[PEN-L:8040] Re: RE: Good critiques of MAI, Tobin tax/alternatives
There is a critical book called MAI by Maude Barlow and Bruce Cameron, 2 Canadian activists and writers.It focusses mostly on the MAI as it is applied to Canada but you mind find it useful, though it is too nationalistic and social democratic for me. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has a number of papers on the Tobin tax including a speech and QA by Tobin himself. Sam Pawlett
[PEN-L:8041] BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 1999 RELEASED TODAY: CPI -- On a seasonally adjusted basis, the CPI-U was unchanged in May, following a 0.7 percent rise in April. Energy costs declined 1.3 percent in May, reflecting a sharp turnaround in the index for gasoline. ... The food index, which increased 0.1 percent in April, rose 0.4 percent in May. ... Excluding food and energy, the CPI-U increased 0.1 percent in May, following a 0.4 percent rise in April. The deceleration in May reflects downturns in the indexes for apparel, for tobacco and smoking products, and for airline fares, coupled with a smaller increase in shelter costs. ... REAL EARNINGS -- Real average weekly earnings increased by 0.7 percent from April to May after seasonal adjustment, according to preliminary data. This was due to a 0.3 percent increase in average weekly hours and a 0.4 percent gain in average hourly earnings. The CPI-W was unchanged. ... Real average weekly earnings grew by 0.9 percent over the year. ... The Commerce Department has officially pulled out of an Internet partnership with a private company after the project raised concerns about fee-based access to government documents. The service, which was designed to let paying customers find government information on the Internet quickly and easily, was officially started today, but as a strictly private venture. .Critics had questioned whether the joint service contradicted the administration's pledge to make the Internet and government information more accessible. So while top-level Commerce officials who had been unaware of the partnership investigated the matter, the private company, Northern Light, began offering free trials of the search service. ... (New York Times, June 15, page C2). DUE OUT FRIDAY: Regional and State Employment and Unemployment: May 1999 application/ms-tnef
[PEN-L:8042] China Rebuffs Clinton Envoy On Bombing
China Rebuffs Clinton Envoy On Bombing BEIJING, Jun 17, 1999 -- (Reuters) China rejected on Thursday U.S. envoy Thomas Pickering's explanation of a series of intelligence blunders that led to NATO bombing Beijing's embassy in Belgrade. "The Chinese side refuted this report and so far the explanations by the U.S. side are not convincing," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said in a statement. She repeated a demand for punishment of those responsible for the May 7 bombing, which killed three Chinese journalists and sparked nationwide anti-U.S. protests, and said Beijing wanted compensation. Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan on Wednesday rebuffed Pickering's explanation of an attack which the Chinese state media have said repeatedly was deliberate. On Thursday, the official Xinhua published an account of the meeting. It said Pickering admitted there were three basic errors which led to the embassy becoming a target in NATO's air war against Yugoslavia. The intended target was a Yugoslav military procurement office, but two Yugoslav and one American map misplaced the Chinese embassy, it quoted Pickering as saying. U.S. military databases had not been updated with the mission's location and the target review system failed to turn up the error, he said. Pickering stopped short of promising punishment, Xinhua said, but did not rule it out. He said the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. Department of Defense were still interviewing people involved and "it will be determined whether any disciplinary action will be taken". Xinhua also detailed China's rebuttal. It said China believed it was "impossible" for NATO not to know where Beijing's mission was and that the precision with which the embassy was destroyed proved "the U.S. side had a very detailed knowledge of the building structure". China has specifically linked its willingness to resume negotiations on its entry to the World Trade Organization to the outcome of Pickering's mission. It broke off WTO talks, and froze military exchanges and a human rights dialogue, after the bombing. Analysts were divided on whether the rebuff of Pickering's explanation dealt a fatal blow to China's chance of entering the WTO this year, which U.S. President Bill Clinton said was his aim. Failure to gain membership before a new global round of trade talks begins in November could mean a delay to Chinese membership of several years. Pickering, in a statement before heading back to Washington, gave no insight into his meetings, but he said: "We look forward to further productive discussions with China in the mutual interests of the two countries." But Xinhua's story of Pickering's meetings was broadly in line with an account offered by a State Department official responsible for China to selected U.S. reporters. "It may be in the end that we have to essentially agree to disagree," the U.S. official was quoted as saying. But, the United States was "hopeful that after a period of time, we will get back more or less to normal relations with China". The White House on Thursday said it hoped Beijing would eventually understand the bombing was an accident. "It's our hope that once China has had a chance to review and absorb the information that they'll understand that this was a tragic accident," White House spokesman Joe Lockhart, in Paris with Clinton, said. Zhang said the ball was in the U.S. court. "It is up to the one who ties the knot to untie it. Whoever started the trouble should end it," the spokeswoman said. "The Chinese government has always attached importance to the development of Sino-U.S. ties," Zhang said. "But principles must be topmost in developments in relations, especially on principles of respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity." The embassy bombing sparked three days of violent protests outside the U.S. and British missions in Beijing. Tens of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of other major cities. The U.S. consul's residence in Chengdu was torched. Diplomats had predicted Beijing would reject any explanation of the bombing as an error, partly because public opinion would not allow it. However, one Western diplomat said China's rebuff to Pickering did not necessarily
[PEN-L:8043] Re: Tobacco advertising to end in UK
