Re: Re: market socialism. finis.

2002-07-11 Thread joanna bujes

At 03:35 AM 07/11/2002 +, Justin wrote:
I have not participated in this discussion. But I violently object to 
Michael shutting down a discussion of a topic that a great many people on 
the list are interested in, but that he, for some reason, has an allergy 
too. There are a zillion topics that we beat to death. This one gets 
Michael's goat. I don't know why. I think the usual rule should apply: if 
you aren't interested, Michael, don't participate. If there are fair 
number of people on the list who want to talk about something,a re are 
doing so in a reasonbaly civil manner, let them do it. You don't see it 
getting anywhere new? That's because you have made up your mind. You just 
want various shades of denunciations of the evils of markets. That's find, 
denounce away if you like. But lets others defend.


Well, yeah, if everyone is interested in continuing this discussion, fine. 
I have not gotten much from it myself. The problem for me is that the 
discussion has remained extremely abstract and has not done much other than 
reinforce the prejudices people had when they started the discussion.

People have simply taken the nebulous concept of market -- like a 
Platonic form; they have not distinguished what the differences might be 
between a market under capitalism vs what how it might function under 
democractic socialism; they have not talked about whether the market should 
be the locus of exchange for all labor and the products of labor, or 
whether it needs to be limited,  nor have they explained (to my 
satisfaction) how they invisible hand of the market is an agent 
preferrable to human intelligence and the process of consensus building.

So, if we're going to have a discussion, it would be really nice if people 
addressed some of these issues.

Joanna




Re: Re: Re: market socialism. finis.

2002-07-11 Thread Gar Lipow

 
 
 
 Well, yeah, if everyone is interested in continuing this discussion, 
 fine. I have not gotten much from it myself. The problem for me is that 
 the discussion has remained extremely abstract and has not done much 
 other than reinforce the prejudices people had when they started the 
 discussion.
 
 People have simply taken the nebulous concept of market -- like a 
 Platonic form; they have not distinguished what the differences might be 
 between a market under capitalism vs what how it might function under 
 democractic socialism; they have not talked about whether the market 
 should be the locus of exchange for all labor and the products of labor, 
 or whether it needs to be limited,  nor have they explained (to my 
 satisfaction) how they invisible hand of the market is an agent 
 preferrable to human intelligence and the process of consensus building.
 
 So, if we're going to have a discussion, it would be really nice if 
 people addressed some of these issues.
 
 Joanna
 
 

grin I just joined the discussion. If it continues we will.




market socialism. finis.

2002-07-10 Thread Michael Perelman

I think that our discussion about the ability of the market to offer a
variety and how that variety should be determined has landed is right back
to our earlier discussions of market socialism, although we have done so
without bringing up the names of any obscure Austrian economists. I don't
see this discussion going anywhere new.  It's probably time to drop it.


-- 
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: market socialism. finis.

2002-07-10 Thread Justin Schwartz



Subject: [PEN-L:27861] market socialism. finis.
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:32:34 -0700

I think that our discussion about the ability of the market to offer a
variety and how that variety should be determined has landed is right back
to our earlier discussions of market socialism, although we have done so
without bringing up the names of any obscure Austrian economists. I don't
see this discussion going anywhere new.  It's probably time to drop it.


--

I have not participated in this discussion. But I violently object to 
Michael shutting down a discussion of a topic that a great many people on 
the list are interested in, but that he, for some reason, has an allergy 
too. There are a zillion topics that we beat to death. This one gets 
Michael's goat. I don't know why. I think the usual rule should apply: if 
you aren't interested, Michael, don't participate. If there are fair number 
of people on the list who want to talk about something,a re are doing so in 
a reasonbaly civil manner, let them do it. You don't see it getting anywhere 
new? That's because you have made up your mind. You just want various shades 
of denunciations of the evils of markets. That's find, denounce away if you 
like. But lets others defend. This  is a topic of central important to the 
left. Some people obviously find value in the discussion. So I'm asking you 
to  stop trying to cap what a lot of folks here apparantly think they are 
learning from. jks

jks


_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx