[PEN-L:6748] Re: NATO Losses -Reply
At 01:50 PM 5/12/99 -0700, you wrote: This seems like a very important message - if it's at all true. Michael Eisenscher - what is the URL from whence this message came, and what is the International Strategic Studies Association? Came from THE GOLEM site: http://pnews.org/boards/yugoboard/messages/13.html But I tracked down the International Strategic Studies Association report via a link from MotherJones. http://www.strategicstudies.org/conflict/kosovo.htm http://www.motherjones.com/total_coverage/kosovo/altnews.html
[PEN-L:6740] Re: una preguntita
The short answer to Tom's question is, no. Several times, I have raised the possibility of a quality of employment index to counter the idea that labor markets are healthy because unemployment is low. Jim Devine just mentioned Bob Pollin's piece, observing that U.S. labor markets are coming to resemble those of Mexico. The mass layoffs frequently hit older workers with a lot of seniority. The new jobs are all over the place, except for the fast disappearing, well paid blue-collar jobs that, at least in the past, constituted a good number of the mass layoffs. Some time ago, Doug posted some information about a study that claimed that workers are more secure now. I never followed up on it. Perhaps I should have. Thomas Kruse wrote: Is turnover/instability something you economists study as part of "standard of living"? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6741] Russia, China, India
William Mandel read an article on KPFA a few months ago, in which some intellectual was also suggesting the alliance between China, India and Russia. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6743] Re: una preguntita
Doug Henwood wrote, Most studies of turnover/instability/tenure I've seen for the U.S. show no significant increase from the 1970s. I know this is counterintuitive, and it pisses people off when I say it sometimes, but it seems to be true. What may have happened is that some instability has crept up the social ladder, making middle managers vulnerable to the instability that blue/pink collar workers have long known, which attracts more attention than in the past. Also, behind the flattish average tenure figures, men are falling but women are rising. The Canadian studies I've seen have shown significantly rising tenure. So it doesn't piss me off that Doug mentions the same thing for the U.S. Based on the industries where I have direct contacts (communications, forests, and autoworkers), I suspect that one explanation for the increased average tenure is the dirth of quits from "good" full-time jobs. Another factor IN CANADA would no doubt be the substantial withdrawal of people from the labour force over the past ten years. Most of those people would no doubt have either been precariously employed or unemployed but instead became simply non-employed. I haven't looked at comparative labour force participation in the U.S. lately, but my impression was it hasn't fallen to the same extent as in Canada. Is that right, Doug? regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/covenant.htm
[PEN-L:6739] Re: Re: Embassy Attack Fallout
Ajit: The Russian foreign minister floated the idea last year while in India. It did not go very far. The idea is not without merit, but it has a lot of historical baggage to overcome. USSR-India alliance against China had been operative until the fall of the USSR. India, a great friend of China after WWII under Nehru, has abandoned the non-aligned nation leadership since after Nehru's death. The Indo-China border war over disputed territory left by British imperialism was unfortunate and unnecessary and China saw it as part of US containment policy against China. When India shift toward the USSR, China drew closer to Pakistan for both geo-political and domestic minority policy (moslem) considerations. Since the end of the Cold War, India and China repeatedly try to move toward rapprochement, but the complexity of Indian domestic politics needed a hostile posture toward China to justify its nuclear policy. And then there is the Tibetan exiled pretension government. To China, India adopted British imperialistic aims toward Tibet. Until India stops supporting the Dalai Lama, Indian-Chinese relations cannot improve. The Indian domestic political scene is too unstable for long term foreign policy structure as this time, and in many ways the same problem exists in Russia. Yet in the long run, there is logic in the idea. What does it look like from the Indian perspective? Henry Ajit Sinha wrote: _ Henery, What do you think of the talk about Russia-China-India triangular counterweight to US led hegemony that is going on around here? Cheers, ajit sinha
[PEN-L:6737] Re: ANALYSIS--Labor/inflation theory nears last breath
IN THIS MESSAGE: ANALYSIS--Labor/inflation theory nears last breath... Monday May 3, 3:15 pm Eastern Time ANALYSIS--Labor/inflation theory nears last breath By Isabelle Clary NEW YORK, May 3 (Reuters) - It seems like just about everyone is working in the United States, except the Phillips Curve -- a once-popular economic theory that could have cost millions of Americans jobs if Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan did not have his doubts about it. The Phillips Curve theory, named after British economist A.W. Phillips, holds that wages rise faster when demand for labor is strong -- as should be the case in America where the jobless rate today is at a 29-year low of 4.2 percent. However, unemployment and inflation have steadily fallen hand in hand over the past four years. ``I must say, I'm blown away by the last two ECI reports,'' admitted former Fed Vice Chairman Alan Blinder, commenting on the broad measure of U.S. labor costs known as the Employment Cost Index. Even though it's nice to see Blinder being embarrassed, I think it's a mistake to simply toss the Phillips curve out (and it's been done before, by conservative "new classical" economists, when inflation and unemployment both rose). The idea of the PC is that as unemployment falls, all else equal, inflation rises. The way I interpret this connection is in terms of rising worker bargaining power threatening to squeeze profits, which under certain conditions means inflation as bosses use their pricing power to protect their profits. The crucial clause is "all else equal," since usually "all else" isn't equal in the real world. That is, the PC _shifts_. There are lots of good reasons to say that the PC shifted in the US, so that falling inflation is associated with falling unemployment. Some of them include: (1) the US Bureau of Labor Statistics has redefined its measures of the inflation rate, downward; (2) oil prices have generally been down; (3) crucial products like computers are cheaper; (4) workers are more insecure in their jobs, meaning that any given (official, overt) unemployment rate has a greater power to deter wage inflation; (5) labor unions are in big trouble, weakening worker bargaining power; (6) the welfare state has been undermined, weakening worker bargaining power; (7) increasingly fierce competition for exports and from imports has limited US business' ability to increase prices to protect prices, making them more prone to play "hard ball" against workers; and (8) until recently, the duration of unemployment spells has been longer than usual for the prevailing unemployment rates. As Bob Pollin notes in his article in a recent REVIEW OF RADICAL POLITICAL ECONOMICS, the situation of US labor-power market is trending in the direction of that of Mexico, where little overt unemployment is needed to prevent inflation. To toss out the PC because it doesn't explain recent economic behavior is like throwing out a market demand curve because one sees falling prices and falling quantities over time. The problem is not with the PC -- except that it is a superficial description of reality. Some experts, like Nobel-Prize winner Milton Friedman, drew from Phillips's observations the notion of a natural rate of unemployment -- meaning that, for one reason or another, there always are people who are unemployed. ``From there, others inferred it's possible to identify an unemployment rate level that would predict future inflation because all goods and services prices would go up from there. They were proven wrong in the recent years,'' Resler added Yes, the NAIRU [the Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment, a more scientific name for the "natural rate of unemployment"] has fallen, due to several of the factors listed above. But does that mean that the US economy could have 1 or 2 percent unemployment for very long without the capitalists punishing us with faster and faster inflation? If not, a version of the NAIRU still applies. In any case, some of the fall in the NAIRU is an illusion, since 4.3 percent unemployment now has greater oomph than it did in (say) 1979 or 1969, greater ability to scare workers and discipline their labor. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/JDevine.html Bombing DESTROYS human rights. US/NATO out of Serbia now!
[PEN-L:6736] Embassy Bombing Fallout
Missile attack damages military relations CHINESE outrage at the US bombing of the Belgrade embassy is taking a toll on one of the most sensitive aspects of US-China relations: an effort to build closer military co-operation. The Pentagon said on Tuesday that China had cancelled a planned visit to Beijing next week by the head of the US Marine Corps. In Washington, the defence attache at the Chinese embassy scrapped a tour of US military bases. The freeze on military contacts is to last at least through May, Pentagon officials said. Defence Secretary William Cohen is tentatively scheduled to visit China next month, but the trip now appears unlikely. In testimony on Tuesday, he told a Senate committee he ``had planned to go there'' for talks already postponed in April because of the bombing campaign. The fallout from Friday's mistaken bombing is putting the heaviest strain on US-China military relations since the Taiwan Straits crisis of March 1996, when Beijing test-fired missiles off the coast of Taiwan and President Bill Clinton responded by sending two aircraft carriers to the area. Washington withdrew an invitation for the Chinese defence chief to visit, and military relations unravelled. In 1997, the Pentagon began repairing the relationship. Mr Cohen made his first visit to Beijing in January 1998 and signed an agreement on ``rules of the road'' for naval forces in the Pacific. Even then, however, US officials saw a lingering reluctance among the Chinese military, particularly among its older generation, to establish more open relations with the Pentagon. ``I don't think anyone in the Pentagon _ even before this latest problem _ was wild-eyed and gushy about what could be accomplished,'' said Jonathan Pollack, a senior Asia specialist at the Rand Corp think tank. Before his April visit to China was taken off the agenda, Mr Cohen said he expected his hosts to reciprocate Pentagon gestures of openness by granting him access to People's Liberation Army facilities deemed off limits in previous visits by senior US officials. The Pentagon also has been frustrated in its efforts to gain China's co-operation in documenting the fate of US soldiers unaccounted for from the Korean War. Just last week, President Clinton disclosed that he raised this problem with Prime Minister Zhu Rongji during his recent visit to Washington, and Mr Zhu ``indicated that the Chinese should be able to help''. He made no promises. China intervened on North Korea's side early in the 1950-53 Korean War as US troops approached the Yalu River on China's border. In a sign of long-lasting distrust, a sign carried by Chinese youth protesting at the US Embassy in Beijing this week read: ``Remember the Korean War!'' Even before the embassy bombing, however, US-China military ties were under stress from allegations that China stole US nuclear weapons secrets and Beijing's anger at American plans to develop a defence against ballistic missiles, which China sees as a potential trigger to an Asian arms race. During a January visit to Washington, Sha Zukang, a senior Chinese arms control official, warned the administration that pushing ahead with the missile defence system would end any chance of China's joining the Missile Technology Control Regime, an international regime for controlling the technology. - AP
[PEN-L:6735] Germany on Embassy Bombing
Nato has not told enough: Schroeder GERMAN Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder offered China an ``unconditional apology'' on behalf of his country and Nato for the bombing of the embassy in Belgrade and said alliance explanations had been ``far from enough''. Mr Schroeder also said in a meeting with Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan that China ``has every reason to demand a comprehensive, thorough and in-depth investigation into the incident and affix the responsibility for it'', Xinhua News Agency reported. Mr Schroeder arrived in China on Wednesday after four days of sometimes violent protests in Beijing and just hours before the remains of three journalists killed in Friday's attack were returned to Beijing. Mr Schroeder had sent a personal message of regret to Chinese President Jiang Zemin before leaving Germany. China has rejected Nato's explanation that the bombing was a mistake and demanded a full explanation and punishment of those responsible. German officials said the bombing and an outpouring of rage across China would dominate Mr Schroeder's visit, his first to China since becoming chancellor last year. The visit had been intended to focus on trade. As chairman of the Group of Eight _ a forum of Western powers and Russia that agreed on the outline of a peace plan for Kosovo last week in Bonn _ Mr Schroeder plays a key role in forming a consensus on a peace plan. China's support is needed to endorse any plan for Kosovo in the UN Security Council. ``Just the fact that we are talking shows that both sides remain interested in a dialogue,'' Mr Schroeder had said before leaving Germany. He added that differences over Kosovo should not be allowed to affect ties. ``I think we will make it clear that a close economic and political relationship between Germany and China, between Europe and China, will also be needed in the future,'' he said. Earlier, the chancellor told his cabinet that his main goal was to ensure ``that no doors are slammed shut and that China is tied into efforts for a political solution'' for the southern Yugoslav province. Following the bombing, China downgraded the long-planned trip from a state visit to a simple working visit, and it was cut from four days to just 24 hours. A German business delegation that was to accompany Mr Schroeder cancelled, and Mr Schroeder cancelled a visit to Shanghai. Mr Schroeder was briefed by Nato Secretary-General Javier Solana on the latest in the investigation into the errors that led to the attack on the embassy. The Nato claim was that it mistakenly believed the embassy to be a Yugoslav command centre. - AP 5/13/99 Via HK Standard
[PEN-L:6734] Germany on Embassy Bombing
[PEN-L:6732] NATO Losses -Reply
This seems like a very important message - if it's at all true. Michael Eisenscher - what is the URL from whence this message came, and what is the International Strategic Studies Association?
