http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A16365-2001Apr28?language=printer
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brown, Martin (NCI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 8:00 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:11155] RE: Re: Re: the enemy's statistics
> I have been working with OECD on a cross-national study of breast cancer.
> This study only involves developed countries (I guess with the exception
of
> Mexico). Even within this group it is true that that quality and
reliability
> of statistics is highly variable by country. Of course, developing
national
> statistics on national expenditures and outcomes at the disease-specific
> level is a lot more arcane than more general national health and income
> statistics. I felt a little guilty working for this NATO - like agency (I
> don't get any money from them, this is considered part of my professional
> NCI duties like virtually every consulting I do - we have real ethics
> regulations, unlike Universities). But then I saw an article in the
> Washington Post the other day reporting that OECD has become the latest
> favorite villain of the U.S. right. It seems that OECD published a very
> mild report suggesting development of an international code of standards
to
> prevent off-shore banking havens from being used to shield money gained
from
> criminal activity and tax evasion. This caused a torrent of abuse from
the
> U.S. right, portraying the OECD report as calling for a world government
> that would violate the sacred right of wealth holders to freely move their
> assets anywhere in world for any reason, especially tax avoidance.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ALI KADRI [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 10:44 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEN-L:11154] Re: Re: the enemy's statistics
>
>
> On a more concrete or detailed level, much of the data
> is not gathered by the UN but through the national
> stastistical offices. So the quality of the data is in
> doubt when the conuntry's bureau of statistics in
> Benin has a reputation for rigging stuff. Statistics
> from the the transition economies are fairly reliable
> because these countries had highly qualified people in
> place. UN statistics are better or at least used to be
> before the big restructuring. Some of the old stock of
> UN statisticians studied with Tinbergen, and people
> like Kalecki, Myrdal and others were UN
> economist-statisticians. But the big restructuring
> beginning with the end of the cold war killed off any
> reliable statistics on the poor, women, and other
> essential developmental programs because it attacked
> anything to do with development and emphasized the
> role of private capital in developemntal processes,
> hence, the rise of microcredit, fdi, tncs etc....
> An area which which everyone should be aware of the
> poor quality of trade statistics in the developing
> world.
> The point I want to make is again much of the
> statistics are nationally generated; back in the good
> old days the qulaity was a bit better because UN
> statisticians tried to systemetize the data and the
> data collection process and provide assitance to
> national bureaus as needed.
> by the way Kalecki was serving in the new york office
> in the 1950's as senior UN official, but with macarthy
> having influence in the un administration, the un
> demoted to a lower level. this to my knowledge is the
> only demotion in UN history.
> One area of concern
> --- Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jim Devine:
> > >Don't you think that the UN statistics indicating a
> > rise in mortality in
> > >Russia are valid, at least as ballpark estimates?
> > why do you accept these
> > >statistics -- which make a newly capitalist country
> > look horrible -- and
> > >not others, that might indicate that it's possible
> > for workers to win
> > >longer life-spans under capitalism if they fight
> > hard enough and they're
> > >lucky? Is it because you agree with the political
> > conclusions that jump out
> > >of the one set of statistics (that the transition
> > to capitalism is a bad
> > >thing) and not those of the other (that capitalism
> > might allow some
> > >reforms)? If so, that's totally fallacious.
> >
> > This is not about whether one should use or not use
> > the enemy's statistics.
> > It is about using them in a reductionist way like
> > Doug and Brad do. If
> > somebody asked me if South Korea was making progress
> > or not making
> > progress, the last place I'd look is the HDI report.
> > I'd look at Marty
> > Hart-Landsburg's books.
> >
> > I have been studying Latin America closely since
> > 1974 when I was involved
> > in a faction fight in the Fourth International over
> > guerrilla warfare. As a
> > reporter for the anti-Mandel faction, I worked
> > closely with Argentine
> > Trotskyists and learned a lot about the problems of
> > the country through
> > discussions with them and reading their documents.
> > In the early 1980s I got
> > involved with the Committee in Solidarity with the
> > People of El Salvador
> > first and then with Nicaragua solidarity
> > organizations from 1987 onwards.
> > Through a combination of studying, organizing and
> > publishing a newsletter
> > for a city-wide coalition, I learned much about the
> > region. If somebody
> > asked me how Central America was faring, I wouldn't
> > dream of extrapolating
> > a column from a UN spreadsheet and saying, "Things
> > are looking better." (In
> > fact, GDP was on the rise all through the Somoza
> > era. But the social impact
> > of the economic changes wrought through the
> > introduction of large-scale
> > cattle-ranching was what produced the Sandinista
> > revolution.)
> >
> > There is an implicit logic in Brad and Doug
> > relentless touting of these
> > figures. If you take some god-forsaken third world
> > country that is
> > experiencing something like a 10 percent growth rate
> > over some defined
> > time-span, you might conclude that--ceteris
> > parebis--the country would
> > eventually reach first world levels. This is a
> > reformist illusion. It is at
> > odds with a Marxist understanding of how capitalism
> > operates in places like
> > Argentina, South Korea, etc. I can understand why
> > Brad would argue along
> > these lines. He is an outspoken neoliberal. Why Doug
> > argues along the same
> > lines (while holding out for some vague classless
> > "humane regime") is
> > another story altogether and a depressing one at
> > that.
> >
> > Louis Proyect
> > Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
> http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>
