheung 1983, p. 5). Even if these children defied all of our understanding of child psychology and chose to have themselves beaten to earn more money for their parents, would such treatment represent an expression of slavery? For example, some people in impoverished nations, such as China and Japan and Russia, were so destitute that they sold themselves into slavery (see Patterson 1982, p. 130). Voluntary slavery is said to exist today in some of the poorest parts of the world. Would any rational person see slavery as an indicator of freedom or just as an absence of choice? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 07:11:43 -0700 From: michael perelman <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed I am working on a new book about 17th & early 18th C. economists. There are several cases of murder and and assortment of other crimes usually associated with the profession. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 08:23:51 -0600 From: Bill Lear <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Tuesday, March 24, 2009 at 07:09:32 (-0700) michael perelman writes: >... > Even if these children defied all of our understanding of child >psychology and chose to have themselves beaten to earn more money for >their parents, would such treatment represent an expression of slavery? > For example, some people in impoverished nations, such as China and >Japan and Russia, were so destitute that they sold themselves into >slavery (see Patterson 1982, p. 130). Voluntary slavery is said to >exist today in some of the poorest parts of the world. Would any >rational person see slavery as an indicator of freedom or just as an >absence of choice? My thoughts/questions parallel yours with regard to our "volunteer" military, the labeling of it as such is really ignoring the obscene. Bill ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:02:47 -0400 From: ravi <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed ==================== Canada's annual war on seals has begun. This year, sealers will shoot or bludgeon 338,200 of these gentle animals, all for the sake of "fashion." Most of these seals are just babies, and many are skinned alive on the ice while still conscious. http://getactive.peta.org/campaign/seal_hunt_09?rk=zp2EmU4aORwbW ==================== --ravi ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:03:44 +0100 From: "Robert Scott Gassler" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: "Progressive Economics" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <6e5adf0453e8411aa6f91565f67c1...@winc82e3c78ec5> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I had Steve Cheung for a class in the early 1970s. I heard him describe the selling of children in China. His comment: "that's okay; they were just maximizing their wealth." He seemed serious. I bit my tongue rather than ask, "is that a positive or a normative statement?" ----- Original Message ----- From: "michael perelman" <[email protected]> To: "Progressive Economics" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA > More Stephen Cheung, from my Manufacturing Discontent > > Greg Clark proposed that "factory discipline [was] successful because it > coerced more effort from workers than they would freely give .... The > empirical evidence shows that discipline succeeded mainly by increasing > work effort. Workers effectively hired capitalists to make them work > harder" (Clark 1994, p. 128). > > Greg Clark was referring to the sort of theory earlier proposed by > Clark Nardinelli, who, presumably in all seriousness, declared that > children in the factories would voluntarily choose to have their > employers beat them. In his words: "Now if a firm in a competitive > industry employed corporal punishment the supply price of child labor to > that firm would increase. The child would receive compensations for the > disamenity of being beaten" (Nardinelli 1982, p. 289). Does any parent > seriously believe that children would make such a calculation? > Similarly, Steven Cheung maintains that riverboat pullers who towed > wooden boats along shore line in Pre-communist China agreed to hire > monitors to whip them to restrict shirking (Cheung 1983, p. 5). > > Even if these children defied all of our understanding of child > psychology and chose to have themselves beaten to earn more money for > their parents, would such treatment represent an expression of slavery? > For example, some people in impoverished nations, such as China and > Japan and Russia, were so destitute that they sold themselves into > slavery (see Patterson 1982, p. 130). Voluntary slavery is said to > exist today in some of the poorest parts of the world. Would any > rational person see slavery as an indicator of freedom or just as an > absence of choice? > > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA > 95929 > > 530 898 5321 > fax 530 898 5901 > http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.26/2020 - Release Date: 03/24/09 09:19:00 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: multipart/alternative Size: 0 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/private/pen-l/attachments/20090324/6b3d75 a1/attachment-0001.bin -------------- next part -------------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.26/2020 - Release Date: 03/24/09 09:19:00 ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:05:28 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Is an effort made to ensure that the seal population is conserved over the years? On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:02 AM, ravi <[email protected]> wrote: > > ==================== > > Canada's annual war on seals has begun. This year, sealers will > shoot or bludgeon 338,200 of these gentle animals, all for the > sake of "fashion." Most of these seals are just babies, and many > are skinned alive on the ice while still conscious. > > http://getactive.peta.org/campaign/seal_hunt_09?rk=zp2EmU4aORwbW > > ==================== > > --ravi > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:09:06 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Max B. Sawicky wrote: > http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/not-as-authentic-as-i > t-seems/#more-4445 > > > Schleifer, Weitzman, Rafael Robb . . . I know about Schleifer (Brad deLong's known criminal associate), but who are Weitzman and Robb? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:18:45 -0400 From: ravi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes On Mar 24, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Jim Devine wrote: > Is an effort made to ensure that the seal population is conserved over > the years? > I don't know about that. In my case, it is an effort to stop brutal unnecessary murder of other living things. > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:02 AM, ravi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ==================== >> >> Canada's annual war on seals has begun. This year, sealers will >> shoot or bludgeon 338,200 of these gentle animals, all for the >> sake of "fashion." Most of these seals are just babies, and many >> are skinned alive on the ice while still conscious. >> >> http://getactive.peta.org/campaign/seal_hunt_09?rk=zp2EmU4aORwbW >> >> ==================== >> >> --ravi >> --ravi -- Support something better than yourself ;-) PeTA => http://peta.org/ Greenpeace => http://greenpeace.org/ If you have nothing better to read: http://platosbeard.org/ ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:20:08 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] neoclassical theory of work [was Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 michael perelman edu> wrote: > Greg Clark proposed that "factory discipline [was] successful because it coerced more effort from workers than they would freely give .... The empirical evidence shows that discipline succeeded mainly by increasing work effort. Workers effectively hired capitalists to make them work harder" (Clark 1994, p. 128).< this is the standard neoclassical theory of management: as a group, workers have a collective good (a small-scale public good) in having everyone work hard (avoiding "shirking"), likely because of the interdependence of individual efforts. They thus hire a boss to provide that good. Presumably, they "pay" for this boss by accepting wages less than they could make if they didn't pay for the management. This assumes that somehow workers get together to hire a boss. This ignores the way that the collectivity of workers is often fragmented and individualized by competition in labor-power markets and the way in which bosses make efforts to preserve and increase this fragmentation ("divide and conquer"). It totally misses the "free rider" problem that neoclassicals usually invoke when dealing with collective goods problems. > Greg Clark was referring to the sort of theory earlier proposed by Clark Nardinelli, who, presumably in all seriousness, declared that children in the factories would voluntarily choose to have their employers beat them. In his words: "Now if a firm in a competitive industry employed corporal punishment the supply price of child labor to that firm would increase. The child would receive compensations for the disamenity of being beaten" Nardinelli 1982, p. 289). Does any parent seriously believe that children would make such a calculation? Similarly, Steven Cheung maintains that riverboat pullers who towed wooden boats along shore line in Pre-communist China agreed to hire monitors to whip them to restrict shirking (Cheung 1983, p. 5). < Nardinelli throws in Adam Smith's theory of compensating wage differentials. That theory does not work because of the existence of unemployment, frictions, efficiency wages, etc. Back when I did an empirical survey of evidence for the compensating wage differential theory, the literature said that the only time it worked was when labor unions were present (the United Mine Workers won compensation for dangerous/deadly jobs, etc.) I've done a smaller survey since and asked labor economists about this. It's confirmed my earlier survey. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:25:10 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 me: >> Is an effort made to ensure that the seal population is conserved over >> the years? ravi: > I don't know about that. In my case, it is an effort to stop brutal > unnecessary murder of other living things. what happens if seals over-breed, the way deer have done in many places after their natural predators were killed off? I remember that a lot of deer died from starvation and sickness because they over-bred. NB: I'm not in favor of killing seals for rich people's furs. I'm not in favor of people wearing furs. But since humans are running this planet, we have the responsibility to try to solve the disasters we've created (like over-breeding). We shouldn't be overly concerned with the issue of cuteness. A lot of endangered species aren't cute the way baby seals are. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 16 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:29:19 -0400 From: "Max B. Sawicky" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: "'Progressive Economics'" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <002501c9ac9d$ae88be90$0b9a3b...@net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Marvin. Might have spelled it wrong. Famous Harvard prof and manure thief. Rafael Robb, game theorist, murdered his wife. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 12:09 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA Max B. Sawicky wrote: > http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/not-as-authentic-as-i > t-seems/#more-4445 > > > Schleifer, Weitzman, Rafael Robb . . . I know about Schleifer (Brad deLong's known criminal associate), but who are Weitzman and Robb? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l ------------------------------ Message: 17 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:38:36 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: [Pen-l] bancor? To: Pen-l <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 China Wants A New Global Currency by The Associated Press NPR.org, March 24, 2009 7 China is calling for a new global currency controlled by the International Monetary Fund, stepping up pressure ahead of a London summit of global leaders for changes to a financial system dominated by the U.S. dollar and Western governments. The comments, in an essay by the Chinese central bank governor released late Monday, reflect Beijing's growing assertiveness in economic affairs. China is expected to press for developing countries to have a bigger say in finance when leaders of the Group of 20 major economies meet April 2 in London to discuss the global crisis. Gov. Zhou Xiaochuan's essay did not mention the dollar by name but said the crisis showed the dangers of relying on one nation's currency for international payments. In an unusual step, the essay was published in both Chinese and English, making clear it was meant for an international audience. "The crisis called again for creative reform of the existing international monetary system towards an international reserve currency," Zhou wrote. A reserve currency is the unit in which a government holds its reserves. But Zhou said the proposed new currency also should be used for trade, investment, pricing commodities and corporate bookkeeping. Beijing has long been uneasy about relying on the dollar for the bulk of its trade and to store foreign reserves. Premier Wen Jiabao publicly appealed to Washington this month to avoid any steps in response to the crisis that might erode the value of the dollar and Beijing's estimated $1 trillion holdings in Treasuries and other U.S. government debt. The currency should be based on shares in the IMF held by its 185 member nations, known as special drawing rights, or SDRs, the essay said. The Washington-based IMF advises governments on economic policy and lends money to help with balance-of-payments problems. Some economists have suggested creating a new reserve currency to reduce reliance on the dollar but acknowledge it would face major obstacles. It would require acceptance from nations that have long used the dollar and hold huge stockpiles of the U.S. currency. -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 18 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:02:08 -0400 From: ravi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes On Mar 24, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Jim Devine wrote: > what happens if seals over-breed, the way deer have done in many > places after their natural predators were killed off? I remember that > a lot of deer died from starvation and sickness because they > over-bred. > > NB: I'm not in favor of killing seals for rich people's furs. I'm not > in favor of people wearing furs. But since humans are running this > planet, we have the responsibility to try to solve the disasters we've > created (like over-breeding). > The answer is to bring those predators back (which is entirely feasible in many cases)... but really, clubbing other animals to death under the banner of preventing starvation and sickness is not really a better option, is it? > We shouldn't be overly concerned with the issue of cuteness. A lot of > endangered species aren't cute the way baby seals are. The use of "cuteness" is tactical. Or do you think I encourage list members to oppose this annual brutality because I am worried about the loss of cuteness? ;-) --ravi -- Support something better than yourself ;-) PeTA => http://peta.org/ Greenpeace => http://greenpeace.org/ If you have nothing better to read: http://platosbeard.org/ ------------------------------ Message: 19 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:26:44 -0700 From: michael perelman <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed In defense of Weitzman, he only stole poop. The rest of our profession creates bad manure. Max B. Sawicky wrote: > Marvin. Might have spelled it wrong. Famous Harvard prof and manure > thief. > > Rafael Robb, game theorist, murdered his wife. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine > Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 12:09 PM > To: Progressive Economics > Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA > > Max B. Sawicky wrote: > http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/not-as-authentic-as-i >> t-seems/#more-4445 >> >> >> Schleifer, Weitzman, Rafael Robb . . . > > I know about Schleifer (Brad deLong's known criminal associate), but > who are Weitzman and Robb? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com ------------------------------ Message: 20 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:54:42 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Law and Order: AEA To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 michael perelman wrote: > In defense of Weitzman, he only stole poop. The rest of our profession > creates bad manure. why would anyone steal poop? did it help him attain equilibrium? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 21 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:55:00 -0400 From: ravi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] computer question regarding proxy servers To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes On Mar 21, 2009, at 4:34 PM, michael perelman wrote: > Why does something change the settings on my system to show a proxy > server? That's too vague! What's showing a proxy server? Your web browser? What browser do you use? Does this happen when you are at work and home? --ravi -- Support something better than yourself ;-) PeTA => http://peta.org/ Greenpeace => http://greenpeace.org/ If you have nothing better to read: http://platosbeard.org/ ------------------------------ Message: 22 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:19:42 -0700 From: Jim Devine <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 ravi wrote: > The answer is to bring those predators back (which is entirely feasible in > many cases)... but really, clubbing other animals to death under the banner > of preventing starvation and sickness is not really a better option, is it? No, clubbing critters is a bad thing. It demeans the clubbers while inflicting unnecessary pain on the clubbees. In the case of deer, I think that there's nothing wrong with using hunters as substitute for predators. However, I think hunters should be required to eat all the venison they produce (or to sell it to someone who will eat it). Whenever animals are slaughtered (including mole rats and other non-cute critters), a serious effort should be made to find a use for the results. My problem with PETA is that they tend to value animals over people. Or maybe their PR is so bad that they only _look_ like they value animals over people. (They may be closet humanists.) For example, they're not just against testing on animals to develop make-up (which seems reasonable tom me). They're also against testing human-life-saving drugs on animals. me: >> We shouldn't be overly concerned with the issue of cuteness. A lot of >> endangered species aren't cute the way baby seals are. ravi: > The use of "cuteness" is tactical. Or do you think I encourage list members > to oppose this annual brutality because I am worried about the loss of > cuteness? ;-) I try not to attribute motives to anyone on the list, since I can't read minds (especially in e-mails). But PETA and Bridget Bardot (if she's still around) are pretty overt with their thinking and seem more concerned with cuteness than they should be. The use of cuteness in a tactic prevents a lot of communication with the non-PETA folks. Is there some effort to present the PETA world view to everyday people? _why_ should we give up on testing pro-human drugs on animals? -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. ------------------------------ Message: 23 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:40:14 -0400 From: ravi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes On Mar 24, 2009, at 2:19 PM, Jim Devine wrote: > > My problem with PETA is that they tend to value animals over people. > Or maybe their PR is so bad that they only _look_ like they value > animals over people. (They may be closet humanists.) For example, > they're not just against testing on animals to develop make-up (which > seems reasonable tom me). They're also against testing > human-life-saving drugs on animals. > > But PETA and Bridget Bardot (if > she's still around) are pretty overt with their thinking and seem more > concerned with cuteness than they should be. > I don't know... I don't find hen (referred to as "chicken" in American English?) particularly cute. A lot of PETA actions protest their torture. Now they may use chicks to symbolise the hens, because indeed chicken are cute, but again that's tactical. > The use of cuteness in a tactic prevents a lot of communication with > the non-PETA folks. Is there some effort to present the PETA world > view to everyday people? PETA believes that their efforts are indeed a presentation to everyday people. And judging from the response from my niece and her friends, it seems to work quite well. For the cerebral stuff, there is Peter Singer. > _why_ should we give up on testing pro-human > drugs on animals? Here's PETA's take on it: http://www.peta.org/about/faq-viv.asp (they are spot on, IMHO, in the first paragraph, w.r.t the gains in general health) Here's Singer's take on it: "Whether or not the occasional experiment on animals is defensible, I remain opposed to the institutional practice of using animals in research, because, despite some improvements over the past thirty years, that practice still fails to give equal consideration to the interests of animals. For that reason I oppose putting more resources into building new facilities for animal experimentation. Instead, these funds should go into clinical research involving consenting patients, and into developing other methods of research that do not involve the harmful use of animals." --ravi -- Support something better than yourself ;-) PeTA => http://peta.org/ Greenpeace => http://greenpeace.org/ If you have nothing better to read: http://platosbeard.org/ ------------------------------ Message: 24 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:53:03 -0700 From: Bill Burgess <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Help Baby Seals Who Are Killed in Canada To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Please be a little more critical and reflective about a campaign that targets fishers and indigenous people who hunt for a living in the traditionally-poorest province in the country. I used to work in a cattle/pork slaughterhouse so I know what tender mercies went into your meat from the supermarket, notably the veal. ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l End of pen-l Digest, Vol 397, Issue 1 ************************************* _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
