nathan wrote: > by the way: GDP was not invented to be a measure of human welfare. it > was invented to measure financial flows and understand the > interrelated balance sheets of economic sectors. it's quite good at > that. It's inventors in fact warned against using it as such.
And what are financial flows? If the labor theory of value means anything is, precisely, that money (like a stock of *commodities*, or capital, or political power, or sex appeal) is a social structure or social relation objectifying the productive force of labor. The substantive content of money, a stock of commodities, political power, etc. is the productive force of labor. Viewed in the other direction, the productive force of labor exists always in particular social forms. Historically, it exists in alienated forms such as money, capital, political power, a stock of commodities, etc. Another way to say this is that the alienated social structures in which the productive force of labor appears is the state of the class struggle at a given point in time. Now, "welfare" (the economic category), insofar as it represents a form characteristic of a society dominated by capital, is also an alienated expression of the productive force of labor. Until it becomes free productive force, until people free themselves, "welfare" is the aggregation of a fragmented mess of individual "utilities," and individual "utilities" are the distorted or inverted way in which people perceive their own power, the productive force of their own labor, their freedom. How are "utilities" transformed into "welfare"? One way or another. Call it a process of "social averaging," although the average doesn't have to be an arithmetic mean. Don't ask me specifically how, because people interact or establish relations (which is to say, cooperate) with one another in crazy ways. But the fact is that such process of "social averaging" or "social validation" or "social integration" -- in fact, a process of social *formation*, a process of formation of social structures -- takes place one way or another. That's why, I insist, we're really talking about one and the same thing under various names. In plainer terms, do I mean to say that "financial flows" (or money) measure "welfare"? Yeah, exactly. Insofar as "welfare" can be measured, that is a good way of measuring it. You can quibble with this or that way of calculating GDP or HDI or whatever the hell Stiglitz and others may come up with, because it gives more weight to this or that, but that quibbling is part of the struggle we're in. It is a class struggle. They want to smuggle their "welfare" as our "welfare." Our job is to resist and say, "No way, my welfare is free producers through their direct cooperative association." Your stuff falls way short of that. And, of course, the best way of resisting is not so much arguing about what the correct measure of welfare or netput is (although that also counts), but doing whatever is politically effective, whatever unites working people and make them take charge. Enough of that. As requested by Chuck, here's my Moscow update (before my train arrives): I'm traveling to Saint Petersburg in a few hours, taking the Sapsan (bullet train). I'm here for a conference, the Moscow Economic Forum. First time in Russia, so you can tell I'm excited. They invited me to present on the surplus reserves of Russia in one of the plenaries yesterday. Why me? Only God knows for sure, since my previous work on Russia's public finances is not a zero, but some large negative value. The forum is organized by Lomonosov Moscow State University. The language barrier is such a humbling experience. Good thing they gave us ear pieces where we could hear English versions of the speeches. The interpreters seem good to me (their English was excellent). Although, of course, nobody was translating into Russian for the broader public what we English speakers said. Before the plenary, they told us we would have 20 minutes to speak. Then they changed that to 15 minutes just before the plenary began. However, in the spot, the moderator changed the parameters and told us we each had 10 minutes. I tried to mentally adjust. Never mind. At some mid point, as the plenary unfolded, a charming and sharp man well into his 80s, named Zhores I. Alferov, showed up in the hall and sat in the first row. The moderator noticed him and, as soon as he had the chance, invited him to join the panel. With due deference, he was given the floor immediately. Alferov, 2000 Physics Nobel Prize, surveyed the history of physics in Soviet and post-Soviet times, in connection with the recent global development of technology. He seemed pretty well informed about what's going on today in various fields: computers, Internet, etc. He ranted a bit about the opportunities missed and suggested how Russia could regain its edge in the hard sciences. Of course, he took over thirty minutes, and even though I was absorbing the stuff through the English interpreter, it seemed to me like a remarkable tour de force. The guy had no notes. The remainder of the panelists, a former finance minister of France (under Mitterrand), myself, and a few others, were politely asked to shorten our interventions to 5 minutes. When I had my turn, the audience had thinned down a lot and the hardy ones who remained were clearly hungry and tired of the speeches. Insensitive to that, I used well over three minutes to say that the holding by Russia of .6 trillion USD in liquid reserves didn't seem very smart to me if the purpose was to develop Russia. If you want to help Russia develop as a society, go against inequality -- biggest bang for the buck. These reserves are held by the central bank and the Treasury -- not counting the National Wealth Fund reserves, which have increased a lot as a result of late good oil years. By law, the NWF is now transferring its full balances to the Development Bank, for the purpose of funding strategic national projects. Now, I did some research and I just couldn't figure out the bank's loan portfolio. So I really have no idea how these resources are being played with. The IMF, the OECD, the Economist, and Bloomberg News, all applaud the build up of Russian reserves, especially the fact that they keep all that wealth parked in the financial circuits abroad. Then, of course, Russians have to go hat in hand and ask banks for credit at higher rates than the meager returns they get on those funds. Anyway, these reserves are supposed to be Russia's insurance policy against -- I don't know -- the expected collapses of the future Soviet Unions, I guess. And they are supposed to make Russia attractive to foreign investors! Holding those resources abroad, as opposed to spending them domestically and reducing further their 6% unemployment, must be extremely safe, since it is well known how European banks (and foreign banks in general) hold their Russian depositors in such high regard. What could go wrong with keeping that wealth in a safe box away from themselves (I'm here, of course, mixing things up, referring to Cyprus, where the issue is private money, not official reserves, but you get the idea)? Not that these reserves, which amount to close to 1/3 of Russia's annual GDP (if my math is correct), will ever satisfy the IMF, the OECD, or the Wall Street and made them friendly to Russia. Russia is still at the bottom of the list of countries where Wall Street types should invest. Cf. Forbes' list. I think they have Russia in their list of worst countries, along with Afghanistan, Haiti, and Chad. No kidding. "Glad you have a liquid reserve armor of (GDP/3)+ and a strong 'international investment position' in general, but -- guess what -- we still think you suck royally." Now, these (or, rather, their grandparents) are the people who defeated the Nazis. And it shows. Easy to fall in love with these people. But, as I was navigating the line 1 of the metro this morning, from Vorov'evy Gory (a nice park buried under 3 feet of snow, across the river from the Lenin Stadium) to Komsomol'skaya (the plaza by the train station), my body digesting a terrific breakfast at the hotel, I was just feeling to myself that, details apart, we humans really rock, regardless of where the heck we come from. We just need to show it. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
