me:>>One of the nice things about this is that some of the
scarcity-rent can be wasted without it being a horrible thing, though
obviously the less waste, the better. <<

Julio:> It may be my temperament, but I tend to stress the exact
opposite: The horrible thing about these oil rents is that they lead
people to complacency by creating the impression that waste is
affordable.  <

you're right, of course. But in context, I was discussing the likely
small impact of not having economists on Chavez's team.

>The oil rents appear to buffer or insulate the economy from the
competitive pressures of the world market (which we may view as a
subset of the pressures of the overall class struggle).  But those
pressures don't disappear just because you don't have them in sight.
You ignore them at your peril.  In fact, when they're visible it may
be too late. <

Yes -- Chavez, or rather the Venezuelans, MUST think ahead to the
future, when oil prices are going to fall and the "free ride" provided
by oil scarcity rents will disappear.

>If the economy is not becoming more efficient (productive) at the
pace of those leading the world market (actually, faster when you're
trying to catch up), then it's effectively losing ground.  And, of
course, the other challenge is to *correctly* answer the question
"productive of what?" -- which is the substance of the economic and
political strategy of the revolution.  (And strategy is not only
*outcome* but also *process*, an aspect about which Michael Lebowitz
should have much to say.)  IMO, the most strict economic vigilance has
to be in force all the time, whether the oil price is low or high. <

right.
--
Jim Devine / "There can be no real individual freedom in the presence
of economic insecurity." -- Chester Bowles

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStrmeipper.htm

Reply via email to