[PEN-L:6730] Yugoslavia Internet connection threatened
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A. Krstanovic) Subject: US shuts down Yugoslav Internet - For immediate release Dear sirs, We have reliable information that the US Government ordered Loral Orion company to shut down its satellite feeds for Internet customers in Yugoslavia. This action might be taken as soon as later tonight or tomorrow (May 12 or 13, 1999). This is a flagrant violation of commercial contracts with Yugoslav ISPs, as well as an attack on freedom of the Internet. A Web site in protest of these actions should be up shortly. We will supply you with the URL. In the meantime, please be so kind to inform as many people as possible about this tragic event for the Internet community in Yugoslavia and Europe. Kind regards, BeoNET Belgrade, Yugoslavia http://www.beonet.yu Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
[PEN-L:6728] Reception for Farmworker Exhibit at Meany Center
The George Meany Center is hosting a reception and Chatauqua discussion for the photography exhibit, Every Worker is an Organizer - Farm Labor and the Resurgence of the United Farm Workers. David Bacon, the photographer, will talk about how and why the photographs were taken, and the current situation of farmworkers and the UFW in California. Where: George Meany Center 1 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, Maryland When: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 7-8:30 PM --- david bacon - labornet emaildavid bacon internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1631 channing way phone: 510.549.0291berkeley, ca 94703 --- hands.jpg
[PEN-L:6727] Re: IMF ready to offer financial help, structural reforms to the
The National Post Monday, May 03, 1999 NATO: UNITED TO SUCCEED By Javier Solana Our aims remain clear. The Washington summit wholeheartedly confirmed NATO's continuing commitment to them. But let us be clear -- the aims we set out on April 12 are not negotiable. And our longer-term strategy remains the achievement of a lasting political settlement, based on the Rambouillet agreement. The International Monetary Fund and Group of Seven industrialized countries are among those who stand ready to offer financial help to the countries of the region. This should go hand in hand with the necessary structural reforms in the countries affected -- helped by budget support from the international community. Javier Solana is Secretary-General of NATO. in other words, transnational corporate elites have an advantage via uneven and unequal tariff and 'free trade' agreements, IMF loansharking, democratic pretense, and covert/'low-intensity'/overt warfare... Michael Hoover
[PEN-L:6726] Re: Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary
Charles, Perhaps I should have made myself clearer. I do not see something in the Post and go,"oh, that's it!" One has to read between the lines very carefully. But the fact of the matter is that the W. Post has the best reporting there is on the inside shenanigans in Washington, including especially its intelligence agencies. Walter Pincus beats any reporter from anywhere for his connections. It was no accident that the Post broke the Watergate story. The administration hands out its line in the Post, for sure. But its critics also get their say in there as well, if you look carefully enough. So, one has to read very critically and very carefully. But, one can learn a lot by doing so. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 4:11 PM Subject: [PEN-L:6724] Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/99 03:30PM Barkley: I get my versions from the Washington Post which reports stuff that is not just from "official spokespersons." Charles: This is not very critical thinking. To buy the idea that the monopoly media is independent from the U.S. power structure is to be under U.S. Big Brother mind control. In other words, your response to the People's Daily Commentary is in a sarcastic tone, smacking of the old capitalist propaganda that communism has Big Brother and the U.S. doesn't, that the U.S. has freedom of the press, and communist countries don't. This in itself is to be a sucker for U.S. mindcontrol. The U.S. has freedom of the press, for them that owns the presses. ( Barkley: That is where all this murky stuff about the NIMA is coming from. I think that is a very big story and I don't see anybody on any of these lists willing to deal with it or think about it particularly. If one wants to do a right-wing cabal theory, which I do not rule out, that is where it is operating. Why is the non-Pentagon CIA getting all the blame for this while the Pentagon-NIMA is getting let off the hook entirely? Charles: In this context, I think from the standpoint of the Chinese, the Pentagon and the CIA are the same thing; they are the United States. The responsibility for whoever did it , intentional or unintentional, mistake or accident, lies with the President and U.S. for carrying out the war at all. In that sense, the President of China's characterization of it as "prevarication" seems accurate. It is not some dictatorial pronouncement , as your sarcasm implies, but good logic and appropriate indignation. Charles Brown -Original Message- From: Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 3:07 PM Subject: [PEN-L:6718] Re: People's Daily Commentary Just like if the Official Spokesperson of the United States Government says it was a "mistake" or "accident" that certainly makes it so. Obviously, you ARE very impressed by source. Big Brother media control is in the U.S. just as much as anywhere. Charles Brown "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/99 02:37PM Henry, Ooh. Well, if His Excellency, President Jiang Zemin declares that "mistaken bombing" or "accident" is "prevarication" and "can never be accepted" as explanations, that certainly makes it so. I am very impressed. BTW, let us be very clear that "explanation" is most definitely not the same think as "justification." There is no justification for what has happened. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:41 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the
[PEN-L:6725] Re: Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary
Henry, I take his views very seriously. This is no laughing matter. Not at all. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 4:03 PM Subject: [PEN-L:6723] Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary In politics, perception is reality. Jiang's perception is every bit as credible as Clinton's. At least Jiang has never been caught lying. Jiang is the leader of over one billion people of this world. His perception is of some significant, may be not as important as Greensapn's perception on the correct level of interest rates, but Jiang's self fulfiling authority is not easily discountable. Your life and mine may depend on it. Henry C.K. Liu "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote: Henry, Ooh. Well, if His Excellency, President Jiang Zemin declares that "mistaken bombing" or "accident" is "prevarication" and "can never be accepted" as explanations, that certainly makes it so. I am very impressed. BTW, let us be very clear that "explanation" is most definitely not the same think as "justification." There is no justification for what has happened. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:41 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the world people, said the paper. According to its so-called "new strategic concept" made public late April, NATO has developed from a defensive organization to an offensive military and political one, which can extend its military actions to areas beyond the north Atlantic and wage war against any country without authorization from the United Nations. Obviously, this is a new strategic concept of hegemonism inflated, and NATO's military attack against Yugoslavia bypassing the United Nations is a practice of this concept, said the paper. The paper added the U.S.-led NATO military strike against Yugoslavia is a downright gunboat policy. In history, the Western powers ran wild by relying on advanced cannons and boats. Today, the U.S.-led NATO uses high-tech weapons to wantonly bomb a small nation and even wantonly raided the embassy of a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council in flagrant defiance of the U.N. Charter and basic principles governing international relations. Such new gunboat policy is more fierce and more dangerous, and poses greater threat to world peace, the paper warned, calling on all the peace-loving people in the world and responsible politicians of various countries to be highly vigilant against this dangerous tendency of U.S.-led NATO. The paper stressed that major powers bear unshirkable responsibilities for safeguarding world peace and security. In their telephone conversation on May 10, President Jiang Zemin and Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed that, as Security Council permanent members and countries with vital influence in the world, China and Russia bear strong responsibilities for maintaining justice and defending peace. They noted that China and Russia have cooperated well on the Kosovo and other important international issues and will continue to keep in close contact to make their efforts for the maintaining of world peace and security. The paper finally urged all the peace-loving countries to work together to immediately halt the extremely barbaric military actions against Yugoslavia by the U.S.-led NATO in defense of world peace.
[PEN-L:6724] Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary
"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/99 03:30PM Barkley: I get my versions from the Washington Post which reports stuff that is not just from "official spokespersons." Charles: This is not very critical thinking. To buy the idea that the monopoly media is independent from the U.S. power structure is to be under U.S. Big Brother mind control. In other words, your response to the People's Daily Commentary is in a sarcastic tone, smacking of the old capitalist propaganda that communism has Big Brother and the U.S. doesn't, that the U.S. has freedom of the press, and communist countries don't. This in itself is to be a sucker for U.S. mindcontrol. The U.S. has freedom of the press, for them that owns the presses. ( Barkley: That is where all this murky stuff about the NIMA is coming from. I think that is a very big story and I don't see anybody on any of these lists willing to deal with it or think about it particularly. If one wants to do a right-wing cabal theory, which I do not rule out, that is where it is operating. Why is the non-Pentagon CIA getting all the blame for this while the Pentagon-NIMA is getting let off the hook entirely? Charles: In this context, I think from the standpoint of the Chinese, the Pentagon and the CIA are the same thing; they are the United States. The responsibility for whoever did it , intentional or unintentional, mistake or accident, lies with the President and U.S. for carrying out the war at all. In that sense, the President of China's characterization of it as "prevarication" seems accurate. It is not some dictatorial pronouncement , as your sarcasm implies, but good logic and appropriate indignation. Charles Brown -Original Message- From: Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 3:07 PM Subject: [PEN-L:6718] Re: People's Daily Commentary Just like if the Official Spokesperson of the United States Government says it was a "mistake" or "accident" that certainly makes it so. Obviously, you ARE very impressed by source. Big Brother media control is in the U.S. just as much as anywhere. Charles Brown "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/99 02:37PM Henry, Ooh. Well, if His Excellency, President Jiang Zemin declares that "mistaken bombing" or "accident" is "prevarication" and "can never be accepted" as explanations, that certainly makes it so. I am very impressed. BTW, let us be very clear that "explanation" is most definitely not the same think as "justification." There is no justification for what has happened. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:41 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the world people, said the paper. According to its so-called "new strategic concept" made public late April, NATO has developed from a defensive organization to an offensive military and political one, which can extend its military actions to areas beyond the north Atlantic and wage war against any country without authorization from the United Nations. Obviously, this is a new strategic concept of hegemonism inflated, and NATO's military attack against Yugoslavia bypassing the United Nations is a practice of this concept, said the paper. The paper added the U.S.-led NATO military strike against Yugoslavia is a downright gunboat policy. In history, the Western powers ran wild by relying on advanced cannons and boats. Today, the U.S.-led NATO uses high-tech weapons to wantonly bomb a small nation and even wantonly raided the embassy of a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council in flagrant defiance of the
[PEN-L:6723] Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary
In politics, perception is reality. Jiang's perception is every bit as credible as Clinton's. At least Jiang has never been caught lying. Jiang is the leader of over one billion people of this world. His perception is of some significant, may be not as important as Greensapn's perception on the correct level of interest rates, but Jiang's self fulfiling authority is not easily discountable. Your life and mine may depend on it. Henry C.K. Liu "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote: Henry, Ooh. Well, if His Excellency, President Jiang Zemin declares that "mistaken bombing" or "accident" is "prevarication" and "can never be accepted" as explanations, that certainly makes it so. I am very impressed. BTW, let us be very clear that "explanation" is most definitely not the same think as "justification." There is no justification for what has happened. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:41 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the world people, said the paper. According to its so-called "new strategic concept" made public late April, NATO has developed from a defensive organization to an offensive military and political one, which can extend its military actions to areas beyond the north Atlantic and wage war against any country without authorization from the United Nations. Obviously, this is a new strategic concept of hegemonism inflated, and NATO's military attack against Yugoslavia bypassing the United Nations is a practice of this concept, said the paper. The paper added the U.S.-led NATO military strike against Yugoslavia is a downright gunboat policy. In history, the Western powers ran wild by relying on advanced cannons and boats. Today, the U.S.-led NATO uses high-tech weapons to wantonly bomb a small nation and even wantonly raided the embassy of a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council in flagrant defiance of the U.N. Charter and basic principles governing international relations. Such new gunboat policy is more fierce and more dangerous, and poses greater threat to world peace, the paper warned, calling on all the peace-loving people in the world and responsible politicians of various countries to be highly vigilant against this dangerous tendency of U.S.-led NATO. The paper stressed that major powers bear unshirkable responsibilities for safeguarding world peace and security. In their telephone conversation on May 10, President Jiang Zemin and Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed that, as Security Council permanent members and countries with vital influence in the world, China and Russia bear strong responsibilities for maintaining justice and defending peace. They noted that China and Russia have cooperated well on the Kosovo and other important international issues and will continue to keep in close contact to make their efforts for the maintaining of world peace and security. The paper finally urged all the peace-loving countries to work together to immediately halt the extremely barbaric military actions against Yugoslavia by the U.S.-led NATO in defense of world peace.
