Re: [Marxism] Marxism Digest, Vol 84, Issue 30
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Baran and Sweezy are correct. Such policies can alleviate a crisis, but not eliminate the contradictions. On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Leonardo Kosloff holmof...@hotmail.com wrote: I'm not saying that the policies didn't have any positive effects, but that even if they had attained this recovery...what kind of recovery would that have been?If I recall correctly, it is in Monopoly Capital where Baran and Sweezy argue, I think (, at least that's where I seem to remember it from), that the problems affecting the foundations of the economy would haveremained, the tendency to stagnation would still be there. This isn't my view though. I think the recovery, had it been attained through New Deal policies, which it temporarily could have, (though I repeat, I'm not knowledgeable enough) wouldn't have restored profitability sufficiently enough so as to avoid this destruction of capital indefinitely. Andrew Kliman, for example, looks at it along similar lines: http://sites.google.com/site/radicalperspectivesonthecrisis/finance-crisis/on-the-origins-of-the-crisis-beyond-finance/kliman%E2%80%9Cthedestructionofcapital%E2%80%9DandthecurrenteconomiccrisisThanks for the response, and sorry for the typos. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Marxism Digest, Vol 84, Issue 30
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I don't think the issue is whether or not policies can alleviate, shorten, mitigate a crisis, or even prevent the complete collapse of capitalism. Obviously, given what we just witnessed, certain aspects of crisis, for the bourgeoisie, can be mitigated, and a complete collapse can be avoided. Capitalism doesn't fall over from its own dead weight. It needs to be kicked. That's why we wear these boots. Regarding the New Deal, again the issue is not if those policies had accompanied, or even precipitated a recovery from the trough of the depression. With or without a New Deal, capitalism would have been capable of creating a recovery from the trough of the depression. The issue isn't even could the New Deal have worked without the advent of WW2. The real issue is could any recovery with or without the New Deal have prevented, obviated the NEED for World War 2 on the part of capitalism. And the answer to that is, no. No recovery that would have prevented WW2 was possible. - Original Message - From: michael perelman michael.perelm...@gmail.com To: sartes...@earthlink.net Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:40 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Marxism Digest, Vol 84, Issue 30 Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Marxism Digest, Vol 84, Issue 30
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Michael Perelman wrote First of all, I don't think we use titles here. LK: My mistake... MP: What Shaikh says is true. The New Deal was having a positive effecton the economy, but in 1937, the budget cutters pulled the rug out from the New Deal the economy fell back down again until WW II. I should have been more clear in what you cited. Policies can shorten the recovery time, but in the absence of such policies, a crisis can take decades to recover.LK: Yes I know this. I'm not saying that the policies didn't have any positive effects, but that even if they had attained this recovery...what kind of recovery would that have been?If I recall correctly, it is in Monopoly Capital where Baran and Sweezy argue, I think (, at least that's where I seem to remember it from), that the problems affecting the foundations of the economy would haveremained, the tendency to stagnation would still be there. This isn't my view though. I think the recovery, had it been attained through New Deal policies, which it temporarily could have, (though I repeat, I'm not knowledgeable enough) wouldn't have restored profitability sufficiently enough so as to avoid this destruction of capital indefinitely. Andrew Kliman, for example, looks at it along similar lines: http://sites.google.com/site/radicalperspectivesonthecrisis/finance-crisis/on-the-origins-of-the-crisis-beyond-finance/kliman%E2%80%9Cthedestructionofcapital%E2%80%9DandthecurrenteconomiccrisisThanks for the response, and sorry for the typos. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
