Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Justin wrote: [clip] So, we're fucked, right, Carrol? Not completely so anyhow when I can have that much fun writing a post off the top of my head. :-) A whole series of 19th c. poems (beginning with Keats's Nightingale Ode) may be crudely paraphrased thusly: The world is all fucked up. But look, that I (the poet) can dramatize what a fucked up world looks like means that I have created in my imagination what an unfucked up world would look like. And a world that contains that triumph of the imagination is not wholly fucked up. ** Yeats didn't think that was good enough: Once out of Nature I shall never take / My bodily form from any natural thing [i.e., not from Keats's bird] / But such a form as grecian goldsmiths make [i.e., dead, frozen, out of time]. . . .to sing / Of what is past, or passing, or to come. But Pound came close to returning to Keats at the end of his life: I have brought the great ball of crystal; who can lift it? Can you enter the great acorn of light? But the beauty is not in the madness Tho' my errors and wrecks lie about me. And I am not a demigod, I cannot make it cohere. . . . . . . . . . . to see again,* the verb is see, not walk on i.e. it coheres all right even if my notes do not cohere. (Canto CXVI) (*The roads of France, wish expressed in an earlier Canto.) But Pound's Make It New was Platonic: the same forms endlessly recur, and must on each occurrence be made new. History is not Platonic; it has surprises for us. Perhaps that is what at one time some marxists I believe called attentisme. Carrol
Re: Cuba: Dealing with the dollar
The article forwarded by Ulhas states: Food, medicines, inputs and fuel can be accessed in adequate volumes only with foreign exchange, making the effort at restoring the health of a devastated economy and protecting the quality of life of its citizens dependent on dollar earnings. Fidel Castro's Government is committed to ensuring that the entire population has access to basic necessities. But the definition of what goods and services and how much of them constitute basic necessities depends in turn on the amount of foreign exchange that could be drawn into the economy and soaked up by the Government. With no supporter of the Soviet kind in sight, recovery became synonymous with the pursuit of the dollar. [ ] The faster rate of growth of the supply of dollars relative to demand is reflected in the fact that the regular peso, which is the principal form of income for the average Cuban, has improved its position vis-a-vis the dollar over time. From an all-time low of 130 pesos to the dollar in 1994, its value rose to 40 pesos to the dollar in November 1995, 30 pesos to the dollar in July 1995 and an unusual seven pesos to the dollar, in August 1995. Since then the rate has stabilised at 20 pesos to the dollar, where it currently stands. There have been several recent posts on the HDI and Cubas admirable ranking in so many aspects of this index which obviously points to how committed the Cuba government is in ensuring that ALL Cubans have adequate supplies of basic necessities: food, medicine, etc. But adequate supplies require imports, for smaller countries like Cuba, and imports require foreign currency. The US embargo on trade with Cuba explicitly includes food and medicine. Dollarization is helping to establish that mechanism in Cuba, but at the same time and as we well know (Enron and others), accounting practices and accounts in hard currencies at the corporate level can make the currency (dollars in the case of Cuba) very difficult to keep track of -- corporate corruption. Dollars are needed for the imported goods (food and medicine). There are three -- actually four if you include the euro that is now accepted at a few tourist locations in Havana -- currencies used in Cuba: the Cuban peso, the convertible peso (equivalent to the dollar), and dollars. All three of these currencies circulate freely in Cuba. The convertible peso was created in 1994, but just last year the Cuban Central Bank established new rules that require firms to exchange their dollars for convertible pesos to conduct their business within Cuba, and then purchase dollars with their convertible pesos for the their import needs. The convertible peso is equivalent to the dollar within Cuba, but it has no value outside of Cuba. This action by the Cuban Central Bank has lessened the problem of getting adequate supplies of medicine and basic necessities, but Cubans are still in dire need. The US embargo includes all trade -- including trade in food and medicine -- which also restricts the flow of hard currencies. Currency is needed to import anything including food and medicine. See the 1997 report, DENIAL OF FOOD AND MEDICINE: THE IMPACT OF THE U.S EMBARGO ON HEALTH AND NUTRITION IN CUBA. A Report from the American Association for World Health at http://www.ifconews.org/aawh.html Diane
Stiglitz on Trade Talks
The Economic Times Thursday, July 22, 2004 Let the pleasant trade winds blow JOSEPH E STIGLITZ In the year since the breakdown of the trade talks in Cancun, sentiment has increasingly grown in the developing world that no agreement is better than a bad agreement. But what would a good agreement look like? The British Commonwealth recently posed this question to me and the Initiative for Policy Dialogue, an international network of economists committed to helping developing countries. Our first message was that the current round of trade negotiations, especially as it has evolved, does not deserve even to be called a development round. Well before the riots that marked the World Trade Organization talks in Seattle in 1999, I called for a true development round of trade talks to redress the inequities of previous rounds. The advanced countries, with their dominant corporate and financial interests, had set the agenda for those negotiations. Whether or not developing countries benefited was of little concern. Indeed, in the last round of trade negotiations, the Uruguay Round, the world's poorest region, sub-Saharan Africa, was actually made worse off. Our second message was optimistic: if the agenda of the current round is reoriented towards development, and if assistance is provided to manage implementation and adjustment costs, developing countries can gain much. We analysed which reforms in the international trade regime would most benefit those in the developing world, and we presented an alternative agenda based on our findings. The results were perhaps obvious: more people live from agriculture in the developing world than from manufacturing, so agricultural liberalisation must be high on the agenda. But genuinely beneficial agricultural reform would need to go further than merely transforming export subsidies into other types of subsidies, because many supposedly non-distorting subsidies lead to more output, which hurts producers in developing countries by lowering prices. Trade reforms must be sensitive to the effects on developing countries, many of which are net importers of subsidised agricultural commodities. But some subsidies, like cotton subsidies in the United States, are rightly emblematic of America's bad faith. Eliminating this subsidy would help 10 million poor cotton farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. American