[PEN-L:6722] Re: Re: Re: People's Daily Commentary
Why is the non-Pentagon CIA getting all the blame for this while the Pentagon-NIMA is getting let off the hook entirely? perhaps it's part of the CIA's job to take the blame? and the Pentagon and NIMA have been playing bureaucratic politics well enough to avoid having to take on that job? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html Bombing DESTROYS human rights. US/NATO out of Serbia!
[PEN-L:6720] Re: Re: LA Times commentary on Milosevic'selection in 1990
At 03:03 PM 5/12/99 -0400, you wrote: Louis, Thank you for reminding us of the role of His Excellency in the tragic breakup of Yugoslavia. Your "explanations" fail to hide the fact that His Excellency's oppression of the Albanians in Kosovo-Metohija was a central factor in the breakup. The man is a war criminal and responsible for over 200,000 people being killed. Barkley Rosser 2 things, Barkley. First, this continued use of "His Excellency" evokes the petulancy of an 11 year old. Second, Milosevic had very little responsibility for the breakup of Yugoslavia. How you can glean this from the article is beyond me. It virtually agrees with the Marxist analysis of Chussodovsky and Gervasi that western imperialism was mainly at fault, except that the LA Times uses euphemisms to describe the process. Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
[PEN-L:6719] (Fwd) Open letter to Tony Blair
--- Forwarded Message Follows --- Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 15:06:26 -0400 Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Slobodan M. Pesic" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Open letter to Tony Blair HUGH MACDONALD ASSOCIATES RESEARCH CONSULTANTS IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS 19 NORTON CLOSE OXFORD OX3 7BQ Rt. Hon. Tony Blair 2 May 1999 Prime Minister 10 Downing St. London SW1 Dear Tony, This is an open letter to you. As a long-standing member of the Labour Party, and an expert in international security with direct experience of Milosevic's Serbia, I write about the unsustainable claims you have been making for a moral foreign policy; and the clear, measurable, damage to our national interests and to international security which are resulting. The inept military strategy NATO has adopted in the Kosovo crisis stems importantly if not exclusively from moral confusion and holy foolhardiness. This has hopelessly derailed the strategic and moral ends which the allies ought to have been seeking, namely a practical and effective political settlement. Irrespective of whether the alliance goes on to extort an absolute victory, or settles for a limited outcome, the attached paper estimates the consequences so far of the policy constructed by you. I am appalled by ethnic cleansing wherever it occurs. The UN Charter and Security Council should be reformed so as to make abuses under the Universal Declaration matters prima facie requiring the exercise of Chapter VII powers. Yet in twelve years since the effective end of the Cold War, no serious reform of the UN has occurred. The Permanent Members, including Britain, are locked in a protracted struggle over their national interests. And the most powerful Permanent Member, the US, absolutely refuses to subject any of its capabilities or interests to stronger forms of international law. 'New internationalism' therefore seeks to operate through an institution, NATO, that depends largely on the US and Britain. Such new internationalism is not deserving of the name, and it is profoundly silly of a British Prime Minister to propagate such a doctrine. In the first place it cannot hope to represent, and will therefore rightly be rejected by, the vast populations and societies that will never belong to NATO. Attaching a moral mission to NATO opens the world's most powerful military alliance to the leadership of fanatics, whether Generals, Foreign Ministers, Prime Ministers or Presidents. The rest of the world is bound to say 'Thanks, but no thanks'. And many NATO governments will quietly say the same. The conduct of this war has violently demonstrated what many of us have been saying for years if not decades: that NATO is a shambolic institution covering over important differences that naturally occur among sovereign states. As presently structured it is incapable of conducting a meaningful diplomatic-military strategy through the use of force, or of setting and pursuing military aims that are beyond the limits of consensus in advanced liberal-democratic societies. Your attempt to hijack that consensus through claims of 'genocide' is both a flop in the context, and a dangerous misappropriation of the most extremely sensitive word in the twentieth century lexicon. Genocide means, 'the systematic extermination of an entire people whether on grounds of its ethnic, religious or social characteristics'. You are well aware that this word acquired a special significance for the civilised world because of the Shoa; because of what Hitler's Reich sought to do to the Jewish people. What is happening to the Kosovo Albanians is terrible; but it is not genocide. NATO fulfilled a profoundly important purpose when it is focussed on a threat to all member states. But NATO acting as "Globocop" without UN Security Council endorsement is extremely dangerous. NATO might have been able to play a crucial role on behalf of the United Nations in many local and regional conflicts. The chances of that happening now have been heavily damaged. Historically, it was one of Britain's most useful if unheralded roles during the Cold War to counter ideological excesses by 'mad bombers' of whatever national stripe. It is particularly distressing, therefore, to witness a British Prime Minister pleading for war, for the continuation of war, for the widening of war, for NATO to go on pursuing its original, inappropriate, unsustainable war aims. And how far do you want to go on fighting? To the last American Marine Division? This is a war eagerly foisted on a reluctant and distracted American Presidentby irresponsible European leaders who convinced the White House that a victory would be rapidly delivered. Forty days later we hear NATO leaders telling us that, on the one hand, the military campaign is having greater success every day; and on the other that, unfortunately, the constraints placed on
[PEN-L:6718] Re: People's Daily Commentary
Just like if the Official Spokesperson of the United States Government says it was a "mistake" or "accident" that certainly makes it so. Obviously, you ARE very impressed by source. Big Brother media control is in the U.S. just as much as anywhere. Charles Brown "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/99 02:37PM Henry, Ooh. Well, if His Excellency, President Jiang Zemin declares that "mistaken bombing" or "accident" is "prevarication" and "can never be accepted" as explanations, that certainly makes it so. I am very impressed. BTW, let us be very clear that "explanation" is most definitely not the same think as "justification." There is no justification for what has happened. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:41 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the world people, said the paper. According to its so-called "new strategic concept" made public late April, NATO has developed from a defensive organization to an offensive military and political one, which can extend its military actions to areas beyond the north Atlantic and wage war against any country without authorization from the United Nations. Obviously, this is a new strategic concept of hegemonism inflated, and NATO's military attack against Yugoslavia bypassing the United Nations is a practice of this concept, said the paper. The paper added the U.S.-led NATO military strike against Yugoslavia is a downright gunboat policy. In history, the Western powers ran wild by relying on advanced cannons and boats. Today, the U.S.-led NATO uses high-tech weapons to wantonly bomb a small nation and even wantonly raided the embassy of a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council in flagrant defiance of the U.N. Charter and basic principles governing international relations. Such new gunboat policy is more fierce and more dangerous, and poses greater threat to world peace, the paper warned, calling on all the peace-loving people in the world and responsible politicians of various countries to be highly vigilant against this dangerous tendency of U.S.-led NATO. The paper stressed that major powers bear unshirkable responsibilities for safeguarding world peace and security. In their telephone conversation on May 10, President Jiang Zemin and Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed that, as Security Council permanent members and countries with vital influence in the world, China and Russia bear strong responsibilities for maintaining justice and defending peace. They noted that China and Russia have cooperated well on the Kosovo and other important international issues and will continue to keep in close contact to make their efforts for the maintaining of world peace and security. The paper finally urged all the peace-loving countries to work together to immediately halt the extremely barbaric military actions against Yugoslavia by the U.S.-led NATO in defense of world peace.
