[PEN-L:6859] Reforming/replacing the Feds...
Can anyone direct me to existing proposals to reform, reconstitute, restructure, abolish, etc., the Federal Reserve System? Is this something taken up in your new book, Doug? thanks much, Thad Thad Williamson National Center for Economic and Security Alternatives (Washington)/ Union Theological Seminary (New York) 212-531-1935 http://www.northcarolina.com/thad
[PEN-L:6860] Growth Industries At The U.N., Destruction In Chechnya And ,
Growth Industries at the U.N. - Figures released by the United Nations show that disaster relief costs approximately $8 billion per year. A growing number of countries have asked the U.N. for assistance in recent years. The United Nations responded with financial and material aid in 85 natural catastrophes during 1995. Also during 1995, the U.N. discussed and dealt with 50 countries that were engaged in an active war. This involved billions more dollars for U.N. peacekeepers and other activity. Taking advantage of this situation more than 300 monopolies from around the world gathered in Geneva last week to show-off their commodities at the first-ever U.N. "World Emergency Relief Exhibition and Conference." The companies were there to sell their wares - everything from water purifying equipment to tanks which destroy land mines. It begs the question that if enormous profits are generated by disaster relief and war, it is in the self-interest of the monopolies to oppose measures to humanize the natural and social environment, ensuring that people and their societies are empowered to look after themselves and eliminate imperialism, the root cause of war. It also exposes the reality that every facet of life, even humanitarian aid, is transformed into a profitable risk-free business by the imperialists. Destruction in Chechnya --- The restoration of capitalism in the Soviet Union has brought many tragedies to the people, one of the most destructive has been the war in Chechnya. The use of violence by Russian imperialism to solve the political problem of the role and place of the Chechen people within Russia has brought terrible disaster to the people. The toll of human and material losses has been stupendous for such a small people. On October 12, the acting Chechen President Zelimkhan Yandarbiev summarized the losses incurred to this point. There has been US$140 billion worth of material damage throughout the area. Some 70 percent of schools, hospitals, and kindergartens have been damaged, more than 500,000 people are homeless, and an additional 400,000 have left altogether. According to Yandarbiev, 100,000 Chechens were killed in the fighting and attacks by the Russian military, and 45,000 were wounded. Most of these casualties were civilians. The Russian military and Interior Ministry refuses to divulge their human or material losses. The only indication comes from the Russian military newspaper Krasnaya zvezda, which publishes the names of soldiers who die while on duty, but many family members of missing soldiers complain that they have been given no indication of the whereabouts of their soldier-kin. The newspaper reports that 3,826 Russian soldiers have died in Chechnya in the last three years and 1,906 are missing. Marxist Literature Banned in Albania An Albanian court sentenced 37-year-old Nusret Recica from Kosovo to 10 months in prison for disseminating "anti-constitutional propaganda," Agence France Presse reported October 18. Recica was arrested for selling works by Marx, Lenin, and former Albanian communist leader Enver Hoxha on the streets of Tirana. Marxist writings and those of former Albanian communist leaders have been banned since April 1992. The seizure of political power by those who wanted to restore capitalism and invite U.S. imperialism into Albania has resulted in the most brutal suppression of the right to conscience and is a violent barrier on the road towards human progress. Those who struggled against the occupation of Albania by the Italian fascists and German Nazis, and for the overthrow of the reactionary rule of the semi-feudal fascist Albanian government during the thirties and forties, are faced once again with a similar ruthless enemy. Shawgi Tell University at Buffalo Graduate School of Education [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6861] Re: puzzle
At 7:26 PM 10/22/96, Michael Perelman wrote: 3) relatively stable profits Rising, even. RATES OF RETURN ON CAPITAL IN THE BUSINESS SECTOR from OECD Economic Outlook, June 1996, table A25 197919891995 U.S.16.017.318.3 Japan 14.415.813.3 Germany 11.712.513.8 G7 average 14.315.716.2 12 smaller countries 13.214.614.9 OECD-Europe 12.113.614.6 all OECD14.215.616.0 Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6862] Re: Reforming/replacing the Feds...