taxpayers would also benefit. The only losers would be the 25,000 rich farmers who currently divvy up $3-4 billion in government hand-outs each year. Developing countries also need access for the unskilled labour-intensive services in which they have a comparative advantage. These were off the agenda in earlier trade rounds, as the US pushed for liberalisation of financial services - thus serving its own comparative advantage. Today, unskilled services remain off the agenda. Developing countries' gains from capital market liberalisation have been widely noted (although recent studies raise some doubts about these benefits). Nevertheless, the global gains from allowing freer flows of unskilled labour (even temporarily), let alone the benefits to developing countries, far outweigh the benefits from capital market liberalisation. But, as I said, this issue is not on the agenda. The trade talks in Cancun raised new subjects - the so-called Singapore issues. But even a cursory look at these items reveals that they primarily reflect the interests of developed countries. Indeed, poor countries' development would arguably have been set back if they had acquiesced in some of the demands. Consider the issue of government procurement. The single largest area of US government procurement is defence, a sector in which even the European Union has found it difficult to make inroads. Are developing countries really targeting this area in the next few years? Clearly, this issue is not high on their agenda. Competition is another example. Without competition, lowering tariffs may merely be reflected in higher profit margins for a monopoly importer. The most important competition issue for developing countries, however, is reform of dumping duties. The US and EU keep out products from developing countries, alleging that they charge less than the cost of production. But why would anyone knowingly sell at a loss? This could only be rational if the seller can hope to establish a monopoly position and extract large profits in the future. But few developing countries are in a position to establish such monopoly positions, so the dumping charges are mostly bogus. As tariff barriers have come down, the unfair fair trade laws are increasingly being used as America's favoured protectionist tool. Treating foreign and domestic firms the same with respect to competitive practices would stop these abuses. This, too, should be a high priority of a true development round. The breakdown of the Cancun talks may yet provide an opportunity for deeper reflection. Now that rich countries no longer need
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Carrol wrote: I think Yoshie has gotten a bit too wrapped up in the Greens (in the 2004 election). We cannot know the form that socialist activity will take in the future, but we can be fairly certain that it will not be electoral and will involve mass resistance to imperialist policies. Arguments against the Greens are equally arguments against paying any attention at all to elections at any level. The future of mass resistance to imperialist policies that you speak of, for all I know, may come, say, four years from now; it may not come in our lifetime, however. Whichever is the case, we have to do what we can in the meantime, and among the things to do in the United States is to challenge the Democratic Party, because it, unlike the Republican Party, commands the allegiance of a politically active layer (10-20%) of the American working class and thus is a more effective instrument of capitalist hegemony at home and US hegemony in the world than the Republican Party. The reason why Democratic Party operatives are *hopping mad* at Ralph Nader is that his campaign actually challenged the Democratic Party, becoming a factor in its electoral defeat in the election for the highest political office in the USA in 2000, it may do so again in 2004, and its supporters and sympathizers (choosing a more potent standard-bearer in the future) may do even better in the near future, eventually eroding the confidence of the aforementioned politically active layer (10-20%) of the American working class in the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party operatives, in contrast, are not mad at anarchists, Marxist-Leninist sects, the Socialist Party, independent socialists, etc. at all, even though they, in theory, espouse more radical transformations of American society as their respective goals than Nader does. Why? Because they pose no practical threat whatsoever to the Democratic Party's absorption of organizers, activists, and voters on the left side of the political spectrum. There is another factor in all the discussions of the elections -- the failure of so many to see that social democracy is as dead as stalinism. Both were equally discredited by the events of the twentieth century. Both old-style socialism and social democracy are objectively things of the past, in that reforms that parties of either type propose today are, on the whole, reforms that bring down the living standards of the working class (whereas they could and did implement reforms that actually improved the living standards of the working class before the mid-1970s), but they are still subjectively alive, in that masses of people *consent* to live with the shadows of the old selves of such socialist and social democratic political parties. The subjective is as important as the objective, and as far as mass political actions are concerned, it is probably more important than the objective. At 11:05 PM -0400 7/23/04, Marvin Gandall wrote: Don't you think it will be necessary for the Greens to win a number of congressional seats before they can be seen as a potential alternative to the Democrats by the unions and social movements, and a durable third party in the country as a whole? For many people, that will be the case, but somebody has to be the first person to get things started, for otherwise nothing will ever get done. Unions as organized entities (as opposed to factions of activists in them) will be *the last* to join any third-party movement on the left that has an actual potential to grow powerful (that is, if they will ever join any such thing en masse at all -- very improbable), for most union leaders have so many things to lose and a precious few things to gain from such a movement's challenge to the Democratic Party. -- Yoshie * Critical Montages: http://montages.blogspot.com/ * Greens for Nader: http://greensfornader.net/ * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
PEN-L: Peasant Suicides in India is a chapter in Contours of Descent: U.S. Economic Fractures and the Landscape of Global Austerity by Robert Pollin that details the ruinous outcomes of IMF policies on Indian farmers. Seth Sandronsky _ Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to Dig Yourself Out of Debt from MSN Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
CC writes: it would be more interesting and more relevant to the future to explore the forms of commodity fetishism int he 21st century. maybe, given the way that the presidential and other electoral contests have turned into duopolistic or monopolistic marketing events, this is quite relevant. jd
Re: phones and human welfare
--- Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it seems to me that cell phones are at best a mixed blessing. (I have one, but I hate it: it rings when I'm driving, so I either have to pull over to talk or drive in a risky way. This morning it interrupted a good song by Townes Van Zandt.) They are only really necessary if the land-line system is broken for some reason. If you see phones as part of some sort of human development index, it would be as cell phones _plus_ access to land-lines or something like that. --- Russia practically has a full-fledged cult of the mobile phone. About half the population has one (as opposed to about 5% in 1998). It's a social symbol that says you're part of the middle class, even if you really aren't. People practically organize their lives around those things. There are dating services run through mobile phones in Russia (maybe this is true in the US nowadays too -- I haven't been back there in years). __ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
Re: Cuba: siempre con combate
There are relatively few automobiles in Havana, but when you do see them, they are either American cars from the 1950s or Russian cars from the 1970s or thereabouts. Public transportation includes regular buses, camel buses, a few taxi cabs, bicycle cabs...and walking. I'm sure that's a good reason why they're so fit. --- Does Russia still export cars to Cuba? Putin has been trying to reestablish strong ties between the two countries. __ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Re: United Nations Human Indicators Index 2004
Lou wrote: Is now available at: http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2004/pdf/hdr04_HDI.pdf It is *highly* interesting that for the first time ever Cuba has made it into the High human development grouping that includes the G-8 nations, etc. Does that mean that Cuba's economy is more marketized and monetized than before -- hence a higher GDP per capita and a higher position in the UN Human Development Report? -- Yoshie * Critical Montages: http://montages.blogspot.com/ * Greens for Nader: http://greensfornader.net/ * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: India's HDI Improves, Ranking Doesn't
--- Anthony D'Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is hard to estimate but the numbers that float around, are 3-4% of the population, which is not a small number by any means. English has been both a uniting factor (in a national sense) but also one that sets the rural-urban and class divide more forcefully. --- Given that knowledge of English is so low and the absence of a national language (I guess), what is the lingua franca in India? I mean, is there any language that people anywhere in India would be able to communicate in (like Russian in the fSU)? Without that, I imagine it would be very difficult to have a united country. __ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Iran will have nuke capacity by '07: Israel
The Times of India THURSDAY, JULY 22, 2004 Iran will have nuke capacity by '07: Israel AFP JERUSALEM: Israeli intelligence chiefs told Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's security cabinet in a joint assessment on Wednesday that Iran will have a nuclear weapons capacity by 2007, public radio reported. The warning came in a report delivered by the heads of the Mossad overseas spy agency, domestic Shin Beth intelligence service and representatives from army. Copyright © 2004 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Query: Ford/General Motors - correction
In a message dated 7/23/2004 6:35:11 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A per unit drop of labor input of 40% in 30 years is running at an annual improvement factor of more than 10% and what is built into the union contract is an annual improvement factor of 3% increase in wages. The 3% annual improvement factor (AIF) was actually lost during years of concessionary contracts - 1980-1993, and "re-won" in the mid 1990s. Correction 10% should be one percent. Contract negotiations took place every three years until changed in the late 1990s to a five year contract.
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Yoshie wrote: Unions as organized entities (as opposed to factions of activists in them) will be *the last* to join any third-party movement on the left that has an actual potential to grow powerful (that is, if they will ever join any such thing en masse at all -- very improbable), for most union leaders have so many things to lose and a precious few things to gain from such a movement's challenge to the Democratic Party. - I think mass disastifaction with the Democrats and interest in the Greens or another third party, if it were to occur, would be a more uneven and unpredictable process than you suggest. Political divisions would concurrently appear in all organizations, and it is impossible to predict which sectors would move faster than others, or that the unions are fated to be last. The political differences at the activist level which you identity would also be reflected at the top, as was the case when Marxists were battling social democrats for leadership of the industrial unions in the 30's and 40' s, and you and your colleagues would, I'm sure, be concentrated on wooing Green-minded local and national union leaders. Your frustration with the unions is characteristic of the US left, and is a product of the AFL-CIO's conservative cast and political immobility relative to the history of other labour organizations around the world. However, I think you'd agree that this in turn is related to the relative stability of US capitalism, and that if that changed, so too would the American labour movement from bottom to top. Finally, it seems Carrol has gone anarchist on us: I think Yoshie has gotten a bit too wrapped up in the Greens (in the 2004 election). We cannot know the form that socialist activity will take in the future, but we can be fairly certain that it will not be electoral and will involve mass resistance to imperialist policies. Arguments against the Greens are equally arguments against paying any attention at all to elections at any level. Marv Gandall
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
Seth Sandronsky wrote: Peasant Suicides in India is a chapter in Contours of Descent: U.S. Economic Fractures and the Landscape of Global Austerity by Robert Pollin that details the ruinous outcomes of IMF policies on Indian farmers. India doesn't owe any money to the IMF. How IMF policies are ruining Indian farmers? As for farmers' suicides, they are largely in Andhra Pradesh, not elsewhere in India. Ulhas Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: phones and human welfare
Chris D writes: Russia practically has a full-fledged cult of the mobile phone. About half the population has one (as opposed to about 5% in 1998). It's a social symbol that says you're part of the middle class, even if you really aren't. People practically organize their lives around those things. ... awhile back, a pen-pal from Bolvia forwarded a message from Chile. There, the home of the first neo-liberal revolution (in 1973) -- the cult of the cell phone had gone so far that some drivers had whittled fake ones out of wood so that they could look as if they were talking on the phone while driving. (They needed the cars, but couldn't afford the phones.) In the US, cell phones are taking over. But text-messaging came after a delay of a few years, compared to Europe. Speaking of which, I remember reading a science fiction short story a long time ago (early 1960s?) in which everyone had a portable phone (on their wrists, like Dick Tracy) and spent all day talking on the phone rather than actually getting anything done. jim devine