[PEN-L:6717] Re: LA Times commentary on Milosevic's election in 1990
Louis, Thank you for reminding us of the role of His Excellency in the tragic breakup of Yugoslavia. Your "explanations" fail to hide the fact that His Excellency's oppression of the Albanians in Kosovo-Metohija was a central factor in the breakup. The man is a war criminal and responsible for over 200,000 people being killed. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 11:34 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6708] LA Times commentary on Milosevic's election in 1990 [This article is extraordinary for the way it obfuscates what was occurring in former Yugoslavia on the eve of the outbreak of war, while still providing useful information that can be gleaned by reading between the lines. My "Translations" are interspersed, surrounded by brackets, in an attempt to tease out the political implications of this biased but important article.] = Los Angeles Times December 12, 1990, Wednesday, Home Edition HEADLINE: NEWS ANALYSIS; COMMUNIST VICTORY IN SERBIA MAY SIGNAL START OF YUGOSLAV BREAKUP; NATIONALISM: INCUMBENT'S REELECTION PUTS REPUBLIC AT ODDS WITH THE GOALS OF FEDERATIONS' OTHER STATES. BYLINE: By CAROL J. WILLIAMS, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: BELGRADE, Yugoslavia Communism's sweeping election victory in Serbia may have eased fears of a military coup, but it sets up what observers say is a worst-case-scenario for durable peace and Yugoslav unity. The only hope for avoiding a breakup of the federation was for Serbia to elect a democratic president or a Parliament willing to negotiate a more equitable relationship with Slovenia and Croatia. Yugoslavia's two most prosperous republics plan to secede unless they are granted economic and military autonomy. [TRANSLATION: "democratic president" means pro-western and pro-capitalist.] Instead, Serbian voters gave strong endorsement to incumbent President Slobodan Milosevic and the nationalist policies of the former Communists, now renamed but little reformed as Socialists. "If the results are such that the opposition has failed even to win a majority in the Assembly, then it means the end of Yugoslavia," said a senior Western diplomat. The choice of Milosevic and what amounts to hard-line communism isolates Serbia, the largest republic, from four other Yugoslav states that have elected center-right governments and set about repairing the economic damage inflicted by half a century of Marxism. [TRANSLATION: repairing "economic damage" means dismantling all socialist institutions, which the "hard-line" communism of Milosevic stands opposed to.] The Socialists have remained popular in Serbia despite an anti-Communist mood in Eastern Europe because Milosevic used his political monopoly to reassert Serbian authority over ethnic Albanians in Kosovo province and by threatening to use force to prevent Slovenia and Croatia from seceding. Sunday's vote showed that Milosevic enjoys broad support in his efforts to subjugate Kosovo Albanians and for his tough talk against independence for the northern republics. Balkan bureaucracy continued to delay full returns even two days after the polls closed, but government and opposition sources concurred Tuesday that the Socialists appeared to have won by a landslide. Milosevic had 62% of the presidential vote in the precincts where the count was deemed official, and those figures appeared to be consistent with preliminary results from other districts, according to Election Committee spokesman Zoran Djumic. Opposition leaders said their independent counts suggested that the former Communists might win as many as 200 of the 250 seats in the Serbian Assembly. The Socialists won because of a widespread fear of change and their complete control of the state-run media, according to leaders of the main opposition group, the staunchly nationalist Serbian Renewal Movement. They have lodged numerous complaints of voting fraud and manipulation, but they accepted the Socialist victory as valid. "The Communists stole a lot of the vote, but we feel they couldn't have stolen as much as they won by," said Stanko Kustrin, a campaign activist and Belgrade businessman. [TRANSLATION: Although Milosevic is widely characterized as a "dictator" in the western media, this amounts to an open admission that he was the choice of the people. We must remember that Daniel Ortega was also described as a "dictator" after having been freely elected by the Nicaraguan people in 1987.] Vuk Draskovic, the movement's presidential contender, won only 17% of the vote, according to the partial returns. The bearded novelist, who had been considered a strong challenger to Milosevic, was visibly shaken by the loss and denounced the electorate for choosing "bondage and Bolshevism" over the democracy and economic reform championed
[PEN-L:6714] Re: People's Daily Commentary
Henry, Ooh. Well, if His Excellency, President Jiang Zemin declares that "mistaken bombing" or "accident" is "prevarication" and "can never be accepted" as explanations, that certainly makes it so. I am very impressed. BTW, let us be very clear that "explanation" is most definitely not the same think as "justification." There is no justification for what has happened. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Henry C.K. Liu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:41 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the world people, said the paper. According to its so-called "new strategic concept" made public late April, NATO has developed from a defensive organization to an offensive military and political one, which can extend its military actions to areas beyond the north Atlantic and wage war against any country without authorization from the United Nations. Obviously, this is a new strategic concept of hegemonism inflated, and NATO's military attack against Yugoslavia bypassing the United Nations is a practice of this concept, said the paper. The paper added the U.S.-led NATO military strike against Yugoslavia is a downright gunboat policy. In history, the Western powers ran wild by relying on advanced cannons and boats. Today, the U.S.-led NATO uses high-tech weapons to wantonly bomb a small nation and even wantonly raided the embassy of a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council in flagrant defiance of the U.N. Charter and basic principles governing international relations. Such new gunboat policy is more fierce and more dangerous, and poses greater threat to world peace, the paper warned, calling on all the peace-loving people in the world and responsible politicians of various countries to be highly vigilant against this dangerous tendency of U.S.-led NATO. The paper stressed that major powers bear unshirkable responsibilities for safeguarding world peace and security. In their telephone conversation on May 10, President Jiang Zemin and Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed that, as Security Council permanent members and countries with vital influence in the world, China and Russia bear strong responsibilities for maintaining justice and defending peace. They noted that China and Russia have cooperated well on the Kosovo and other important international issues and will continue to keep in close contact to make their efforts for the maintaining of world peace and security. The paper finally urged all the peace-loving countries to work together to immediately halt the extremely barbaric military actions against Yugoslavia by the U.S.-led NATO in defense of world peace.
[PEN-L:6713] Re: Econometrics: a reply to Barkley
Michael, I said that that is what the textbook stories tell us we should do. I did not say that that is in fact what we should do. Although, it generally does not hurt to have some idea of what the relationships one are looking for (or not for) are, and why one might expect to find them (or not find them), which may well come from some theory or other. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:15 AM Subject: [PEN-L:6699] Econometrics: a reply to Barkley I'm glad that Barkley agrees with my point that we spend too much energy manipulating data relative to the emphasis would put on quality of data. I disagree with Barkley on the approach to econometrics. He says, if I understand him, we should begin with the theory and then test it. Tom Walker and I suspect that our tests will merely confirm our prior beliefs. I suspect that pure data mining might prove to be more fruitful, in the sense that it might alert us to unsuspected relationships. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6712] BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1999: Today's News Release: "Productivity and Costs: First Quarter 1999" indicates that the annual rates of productivity change -- as measured by output per hour of all persons -- for the first quarter of 1999 were 4.7 percent in the business sector and 4.0 percent in the nonfarm business sector. The data is preliminary. These productivity gains resulted from a combination of strong output growth and modest increases in hours of all persons. In manufacturing, productivity changes in the first quarter were: 5.8 percent in manufacturing; 8.2 percent in durable goods manufacturing; and 2.4 percent in nondurable goods manufacturing. The Wall Street Journal's feature "Tracking the Economy" (May 10, page A6) shows that the CPI for April, to be released Friday, is predicted to rise .2 percent. It rose .2 percent in March, as well. __Falling energy prices, cheap imports, docile workers and the plunging price of computer power aren't the only reasons the U.S. inflation rate is falling. Changes in the way the government calculates the CPI also account, to a significant degree, for the poky pace of inflation. As measured by the CPI, the inflation rate has fallen from above 3 percent in 1991 to less than 2 percent in the past 12 months. Had BLS used the same yardstick in each of those years, the inflation rate would be down, but the difference wouldn't be so sharp. In the last 12 months, the prices of the basket of goods and services in the CPI rose by 1.9 percent. But had changes to the index not been made over the last 4 years, prices would have risen approximately 2.0 percent, according to BLS. Robert J. Gordon, professor of economics at Northwestern University, estimated in a recent article that the CPI would have been 0.73 percentage points higher in 1998 if calculated using 1992 methods. Thus far, BLS hasn't restated historical data, so comparing today's inflation rate to the inflation rate reported for 1992 is misleading. The agency is currently compiling data for researchers that will allow them to compare the changes in the CPI dating back to 1978 on an apples to apples basis. The new data are expected to be available this summer (The Wall Street Journal, page A2). The national retail price for unleaded gasoline increased during the past week to $1.140 a gallon, putting the price more than 10 cents above year earlier levels, the Department of Energy said. Based on its survey of 800 stations, the DOE said the price for gasoline at the pump rose from $1.136 from May 3 to $1.140 on May 10. Fuel costs were predicted to rise throughout the month, according to a DOE forecast that said summer gasoline prices will peak in May at $1.18 a gallon and then average $1.13 for the season (The Washington Post, page E13). In Europe, there's no longer much stigma attached to being out of work, says The New York Times (May 9, page WK 5). While America's economy is booming, the economies of Japan and Europe are stagnating. Then some other countries have generous unemployment benefits. In Sweden, where the unemployment rate has jumped from a minuscule 1.4 percent to 5.6 percent in the last decade, unemployed workers can collect nearly 80 percent as much as if they were working, compared with about 50 percent in the United States and Japan. In Spain, it's 70 percent (until recently it was 90 percent) and in France it's nearly 60 percent. While in the United States and Japan, an unemployed worker can collect unemployment benefits for 26 weeks, in Britain unemployed people can collect practically forever. Accompanying charts show the America has one of the world's lowest jobless rates, and creates jobs faster than Europe and Japan, especially among younger workers and women. One reason is that there is no incentive to remain unemployed for long in the United States. And American companies also find it cheaper to hire workers than their European counterparts. Among the sources of data is BLS. Setting up an employee stock ownership plan improves companies financial performance, not just staff morale, according to a new study of the plans by Hewitt Associates, a consulting firm based in Lincolnshire, Ill. The study examined the performance of all 382 publicly traded companies that adopted such plans, known as ESOP's from 1971 through 1995. The average company in the study improved the annual return on its stock by 6.9 percentage points and the return on assets by 2.7 percentage points after establishing its plan. An ESOP acquires or is granted significant holdings of company stock on employees' behalf. The director of the National Center for Employee Ownership says "ESOP's are almost never a substitute for compensation," noting that wages at companies with the plans are typically 5 to 12 percent higher than industry averages. Nevertheless, he says, publicly traded companies were turning away
[PEN-L:6711] Re: NATO Losses
