==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==
Good reply Marce. Buddhists have lots of good ideas, if you can
separate the wheat from the chaff.
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Marce Cameron wrote:
> In fairness, the Cuban columnist's favourable reference to Bhutan was
> related to just one thing: the fact that the regime does not view GDP
> growth as an appropriate measure of development, so they have come up
> with a different concept that encompasses other important things, such
> as ecological sustainability and respect for local culture. (Since
> about 2005 Cuba has adopted a unique way of measuring GDP that takes
> into account universal subsides for social services that would slip
> under the radar of traditional measures of GDP growth; this seems to
> be why the UN excluded Cuba from the Human Development Report rankings
> this year, complaining of inadequate data). He did not endorse
> Bhutan's semi-feudal social relations, the monarchy, discrimination
> against ethnic Nepalese, the banning of progressive political parties,
> etc. He did not hold up Bhutan as some kind of model for Cuba's social
> development. He simply used Bhutan's attempt to come up with national
> goals other than maximising GDP growth as something that is relevant
> to Cuba and its socialist orientation. Am I aware that "Gross National
> Happiness" is a Buddhist concept? I assumed so. But so what? Do
> Marxists have monopoly on good ideas?
>
> Marce Cameron
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