The tobacco industry, a state monopoly, is very powerful in China. China is the biggest market for international tobaco. On this issue, China is among the most backward nation in the world, although smoking has recently been banned in public places in major cities. The reason for this backwardness can be traced to the use of tabacco by veteran revolutionaries to help them withstand the hardship of their early struggles underground. And after the revolution, by the time tobacco smoking is universally recognized as generally not benign, the leadership was unable to deal objectively with the problem. When elders do, youth follows. Instead of bogus human rights issues, it would be more constructive for progressives of the world to pressure China to face its tobbacco curse. Henry C.K. Liu Chris Burford wrote: The UK government is to issue regulations today which will end tobacco advertising on hoardings and in magazines by the end of the year. This is 2 years earlier than the EU deadline. There are embarrassments for Blair in this, because there will be extensions for certain sports including motor racing. Ecclestone, a racing capitalist, gave New Labour 1 million pounds. But hypocrisy is hypocrisy, and cannot be eliminated from politics, only made bare. What do we expect? The good news is that this is further progress for what Marx called "social production controlled by social foresight". Perhaps I will quote the wider passage from his inaugural address to the First International 1964. A word of caution: in this context "middle class" means the capitalist class, not, as today, the educated layer of the working class who are "class conscious" in the negative sense of the term. "The struggle about the legal restriction of the hours of labour raged the more fiercely since, apart from frightened avarice, it told indeed upon the great contest between the blind rule of supply and demand laws which form the political economy of the middle class, and social production controlled by social foresight, which from the political economy of the working class. Hence the Ten Hours' Bill was not only a great practical success; it was the victory of the middle class succumbed to the political economy of the working class." Chris Burford London
[PEN-L:8046] RE: Good critiques of MAI, Tobin tax/alternatives
There's quite a bit of stuff on the web, depending on what you are looking for. I believe Rob Weissman has written in Mulitinational Monitor on the Tobacco/MAI/WTO nexus. You can search back issues of the Monitor on their web site at www.essential.org. for other MAI stuff, what better place to start that www.preamble.org and www.tradewatch.org (my present and former employers.) There's a lot of stuff on the Tobin Tax now, Halifax Initiative did a big campaign in Canada, and they developed a lot of popular education materials. Here in the U.S. there is the Tobin Tax Initiative in California, headed by Ruthann Cecil. There's plenty of academic writing in support of transaction taxes, including by the Treasury Secretary-designate, before he worked for the Administration. Corporation for Enterprise Development did a big study on MAI impacts, I can't remember if it touched on the tobacco issue specifically. The WTO does have a public health exemption, and my memory is that part of Thailand's anti-tobacco law was upheld by the WTO under this exemption -- part was struck down. The proposed MAI (now considered dead at the OECD, but resurfacing in other forms in FTAA, TEP, and possibly the threatened Seattle WTO round) had no such exemption. -bob At 09:49 AM 6/16/99 -0400, you wrote: I am examing provisions of the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) for their potential impact on the ability of governments to conduct tobacco control activities. I have been away from the Intl trade and finance arena for about three years, and would like to get any input from the list on good critical assessments of MAI (and trade-investment agreements like NAFTA), the Tobin tax, and any alternatives to the Tobin tax. Any suggestions? Jeff --- Robert Naiman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Preamble Center 1737 21st NW Washington, DC 20009 phone: 202-265-3263 fax: 202-265-3647 http://www.preamble.org/ ---
[PEN-L:8048] Re: Re: RE: Good critiques of MAI, Tobin tax/alternatives
By far, a better critique from a Canadian perspective of MAI is Andrew Jackson and Matthew Sanger (eds.) *DISMANTLING DEMOCRACY*, (CCPA/Lorimer, 1998). It is a superb collection of critiques by various experts on many aspects of the MAI -- e.g. the MAI and the Environment byMichell Swenarchuk or The MAI and the World Economy, by Greg Albo. Paul Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba Date sent: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 23:45:28 -0700 From: Sam Pawlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copies to: "'POST-KEYNESIAN THOUGHT'" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[PEN-L:8040] Re: RE: Good critiques of MAI, Tobin tax/alternatives Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is a critical book called MAI by Maude Barlow and Bruce Cameron, 2 Canadian activists and writers.It focusses mostly on the MAI as it is applied to Canada but you mind find it useful, though it is too nationalistic and social democratic for me. The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has a number of papers on the Tobin tax including a speech and QA by Tobin himself. Sam Pawlett
[PEN-L:8049] chomsky on Kosova/o settlement
Kosovo Peace Accord (Z, July '99) By Noam Chomsky On March 24, U.S.-led NATO air forces began to pound the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY, Serbia and Montenegro), including Kosovo, which NATO regards as a province of Serbia. On June 3, NATO and Serbia reached a Peace Accord. The U.S. declared victory, having successfully concluded its "10-week struggle to compel Mr. Milosevic to say uncle," Blaine Harden reported in the New York Times. It would therefore be unnecessary to use ground forces to "cleanse Serbia" as Harden had recommended in a lead story headlined "How to Cleanse Serbia." The recommendation was natural in the light of American history, which is dominated by the theme of ethnic cleansing from its origins and to the present day, achievements celebrated in the names given to military attack helicopters and other weapons of destruction. A qualification is in order, however: the term ethnic cleansing" is not really appropriate: U.S. cleansing operations have been ecumenical; Indochina and Central America are two recent illustrations. While declaring victory, Washington did not yet declare peace: the bombing continues until the victors determine that their interpretation of the Kosovo Accord has been imposed. From the outset, the bombing had been cast as a matter of cosmic significance, a test of a New Humanism, in which the "enlightened states" (Foreign Affairs) open a new era of human history guided by "a new internationalism where the brutal repression of whole ethnic groups will no longer be tolerated" (Tony Blair). The enlightened states are the United States and its British associate, perhaps also others who enlist in their crusades for justice. Apparently the rank of "enlightened states" is conferred by definition. One finds no attempt to provide evidence or argument, surely not from their history. The latter is in any event deemed irrelevant by the familiar doctrine of "change of course," invoked regularly in the ideological institutions to dispatch the past into the deepest recesses of the memory hole, thus deterring the threat that some might ask the most obvious questions: with institutional structures and distribution of power essentially unchanged, why should one expect a radical shift in policy -- or any at all, apart from tactical adjustments? But such questions are off the agenda. "From the start the Kosovo problem has been about how we should react when bad things happen in unimportant places," global analyst Thomas Friedman explained in the New York Times as the Accord was announced. He proceeds to laud the enlightened states for pursuing his moral principle that "once the refugee evictions began, ignoring Kosovo would be wrong...and therefore using a huge air war for a limited objective was the only thing