Is there a documented figure for NATO casualties? This says "there are reports," etc. At 07:49 AM 5/12/99 -0700, you wrote: NATO Losses [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Message Board ] Posted by TheGolem on May 11, 1999 at 23:15:03: What they're not telling us. This is from The International Strategic Studies Association. NATO Losses and the Military Costs: It is clear from the amount and quality of intelligence received by this journal from a variety of highly-reputable sources that NATO forces have already suffered significant losses of men, women and materiel. Neither NATO, nor the US, UK or other member governments, have admitted to these losses, other than the single USAF F-117A Stealth fighter which was shown, crashed and burning inside Serbia. The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff had denied, about a month into the bombing, that the US had suffered the additional losses reported to Defense Foreign Affairs. By April 20, 1999, NATO losses stood at approximately the following: 38 fixed-wing combat aircraft; Six helicopters; Seven unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs); Many Cruise Missiles (lost to AAA or SAM fire). Several other NATO aircraft were reported down after that date, including at least one of which there was Serbian television coverage. The aircraft reportedly include three F-117A Stealth strike aircraft, including the one already known. One of the remaining two was shot down in an air-to-air engagement with a Yugoslav Air Force MiG-29 fighter; the other was lost to AAA (anti-aircraft artillery) or SAM (surface-to-air missile) fire. Given the recovery by the Yugoslavs of F-117A technology, and the fact that the type has proven less than invincible, the mystique of the aircraft a valuable deterrent tool until now for the US has been lost. At least one USAF F-15 Eagle fighter has been lost, with the pilot, reportedly an African-American major, alive and in custody as a POW. At least one German pilot (some sources say two men, implying perhaps a Luftwaffe crew from a Tornado) has been captured. There is also a report that at least one US female pilot has been killed. In one instance in the first week of the fighting, an aircraft was downed near Podgorica. A NATO helicopter then picked up the downed pilot, but the helicopter itself was then shot down, according to a number of reports. Losses of US and other NATO ground force personnel, inside Serbia, have also been extensive. A Yugoslav Army unit ambushed a squad climbing a ravine south of Pristina, killing 20 men. When the black tape was taken from their dog-tags it was found that 12 were US Green Berets; eight were British special forces (presumably Special Air Service/SAS). This incident apparently occurred within a week or so of the bombing campaign launch. It is known that other US and other NATO casualties have, on some occasions, been retrieved by NATO forces after being hit inside Yugoslavia. At least 30 bodies of US servicemen have been processed through Athens, after being transported from the combat zone. At least two of the helicopters downed by the Yugoslavs were carrying troops, and in these two a total of 50 men were believed to have been killed, most of them (but not all) of US origin. Certainly, the US has lost to ground fire and malfunction a number of Tomahawk Cruise Missiles. At least some of these have been retrieved more or less intact, and the technology has been immediately reviewed by Yugoslav engineers. More than one told this writer that the technology was now readily able to be replicated in Yugoslavia. The war has cost Alliance members in other ways, too. There is enormous disaffection with the US Armed Forces. For a start, to prosecute even the smallest expansion of the war requires the call-up of Reserve and National Guard units. The personnel from these units have civilian jobs, and, as with the US involvement in S-FOR in Bosnia-Herzegovina, being called up for active duty in the Balkans seems to be an open-ended thing. This is not the type of national emergency for which most of them signed-on. On top of that, there are questions about the wisdom of the orders they are receiving, and a total lack of clear strategic (let alone military) objectives. One serving career mid-level military officer in the US told this writer: I am incredibly appalled at this war, or whatever it is, and the lack of strategic thought; the bungling, stumbling blind policies which have led to this [situation], and the murderous impact on not just the Serbs and Kosovars, but on the concepts of conflict resolution and sovereignty. The officer continued: I am very upset, and while I have been vocal in my small world, and many agree with me, I am part of a system that is stumbling as best it can to implement the failed brainwork of the NCA [National Command Authority; the President] and SecState [Secretary of State], and General [Wes- ley] Clark [Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, for NATO], too. Why
[PEN-L:6709] Globalization
!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en" html Last night I attended a dinner meeting of the Association of Iron and Steel Engineers.nbsp; The union picked up the tab for me to go and break bread with this august group.nbsp; My job was to pay special attention to the speech by the after dinner speaker a top ranking steel industry executive in the Cleveland area. pThe meal was excellent and the after dinner speech was honest.nbsp; The topic of the speech was "The Global Challenge and Re-Inventing the Company".nbsp; My take on the talk was that it could be summed up as, bwe re-invented the company and got globalized anyway./b pI may bore you with more details later. pYour email pal, pTom L./html
[PEN-L:6708] LA Times commentary on Milosevic's election in 1990
[This article is extraordinary for the way it obfuscates what was occurring in former Yugoslavia on the eve of the outbreak of war, while still providing useful information that can be gleaned by reading between the lines. My "Translations" are interspersed, surrounded by brackets, in an attempt to tease out the political implications of this biased but important article.] = Los Angeles Times December 12, 1990, Wednesday, Home Edition HEADLINE: NEWS ANALYSIS; COMMUNIST VICTORY IN SERBIA MAY SIGNAL START OF YUGOSLAV BREAKUP; NATIONALISM: INCUMBENT'S REELECTION PUTS REPUBLIC AT ODDS WITH THE GOALS OF FEDERATIONS' OTHER STATES. BYLINE: By CAROL J. WILLIAMS, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: BELGRADE, Yugoslavia Communism's sweeping election victory in Serbia may have eased fears of a military coup, but it sets up what observers say is a worst-case-scenario for durable peace and Yugoslav unity. The only hope for avoiding a breakup of the federation was for Serbia to elect a democratic president or a Parliament willing to negotiate a more equitable relationship with Slovenia and Croatia. Yugoslavia's two most prosperous republics plan to secede unless they are granted economic and military autonomy. [TRANSLATION: "democratic president" means pro-western and pro-capitalist.] Instead, Serbian voters gave strong endorsement to incumbent President Slobodan Milosevic and the nationalist policies of the former Communists, now renamed but little reformed as Socialists. "If the results are such that the opposition has failed even to win a majority in the Assembly, then it means the end of Yugoslavia," said a senior Western diplomat. The choice of Milosevic and what amounts to hard-line communism isolates Serbia, the largest republic, from four other Yugoslav states that have elected center-right governments and set about repairing the economic damage inflicted by half a century of Marxism. [TRANSLATION: repairing "economic damage" means dismantling all socialist institutions, which the "hard-line" communism of Milosevic stands opposed to.] The Socialists have remained popular in Serbia despite an anti-Communist mood in Eastern Europe because Milosevic used his political monopoly to reassert Serbian authority over ethnic Albanians in Kosovo province and by threatening to use force to prevent Slovenia and Croatia from seceding. Sunday's vote showed that Milosevic enjoys broad support in his efforts to subjugate Kosovo Albanians and for his tough talk against independence for the northern republics. Balkan bureaucracy continued to delay full returns even two days after the polls closed, but government and opposition sources concurred Tuesday that the Socialists appeared to have won by a landslide. Milosevic had 62% of the presidential vote in the precincts where the count was deemed official, and those figures appeared to be consistent with preliminary results from other districts, according to Election Committee spokesman Zoran Djumic. Opposition leaders said their independent counts suggested that the former Communists might win as many as 200 of the 250 seats in the Serbian Assembly. The Socialists won because of a widespread fear of change and their complete control of the state-run media, according to leaders of the main opposition group, the staunchly nationalist Serbian Renewal Movement. They have lodged numerous complaints of voting fraud and manipulation, but they accepted the Socialist victory as valid. "The Communists stole a lot of the vote, but we feel they couldn't have stolen as much as they won by," said Stanko Kustrin, a campaign activist and Belgrade businessman. [TRANSLATION: Although Milosevic is widely characterized as a "dictator" in the western media, this amounts to an open admission that he was the choice of the people. We must remember that Daniel Ortega was also described as a "dictator" after having been freely elected by the Nicaraguan people in 1987.] Vuk Draskovic, the movement's presidential contender, won only 17% of the vote, according to the partial returns. The bearded novelist, who had been considered a strong challenger to Milosevic, was visibly shaken by the loss and denounced the electorate for choosing "bondage and Bolshevism" over the democracy and economic reform championed by his anti-Communist movement. Draskovic and his party share the same radical views as the Socialists on the Kosovo conflict, but the opposition has been more conciliatory toward Slovenia and Croatia. [TRANSLATION: Draskovic was removed from office last month. This foaming-at-the-mouth nationalist reactionary was portrayed shamelessly as a "liberal" in the bourgeois press.] Milosevic has refused to negotiate a realignment of relations within the federation or to reduce the economic burdens placed on the two northern republics. [TRANSLATION: Those "economic burdens" were designed to raise the standards of the more backward areas of Yugoslavia, which
[PEN-L:6707] NATO Losses
NATO Losses [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Message Board ] Posted by TheGolem on May 11, 1999 at 23:15:03: What they're not telling us. This is from The International Strategic Studies Association. NATO Losses and the Military Costs: It is clear from the amount and quality of intelligence received by this journal from a variety of highly-reputable sources that NATO forces have already suffered significant losses of men, women and materiel. Neither NATO, nor the US, UK or other member governments, have admitted to these losses, other than the single USAF F-117A Stealth fighter which was shown, crashed and burning inside Serbia. The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff had denied, about a month into the bombing, that the US had suffered the additional losses reported to Defense Foreign Affairs. By April 20, 1999, NATO losses stood at approximately the following: 38 fixed-wing combat aircraft; Six helicopters; Seven unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs); Many Cruise Missiles (lost to AAA or SAM fire). Several other NATO aircraft were reported down after that date, including at least one of which there was Serbian television coverage. The aircraft reportedly include three F-117A Stealth strike aircraft, including the one already known. One of the remaining two was shot down in an air-to-air engagement with a Yugoslav Air Force MiG-29 fighter; the other was lost to AAA (anti-aircraft artillery) or SAM (surface-to-air missile) fire. Given the recovery by the Yugoslavs of F-117A technology, and the fact that the type has proven less than invincible, the mystique of the aircraft a valuable deterrent tool until now for the US has been lost. At least one USAF F-15 Eagle fighter has been lost, with the pilot, reportedly an African-American major, alive and in custody as a POW. At least one German pilot (some sources say two men, implying perhaps a Luftwaffe crew from a Tornado) has been captured. There is also a report that at least one US female pilot has been killed. In one instance in the first week of the fighting, an aircraft was downed near Podgorica. A NATO helicopter then picked up the downed pilot, but the helicopter itself was then shot down, according to a number of reports. Losses of US and other NATO ground force personnel, inside Serbia, have also been extensive. A Yugoslav Army unit ambushed a squad climbing a ravine south of Pristina, killing 20 men. When the black tape was taken from their dog-tags it was found that 12 were US Green Berets; eight were British special forces (presumably Special Air Service/SAS). This incident apparently occurred within a week or so of the bombing campaign launch. It is known that other US and other NATO casualties have, on some occasions, been retrieved by NATO forces after being hit inside Yugoslavia. At least 30 bodies of US servicemen have been processed through Athens, after being transported from the combat zone. At least two of the helicopters downed by the Yugoslavs were carrying troops, and in these two a total of 50 men were believed to have been killed, most of them (but not all) of US origin. Certainly, the US has lost to ground fire and malfunction a number of Tomahawk Cruise Missiles. At least some of these have been retrieved more or less intact, and the technology has been immediately reviewed by Yugoslav engineers. More than one told this writer that the technology was now readily able to be replicated in Yugoslavia. The war has cost Alliance members in other ways, too. There is enormous disaffection with the US Armed Forces. For a start, to prosecute even the smallest expansion of the war requires the call-up of Reserve and National Guard units. The personnel from these units have civilian jobs, and, as with the US involvement in S-FOR in Bosnia-Herzegovina, being called up for active duty in the Balkans seems to be an open-ended thing. This is not the type of national emergency for which most of them signed-on. On top of that, there are questions about the wisdom of the orders they are receiving, and a total lack of clear strategic (let alone military) objectives. One serving career mid-level military officer in the US told this writer: I am incredibly appalled at this war, or whatever it is, and the lack of strategic thought; the bungling, stumbling blind policies which have led to this [situation], and the murderous impact on not just the Serbs and Kosovars, but on the concepts of conflict resolution and sovereignty. The officer continued: I am very upset, and while I have been vocal in my small world, and many agree with me, I am part of a system that is stumbling as best it can to implement the failed brainwork of the NCA [National Command Authority; the President] and SecState [Secretary of State], and General [Wes- ley] Clark [Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, for NATO], too. Why havent the military leadership stepped up and put their job on the line for common sense. The problem is not confined to the
[PEN-L:6705] Re: Embassy Attack Fallout