Re: United Nations Human Indicators Index 2004
As far as I can tell, no; Cuba is still hanging round $15 per head per day. It looks like they're just doing more with less development-wise. dd -Original Message- Does that mean that Cuba's economy is more marketized and monetized than before -- hence a higher GDP per capita and a higher position in the UN Human Development Report? -- Yoshie
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
Why are they localized? Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 -Original Message- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ulhas Joglekar Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 10:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic Seth Sandronsky wrote: Peasant Suicides in India is a chapter in Contours of Descent: U.S. Economic Fractures and the Landscape of Global Austerity by Robert Pollin that details the ruinous outcomes of IMF policies on Indian farmers. India doesn't owe any money to the IMF. How IMF policies are ruining Indian farmers? As for farmers' suicides, they are largely in Andhra Pradesh, not elsewhere in India. Ulhas Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Devine, James wrote: CC writes: it would be more interesting and more relevant to the future to explore the forms of commodity fetishism int he 21st century. maybe, given the way that the presidential and other electoral contests have turned into duopolistic or monopolistic marketing events, this is quite relevant. The posts I wrote yesterday were in part just celebrations of being out of the hospital after three very unpleasant days, but also I have been mulling over for several weeks what I think may be the wrong handle people bring to discussing the topics raised in vols. 2 3 of Capital. The approach is always in economic terms (in ref., e.g., to productive/unproductive labor) rather in terms of a critique of political economy. Marx is partly responsible for this himself, with all the arithmetical rambling in those two volumes and in the Theories of Surplus value. But those are all unfinished mss., and in Vol. 1 of Capital the arithmetic clearly constitutes poetic images rather than economic analysis. Not an economics text; not a criticism or analysis of economics; not a political-economy text; not a criticism of particular theories of political economy, but a CRITIQUE (and overthrow from within) of Political Economy, hence necessarily (even in the supposedly more specific vol. 3) a gaining, from within, of a perspective from OUTSIDE political economy, where the numbers become illustrations not arguments, and illustrations of social relations; hence the focus must be on the relations, not on the empirical accuracy or inaccuracy of the illustrations. We live in a historical period when an immense amount of our human activity consists in distributing paper claims to surplus. I buy hearing-aid batteries at Walgreens. (I'm making the example false enough so there will be no temptation to translate into real dollars cents.) Supply of the size I need has been exhausted in the display case, so the clerk brings new supply from the store room. Obviously (in vulgar materialist terms, such as would fit even a hunter-gatherer culture) she has made the hearing aids of worth to me (since I can't wear them if they are stacked up in the storeroom any more than I can eat fish that are still in the ocean or cut my potato with iron ore that is still in the ground. But then the clerk spends a number of minutes explaining to me that if I were to take out a Walgreens credit card instead of charging on my mastercard I would get 10% off on the batteries. Clearly this human activity is profoundly different from the human activity of physically bringing to me the batteries I need. Different _as human activity_ whether it shows up in the national accounts or not. So even if the distinction makes no economic sense at all, nevertheless Marx's distinction between productive and unproductive labor is a profound truth of history, of human culture. Now I leaped a few stages there, and left productive and unproductive undefined. Those steps ought to be filled in -- BUT NOT BY TRYING TO MAKE _ECONOMIC_ SENSE. As soon as you try to prove or disprove this as a statement about technical economics you will lose completely the profound historical (cultural) importance of the distinction. Or to put it another way, to reject Marx's distinction between productive and unproducive labor (by placing on it the burden of practical economics or political economy) you will completely lose the main point of Marx's whole life's labor, that capitalism is a _historical_ phenomenon. That it is _different_. And it is different (among other reasons) because of the difference between the two types of human activity which our Walgreens' clerk has exhibited for us. That distinction could not have arisen except in a capitalist economy. And it probably can't be translated into empirically confirmable/disconfirmable statements about the actual economy -- but one cannot let that interfere with developing one's historical and cultural understanding of the distinctions in living human activity involved. Carrol jd
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
didn't Bob write of the effects of neo-liberal policies in India, rather than neo-lib policies pushed by the IMF? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine From: PEN-L list on behalf of Ulhas Joglekar Sent: Sat 7/24/2004 10:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic Seth Sandronsky wrote: Peasant Suicides in India is a chapter in Contours of Descent: U.S. Economic Fractures and the Landscape of Global Austerity by Robert Pollin that details the ruinous outcomes of IMF policies on Indian farmers. India doesn't owe any money to the IMF. How IMF policies are ruining Indian farmers? As for farmers' suicides, they are largely in Andhra Pradesh, not elsewhere in India. Ulhas Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
From: http://www.epw.org.in EPW Commentary July 10, 2004 Is Rural Economy Breaking Down? Farmers' Suicides in Andhra Pradesh Farmers' suicides represent only the tip of the iceberg. To attribute the rural crisis entirely to poverty and drought would be an oversimplification of the situation and the several ways in which village economy is under stress today. Hastily announced relief packages do not address this complex situation. E A S Sarma Andhra Pradesh, applauded by every visiting dignitary for its reformist and hi-tech approach to governance, has been in the news, but this time for a different reason. Heavy debt and acute poverty have forced many a farmer in the state to take the extreme step of committing suicide. In his first visit outside Delhi as prime minister, Manmohan Singh met some of the affected families and consoled them with a great deal of compassion and kindness.
Re: F911 fizzle?