that made sense." A minor difficulty is that concern over the "refugee evictions" could not have been the motive for the "huge air war." The United Nations Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported its first registered refugees outside of Kosovo on March 27 (4000), three days after the bombings began. The toll increased until June 4, reaching a reported total of 670,000 in the neighboring countries (Albania, Macedonia), along with an estimated 70,000 in Montenegro (within the FRY), and 75,000 who had left for other countries. The figures, which are unfortunately all too familiar, do not include the unknown numbers who have been displaced within Kosovo, some 2-300,000 in the year before the bombing according to NATO, a great many more afterwards. Uncontroversially, the "huge air war" precipitated a sharp escalation of ethnic cleansing and other atrocities. That much has been reported consistently by correspondents on the scene and in retrospective analyses in the press. The same picture is presented in the two major documents that seek to portray the bombing as a reaction to the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo. The most extensive one, provided by the State Department in May, is suitably entitled "Erasing History: Ethnic Cleansing in Kosovo"; the second is the indictment of Milosevic and associates by the International Tribunal on War Crimes in Yugoslavia after the U.S. and Britain "opened the way for what amounted to a remarkably fast indictment by giving [prosecutor Louise] Arbour access to intelligence and other information long denied to her by Western governments," the New York Times reported, with two full pages devoted to the Indictment. Both documents hold that the atrocities began "on or about January 1"; in both, however, the detailed chronology reveals that atrocities continued about as before until the bombing led to a very sharp escalation. That surely came as no surprise. Commanding General Wesley Clark at once described these consequences as "entirely predictable" -- an exaggeration of course; nothing in human affairs is that predictable, though ample evidence is now available revealing that the
[PEN-L:8051] Re: Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
Max, I think there are arguments for both average wages and CPI as indexing options, but I would offer this argument for average wages: it has the potential to become an international standard. In thinking about labor standards that might be pushed internationally, minimum wages are central. It is difficult to write a standard that would be applicable in all countries -- even the standard of "meets minimum subsistence needs" is difficult to define and measure. But pegging the minimum at, say, half the average is perfectly feasible, and low-wage countries can't complain that it has a differential impact on them. Putting our own minimum wage system on this type of automatic pilot would be a small step towards attaining a global minimum. Peter Max Sawicky wrote: Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. Another issue is progressive tax cuts, to contrast with the proposed 15% across-the-board rate cuts being pushed by the GOP. (I'm writing economics resolutions for the ADA convention this week.) mbs
[PEN-L:8053] Re: gay pride month
Hi Jim, Well, he is one of "those Hormels" (old canned pork money, heh.) I don't know if Hormel is owned by the family anymore, though. he's mostly a philanthropist, funded a very lovely g/l/b/t reading research room at the new San Fran library and is very active in Democratic Party fundraising (obviously--are there any other qualifications for being ambassador to a country like Luxembourg?) In today's St. Pete Times I read that the Southern Baptists have called upon Clinton to recall Hormel. BTW, there was/is a flap about Clinton's appointment of James Hormel, an open gay, as US ambassador to Luxemburg (or is it Liechetenstein?) I ask: does he have any connection with the Hormel corporation? frances
[PEN-L:8056] US Official Admits US Public Skeptical re mistake Embassy Bombings
U.S. Details Embassy Bombing for Chinese Beijing Officials Remain 'Skeptical' at Washington's Explanation of Accidental Attack By Michael Laris Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, June 17, 1999; Page A30 BEIJING, June 17 (Thursday)After 5 1/2 hours of meetings detailing how the United States came to bomb the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, Chinese government officials remained "skeptical" that the attack was an accident, according to a member of the U.S. presidential delegation that offered the explanation. The delegation of diplomats and intelligence officials, led by Undersecretary of State Thomas R. Pickering, also delivered a letter from President Clinton to his Chinese counterpart Jiang Zemin offering to pay compensation to the families of those killed and injured in the May 7 bombing. The United States has also agreed to discuss the issue of the damage done to the embassy. The Pickering delegation held discussions with Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan and Yang Jiechi, the ministry's chief diplomat responsible for American affairs, as well as a number of Chinese military officers. U.S. officials presented the most complete account yet of the attack, saying that a series of mistakes over an extended period of time was to blame. Their Chinese counterparts said they were not convinced. "They said it was hard to believe so many things could go wrong at the same time, and I think the American public is going to feel the same way," said the U.S. official. The U.S. side presented the Chinese with a report detailing the errors, and will release the information publicly in the United States within days, according to a U.S. official. The official emphasized that it was not merely a faulty map that led the United States to mistakenly target the embassy and hit it repeatedly with precision bombs. U.S. officials first pointed to an outdated map as a key explanation for the attack last month. Today, officials said that explanation is much too narrow. "It's a more complicated series of mistakes, rather than one mistake," said the U.S. official, who spoke on background. "It's not a faulty map. It's a more complicated set of mistakes." Chinese relations have taken a steep downturn following the bombing, with China suspending a series of important military and arms control contacts. The U.S. delegation sought to make a clear distinction between its efforts to explain and compensate for the bombing in an "appropriate" fashion, and its overall relationship with China. "We certainly don't intend to make amends for the accident through policy concessions," said a member of the U.S. delegation. The official added that the Chinese have not asked them for such concessions. But in recent weeks, Chinese officials have tied a number of important bilateral issues to the bombing. The U.S. Embassy noted that China has agreed to discuss the issue of damage done to U.S. property in China during four days of raucous demonstrations following the bombing. Regarding China's public demands that the "perpetrators" of the bombing be held responsible, the delegation told the Chinese that the "issue of accountability" will be addressed. The Chinese did not ask the delegation "to come up with any specific names or groups or institutions now," said a U.S. official. On the fundamental question of whether Chinese leaders will ever completely accept the U.S. explanation on the bombing, U.S. officials were pessimistic. "We don't have any illusions that they will turn around on a dime and say, 'Oh, we were wrong. We see the light,' " said one member of the delegation. "It may be in the end that we have to agree to disagree," added another member of the delegation. © Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company