To China, its policies of the past decades has gradually led to the US treatment of China as a weak nation with no consequence. US judgment that the growing Chinese trade surplus with the US entitles the US to bully China is deeply resented by China. The China leadership cannot afford to allow the US to downgrade its hard earned status as a legitimate major power, and cannot afford to appear to the Chinese people as betraying the interest of the nation, regardless of sophisticated logic of realpolitik and economic considerations. This undeniable development will tilt in favor of forces within China that pressure for a change in policy. _ Henery, What do you think of the talk about Russia-China-India triangular counterweight to US led hegemony that is going on around here? Cheers, ajit sinha Envoy Says China Dispute Won't Last By GEORGE GEDDA Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- Holed up in the U.S. Embassy in China as a virtual prisoner for four days, Ambassador James Sasser nonetheless believes the flap over the mistaken U.S. bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade is an aberration that the two sides will overcome. ``I think wiser heads will prevail on both sides, and both sides will move forward and continue to build a partnership,'' Sasser said Monday night on CNN's ``Larry King Live'' program. Sasser said he is encouraged by signs of a Chinese willingness for the first time to permit the media to publish U.S. expressions of condolences over the loss of life in Belgrade and the apologies of President Clinton and other senior officials. But Chinese President Jiang Zemin has yet to accept a telephone call from Clinton, and other Chinese officials are continuing to cast doubt on the American claim that last week's bombing was an accident. In the first direct fallout on the fragile U.S.-Chinese military relationship, Beijing canceled a planned visit next week by Gen. Charles Krulak, commandant of the Marine Corps, and ``put on hold'' virtually all military-to-military cooperation with the United States, U.S. defense officials said today. Defense Secretary William Cohen's planned trip to China in June now appears unlikely, officials said, although Cohen said Monday, ``Much will depend upon whether the Chinese government wishes to have me travel there.'' He said he wanted to strengthen defense ties, ``but that depends upon the Chinese government.'' China's ambassador to the United States, Li Zhao Xing, said on CNN: ``Some people are saying this is a mistake. ... How could they make such an error?'' He demanded a ``thoroughgoing investigation'' into the incident. The situation improved today, Sasser said. ``We are not getting nearly as many rocks thrown at us and the crowds are much smaller,'' he said on NBC's ``Today.'' ``I think it is clear that we have to move rapidly to give China a clear and cogent explanation'' how the bombing mistake occurred, Sasser said. Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering, interviewed immediately after Sasser, was asked when the United States would provide that explanation. ``Yesterday,'' he replied, referring to Defense Secretary William Cohen's statement Monday. ``We responded with great speed and made clear to the Chinese that this was a tragic mistake,'' Pickering said. He would not rule out further explanations, adding, ``We are continuing our review.'' Sasser, a former Democratic senator from Tennessee, said he has remained at the embassy because the Chinese police were unable to guarantee his safety. He said his wife and son were moved
[PEN-L:6700] People's Daily Commentary
People's Daily: NATO, Serious Threat to World Peace BEIJING, May 11 (Xinhua) -- China's leading newspaper, the People's Daily, has accused the U.S.-led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade as brutal infringement upon China's sovereignty and national dignity, and a serious threat to world peace and security. In a commentary entitled "Serious Threat to World Peace" to be published Wednesday, the paper pointed out that the lunatic U.S.- led NATO strikes against the Chinese Embassy have shocked the whole world and ignited wide-spread condemnation and indignation among the world people. Quoting Chinese President Jiang Zemin as saying, "The U.S.-led NATO must bear full responsibility for the atrocity, or the Chinese people will not leave the matter at that," the paper pointed out that any prevarication such as "mistaken bombing" or " accident" can never be accepted. Development and peace have become the irresistible trend of the world since the end of the cold war. As a cold-war-time military organization, NATO, manipulated by the U.S., did not disband with the end of the cold war, but kept growing larger to the contrary of the expectation of the world people, said the paper. According to its so-called "new strategic concept" made public late April, NATO has developed from a defensive organization to an offensive military and political one, which can extend its military actions to areas beyond the north Atlantic and wage war against any country without authorization from the United Nations. Obviously, this is a new strategic concept of hegemonism inflated, and NATO's military attack against Yugoslavia bypassing the United Nations is a practice of this concept, said the paper. The paper added the U.S.-led NATO military strike against Yugoslavia is a downright gunboat policy. In history, the Western powers ran wild by relying on advanced cannons and boats. Today, the U.S.-led NATO uses high-tech weapons to wantonly bomb a small nation and even wantonly raided the embassy of a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council in flagrant defiance of the U.N. Charter and basic principles governing international relations. Such new gunboat policy is more fierce and more dangerous, and poses greater threat to world peace, the paper warned, calling on all the peace-loving people in the world and responsible politicians of various countries to be highly vigilant against this dangerous tendency of U.S.-led NATO. The paper stressed that major powers bear unshirkable responsibilities for safeguarding world peace and security. In their telephone conversation on May 10, President Jiang Zemin and Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed that, as Security Council permanent members and countries with vital influence in the world, China and Russia bear strong responsibilities for maintaining justice and defending peace. They noted that China and Russia have cooperated well on the Kosovo and other important international issues and will continue to keep in close contact to make their efforts for the maintaining of world peace and security. The paper finally urged all the peace-loving countries to work together to immediately halt the extremely barbaric military actions against Yugoslavia by the U.S.-led NATO in defense of world peace.
[PEN-L:6701] NATO Bombing Threatens Disarmament
US-led NATO Bombing Against Yugoslavia Casts Shadow on Disarmament, Says Chinese Official GENEVA, May 11 (Xinhua) -- The United States-led NATO bombardment against Yugoslavia is among a series of development which has cast a deep shadow over the work of the Conference on Disarmament (CD), said Chinese Ambassador Li Changhe here Tuesday. Speaking at the opening meeting of the second part of the CD's 1999 session, Li said thatNATO began its aerial bombardment of the sovereign state of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) three days before the end of the first part of the 1999 session. NATO's indiscriminate bombing in the past 48 days have caused large-scale civilian casualties and hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing their homes, Li said, adding that this is the biggest humanitarian disaster since the end of the Cold War. In a latest development, Li said, NATO attacked the Chinese embassy in the FRY last weekend by missiles, killing three people and wounding more than 20 others. "The bombing of the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia is an extremely grave event," Li pointed out. "The US-led NATO must make convincing clarifications and explanations for this and bear all political, legal and financial responsibilities arising therefrom." Another shadow-casting development is that a certain country announced its plan to speed up work on the "National Missile Defense (NMD)" and "Theater Missile Defense (TMD)" and demanded to revise the "Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)", according to Li. "This decision will have profound negative influence on the global and regional strategic balance and stability, and trigger a new round of arms race to the detriment of international disarmament process," Li stressed. Li told the meeting that the Chinese government and its people uphold justice, love peace and are ready to develop mutually beneficial and friendly cooperative relationship with other countries. "However, we will not tolerate any bullying and aggression, neither do we fear any threat and pressure," he said. On March 26, the last day of the first part of this year's CD session, Li recalled, Chinese President Jiang Zemin delivered an important speech at the plenary. As what President Jiang has pointed out, the Cold War mentality still lingers on and that hegemonism and power politics manifest themselves from time to time. The tendency towards closer military alliance is on the rise. And new forms of "gunboat policy" are rampant. Jiang has thus called for the cultivation of a new security concept that meets the need of the times and calls for vigorous efforts to explore new ways to safeguard peace and security.
[PEN-L:6704] Conspiracy?
Updated Mon., May. 10, 1999 at: Lon 1:55 p.m. Pra 2:55 p.m. NY 8:55 a.m. HK 8:55 p.m. China embassy bombing: Incompetence or conspiracy? BRUSSELS -- Was it simply a gross error, an instance of sheer incompetence, or was NATO somehow tricked into bombing the Chinese Embassy in the capital of Yugoslavia? How could the combined intelligence sources of the world's strongest military alliance have mistaken a large diplomatic mission, fenced off in ample grounds, with brass plate on the gate and fluttering national flag? Diplomats from NATO countries sipped cocktails in the embassy reception rooms that were gutted by alliance munitions. Amid profuse apologies at the weekend, NATO briefers ruffled at the suggestion that they might have used "an old map." There were plenty of sources of good intelligence, they insisted, without admitting they have eyes on the ground as well as sharp-eyed satellites in space. But of all the buildings in Belgrade that could have been bombed in error, what amazing coincidence drew NATO guided bombs with unerring accuracy to the embassy of the country that may hold the key to Yugoslavia's ultimate political isolation? The United States, apparently admitting its aircraft were involved, issued a statement on Sunday saying neither pilot nor mechanical error was to blame. It was "faulty information" which was not detected in the target validation process and "an anomaly that is unlikely to occur again." That would appear to indicate a basic if monumental error, an initial, gross targeting foul-up that slipped through the U.S. military's mesh of check-and-double-check procedures and sent NATO planes to the wrong address. The statement did not go into what misled NATO targeters who "believed that the (Yugoslav) Federal Directorate of Supply and Procurement was at the location that was hit." It did not say which of the 19 NATO allies, if any other than the United States, was involved in providing information that turned out to be so dramatically "faulty." An earlier statement from NATO's Allied Command Europe, issued in the middle of the European night by the staff of NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark, said the intended target was the "weapons warehouse" of the procurement office. Could there be a hardened weapons bunker under the land that Belgrade sold to Beijing a few years ago for construction of its new embassy? Could NATO have known about the bunker but somehow failed to register that an embassy made it impossible to strike? NATO has not divulged what sort of munitions were used or what plane delivered them. If they were deep penetration "bunker-buster" bombs, perhaps the intended target was more than a five-story embassy compound. A Turkish newspaper on Sunday reported that Serbian national intelligence had moved equipment into the embassy 10 days ago, possibly to receive intelligence from China that would help Serbia defend its military against NATO attacks. Could NATO have decided it must destroy this link even at the risk of killing civilians and derailing diplomacy? A cloak of national security has been thrown over the incident, and as long as it remains such questions and speculations are unlikely to receive answers. But the dagger of investigative reporting is barely out of its sheath. "We are as mystified as you are," said a NATO official. "Everyone is searching for a satisfactory explanation. But no one knows if we'll ever have it." Both the statement from Clark's command and that in the name of U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen and CIA Director George Tenet were issued with unusual speed, as befitted the diplomatic urgency. The full investigation may not be over yet, and it cannot be excluded that new facts may emerge. But on the basis of what has been made public so far it is difficult to imagine how a hostile agent could have tricked NATO into bombing the embassy of the one power whose consent NATO needs in the United Nations Security Council to encircle Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. Unless, that is, the hopeful conspirator was relying on the ally of incompetence. Source: Reuters
[PEN-L:6706] No comment