Thad Williamson wrote: Can anyone direct me to existing proposals to reform, reconstitute, restructure, abolish, etc., the Federal Reserve System? This is a particular political interest of mine, though I'm no monetary economist. See EPI's book on financial reform. See also Jane D'Arista's (Boston College) magnum opus on the US banking system (2 volumes). A leading activist in this area is my friend Tom Schlesinger of the Southern Finance Project (PO Box 334, Philomont VA 20131, 540-338-7754). Other organizations include the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (202-628-8866), National Peoples Action, and ACORN. The latter are more interested in regulation whereas Tom is more balanced between monetary policy and regulatory concerns. Go get 'em. MS Max B. Sawicky 202-775-8810 (voice) Economic Policy Institute 202-775-0819 (fax) 1660 L Street, NW [EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20036
[PEN-L:6863] Re: Reforming/replacing the Feds...
You might want to check on the proposals in G. Dymski, G. Epstein,and R. Pollin (me), "Transforming the U.S. Financial System," 1993, M.E. Sharpe. Regards, Bob Pollin At 09:07 AM 10/23/96 -0700, you wrote: Can anyone direct me to existing proposals to reform, reconstitute, restructure, abolish, etc., the Federal Reserve System? Is this something taken up in your new book, Doug? thanks much, Thad Thad Williamson National Center for Economic and Security Alternatives (Washington)/ Union Theological Seminary (New York) 212-531-1935 http://www.northcarolina.com/thad Robert Pollin Department of Economics Univesity of California-Riverside Riverside, CA 92521-0427 (909) 787-5037, ext 1579 (office); (909) 788-8106 (home) (909) 787-5685 (fax); [EMAIL PROTECTED] (e-mail)
[PEN-L:6864] Re: Reforming/replacing the Feds...
At 9:07 AM 10/23/96, Thad Williamson wrote: Can anyone direct me to existing proposals to reform, reconstitute, restructure, abolish, etc., the Federal Reserve System? Bob Pollin, are you here? See Gary Dymski, Gerald Epstein, and Robert Pollin, Transforming the U.S. Financial System (ME Sharpe for EPI). Is this something taken up in your new book, Doug? Only a bit. I think the Fed is so deeply embedded in a larger financial system that you can only go so far with this sort of thing. Central bank "democratization" can work only if you're willing to take on rentier power in general, which is an unimaginably difficult thing. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:6865] Re:
Someone mentioned that Eudora can filter out mail, though perhaps the shareware version I use is not up to this task. Sandy, I believe this is the case, though as I don't use the shareware version I'm not sure. Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6866] FW: BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1996 RELEASED TODAY: The U.S. Import Price Index rose 0.8 percent in September. The increase, attributable to both rising petroleum and nonpetroleum import prices, followed a modest 0.1 percent gain in September. In contrast, the U.S. Export Price Index, down 0.8 percent in September, fell for the fourth consecutive month Labor Secretary Reich and OPM Director King unveil DOL's World Wide Web site, providing federal employees nationwide with on-line job search and career transition assistance. The set is located at http://safetynet.doleta.gov (Daily Labor Report, page A-7; Washington Post, pages A17,E2). "Who is predicting Fed's next move? Just about everyone," says the Wall Street Journal (page A1). "The search for the magic number that helps it set policy goes on and on and on No nugget of news is too trivial for the frenzied handicapping of Fed moves. Comments by second-string officials rattle traders So do routine economic statistics Lately, the Fed has been testing the inflation risks stemming from ever-lower rates of unemployment by holding policy steady despite strong economic growth. This drives Wall Street crazy, humbling its highly paid economists and repeatedly forcing them to scrap forecasts The frenzy to handicap the Fed is partly due to a proliferation of financial news-wires, interest-rate futures markets and hedge funds. The dirty secret is that `they all have a vested interest in volatility,' says H. Erich Heineman, a New York economist. It doesn't matter whether rumors are false or data misleading -- if they move the market, that's enough, he says, because a lot of people still get paid " DUE OUT TOMORROW: Mass Layoffs in the Second Quarter of 1996
[PEN-L:6867] reform or revolution? revisited
Okay, folks: here's a question that in various forms has been debated (including on this list) over and over and over and Suppose one is teaching intro econ to "typical" (?) university students, which means mainstream range of conservative, and some liberal ideas, including many who will either in school or later go into "business." Do you (I'm asking for your personal opinions here) teach that corporations *must* e.g. open non-union shops, invest abroad where labor is cheaper, skimp on quality, etc., in order to compete in capitalist markets, thereby reinforcing those tendencies in those who are or will be in business; or do you teach that unions can increase productivity; "environmentally friendly commodities" can be profitable, and the like, thereby reinforcing liberal tendencies at the cost of pushing "socialism" away? Eagerly awaiting your responses. Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6868] Satanism and Capitalism
Satan's still behind the baby Jesus but getting closer: ". ..according to a recent study by the National Retail Federation, Halloween has now officially shot past Mother's Day and Easter to generate more commercial revenue than any other day on the calendar except Christmas. " From "Halloween: The Making of a Mercantile Event" By Sam Howe Verhovek *NY Times*, October 23, 1996. Jim Westrich Institute on Disability and Human Development University of Illinois at Chicago "Quotations are useful in periods of ignorance or obscurantist beliefs." --Guy Debord , *Panegyric*, vol. 1, pt. 1 (1989).