[PEN-L:8057] David McReynold's critique of DSA
Last Sunday I was in Philadelphia, speaking to the Brandywine Peace Center - a peace and social justice group that has been doing good work there for many years. Several old friends and members of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) came to hear me, fresh from a meeting of their own. Carl Dahlgren, at 75, looked younger than I do - good Quaker living. After the meeting, during the question period, Ann Davidon, an old friend from WRL, asked about the chance of DSA and the Socialist Party merging. I said there were problems - including the pro-war position DSA had taken. (I didn't go into the other areas, where I tend at times to agree with DSA - a less rigid position on electoral action than the SP takes, and its sound position on class as a determining force). I was told at once by the DSA folks present that "that is just Bogdan Denitch - he doesn't speak for DSA". When I got back I sent out a note to some of the comrades in the Socialist Party, saying the brief encounter helped remind me that, despite the differences with the DSA leadership, there were strong and decent forces in DSA with which we would be in wide agreement in local work. (I still think this, and this letter is meant to explore a problem, not provoke one). And then I brought home the DSA house organ - Democratic Left - which I still get, even though my nominal membership in DSA lapsed many months ago. It had, as always, some good material. Including a sharp review by Jason Schulman of a bio on Irving Howe, some useful notes on MAI (Multilateral Agreement on Investment) by Chris Riddiough. However it also had on the cover three heads: Bombs / Books / Buds. This suggested perhaps something significant on the NATO bombing. (And maybe on literature and Budweiser beer). Inside the front page was the April 21st Statement of the DSA Steering Committee, and the shorter May 15th statement of the National Political Committee. Then in the back, Bogdan Denitch, DSA's Honorary Chair, had three pages for his own article. Sorting this all out was a little like reading Pravda. The short, most recent statement by what I assume is the more representative committee of DSA, began by strongly condemning the NATO bombing. But the statement also said it "reaffirmed" the April statement of the Steering Committee, which was much longer and only opposed the bombing of Belgrade and other urban centers - not the bombing itself, and not the civilian targets which were being hit. The NATO action was not condemned, even though the statement said that "we have never believed that NATO has the moral authority to carry out such missions". (No comment anywhere in either statement that the US, which calls the shots for NATO, was in violation of the UN Charter or that NATO was in violation of its own Charter, so that not only was there a lack of moral authority, there was also a clear problem of the NATO action being in violation of established international law). There was a call in the April statement for the War Crimes Tribunal to continue its work and specifically to prosecute all those responsible for directing ethnic cleansing campaigns - but this call for justice (which I support) did not suggest that perhaps the United States and NATO had taken actions which should fall under the jurisdiction of the War Crimes Tribunal. (Specifically the deliberate hitting of civilian targets, including media and communications, power, bridges, hospitals, factories, etc.). I don't want to parse the politics of the two statements, except to note it was obvious from reading them that they were a desperate effort to bridge major disagreements. (At the bottom of this first page there was a paragraph by the editors which noted there were serious problems, and many issues, including the dissolution of NATO, which ought to be up for discussion in the coming discussion bulletins). Now we turn to the three pages from Bogdan Denitch. Denitch is not only the honorary Chair, he is also the DSA rep to the Socialist International, and Chair of the DSA International Committee, and has sold himself for years to DSA and others (I gather from the two paragraphs introducing his article, the "others" include various "European foreign ministries") as an expert on Yugoslavia. Something I'd never guess from this botched article. He begins with a denunciation of ethnic cleansing (very good, who can disagree), but then, unless you read it carefully, it seems as if the ethnic cleansing was in full swing BEFORE the NATO attack, when in fact it was not. The horror of the ethnic cleansing came after the bombing. Nor does Dentich discuss the role of the KLA in the past year or so until late in the article, thus detaching it from any kind of "cause and effect", and he doesn't note its role in shooting Serb police and troops - and Albanian civilians. Here is Denitch, an expert on Yugoslavia, and all he can say of the KLA is that they have no "visible
[PEN-L:8058] We all shouted, 'Heil Hitler'
Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1999, Thursday, Home Edition The path to peace; German force savors 'moral' postwar debut; Balkans: many older ethnic Albanians recall Nazi troops in WWII as liberators from Serbs. Today's soldiers are happy to hold their heads high. MARJORIE MILLER, TIMES STAFF WRITER PRIZREN, Yugoslavia For the German army, returning to Yugoslavia for the first time since World War II as part of a NATO peacekeeping force marks a final break with a terrible past. The deployment of German combat troops and Leopard-2 tanks into Kosovo province means that the Bundeswehr at last has become a "full partner in NATO with all of the rights and responsibilities" of the other members, said Lt. Col. Dietmar Jeserich. It is a proud moment for the Germans. But many Kosovo Albanians sided with the Nazis during World War II, and today, some of them do not distinguish between the past and present German armies--both of which, to their way of thinking, accomplished the same feat: freeing them from Serbian rule. "This is a second liberation," said Ali Majo, 68, a native of this city in southwestern Kosovo. "I can't describe how it felt when we saw German soldiers come to liberate us again." So much for moral victories in the Balkans. Majo was 10 years old when the German Wehrmacht rolled into Prizren in April 1941. The Nazis arrived in the hills around town on motorcycles, looked through their binoculars and opened fire on a partisan artillery position, he recalled. "After that, they came in and circled the town," Majo said. "We all shouted, 'Heil Hitler.' We were proud of the German soldiers because they liberated us from the Serbs." Naim Poloshka, 72, remembers how one of the Wehrmacht soldiers gave him a chocolate and a ride on his motorcycle. They drove him around town so he could point out houses where partisans lived. Like much of Prizren, Poloshka was stunned when he woke one morning to find that the Germans had hanged nine suspected partisans--five Serbs and four ethnic Albanians--in the center of town overnight. But it did not dampen his enthusiasm for the Nazis. "The enemy of your enemy is your friend," Poloshka said. "We were occupied, and they liberated us." This historical baggage is lost on most of the Kosovars who welcomed the German NATO troops with flowers, kisses and tears of relief this week, as it may have been on the young German soldiers tossed into the air by those celebrating their arrival. "For me, the German troops are welcome," Gafur Musaj, 21, a member of the ethnic Albanians' rebel Kosovo Liberation Army, said after posing for snapshots with a group of Bundeswehr soldiers. "They mean peace for our people." The German troops are happy to be appreciated and to be able to hold their heads high on a foreign mission that finishes what the leaders of the United States and Britain--their World War II enemies--described as a "moral war." German planes flew alongside British fighters during the 11-week North Atlantic Treaty Organization air war--the first time the Luftwaffe had engaged in battle since 1945. A squadron of Tornado jets took off from Piacenza, Italy, to fire missiles on key military targets. Earlier this decade, the German government, still burdened by the country's history of aggression, forced its army to sit out the Persian Gulf War and give only limited support to the peacekeepers in Bosnia-Herzegovina when the war there ended in 1995. They moved into Bosnia only "after the dirty work was done," said a German officer. This time, however, the Bundeswehr will contribute 8,500 troops to the peacekeeping mission. And the troops were among the first to move into Kosovo. The first German contingent arrived in Prizren just after midnight Sunday morning, when the city was still under Serbian control and the situation unstable. At the Morine border crossing with Albania that day, Gen. Helmut Harff negotiated the withdrawal of about 60 Serbian soldiers in front of a crowd of jeering refugees. When the Serbian commander said he needed six hours to withdraw, the general replied: "You have 30 minutes. In fact, now you've got 29 minutes." The Serbs pulled back. © 1999, LEXIS®-NEXIS®, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
[PEN-L:8059] Th Voice of Asian Economic Nationalism
Mahathir Mohamad is a couragaeous leader of Asian economic nationalism. His intereview is worth reading by all interest in Asia and globalization. Examples: I started, from the very beginning to find a way to deal with the problem without resorting to the IMF [International Monetary Fund]. From the very beginning, I thought that resorting to the IMF would not be good for the economy in the first place and would weaken our position to the point where we would lose control over our economy and also our politics. So we had to find a way by ourselves to overcome this currency devaluation, which has cost us billions of dollars. Between the currency devaluation and the fall in the stockmarket, we lost almost $200 billion. That is something that lots of people don't appreciate. Yes, because the market capitalization of the KLSE [Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange] was very high. It was about 800 billion Malaysian ringgit at 2.50 [to the U.S. dollar]. At 2.50 that was about $300 billion U.S. When the share prices went down, the market capitalization of course was depreciated, causing terrible problems for the companies and the banks because they were unable to pay their debts and the banks couldn't collect their debts. So if it is allowed to go on, we would go bankrupt. You can't do any business at all and the government in the end would not be able to collect taxes, because nobody was making any profit. So the question is: How do we overcome this problem without resorting to the IMF? And we came up, I came up, with the idea that we'll adjust everything according to the depreciation in the value of the currency. If the currency is devalued by 20%, okay, we will increase prices by 20%, increase all wages by 20%. That way you will nullify the effect of the devaluation. But the devaluation was not something that is static, it keeps on moving up and down. Obviously, we cannot do this. So we have to think of some other way to overcome this problem. And we looked around, we looked at Chile, we looked at China and at a number of other countries which were poorer than us, but they were not attacked by the currency traders. And we discovered that the difference between them and us is that we allow our currency to be traded, whereas they keep a tight control over their currency. Because of that, China, for example, was able to continue growing during our recession. Obviously, if the currency traders could attack them, they would have attacked them. Indeed, they tried to attack China through Hong Kong and that was a failure. So by preventing currency traders from getting hold of your currency, you can stabilize the economy. We had to look into how to do that. See, most our money was in Singapore. What Singapore did was to offer very high interest rates, siphoning off all the money. Banks had no money to lend. And people were, of course, attracted by the high interest rates or they have a loss of confidence in Malaysian banks and kept their money with branches of foreign banks in Singapore. So then of course the interbank rates went up. All these things created . . . We heard that at one stage there was 32 billion ringgit in Singapore and 20 billion ringgit in Malaysia. Yes, that was about right. We estimated that there would be about 32 billion ringgit in Singapore. And that money was obviously being lent to the currency traders so that they can trade it down. And that was damaging our economy more and more. So the question is how do we get this money out of their control? How do we bring back the money? The answer to that of course is to make the money absolutely valueless outside of Malaysia. So we gave them one month. If within one month, they don't bring back the money, we declare that money as no longer legal tender. It will not be allowed to come in. And if they're not allowed to come in, in whatever form it may be--it may be just bank transactions, figures in books and all that, but they can't just transfer it back by computer or whatever--that will force them to bring the money back into the country. Otherwise they will lose and in fact a lot of people lost money. I believe that a lot of currency traders lost money. Once it is back, the question is how do we prevent the money from going out. And we had of course all these regulations and they have been effective. Also the rate of exchange that we had permitted to fall. The temptation of course is to strengthen it to the old level of 2.5 [to the U.S. dollar]. But if we do that we will not be competitive against our neighbours. We heard that at one stage there was 32 billion ringgit in Singapore and 20 billion ringgit in Malaysia. Yes, that was about right. We estimated that there would be about 32 billion ringgit in Singapore. And that money was obviously being lent to the currency traders so that they can trade it down. And that was damaging our economy more and more. So the question is how do we
[PEN-L:8062] Stupid CPI and real wages question
I have a stupid question regarding the CPI and real wages. My understanding is that real wages are today essentially where they were in about 1972 or so. I also am under the impression that "real wage" is obtained by taking the wage and discounting by the CPI. One: Is this correct? If not, how are "real wages" calculated? Two: Has the CPI been adjusted since 1972 to take into account quality improvements in, e.g., automobiles? I could swear that it has always been regularly adjusted, but a co-worker thinks otherwise. Bill