USIA 10 May 1999 U.S. ENVOYS TO CASPIAN BASIN TOUT INVESTMENT PROSPECTS (Say financial payoff requires long-term commitment) (900) By Phillip Kurata USIA Staff Writer Washington -- U.S. ambassadors assigned to energy-rich countries surrounding the Caspian Sea are offering "gold key" service to U.S. businesses considering investing in Central Asia. "We offer gold key service We will help you get started. We'll help you make appointments. We'll rent you a car. We'll rent you an interpreter. We'll make hotel reservations -- all kinds of things like this," U.S. Ambassador to Azerbaijan Stanley Escudero said at a May 7 business forum in Washington. The U.S. embassies in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan offer similar services to help U.S. companies capitalize on potentially enormous opportunities in the Caspian Basin, which has huge oil and gas reserves. The U.S. government has opened a business center in Ankara, Turkey, staffed by trade promotion officials to help U.S. business people to establish contacts in Turkey and points east. The U.S. Caspian diplomacy is pegged to two proposed pipelines. One would carry crude oil from Baku, Azerbaijan, through Georgia to Turkey's Mediterranean port at Ceyhan. The second would pump natural gas from Turkmenistan, under the Caspian Sea, through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey. The United States and its NATO partner Turkey have embarked on a policy to bring democracy, stability and prosperity to the Caucasus and Central Asia by encouraging foreign investment in the region's fledgling free market economies. Ambassador Escudero said business, not aid, fosters development. "What develops a nation is business activity. What develops a nation is the new wealth which is created and the new knowledge that is created and the multiplier effect of successful activities Azerbaijan is ready for that. It's ripe for it," Escudero said. Speaking at the same forum with Escudero were U.S. Ambassador to Armenia Michael Lemmon, U.S. Ambassador to Georgia Kenneth Yalowitz, U.S. Ambassador to Kazakhstan Richard Jones, U.S. Ambassador to Turkmenistan Steve Mann, U.S. Ambassador to Uzbekistan Joseph Presel, and U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Mark Parris. With the exception of Parris, the ambassadors also spoke to business conferences in New Orleans and New York to publicize the investment opportunities in the Caucasus Basin. The three main U.S. trade agencies -- the Trade and Development Agency, the Export-Import Bank, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation -- are offering incentives and guarantees to U.S. companies willing to risk investment in the former Soviet republics. Jones, the U.S. envoy to Kazakhstan, voiced a theme common to all the ambassadors. "Kazakhstan is not a market for the faint hearted. It's a high-maintenance business environment that will require financial strength and a significant amount of executive time and energy to make your business profitable," he said. Costly customs delays, bureaucratic red tape to obtain work permits, inconsistent application of the tax code and lack of respect for contracts are a partial list of pitfalls facing U.S. businesses in Kazakhstan, Jones said. Nevertheless, more than 100 U.S. companies have opened offices in Almaty, the commercial capital of Kazakhstan, in sectors such as oil and gas, consumer goods, power generation and telecommunications, Jones said. The ambassador has a doctorate in business and said he was chosen for the Kazakhstan assignment because he could be instrumental in helping the country's conversion to a Western-style economy. "I met with President (Nursultan) Nazarbayev just prior to my departure from Kazakhstan for this tour to stress our concerns in commercial issues. In this meeting, he reiterated his strong desire for more U.S. direct investment in Kazakhstan. He also reiterated his wish to diversify Kazakhstan's economy, create more jobs and spur economic growth," Jones said. Turkmenistan, possessing the world's fourth largest proven reserves of natural gas and large oil deposits, is hampered by a lingering addiction to central planning, Ambassador Mann said. President Saparmurat Niyazov personally supervises political affairs, even at the local level, Mann said. "With Turkmenistan, the question is, When is this energy potential going to be exploited? Will it be? I think the answer is, yes, it will be. I think the time is now," Mann said. Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan are progressing toward a resolution of their territorial dispute over the delineation of the Caspian Sea. The ambassador said he is encouraged by the competence of Niyazov's advisers and ministers in the energy sector who have convinced the Turkmen leader to approve the construction of a trans-Caspian natural gas pipeline. Turkmen gas is a crucial element in Turkey's development plans. Within a decade, natural gas is projected to account for a quarter of Turkey's energy needs. At present, the clean-burning fuel satisfies
[PEN-L:6710] Re: Re: Mistakes, randomness, accidentsandeconometrics
Yea, In law there are torts (or civil wrongs) and crimes. Lets just call them all wrongs for this discussion. There are intentional wrongs and unintentional wrongs. In other words, they have mental elements. The mental element of unintentional wrongs is called neglegance or gross neglegence ( recklessness). For example, the crime of murder requires that it be an intentional killing. Manslaughter is an unintentional or negligent killing. Neglegance or recklessness is a failure to fulfill a duty of care. The liability question in your mistake/accident examples depends on whether the actor was negligent , or failied to fulfill a duty of care. I suppose we could say that you may be differentiating between negligence and non-negligence by your mistake/accident differentiation below, but I think the "US" is culpable for either a mistake or accident in this case. I don't disagree with those who are arguing that there is evidence that this might be intentional There another issue here that a legal framework deals with: cause. There are "but for" (or necessary) cause and proximate cause. For example, a butterfly flapping its wings in China might have been a but for cause of the bombing, but it is not a proximate or culpable cause. U.S. President and generals dropping so many bombs and not doing super checks on what they are bombing, is negligence or recklessness that is a but for cause and a proximate (culpable) cause of this incident. So, the "U.S." is probable culpable whether this is an accident or a mistake in your terminology, because if you drop this many bombs ( and don't do a super-duper check) , it is foreseeable that you will mistake one building for another OR that one missile out of many will go astray (accident). In sum, this incident might have been intentional (see many arguments by others on this thread). But even if it was unintentional, the "US"' negligence or recklessness was a "but for" and proximate (culpable) cause of the harm done. The econometrics stuff has to do with correlations of events. But two correlated events (raising the minimum wage and prices going up) could be both caused by a third factor , and not be but for causes of each other. The classic Marx critique of this is not that raising wages (minimum or otherwise) won't raise prices, but that that prices don't have to go up, rather profits can go down. There is not a necessary causal connection between wages up and prices up , except with capitalist assumptions. Charles Brown Ken Hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/11/99 11:03PM The difference is roughly as follows. If A does X intentionally but it turns out that even though A does not know it A is actually doing Y, that is doing something by mistake. If A intends to do X but unintentionally causes Y that is doing something by accident -or at least one way of doing something by accident. Consider the bombing of the embassy. According to the official story this was a mistake. The pilot intentionally bombed the bldg that he targeted (X), a building that he thought was an arms depot, but he is actuially bombing the Chinese Embassy (Y). Contrast this with a case where a pilot intends to bomb a military barracks (X) but the bomb veers off course and hits a market place (Y) The pilot unintentionally causes the market to be bombed, and thus bombs it by accident. Both accidents and mistakes are unintentional. The first explanations of the bombing were that it was an accident. The target was said to be a TV studio or an arms supply depot but the missiles somehow or other missed, wandered off course and hit the embassy. This was totally ludicrous, as I pointed out. There were three bloody missiles fired from different angles. The pilot, whatever else he was doing, was firing at the goddam CHinese Embassy bldg. not some studio or arms depot several blocks away. Even the nincompoops at NATO finally figured out that their first explanation could not work in the circumstances Hence the new story about the mistake. It was no accident. Given that it is a mistake, someone is responsible. THere seems precious little concern for ascertaining who is responsible for the mistake and making sure they are properly punished. Accidents happen. Mistakes are made. To put it another way. A mistake is doing one and the same thing under two descriptions--ie bombing a building the pilot took to be an arms depot, and bombing the Chinese Embassy. An accident is when two different things are involved. Bombing barracks (intended), actually bombing a market place (uinintended). I am speaking of course of doing something by accident, not of events per se as accidents. Cheers, Ken Hanly Charles Brown wrote: "J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/11/99 04:43PM Charles, 1) I believe that I have been using the term "mistake' not "accident" with respect to the Chinese embassy bombing. Certainly that is what I have meant,
[PEN-L:6715] more on Brenner
an addendum to my comments on Brenner's book: Robert Brenner's excellent 1998 book, _The Economics of Global Turbulence_, published in New Left Review #229 and to be published as a separate book in 1999 titled _Turbulence in the World Economy_ (Verso press), provides a very complete analysis of these issues [as I explained in my earlier missive on this subject]. I disagree with Brenner on some matters, some of which are made clear in James Crotty's very useful book review in _Challenge_, 42(3), May-June 1999: 108-119 and Brenner's reply in the same issue, pp. 119-30, especially his footnote 1. In essence, I see a profit-squeeze by wages as part of the normal cyclical dynamics of capitalism under labor-scarce conditions: thus, the persistently low unemployment rates of 1966-69 helped squeeze profits (Crotty) along with the increases in international competition (Brenner). Brenner's analysis of the trend seems to be more on-target, helping to explain the abolition of the labor-scarce regime that is central to Crotty's analysis. Following Maurice Dobb, I posit two broadly-defined types of "regimes" that can accompany capitalist accumulation in a specific country, which (for lack of better terms) are called "labor scarce" and "labor abundant." If you wish, the two types of regimes could be seen in terms of two different types of rough aggregate labor-power supply curves, an issue that Marx didn't analyze. The first is relatively inelastic compared to the latter. Aggregate labor demand depends on the rate of accumulation of capital, along with such things as fiscal deficits. I see the 1950s and 1960s in the US as "labor scarce" in the sense that accumulation tends to pull up wages compared to labor productivity, threatening to squeeze profits. This Marxian story (which appears in ch. 25 of vol. I of CAPITAL) occurs when there are limits on the mobility of labor from other countries (and from outside the labor force) and limits on capital mobility out of the country. Limits on price hikes (such as the gold standard for Marx, international competition and/or tight monetary policy for Crotty and Brenner) mean that the profit squeeze actually hurts profits rather than simply causing inflation. See my obscure 1987 article, _Cyclical Over-Investment and Crisis: Theory and Evidence," _Eastern Economic Journal_, 13(3). Such profit squeezes are encouraged by rising raw material costs and by overinvestment in fixed capacity. On the other hand, I see the 1920s and 1980s-90s in the US as "labor abundant" in the sense that accumulation can rise without much in the way of wage hikes relative to productivity (as labor-power supplies are more available and as capital is more mobile). Instead of seeing "over-investment relative to supply" as in the late 1960s, we see the possibility of "over-investment relative to consumer demand" as in the late 1920s and an "underconsumption trap" as in the early 1930s. See my paper at: http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/depr/D0.html The labor abundance of the US economy in the 1990s helps explain why the US can have such low unemployment rates at the same time having such low inflation. In desperate brevity, we also had low unemployment combined with price stability in 1926. Brenner's analysis helps explain both (1) the transition of the US from labor scarcity to labor abundance and (2) the "globalization" of the US economy (and some other economies), i.e., the end of model of capital accumulation centered on the nation-state. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html Bombing DESTROYS human rights. US/NATO out of Serbia!
[PEN-L:6716] Forward of a hypothesis on bourg. vulgar economic motives
This is from a son of Karl Mark, hypothesizing bourgeois, vulgarly materialist motivation for the war on Yugoslavia. Charles Brown (Excerpt) The consequences of the Kosovo debacle will take time to work themselves out. But the chances of disgraced Nato being resurrected seem small, and the Atlantic dimension is therefore going to be transformed. US hegemony is under threat not just in Eastern Europe, Russia and the Balkans, but in the EU too. The intertwining of financial, corporate and military structures and process, and the reciprocity of effects among them, is a key feature of modern imperialism and a clue to the flexibility, dynamism and overwhelming political power enjoyed until now by the US. But leverage works both ways, and from being in a win-win situation the US now faces a lose-lose situation. Loss of military-political control over Europe is dangerous for US corporate and financial hegemony and directly imperils the supremacy of the dollar. Financial convulsions cannot be far behind and as Russia spins out of control, there seems little left to keep the Wall St bubble inflated. But that is not the worst of it. The 'disinterested humanitarians' of Downing St and the White House needed to win in the Balkans to be sure of securing Caspian and Persian Gulf energy supplies in the coming decades. Their failure is no encouragement to their client states in the Gulf or Georgia and Azerbaijan in the Caspian/Caucasus region. And what are the chances now of the US/Europe dominating Russian oil and squeezing China out of the energy-rich Kazakh, Uzbek and other Central Asian states? Nil. The blindingly-obvious ultimate reason for Nato's military failure is the absolute lack of militarism among the 600m citizens of Nato countries. Arcade war is OK, war-war definitely not, especially when it takes place near Adriatic tourist centres. The mass psychological reconstruction of Nato populations is perhaps the most urgent necessity which the imperialist states, their war makers and ideologists, face. Unless popular pro-war feelings can be whipped up, it is clear that not just Nato is a white elephant: the Revolution in Military Affairs, which was supposed to guarantee push-button control of human affairs, is just a hollow farce.