[PEN-L:6869] Re: revolutionary ecological fiction
Thad wrote, Because, I would argue, if you're a firm operating in a market system on a for-profit basis, you'll be under pressure to either grow or die in most instances. You'll also have strong incentive to pass of ecological costs on to the community. And unless you radically undercut the economic insecurity characteristic of present-day capitalism, there'll be pressure to grow politically simply to provide enough jobs, etc. I agree theoretically there are vast ecological gains that reform-under-capitalism might accomplish, but don't think that's a very plausible scenario given the way existing power interests can block meaningful reform. This is certainly the standard eco-Marxist argument (see any of numerous issues of CAPITALISM, NATURE, SOCIALISM, the great journal from Jim O'Connor and Guilford Press). However, for a counter perspective, see my article, "Grow or Die: Marxist Theories of Capitalism and the Environment," in RETHINKING MARXISM 7.2 (Summer 1994), where I argue that the relationship between capitalism and the environment depends upon the "environmental regime," the "complex of natural, cultural, political and economic processes relating to environmentalism that overdetermines class" [class in the sense of surplus labor production, appropriation and distribution]. Better yet, see my Ph.D. dissertation, "Enterprise, Value, Environment: The Economics of Corporate Responses to Environmentalism" (UMI, 1995), which was written after the article and which elaborates the argument in more detail and I think much more persuasively. The argument in my article is contrasted with O'Connor's in the guest introduction to the current special issue of SCIENCE AND SOCIETY on Marxism and Ecology. However, I have to say I don't think the guest editor, David Schwartzman understood the argument as I intended (perhaps the fault of my exposition rather than his reading?): I would by no means say, for example, as he does, that I am "optimistic!" In any case, as Schwartzman does note, like O'Connor, my argument, based on Marxian class analysis, suggests we'll be much better off when communist or communal class processes, rather than capitalist ones, are dominant. While there is no utopianism in my argument (to say the least); it is perhaps a possible basis for a socialist, ecologically sustainable utopian fiction, and maybe even reality. :) Thanks for some of these refs! In general I don't think ecological writers are very strong in facing up to power issues and often act as if you can wish away corporate structures. My preliminary judgement is that serious thought about what a sustainable society would like institutionally is underdeveloped but far from nonexistent. On this point, again, I suggest you look at CNS. Lots of great articles about political economy and political ecology (where in my mind politics is about power). Regards, Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6870] Re: reform or revolution? revisited
Suppose one is teaching intro econ to "typical" (?) university students,
which means mainstream range of conservative, and some liberal ideas,
including many who will either in school or later go into "business."
Do you (I'm asking for your personal opinions here) teach that corporations
*must* e.g. open non-union shops, invest abroad where labor is cheaper,
skimp on quality, etc., in order to compete in capitalist markets, thereby
reinforcing those tendencies in those who are or will be in business; or
do you teach that unions can increase productivity; "environmentally
friendly commodities" can be profitable, and the like, thereby reinforcing
liberal tendencies at the cost of pushing "socialism" away?
Dear Blair
I don't teach first year but i do teach 2nd year. i tell my students that i
think there in an ineluctable logic to capitalism - a dynamic which defines the
system.distributional conflict (arising from ownership disparity), the
role of the rate of profit and the impossibility of full employment (much less
the desirability of itgiven environmental concerns and production
techniques).
within that logic...there are some things which will make it work better
for the systemthat is the cappos. i say to them that most nearly all things
that a re better for people are worse for cappos and vice versa.
so para (a) above is right.
and para (b) creates conflict and crises.
i tell them that within capitalism it might be possible to escape and create
community -based green production cultures where people and nature replace the
rate of profit as the goal and ownership becomes a second order of smallness
issue.
but i don't resile from agreeing that unions can create unemployment and are
open always (through petty greed) to being divided and conquered.