[PEN-L:8064] Re: Re: Th Voice of Asian Economic Nationalism
Charles Brown wrote: Charles: Henry, what is meant by this "destroying" ? I thought we were in an era of unprecedented prosperity. Won't this Wall Street bull run forever ? CB Yea, like run for your lives. Henry
[PEN-L:8067] Re: Stupid CPI and real wages question
Bill writes: I have a stupid question regarding the CPI and real wages. My understanding is that real wages are today essentially where they were in about 1972 or so. I also am under the impression that "real wage" is obtained by taking the wage and discounting by the CPI. One: Is this correct? If not, how are "real wages" calculated? real wages are measured as you say: real wage = money wage (either before or after taxes)/CPI. Two: Has the CPI been adjusted since 1972 to take into account quality improvements in, e.g., automobiles? I could swear that it has always been regularly adjusted, but a co-worker thinks otherwise. Yes, the CPI has been regularly adjusted for quality improvements. Recently, these adjustments were intensified, following pressure from Congress via the Boskin commission. This led to a fall in the CPI inflation rate. According to Gene Koretz of BUSINESS WEEK, "a significant chunk of the reported downturn in inflation since 1995 -- perhaps three-quarters of a percentage point -- reflects changes in the behavior of statisticians [recalculating the CPI] rather than changes in the underlying pace of price hikes." This in turn has led to increases in the real wage, which were also encouraged by low unemployment rate. According to the ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT, the average hourly real wage in the total private sector in 1998 equaled 7.75 1982 dollars, below what it was in all years of the 1970s, 1969, and 1968. The manufacturing average hourly real wage equaled 8.03 1982 dollars (using the same CPI), again below the 1970s and late-1960s levels. There have been rises in recent years, which as noted are partly a matter of recalculation of the CPI. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8066] RE: Stupid CPI and real wages question
I have a stupid question regarding the CPI and real wages. My understanding is that real wages are today essentially where they were in about 1972 or so. I also am under the impression that "real wage" is obtained by taking the wage and discounting by the CPI. Not stupid, just a little unspecific. Median wage, average wage, urban, rural, CPI, CPI-UX, etc. etc. For free answers, check out epinet.org. One: Is this correct? If not, how are "real wages" calculated? Two: Has the CPI been adjusted since 1972 to take into account quality improvements in, e.g., automobiles? I could swear that it has always been regularly adjusted, but a co-worker thinks otherwise. The CPI is adjusted to a fare-thee-well for this and numerous other things. Reference: Getting Prices Right, by Dean Baker for EPI (book, costs $). mbs Bill
[PEN-L:8069] Fw: embargo of Serbia
-Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 12:46 PM Subject: Re: embargo of Serbia Still catching up, so I don't know if anyone answered Barkley's question about the embargo, but a quick glance at the subject headings looks like a no. Anyway, these two documents are from the White House web site. Doug http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/1999/5/ 4/11. text.1 THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate ReleaseMay 1, 1999 FACT SHEET New Sanctions Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia During the Washington Summit April 23-25, NATO allies agreed to intensify economic sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) and maximize the pressure on President Slobodan Milosevic to accept NATO's conditions for securing a durable peace in Kosovo. These sanctions reinforce the military action NATO has undertaken to reverse the ethnic cleansing campaign waged by Serbian security and paramilitary forces against the Kosovar Albanians. To implement this agreement, President Clinton signed an Executive Order on April 30, 1999, which strengthens sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). This Executive Order adds to the measures already in place under Executive Order 13088, which entered into effect on June 9, 1999. The sanctions consist of: -The blocking of all property and interests in property of the Governments of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), Serbia, and Montenegro; -A general ban on all U.S. exports and reexports to and imports from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), including specifically the export of petroleum and strategic goods; and -The elimination of loopholes by strengthened provisions on evasion. The current exemption from Montenegro will remain in force, reflecting the strong U.S. support for the democratically-elected, multi-ethnic government of that republic. Special consideration will also be given to the humanitarian needs of refugees from Kosovo and other civilians within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Finally, the Executive Order provides appropriate licensing authority for sales of food and medicine, consistent with the President's April 28 announcement. The State Department continues to enforce an embargo against the shipment of arms and related materiel to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) under the Arms Export Control Act. ### - http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/1995/1 2/8/4 .text.1 THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ___ For Immediate Release December 8, 1995 TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES: On May 30, 1992, in Executive Order No. 12808, the President declared a national emergency to deal with the threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States arising from actions and policies of the Governments of Serbia and Montenegro, acting under the name of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in their involvement in and support for groups attempting to seize territory in Croatia and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina by force and violence utilizing, in part, the forces of the so-called Yugoslav National Army (57 FR 23299, June 2, 1992). I expanded the national emergency in Executive Order No. 12934 of October 25, 1994, to address the actions and policies of the Bosnian Serb forces and the authorities in the territory of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina that they control. The present report is submitted pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1641(c) and 1703(c) and covers the period from May 30, 1995, to November 29, 1995. It discusses Administration actions and expenses directly related to the exercise of powers and authorities conferred by the declaration of a national emergency in Executive Order No. 12808 and Executive Order No. 12934 and to expanded sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) (the "FRY (SM)") and the Bosnian Serbs contained in Executive Order No. 12810 of June 5, 1992 (57 FR 24347, June 9, 1992), Executive Order No. 12831 of January 15, 1993 (58 FR 5253, January 21, 1993), Executive Order No. 12846 of April 25, 1993 (58 FR 25771, April 27, 1993), and Executive Order No. 12934 of October 25, 1994 (59 FR 54117, October 27, 1994). 1.