[PEN-L:6729] Re: IMF ready to offer financial help, structuralreforms to the
Beware of bourgeoisie bearing gifts. Charles Brown "Michael Hoover" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/12/99 05:00PM The National Post Monday, May 03, 1999 NATO: UNITED TO SUCCEED By Javier Solana Our aims remain clear. The Washington summit wholeheartedly confirmed NATO's continuing commitment to them. But let us be clear -- the aims we set out on April 12 are not negotiable. And our longer-term strategy remains the achievement of a lasting political settlement, based on the Rambouillet agreement. The International Monetary Fund and Group of Seven industrialized countries are among those who stand ready to offer financial help to the countries of the region. This should go hand in hand with the necessary structural reforms in the countries affected -- helped by budget support from the international community. Javier Solana is Secretary-General of NATO. in other words, transnational corporate elites have an advantage via uneven and unequal tariff and 'free trade' agreements, IMF loansharking, democratic pretense, and covert/'low-intensity'/overt warfare... Michael Hoover
[PEN-L:6733] Imagine...
Bear Chief, Perhaps for the next edition of the Pikanii Sun? Imagine... by James M.S. Craven There is a great deal of sensitivity to one of the most notorious of the many Holocausts humankind has suffered: the Nazi Holocaust against Jews, Gypsies and others. Movies like Schindler's List are a constant reminder of massive suffering that must never be forgotten and historical lessons that must be learned. Most believe that something like the Holocaust of the Nazis against Jews or Gypsies or other victims tageted by the Nazis could never happen here in America or in Canada. Imagine that something like what happened to Jews in Germany happened in America or Canada. Imagine that Jewish children were forced to repeat Christian prayers and were beaten or even murdered if they spoke or prayed in Hebrew or Yiddish and spoke or prayed Jewish prayers. Imagine if Jewish children were forced to eat pork that was not only forbidden for religious reasons but was also rotten, insect-infested and of the lowest quality so that many children could be "fed" cheaply and very profitably. Imagine if vulnerable and trusting Jewish children were routinely sexually and physically abused by clergy and when the sexual and physical abuse was discovered, those who reported it were beaten or murdered while those who committed the ugly deeds were protected by powerful and rich churches and sent elsewhere to do more crimes to other Jewish children. Imagine that Jewish children were used for medical experiments or used to test new drugs or surgical procedures. Imagine if Jewish children were used as sexual objects for powerful pedophiles when visiting the isolated institutions in which the Jewish children were kept away from their families and communities. Imagine if Jewish children were sterilized through coercion or decption. Imagine if Jewish children were registered and controlled by a BJA (Bureau of Jewish Affairs) that had a long history of fraud, theft, abuse and dereliction of trust responsibilities with respect to traditional Jewish lands and resources. Imagine if throughout the Jewish Ghettos, corrupt and sell-out Jews were selected or elected through fraudulent elections to control other Jews in the interests of non-Jews bent on the eventual elimination--through murder, intermarriage, redefinition, assimilation or sterilization--of all Jews.Imagine if Jewish children were forced into special Boarding/Residential Schools designed to beat, torture, intimidate and brainwash the "Jewishness" out of them. Imagine if there were football teams with names like the "Kansas City Kikes", the "San Francisco Sheenies" or the Jersey City Jew Boys" and at half-time some caricature of what the bigoted and ignorant consider to be a "typical Jew" came out to do the "money-grubbing tango". Imagine if Jews were forbidden to celebrate Jewish holidays or to wear traditional Jewish yamulkas or prayer shawls. Imagine if all the precedents of Nuremberg and International Law (Treaties) were routinely broken by non-Jews while Jews were expected to keep all promises and responsibilities under those laws. You say it could not happen to Jews in America or Canada what was done in Nazi Germany? You say that especially after Nuremberg and the horrors that were revealed there "Never Again" anywhere? With respect to Jews in America and Canada, perhaps all of the above and more could happen and perhaps not. But there is no "perhaps" that all of the above and much more was done--and is being done--in America and in Canada and elsewhere in the world to Indigenous Peoples. When do Indians and first Nations Peoples get movies like "Schlinder's List" that expose the past and present of the American and Canadian Holocausts? When do non-Indians care about the American and Canadian Holocausts against Indigenous Peoples as much as many non-Jews do --and should--care about the Nazi Holocaust? When do Indians get the precedents, legal protections and demands for justice of Nuremberg applied in and to the very Nations that so piously and hypocritically sat in judgment at Nuremberg? Jim Craven
[PEN-L:6738] una preguntita
We read: BLS DAILY REPORT, FRIDAY, APRIL 23, 1999 RELEASED TODAY: In January 1999, there were 2,209 mass layoff actions by employers as measured by new filings for unemployment insurance benefits during the month. Each action involved at least 50 persons from a single establishment, and the number of workers involved totaled 211,796. Both the number of layoff events and the number of initial claimants for unemployment insurance were lower in January 1999 than in January 1998. ... And I wonder: Employment may be steady, unemployment low, but these kind of numbers suggest a lot of turn over. I know that when I have to hustle up work, living on year-to-year contracts as I do, it is very stressful. Sennett's recent book illustrates how such hustling makes life pretty miserable. Is turnover/instability something you economists study as part of "standard of living"? Tom Tom Kruse Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-4) 248242, 500849 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6744] Re: una preguntita addendum
Come to think of it, people with not-so-good jobs are holding on to them longer because nothing better is coming along. I've heard stories of people working ten or more years in on-call, part-time positions because they just didn't have anywhere else to go. regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/covenant.htm
[PEN-L:6742] Re: una preguntita
Thomas Kruse wrote: Employment may be steady, unemployment low, but these kind of numbers suggest a lot of turn over. I know that when I have to hustle up work, living on year-to-year contracts as I do, it is very stressful. Sennett's recent book illustrates how such hustling makes life pretty miserable. Is turnover/instability something you economists study as part of "standard of living"? Most studies of turnover/instability/tenure I've seen for the U.S. show no significant increase from the 1970s. I know this is counterintuitive, and it pisses people off when I say it sometimes, but it seems to be true. What may have happened is that some instability has crept up the social ladder, making middle managers vulnerable to the instability that blue/pink collar workers have long known, which attracts more attention than in the past. Also, behind the flattish average tenure figures, men are falling but women are rising. See http://www.mijcf.org/pub03/pub03_workingpapers6.html for a review of the literature. It's not full text, just an abstrat, but you can order the print version for free. Yes, it's from the Milken Institute, but it's a lit review, and one of the authors, Stefanie Schmidt, is a fairly liberal feminist. But the no-uptrend story shouldn't obscure the fact that capitalist labor markets show a tremendous volatility, and that even in times of strong net job growth, there's tremendous gross job loss going on too. In fact, it's changes in job creation more than job destruction, that drive the employment cycle. I wrote up a Census study of this at http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/Myth-smashing.html. In one of its annual Employment Outlooks, the OECD found Europe with entry into unemployment stats very similar to the US's, though Europe was much weaker on the exit from unemployment. Extreme turbulence is capitalism's norm. Doug
[PEN-L:6750] On econometrics and worktime
"We declare that the limitation of the working day is a preliminary condition without which all further attempts at improvement and emancipation must prove abortive." -- Resolution of the Congress of the International Working Men's Association, drafted by Marx, 1866. "The general conclusion is manifest that progress may be expected to be accompanied by a progressive curtailment of the working day." -- S. J. Chapman, Hours of Labour, 1909. "Sure, I'm in favor of cutting back the work day and increasing the employment of labor, but I'm really not very interested in the issue more than that." -- Marxist economist, 1999 "Despite the prophetic and material nature of Marx's argument, it has not attracted much attention from modern scholars. Mainstream economists have generally been uninterested in Marx's work and most radicals appear to have misunderstood the nature of the argument. . . Marx insisted that if working times are continually extended or intensified, with one or the other element being held constant, then a point must inevitably be reached where the limitation of 'man, the obstinate yet elastic barrier,' will be reached. It is this relationship between human capacity and human will that is the core of Marx's theory of worktime. The de-emphasis on the human-limits aspect of the argument . . . has removed much of the materialist content from Marx's argument. What is left is clearly inadequate and has proven relatively easy for non-Marxists to refute. Indeed, an argument for the decrease in standard worktimes that emphasizes only political power is essentially a version of the marginalist preference theory. The only real difference in the two arguments is that one stresses market forces as the primary factor that operates to transform the workers' preferences for leisure over income into actual worktime reductions while the other emphasises political struggle. "Why it is that this non-materialist approach to worktime change has managed to go largely unchallenged by modern Marxists is difficult to explain. Marx, after all, was hardly obscure about his conception of the relationship among human capacities, working time and work intensity. . ." From Chris Nyland, 1989, Reduced worktime and the management of production, Cambridge University Press. The following is from an offlist correspondence, so I won't identify the author. I would ask the author to please NOT identify yourself to the pen-l list because I am not presenting the quote as an ad hominem attack on an individual or to try to win debating points. My point is simply to note that Nyland highlighted the resistance of both non-Marxists and Marxists to Marx's worktime theory. For Nyland, that resistance was manifested in a lack of interest and/or misunderstanding. I can't speak for pen-l. But on a personal level, I tried to understand what you were talking about concerning the lump-of-labor fallacy and found myself very frustrated because you wouldn't simply come out and say what it was. When I finally got to the point where I think I understood what the whole point was, I found that I wasn't very interested in the whole topic. Sure, I'm in favor of cutting back the work day and increasing the employment of labor, but I'm really not very interested in the issue more than that. There are more interesting issues to me. I find it intriguing -- and hardly consider it coincidental -- that when I try to articulate Marx's argument about worktime as it relates to current conditions, I am told (not only by the quoted individual) that what I am saying is "hard to understand" and "not very interesting". I've noted before the odd disappearance of S.J. Chapman's marginalist theory of the hours of labour and Nyland's comment that "The marginalists' acceptance of Chapman's position was a major victory for those involved in the worktime debate who based their analysis on Marx's theory of worktime." Sherwin Rosen has, in a personal correspondence, objected to my claim that Chapman's theory had disappeared (Nyland's claim actually). Rosen pointed to his use of Chapman in his Doctoral thesis and 1968 econometrica article as well as use by Ehrenberg, Hart, Nadiri and Hunt. I'll have more to say later on the use of Chapman by these economists. How much later depends on how much interest and understanding there is. regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/covenant.htm