Why do these numbers represent fizzle? Let say that 9% of the electorate has seen the film, as in the sample. Let's say 18% of those who've seen the film are more likely to vote against Bush as a result, as reported in the sample. Multiplying, we find that 1.6% of the electorate are more likely to vote against Bush, as a result of seeing the film. Now, if you're an anti-Bush campaign consultant, and you have an opportunity for an ad buy that has the potential to move 1.6% of the electorate against Bush, how much would you be willing to pay for that? And that doesn't count the people who have not yet seen the film but will do so before the election, who one would expect would be less committedly anti-Bush then people who saw the movie right away. Did this reporter do the math? - Robert Naiman At 08:23 AM 7/23/2004 -0700, you wrote: http://www.latimes.com/la-et-horn23jul23,1,1478123.story http://www.latimes.com/la-et-horn23jul23,1,1478123.story THE [Los Angeles] TIMES POLL Public Keeping Its Cool Over Election Effect of 'Fahrenheit' By John Horn Times Staff Writer July 23, 2004 Despite its continuing success with the box-office electorate, Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore's sharply satirical attack on President Bush and his administration, appears to be wielding less influence among potential voters than the filmmaker and his supporters might have hoped, a Los Angeles Times Poll has found. The survey found that Fahrenheit is drawing an overwhelmingly Democratic audience, and of the Republicans who have ventured to see it, few appear to be swayed. One of those polled, 27- year-old Thomas Winney, a Republican construction worker who saw the movie in Washington, Mo., said it had no effect on how he views the election. It didn't change my mind at all, Winney said, noting that he was and remains a Bush supporter. Kerry says one thing one time, and another thing the next time. Of the 1,529 registered voters surveyed in the poll, conducted nationwide July 17-21, 9% had seen Moore's film, which has taken in more than $97 million since it opened last month and established itself as the highest-grossing feature-length documentary ever. Of those who have seen the movie, 78% identified themselves as Democrats, 9% as independents and 6% as Republicans. Predictably, the vast majority of those who had seen the film - 92% - said they were planning to vote for Sen. John F. Kerry and Sen. John Edwards for president. Only 3% planned to vote for Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Seventy-nine percent of those who had seen Fahrenheit said the film would not change their November votes; 18% said it made them more likely to vote against Bush; and 3% said it bolstered their resolve to vote for him. Because the Fahrenheit questions were asked only of registered voters, it was not possible to determine whether the film was prompting people to sign up to vote for the first time. Moore closes the film with the message Do something. At a celebrity-studded Beverly Hills screening of the film last month, he said: I hope this country will be back in our hands in a very short period of time. He could not be reached for comment by press time Thursday. Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, said he was not surprised that the film was appealing to a narrow political segment and added that it didn't necessarily need to win over GOP voters in order to have an effect on the election. The important role [movies like this] play is that they are energizers for political points of view, Kohut said. Rush Limbaugh is important not because he converts people - he can't convert anyone. But he gets people riled up. Catherine Krause, a 20-year-old student in Houston, is among the choir to whom Moore is preaching. Even though she identified herself as a Republican, Krause said she went into Fahrenheit intending to vote against Bush - and came out with the same opinion. I'm not a fan of the president, Krause, one of the Times Poll respondents, said in an interview Thursday. If Michael Moore had done the film more truthfully, I would have been more impressed with it. But I agree with the main premise. Overall, the Times Poll found that audience members had mixed feelings about the accuracy of Moore's brand of documentary filmmaking. Nine percent found it somewhat or completely inaccurate. But despite attacks from conservative critics, most others granted it at least some credibility, with 31% calling it completely accurate and 58% calling it somewhat accurate. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. ... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: F911 fizzle?
Don't campaigns often pay $5 or $10 per vote? On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 03:10:08PM -0400, Robert Naiman wrote: Why do these numbers represent fizzle? Let say that 9% of the electorate has seen the film, as in the sample. Let's say 18% of those who've seen the film are more likely to vote against Bush as a result, as reported in the sample. Multiplying, we find that 1.6% of the electorate are more likely to vote against Bush, as a result of seeing the film. Now, if you're an anti-Bush campaign consultant, and you have an opportunity for an ad buy that has the potential to move 1.6% of the electorate against Bush, how much would you be willing to pay for that? And that doesn't count the people who have not yet seen the film but will do so before the election, who one would expect would be less committedly anti-Bush then people who saw the movie right away. Did this reporter do the math? - Robert Naiman At 08:23 AM 7/23/2004 -0700, you wrote: http://www.latimes.com/la-et-horn23jul23,1,1478123.story http://www.latimes.com/la-et-horn23jul23,1,1478123.story THE [Los Angeles] TIMES POLL Public Keeping Its Cool Over Election Effect of 'Fahrenheit' By John Horn Times Staff Writer July 23, 2004 Despite its continuing success with the box-office electorate, Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore's sharply satirical attack on President Bush and his administration, appears to be wielding less influence among potential voters than the filmmaker and his supporters might have hoped, a Los Angeles Times Poll has found. The survey found that Fahrenheit is drawing an overwhelmingly Democratic audience, and of the Republicans who have ventured to see it, few appear to be swayed. One of those polled, 27- year-old Thomas Winney, a Republican construction worker who saw the movie in Washington, Mo., said it had no effect on how he views the election. It didn't change my mind at all, Winney said, noting that he was and remains a Bush supporter. Kerry says one thing one time, and another thing the next time. Of the 1,529 registered voters surveyed in the poll, conducted nationwide July 17-21, 9% had seen Moore's film, which has taken in more than $97 million since it opened last month and established itself as the highest-grossing feature-length documentary ever. Of those who have seen the movie, 78% identified themselves as Democrats, 9% as independents and 6% as Republicans. Predictably, the vast majority of those who had seen the film - 92% - said they were planning to vote for Sen. John F. Kerry and Sen. John Edwards for president. Only 3% planned to vote for Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Seventy-nine percent of those who had seen Fahrenheit said the film would not change their November votes; 18% said it made them more likely to vote against Bush; and 3% said it bolstered their resolve to vote for him. Because the Fahrenheit questions were asked only of registered voters, it was not possible to determine whether the film was prompting people to sign up to vote for the first time. Moore closes the film with the message Do something. At a celebrity-studded Beverly Hills screening of the film last month, he said: I hope this country will be back in our hands in a very short period of time. He could not be reached for comment by press time Thursday. Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, said he was not surprised that the film was appealing to a narrow political segment and added that it didn't necessarily need to win over GOP voters in order to have an effect on the election. The important role [movies like this] play is that they are energizers for political points of view, Kohut said. Rush Limbaugh is important not because he converts people - he can't convert anyone. But he gets people riled up. Catherine Krause, a 20-year-old student in Houston, is among the choir to whom Moore is preaching. Even though she identified herself as a Republican, Krause said she went into Fahrenheit intending to vote against Bush - and came out with the same opinion. I'm not a fan of the president, Krause, one of the Times Poll respondents, said in an interview Thursday. If Michael Moore had done the film more truthfully, I would have been more impressed with it. But I agree with the main premise. Overall, the Times Poll found that audience members had mixed feelings about the accuracy of Moore's brand of documentary filmmaking. Nine percent found it somewhat or completely inaccurate. But despite attacks from conservative critics, most others granted it at least some credibility, with 31% calling it completely accurate and 58% calling it somewhat accurate. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. ... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