[PEN-L:8071] Re: Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. Another issue is progressive tax cuts, to contrast with the proposed 15% across-the-board rate cuts being pushed by the GOP. (I'm writing economics resolutions for the ADA convention this week.) mbs I would say productivity... And I am seriously worried about marginal tax rates in the phase-out range of the EITC... Brad DeLong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- "Now 'in the long run' this [way of summarizing the quantity theory of money] is probably true But this long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. **In the long run** we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is long past the ocean is flat again." --J.M. Keynes -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- J. Bradford De Long; Professor of Economics, U.C. Berkeley; Co-Editor, Journal of Economic Perspectives. Dept. of Economics, U.C. Berkeley, #3880 Berkeley, CA 94720-3880 (510) 643-4027; (925) 283-2709 phones (510) 642-6615; (925) 283-3897 faxes http://econ161.berkeley.edu/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:8073] RE: Re: Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. I would say productivity... Which would subsume the inflationary component, I take it? A question is whether there is some sufficiently simple, 'consensus' measure which could pass legislative muster. Another problem is that if you give politicians a choice, they will feel justified in commissioning a study and doing nothing at all. And I am seriously worried about marginal tax rates in the phase-out range of the EITC... We're working on that one too. Should be out at the end of the year, just in time for the sweet loving embrace of Dem presidential candidates. One of your fellow DoT alumni (jks) doesn't think the phase-out has much effect. For those who make the decision to pursue a life of work, I would think that by and large they are looking past the phase-out range. Course, it wouldn't hurt to cut the marginal 'rate' by increasing the credit. mbs
[PEN-L:8074] Peace Dividend
Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/17/99 03:14PM What about the new role for the US armed forces, imposing the US standards of morality on tin-pot dictatorships all around the world? ( Charles: US standards of morality are those of dictatorship, tin-pot and bigtime. CB
[PEN-L:8076] Re: Minimum Wages, Taxes, Politics
Max asked a very important question, which desrves more time and attention than it can get in this forum, but tossing out some ideas may help get the discussion going. Peter Dorman wrote: Max, I think there are arguments for both average wages and CPI as indexing options, but I would offer this argument for average wages: it has the potential to become an international standard. In thinking about labor standards that might be pushed internationally, minimum wages are central. It is difficult to write a standard that would be applicable in all countries -- even the standard of "meets minimum subsistence needs" is difficult to define and measure. But pegging the minimum at, say, half the average is perfectly feasible, and low-wage countries can't complain that it has a differential impact on them. Putting our own minimum wage system on this type of automatic pilot would be a small step towards attaining a global minimum. --- I agree with Peter that setting the Min wage at one-half of the average has the advantage of being used as a small step toward establishing a global minimum. But it may not help US workers much. As other posts have pointed out, average real wages in the US have been dropping since 1979 (with very minor increases the past two years). Thus, if the min wage was pegged to average wages, it would be going down as well. Thus, I would propose a two step adjustment (similar to the recently passed initiative in WA state.) First, raise the min wage to one-half of the average wage (which is what it was back in the 1930s and the 1960s), then index it. But then we have to decide what to index it to. If we index for inflation, you then need to decide which inflation index to use - CPI, CPI-UX, GDP deflator, etc. It might be better to index it to productivitity. In the current situation, firms are upping productivity thru downsizing and speed-ups. They are not able to raise prices because of intnat'l competition. So if the min wage were indexed to the CPI, no increase goes to workers for the increase in their productivity. All of the productivity increases go to shareholders as profit increases. If the politicians really believed the neo-classical dog shit (oops theory), they would note that wages are supposed to reflrect productivity. So if productivity goes up, wages should go up. By indexing the min wage to productivity, the gov't would force wages to follow NC theory! WRT tax policies, that is not my specialty but a general suggestion and three specific ones. In general, the policies should aim to return the tax structure more toward what existed prior to 1980. The share of tax revenues from corporate income taxes has plummetted, while corporate subsidies and tax expenditures have gone up. I am sure Max has a great list of tax breaks to corps that could be eliminated. Increasing marginal tax rates on the ultra wealthy is a good idea, tho politically unlikely. So is a tax on wealth. All those CEOs,etc get the majority of their compenstation as stock options, which shows up as wealth. Four specific ideas. 1) Currently, payments made by firms to cover future pensions promises are fully tax deductable. The same tax break should be extendied to all workers. Make worker "contributions" to social security tax deductable. Currently, the amount paid in payroll taxes for over 60% of workers exceeds their income taxes. Cutting payroll taxes would help the right wing gut social security, but deducting payroll taxes from income would not have this impact. In fact, if these "contributions" were deductable, there would be much less resistance to raising the payroll tax rates in the future if (which is highly unlikely) there is a shortfall in covering social security payments. (NOte: this tax changes starts us down the road of coviring social insurance out of general tax revenues - which the way it is done in most "civilized" countries.) 2) Increase the tax deductable contributions to IRAs. This is not a radical idea - it benefits the upper middle class more than the poor. But it is still worthwhile. Workers covered by company pensions now get tax preference for retirement. Uncovered workers do not, except for the small amount they can put into IRAs. The limit was set at $2000 and never changed. This could be reaised to $5000, which would benefit the middle class, but not the wealthy, and would not help the poor. The only way to help the working poor in retirement is to INCREASE social security benefits (which is also a good idea - but right now preventing a decrease in benefits is the battle) and/or making private pension coverage MANDATORY (which is not really a tax policy). 3) Implement a tax on the "big casino." This is the Pollin/Baker idea from the 1994 Nation article. Put a tax on every finanacial transaction. If there is a tax on buying milk, there should be a tax on buying stock!
