******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Comrade Shalva, thanks for the link. I think though you are a little unfair to Michael Roberts. His argument, as far as I understand it, is that capitalism is fatally flawed (Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall) and must be replaced by socialism. His anti-Keynesianism does at times seem to put him on the side of the right-wing anti-Keynesians in that he argues the state cannot do anything and they argue the state should not try. Compromisers like myself, think that a bout of Keynesianism would be a very good thing for the poor whose plight is increasingly desperate. I am too old now to wait for an economic Armageddon which will put a radical alternative in place. That does not make me a reformist. I have no doubt that capitalism must be replaced in *toto. * But we need broad fronts and general movement and that is why I welcome the Kuttner article, though one is tempted to say "Duh!" at the spectacle of a liberal trying to work out capitalism. comradely Gary On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Shalva Eliava via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > ******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > ***************************************************************** > > This article isn't really all that interesting for radicals, but it did > have one line that I liked, since it highlights the affinities between the > latter-day falling profit rate fundamentalists and the neoclassicists: > > "On the inequality conundrum, conservative economists divide four ways. > Some are denialists. Rising inequality is simply a mirage if you make the > right adjustments to the data. Scott Winship of the Manhattan Institute > operates a small cottage industry purporting to demonstrate that if you > correct for a variety of factors ranging from household size to counting > health insurance as income, the statistical rise in inequality mostly > vanishes." > > - this is exactly the argument that Kliman and his disciples (e.g. Michael > Roberts) make...just so they can rule out "underconsumption" as a factor of > crisis. > > http://prospect.org/article/new-inequality-debate-0 > > > Отправлено с Айтелеграфа > > _________________________________________________________ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/gary.maclennan1%40gmail.com _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