Perelman, Michael wrote: Farmers' suicides: Why are they localized? Failure of monsoons, farmers' indebtness, shift to the cash crops etc. are among the principal factors. See interview of CPIM Secretary, B.V. Raghavalu for Andhra Pradesh (Pop. about 80 million)for details in Fronline, 19 June-2 July 2004: (i)Interview: CPIM Secretary for Andhra Pradesh, B.V.Raghavalu http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2113/stories/20040702006201900.htm (ii)Other Frontline articles on farmers' suicides in Andhra Pradesh http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2113/fl211300.htm Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
Yes, but why are they localized in only 1 state? Aren't these problems more widespread? On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 08:20:40PM +0100, Ulhas Joglekar wrote: Perelman, Michael wrote: Farmers' suicides: Why are they localized? Failure of monsoons, farmers' indebtness, shift to the cash crops etc. are among the principal factors. See interview of CPIM Secretary, B.V. Raghavalu for Andhra Pradesh (Pop. about 80 million)for details in Fronline, 19 June-2 July 2004: (i)Interview: CPIM Secretary for Andhra Pradesh, B.V.Raghavalu http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2113/stories/20040702006201900.htm (ii)Other Frontline articles on farmers' suicides in Andhra Pradesh http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl2113/fl211300.htm Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/ -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
Michael Perelman wrote: Yes, but why are they localized in only 1 state? Aren't these problems more widespread? I have not studied the pattern of rainfall region by region. Distribution of monsoon varies from region to region and within each region its timing during June-September monsoon period. Some regions also get rains in winter, others have irrigation based on snow fed rivers. Without that sort of study (which I have not done), it's hard to explain why, e.g. we don't hear about suicides by Karnataka farmers _on the same scale_ as those in Andhra Pradesh? Ulhas Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Cuba: Dealing with the dollar
Diane Monaco wrote: There are three -- actually four if you include the euro that is now accepted at a few tourist locations in Havana -- currencies used in Cuba: the Cuban peso, the convertible peso (equivalent to the dollar), and dollars. All three of these currencies circulate freely in Cuba. How far Cuba can be regarded as an independent and socialist nation-state, if there is extensive dollarisation of Cuban economy? Ulhas Yahoo! India Careers: Over 65,000 jobs online Go to: http://yahoo.naukri.com/
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Marvin Gandall wrote: Finally, it seems Carrol has gone anarchist on us: :-) Anarchism is so completely dead that one really need not try particularly hard to distinguish oneself from it. In 1875 after the defeat of the Paris Commune it would not have been possible to predict the political forms of the revolutions in Russia and China, nor would it have been possible to predict (I think) the treason of the leadership in 1914. And the new forms did not drop from the sky or come from revolutionary theorists sitting around and (Gary Hart fashion) dreaming up new ideas. Probably new ideas emerge from within old practices, but only if the old practices are pushed hard, as Yoshie is doing and urging others to do. When I say she is a bit too much wrapped up in the Greens, I refer primarily to further theorizing of and polemics for her position on the lbo and pen-l maillists; Ohio is one of the states where left activity might seriously hurt the DP, so clearly in her local situation it is impossible to be too wrapped up in the Green campaign. For 75 years or so the DP has successfully muffled most forms of mass struggle most of the time. The CPUSA seemed anxious to meet that fate, becoming a mere appendage at times to the DP. (During the Truman Era -- miscalled McCarthy Era -- DP politicians and their lackeys in the labor movement exercised direct repression. Humphrey destroyed the left forces in the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party. Under Reuther Meany the CIO, AFL, AFL-CIO never even really pressured the DP to push for the repeal of Taft-Hartley.) The McGovern campaign absorbed the energies of the anti-war movement and the militancy of the women's movement was absorbed into the polite lobbying through which ERA ratification was sought. Had Roosevelt had his way with Governor Murphy of Michigan the sit-down strikes might well have been militarily crushed. There will never be a good time for leftists to break away from subordination to this enemy; 2004 is perhaps a better time than most. Particularly telling is that the closer we get to the election the more most ABBs, instead of emphasizing that this election is (allegedly) _different_, increasingly spout the same rhetoric that we have been hearing for 30 years, and which will _always_ apply: NLRB; judicial appointments, abortion, etc. This is not ABB; it is Remain with the DP forever. Any argument in 2004 that would have been at all relevant in 2000 is an implicit admission (regardless of how much verbal criticism of the DP accompanies it) that this election is not special but just one more occasion on which to remain tied to the tail of the DP. But these arguments merely heave tofro on these lists, which brings me back to my suggestion to Yoshie: I agree with her arguments but believe that the topic has been exhausted as far as pen-l and lbo are concerned. They may well become relevant again _after the election_ but for now, as I suggested, forms of commodity fetishism, among other topics, might be more fruitful at the present time. Concern with November 2004 here on pen-l and lbo is more like scratching an itch than discussing topics of concern. Carrol I think Yoshie has gotten a bit too wrapped up in the Greens (in the 2004 election). We cannot know the form that socialist activity will take in the future, but we can be fairly certain that it will not be electoral and will involve mass resistance to imperialist policies. Arguments against the Greens are equally arguments against paying any attention at all to elections at any level. Marv Gandall
u/p labor
[was: something about Thomas Frank] cc writes:Now I leaped a few stages there, and left productive and unproductive undefined. Those steps ought to be filled in -- BUT NOT BY TRYING TO MAKE _ECONOMIC_ SENSE. As soon as you try to prove or disprove this as a statement about technical economics you will lose completely the profound historical (cultural) importance of the distinction. there's economics and then there's economics. the unproductive/productive distinction may make no sense in terms of neoclassical economics (though many NCs see government labor as unproductive), but it makes sense in terms of Marxian economics. U labor doesn't contribute to surplus-value, whereas P labor does. I don't know if the concept U/P is very useful, though. jd
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
In a message dated 7/24/2004 1:04:02 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Or to put it another way, to reject Marx's distinction between productive and unproductive labor (by placing on it the burden of practical economics or political economy) you will completely lose the main point of Marx's whole life's labor, that capitalism is a _historical_ phenomenon. That it is _different_. And it is different (among other reasons) because of the difference between the two types of human activity which our Walgreens' clerk has exhibited for us. That distinction could not have arisen except in a capitalist economy. And it probably can't be translated into empirically confirmable/disconfirmable statements about the "actual" economy -- but one cannot let that interfere with developing one's historical and cultural understanding of the distinctions in living human activity involved. Carrol Comment Poetic. I understand my historical connection. You are correct on the entire spans of the polemics concerning electoral politics and Marx Capital Volume 1 . . . in my opinion. Profound piece. Nothing anarchist about it. Very working class . . . very proletarian . . . very communist. Melvin P.
Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic
Ulhas and Jim, My bad. I should have written neoliberal, not IMF, policies in India. Seth Re: Subject: Re: Suicides, Military and Economic by Ulhas Joglekar 24 July 2004 Seth Sandronsky wrote: Peasant Suicides in India is a chapter in Contours of Descent: U.S. Economic Fractures and the Landscape of Global Austerity by Robert Pollin that details the ruinous outcomes of IMF policies on Indian farmers. India doesn't owe any money to the IMF. How IMF policies are ruining Indian farmers? As for farmers' suicides, they are largely in Andhra Pradesh, not elsewhere in India. Ulhas _ Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to Dig Yourself Out of Debt from MSN Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
HDI, GNP and the PPP factor
Louis had expressed some belief that official statistics may have biases and there has been an ongoing discussion of the Human Development Index. So, I thought I should look up the numbers for the impact of the PPP effect alone. For the 130 or so countries listed as Low and Middle Income the World Bank calculates a Gross National Income (GNI, formerly called Gross National Product, GNP) of $6.1 trillion in 2002. This is using the Bank's own version of the standard National Accounts technique, similar to the U.S. government, and uses a 3 year average of exchange rates adjusted for inflation using the country's GDP deflator to convert to the US Dollar. BUT, using the PPP technique I described in earlier posts, the World Bank also calculates an imputed (imaginary) GNI. For the same group of countries this calculation boosts their Gross National Income from $6.1 to $20.5 trillion! This is a 320% increase - but just on paper and of course to buy imports, pay debts, etc nothing has improved, although the World Bank calls its international PPP conversion factor the International Dollar. [see http://www.worldbank.org/data/wdi2004/tables/table1-1.pdf for the data]. This PPP version doesn't just inflate National Income it also has statistical biases that show economic progress over time (even if there had been none) and show neo-liberal policies as successful (even they have produced no improvement). Only 6 years earlier the standard version of GNI showed the Low and Middle Income as having almost the same GNI - $5.7 trillion. The PPP version for that year showed a GNI of $15.1 So, in just 6 years the PPP conversion has gone from increasing stated output by 260% to increasing stated output by 320%. [See the World Bank World Development Indicators 1998 for the comparison] The PPP conversion factor does not seriously inflate the GNI within the High Income group (in fact many years it shrinks the GNI of Europeans and Japanese vis-a-vis the US) so, using the PPP version of National Income purports to show great progress in 'closing the gap' between rich and poor countries. Combined with the PPP-linked World Bank poverty measurement, great progress is shown to have been made in reducing the absolute numbers of the poor [http://www.worldbank.org/data/wdi2004/Section1-intro.pdf]. Indeed, it has been a little noticed trend that today most of the World Bank's 'public relations' type documents, most human development related documents, and most documents arguing for the success of the neo-liberal project use PPP *and only* PPP. Even where there findings would be utterly reversed by the once standard method. Even the introductory chapter to the World Bank's flagship statistical publication (cited above) uses ONLY the more favorable (and yet artificially constructed) version. Even the Human Development Index we have been discussing presents ONLY one version - and this radically changes many stated conclusions. It is not, as if the actual National Income Accounts are not used in other environments where that method would be more favorable to the Bank or the IMF's policy objectives. Indeed in some cases - such as those involving debt negotiations, foreign investment, or sectoral policies promoting the private sector, it appears (by purely casual observation) that *only* the non-PPP version appears. Paul
How Venezuela will spend oil revenues
NY Times, July 24, 2004 Oil, Venezuela's Lifeblood, Is Now Its Social Currency, Too By JUAN FORERO CARACAS, Venezuela - Seventeen months after an antigovernment strike crippled production, Venezuela's state oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, has made what analysts call a Herculean return. Though energy experts say production remains below prestrike levels, the oil-and-gas monolith is, once again, one of the world's great producers of crude. Its giant refining arm is talking of adding two refineries to the three already operating in the United States. The company says it is embarking on a strategy, heavily dependent on foreign oil companies, to nearly double production by 2009. All this is part of a grand design made possible largely by sky-high oil prices, which have nearly doubled the expected revenue of Pdvsa (pronounced peh-deh-VEH-sah), as the company is known. But while Pdvsa's talk of foreign investment and ramped-up production is welcome in the boardrooms of the world's biggest oil companies, in recent months much of the new earnings have been siphoned from exploration and production projects that some energy analysts say Pdvsa needs to recover fully from the strike. Instead, the windfall is financing a social revolution long promised by President Hugo Chávez's 5½-year-old government to extricate the country from its malaise and ease life for the poor, an effort that had been hobbled by the strike and a 2002 coup that temporarily ousted the firebrand leader. And with the Aug. 15 recall referendum that could end Mr. Chávez's presidency drawing ever nearer, the spending spree - on everything from housing to railroads, health clinics and literacy programs - is an increasingly important, and successful, tool for solidifying support for Mr. Chávez. Recent polls show he could squeak to victory. Pdvsa's new role has raised eyebrows among oil executives and in Washington, which has long counted on Venezuela as one of the four big exporters of oil to the United States and which has been hoping Pdvsa will help curtail the reliance on Middle Eastern crude. The company that has emerged from the ashes of the strike that ended in February 2003 is nothing like the button-down, corporate-style company that in the 1990's was often the No. 1 provider of foreign oil to the United States. Gone is the by-the-book giant, which had $42 billion in sales, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission last October. Gone is the multinational whose managers once proudly compared Pdvsa to Exxon Mobil. Gone, too, are 18,000 experienced executives and managers who were fired for their role in the strike. full: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/24/business/worldbusiness/24venez.html -- Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: u/p labor
