Maybe you guys how been over this before I signed on, but even if the 'dualism is hardwired' something has changed since post-war period. GM for example used to make cars (well, vehicles if we include military); I read a year or so ago in the business section of my local rag that that year they made more or a profit in money market speculation than they did on production. I would argue that the post-war boom was self-limiting, and when productive expansion became difficult, capital poured into the finance sector, the contradictions of which are evident in the current shock. I sense that, back in the productive economy, they're back with the old 'overcapacity' issue. I don't have easy access to primary material, which is why I've been so interested in the 'overcapacity' issue. Comments welcome. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Henwood Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 1:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:904] Re: Re: RE: Re: overcapacity - 'Ford chief predictsdoom' [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Doug Henwood (correctly) insists that the same firms are often both >financial and industrial, but this dualism really amounts to a >schizophrenia. Yeah, but the dualism is sort of hardwired into the M-C-M' formula, no? Doug
