[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the original e-mail text, written
by Sif Schniad? Michael Perelman? whom...?): "Marx was clearly mistaken
on several points, including his theory that labor is the sourc
e of value
I did not write it; not did Sid. It was forwarded from elsewhere. I
wish I knew how
"Rhizome", the first essay in the book _A Thousand Plateaus_ by
Deleuze and Guattari, is a work not far from free association, built
in a similar manner to how Mahler built his third symphony. DG
(inseparable, they claim, from one another, being dissolved in some
sort of intellectually cloaking
The following is a draft program for the education and research forum for
the People's Summit on APEC. This forum will be held on Nov. 19-20 and
the registration fee is $50 plus $25 for the People's Summit. The Labour
forum is on November 20 (pm)-21, Women's Conference on Nov. 17-18.
Hope
Much appreciated. Thanks.
Actually, my primary interest is within the U.S. as regards how changes in
public perception of labor affect labor's prospects for revitalization.
Cross-national comparisons are only of casual interest to me at this time.
Michael
At 12:34 PM 10/16/97 -0400, Wojtek
The following is an original message, despite the citation marks.
The debate on "truth" is showing signs of dissipation, and that's
indicative of how difficult it is to talk about "objective truth".
Ajit's remarks on
At 08:59 AM 10/16/97 -0700, you wrote:
Wojtek,
Thanks ever so much for these data. Given that these confidence levels are
measured against all other institutions, can any conclusions be drawn by
comparing the level of confidence expressed in the U.S. in corporations vs.
that regarding unions?
Wojtek,
Thanks ever so much for these data. Given that these confidence levels are
measured against all other institutions, can any conclusions be drawn by
comparing the level of confidence expressed in the U.S. in corporations vs.
that regarding unions? Given that in the U.S. the confidence
Date sent: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 15:13:33 -0400
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Wojtek Sokolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re:Weber
At 01:48 PM 10/10/97 -0400, Ricardo Duchesne wrote:
I agree with you that Weber should not be
At 13:41 14/10/97 -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
Ajit Sinha writes: As anyone could see in Jim's response, he fumbled almost
every second line.
Ajit tells us that _all_ statements of truth are arbitrary (i.e., "coming
about seemingly at random or by chance or as as a capricious and unreasonable
act
Dear Penlrs,
Now that James Glassman and other right-wing idiots are using the new book
by the Thernstroms to argue that racism is bascially gone, I guess it's
time to take a quick look at it. Anybody seen a decent review?
Anders Schneiderman
Research and Education Director
Financial Markets
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
-- =_NextPart_000_01BCDA19.AB3C3AE0
charset="iso-8859-1"
Let us all shed a tear for the managers, as per USA Today, item 1.
The CPI was up 0.2% in
At 11:25 PM 10/14/97 -0700, you wrote:
I would be interested to see how unions faired against all other
institutions and then the difference between how unions and companies scored.
Michael:
Per your request, I am enclosing a comparison of confidence in unions vis
vis that in other major
Is that the multiplier effect of susbequent spending on programs or the
multiplier effect of the extraction of these millions from labor?
Jeff Fellows
On Wed, 15 Oct 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been wondering, since Ted Turner intends to donate about a million a
year for the next ten
At 08:59 AM 10/16/97 -0700, you wrote:
Wojtek,
Thanks ever so much for these data. Given that these confidence levels are
measured against all other institutions, can any conclusions be drawn by
comparing the level of confidence expressed in the U.S. in corporations vs.
that regarding unions?
** Reply to note from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:22:33 +1000
I'll take up the last point first, because I think this is the most
important point. The question is: can one make 'sense' without making a
claim to 'absolute truth' or 'objective truth'. I do not pretend to have a
NYT
October 16, 1997
For First Time, U.S. Discloses Budget on Spying: $26.6 Billion
By TIM WEINER
WASHINGTON -- Abruptly abandoning 50 years of secrecy, the
CIA disclosed Wednesday how much money the United States
spends annually
You know, the single thing that finally pissed me off enough to get me to
read Marx's Capital and see for myself so many years ago -- like so
many others, in a small group of similarly disgruntled economics grad'
students -- was this phrase I kept seeing in all the textbooks hearing
from all
Quoth WS:
To my knowledge, there is not a single instance of a bourgeois democracy
(= absence of feudal-like agrarian sector, and fairly advanced
industrialization) falling to a communist revolution. That is the exclusive
domain of fascist coup d'etats -- which are a reaction of the
Whaddya want from the Village Voice?
Sid Shniad
You know, the single thing that finally pissed me off enough to get me to
read Marx's Capital and see for myself so many years ago -- like so
many others, in a small group of similarly disgruntled economics grad'
students -- was this
Ajit Sinha writes:
I think coherence and internal
consistency of an argument is good enough to make 'sense' without any claim
to 'objective truth'.
Any argument makes sense when you're trapped inside its parameters. Ask my
wife the therapist how coherent and consistent some of her clients are
20 matches
Mail list logo