that's a start
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6871] The Politics and Languages of Contemporary Marxism (conference
RETHINKING MARXISM is sponsoring a gala conference this December (12/5 Thursday afternoon to 12/8 Sunday mid-day) as titled above in the subject header. It's been announced on this list previously, but the web site now has the full schedule and I thought folks might be interested in taking a look. There are some 180 panels, on the broadest range of topics imaginable. Plenaries are: Knowledge, Science, Marxism (Rick Wolff, Jack Amariglio, Sandra Harding, Vandana Shiva); Race and Class: A Dialogue (Antonio Callari, Etienne Balibar, Cornel West); Locations of Power (Andrew Parker, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler, Wahneema Lubiano); Postmodern Socialism(s) and the Zapatista Struggle (Carmen Diana Deere, Roger Burbach, Arturo Escobar, Fernando Navarro) In case anyone wants to check it out, the URL is http://www.nd.edu:80/~plofmarx/RM-Home.html The conference also includes a very full program of art and cultural activities. The full schedule of art, panels and plenaries, along with information about registration, travel instructions, accomodations, daycare, and publishers' exhibitions is available on the web site. Hope to see you there! Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6872] GM-CAW agreement
I'm having a deja vu: in their "job security" agreement with GM, the CAW agree to let GM cut jobs if (1) productivity increases; (2) technology changes; (3) market share declines; or (4) a product line is discontinued. It's not clear to me what the CAW gained, especially since GM is also allowed to get rid oftwo parts plants they wanted to sell. Maybe I just don't get this process, but time and time again I see unions making various sorts of concessions in exchange for "job security" promises of one sort or another that, as far as I can tell, don't amount to a hill of beans. It seems as if, no less than corporations are alleged to do, unions take a very short-term view, protecting temporarily the status of existing workers at the cost of the union and workers' long-term power. Am I just wrong about this and in fact unions are winning significant concessions from corporations regarding long term job security for workers, or are these various promises on the part of the corporations little more than rhetorical dressing so the unions can save face? On the other hand, CAW workers got health and some other benefits for same-sex partners. Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:6873] Re: GM-CAW agreement
On Wed, 23 Oct 1996, Blair Sandler wrote: I'm having a deja vu: in their "job security" agreement with GM, the CAW agree to let GM cut jobs if (1) productivity increases; (2) technology changes; (3) market share declines; or (4) a product line is discontinued. It's not clear to me what the CAW gained, especially since GM is also allowed to get rid oftwo parts plants they wanted to sell. Maybe I just don't get this process, but time and time again I see unions making various sorts of concessions in exchange for "job security" promises of one sort or another that, as far as I can tell, don't amount to a hill of beans. It seems as if, no less than corporations are alleged to do, unions take a very short-term view, protecting temporarily the status of existing workers at the cost of the union and workers' long-term power. Am I just wrong about this and in fact unions are winning significant concessions from corporations regarding long term job security for workers, or are these various promises on the part of the corporations little more than rhetorical dressing so the unions can save face? On the other hand, CAW workers got health and some other benefits for same-sex partners. Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] The labor aristocracy in both the U.S. and Canada is, in general, committed to social democracy, a trend which ideologically disarms the working class, the most multicultural and multiracial segment of our society. In many ways it is a source of defeatist sentiment as well as a major center of working class hooliganism. As the section of society which is bribed by the ruling class (with super-profits from super-exploitation), the labor aristocracy cannot move beyond a "theory" of concessions. They are conditioned to begging the bourgeoisie instead of making demands and setting the agenda. Basically, the labor aristocracy fails to operate according to a theory of inviolable rights. The labor aristocracy, along with big business and government form what may be called the ruling triumvirate. This ruling triumvirate is blocking the path of progress to the society. GM, like all monopoly capitalists, regards workers as wage slaves and incidental to production and making maximum capitalist profit. They want the unquestioned right to do as they please and they certainly do not want strikes that are not sanctioned by them. The issue which must be addressed is why are workers, and the economy as a whole, held up for such ransom by the monopoly capitalists and what is to be done about it. If this problem is not tackled then workers will find themselves fighting endless battles in an attempt to just hold on to what they have. The workers themselves must bring forward the plan to create an economy which serves the needs of the broad masses of the people. Workers must not submit to the illusions spread about the so-called easy and peaceful path of social democracy. The labor aristocracy is not interested in revolutionary class struggle. This is why the so-called "gains" made by workers do not add up to, as you say, "a hill of beans." Shawgi Tell University at Buffalo Graduate School of Education [EMAIL PROTECTED]