Speaking of unproductive labour, I just posted to another mailing list -- swt, shorter worktime list -- a draft essay about a seminal discussion of unproductive labour, fictitious capital, inconvertible paper money and superfluous things. It's an introductory essay to Charles Wentworth Dilke's anonymously published pamphlet, The Source and Remedy of the National Difficulties, mentioned in a footnote in the preface by Engels to vol. II of Capital. According to Engels, Marx saved the pamphlet from falling into oblivion. Well, Marx may have saved it from total oblivion, but I transcribed it and posted it on the internet! Here's the essay: http://www.worklessparty.org/timework/srintro.pdf ...and here's the transcribed pamphlet: http://www.worklessparty.org/timework/source%20and%20remedy.pdf Jim Devine wrote, there's economics and then there's economics. the unproductive/productive distinction may make no sense in terms of neoclassical economics (though many NCs see government labor as unproductive), but it makes sense in terms of Marxian economics. U labor doesn't contribute to surplus-value, whereas P labor does. I don't know if the concept U/P is very useful, though. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: u/p labor
Tom deserves a note of thanks for posting this valuable literature. Going to the site, I found that you can also find a pin-up of Tom. http://www.worklessparty.org/tomwalker.shtml -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: HDI, GNP and the PPP factor
Indeed, it has been a little noticed trend that today most of the World Bank's 'public relations' type documents, most human development related documents, and most documents arguing for the success of the neo-liberal project use PPP *and only* PPP. Even where there findings would be utterly reversed by the once standard method. Even the introductory chapter to the World Bank's flagship statistical publication (cited above) uses ONLY the more favorable (and yet artificially constructed) version. Even the Human Development Index we have been discussing presents ONLY one version - and this radically changes many stated conclusions. It is not, as if the actual National Income Accounts are not used in other environments where that method would be more favorable to the Bank or the IMF's policy objectives. Indeed in some cases - such as those involving debt negotiations, foreign investment, or sectoral policies promoting the private sector, it appears (by purely casual observation) that *only* the non-PPP version appears. Paul Paul, why don't you put together your notes on the PPP factor that you've posted here and publish it as an article for the general audience? -- Yoshie * Critical Montages: http://montages.blogspot.com/ * Greens for Nader: http://greensfornader.net/ * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Does any of this ring a bell?
Columbia, reports the Financial Times of 07-19-04 has "put itself back on the oil maps" due to "improved security" and revised tax laws. The Clinton-era military aid, along with the assassination of workers' leaders, high prices, and reduced taxes have brought ExxonMobil, Burlington Resources, and Shell back to the offshore Tayrona bloc and the onshore Magdalena Valley. The number of new exploration wells is the highest drilled since1990. 1990? Does that yearring a bell with anyone? Speaking of bells, Columbia's production hasn't exactly followed the Hubbert'sbell curve, remaining relatively static until 1995 whendaily output jumped some 40 percent, jumping another33 percent from 1997 to 1999, then dropping 12percent in 2000. Oh well, those pesky details. Here's another one for those who got their Jones on..., this one about the elasticity of "reserves." Columbia's proven reserves in 1990 measured 3.2 billion barrels; in 2003, 1.6 billion barrels.Oh myGod.the party's over; the hydrocarbon era is done.wait a minute. Between 1990 and 2003, Columbia produced 2.9 billion barrels of oil. How can we subtract 2.9 billion from 3.2 billion and still have 1.6 billion? Because reserves are an economic, not geological, calculation.
Re: HDI, GNP and the PPP factor
Yoshie, you are not the only one that has been pestering Paul. Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 -Original Message- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yoshie Furuhashi Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 7:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] HDI, GNP and the PPP factor Indeed, it has been a little noticed trend that today most of the World Bank's 'public relations' type documents, most human development related documents, and most documents arguing for the success of the neo-liberal project use PPP *and only* PPP. Even where there findings would be utterly reversed by the once standard method. Even the introductory chapter to the World Bank's flagship statistical publication (cited above) uses ONLY the more favorable (and yet artificially constructed) version. Even the Human Development Index we have been discussing presents ONLY one version - and this radically changes many stated conclusions. It is not, as if the actual National Income Accounts are not used in other environments where that method would be more favorable to the Bank or the IMF's policy objectives. Indeed in some cases - such as those involving debt negotiations, foreign investment, or sectoral policies promoting the private sector, it appears (by purely casual observation) that *only* the non-PPP version appears. Paul Paul, why don't you put together your notes on the PPP factor that you've posted here and publish it as an article for the general audience? -- Yoshie * Critical Montages: http://montages.blogspot.com/ * Greens for Nader: http://greensfornader.net/ * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: Does any of this ring a bell?
sartesian wrote: Columbia, reports the Financial Times of 07-19-04 has put itself back on the oil maps due to improved security and revised tax laws. I think hiring Jeffrey Sachs and Joseph Stiglitz might have helped as well. -- Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: Does any of this ring a bell?
I didn't know Uribe hired Sachs and Stiglitz. - Original Message - From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 7:52 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Does any of this ring a bell? sartesian wrote: Columbia, reports the Financial Times of 07-19-04 has put itself back on the oil maps due to improved security and revised tax laws. I think hiring Jeffrey Sachs and Joseph Stiglitz might have helped as well. -- Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
