====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Leonardo Kosloff <holmof...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Prof. Perelman, First of all, I don't think we use titles here. > (by the way, you don't have any relation to Grigori Perelman?, he's one of the > latest's winner of the Fields medalists -the biggest prize in math-, but he > rejected > it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman), I don't know if we are related, but his behavior suggests that we might be. > Anyway, as I was reading I found this remark: > > "The economy would eventually recover from the crises, but > these downturns could be long-lasting unless something else intervened, > such as World War II. The > competitive pressures brought on by the economic crises encouraged replacement > investment and the search for improved techniques, which eventually helped to > make the economy stronger. This process > created enormous human costs, especially because recovery could many years." > > > From what I've read on the 30's, mostly from Marxists, that > seems to be the case. Yet, last week I found a new article by Anwar Shaikh, he > says that What Shaikh says is true. The New Deal was having a positive effect on the economy, but in 1937, the budget cutters pulled the rug out from the New Deal & the economy fell back down again until WW II. I should have been more clear in what you cited. Policies can shorten the recovery time, but in the absence of such policies, a crisis can take decades to recover. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 530 898 5321 fax 530 898 5901 http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