[PEN-L:8079] More on Monasteries
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kosova Task Force, USA Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:30 PM To: Kosova Alert Subject: KosovaTAskForce: War Criminals Must Be Pursued Kosova Task Force, USA Action Alert 6.17.1999 French members of KFOR reportedly suspect some members of the KLA of defacing a Serb monastery in Srbica, Kosova. The Kosova Task Force, USA strongly condemns all war crimes committed by either side. These accusations against the KLA must be investigated properly and thoroughly, and those KLA members found to be guilty of war crimes must be brought to justice. Even though hundreds of Mosques in Kosova have been destroyed, and thousands of Kosovar Albanian women have been raped, individually and in rape camps, it still does not allow the victims of genocide to react in the same manner. The Kosova Task Force, USA demands that withdrawing Serbian troops not be allowed to destroy homes or other structures as they leave. Unfortunately, this has been happening even in presence of NATO forces. ACTION REQUESTED: Please participate in the media discussion and raise the following point: This is the time to pursue war criminals. If the war criminals from Bosnia were properly dealth with, they would not have been able to perpetrate the same crimes in Kosova. Call your policy makers to tell them that there is no peace without justice for the Kosovar Albanians. Ambassador David Scheffer Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues ph: 202-647-5072 == Kosova Task Force, USA 730 W. Lake St., Suite 156 Chicago, IL 60661, USA Phone: 312-829-0087 Fax: 312-829-0089 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.justiceforall.org ==
[PEN-L:8081] Re: Re: Minimum Wages, Taxes, Politics
Doug Orr wrote: ... setting the Min wage at one-half of the average... may not help US workers much. As other posts have pointed out, average real wages in the US have been dropping since 1979 (with very minor increases the past two years). Thus, if the min wage was pegged to average wages, it would be going down as well. On the other hand, there has not only been a decrease in the median real wage but also a rise in wage dispersion, the gap between the top and the bottom and between the median and the bottom. Hooking the minimum wage to the median would work against rising wage dispersion. In the current situation, firms are upping productivity thru downsizing and speed-ups. I don't think it's just downsizing and speedups any more (though these play a role). There's been a lot of real investment in the 1990s, with investment rising in producers' durable equipment from about 6 % of GDP in 1990 to 10 % in 1998, encouraged by the rising profit rate. It's also possible that the computer revolution is also paying off, encouraging labor productivity growth (though Microsoft is trying to undermine this by introducing Office 2000 ;-) ). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8080] BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1999: Consumer prices held steady in May, the Labor Department reports, calming inflation fears fanned by a sharp April gain. The price of most components that comprise the CPI-U calmed considerably -- and in some cases retreated -- in May, compared with April. Analysts say the placidity of May's price data relieves some of the pressure on the Federal Reserve to raise short term interest rates. "May is essentially what we had in April, but in reverse, although in not as great a magnitude," BLS economist Patrick Jackman said. While the overall CPI-U has accelerated a little in 1999, the core rate of increase has slowed. Although the April CPI-U showed nearly across-the-board cost increases, a 6.1 percent jump in energy prices helped propel the gain. Gasoline prices charged ahead a record 17 percent in the month. "So far, based on Department of Energy figures, June gasoline prices are down, " BLS's Jackman says (Daily Labor Report, page D-5). __After a sharp jump in April, consumer prices were unchanged last month, allaying fears among investors and government policymakers alike that the national inflation outlook had taken a big turn for the worst. The Labor Department reported...that prices of the goods and services that contributed most to the 0.7 percent increase in the April consumer price index -- gasoline, apparel, lodging away from home, tobacco products and airline fares -- all declined last month (John M. Berry, writing in The Washington Post, page E1). __After haunting investors for weeks, the specter of inflation suddenly retreated -- at least for now. The CPI did not rise at all in May. And the closely watched "core" inflation rate edged up a mere 0.1 percent versus a 0.4 percent increase in April. While the Federal Reserve is still expected to raise short-term interest rats later this month, the absence of any signs of inflation last month eased worries that the Fed was about to embark on a sustained series of rate increases. A wave of relief swept the stock and bond markets, which both rallied strongly yesterday (The New York Times, page 1). __Amid a surging housing market, consumer prices remained flat last month, easing fears of accelerating inflation through some signs of rising price pressure remain. The Labor Department reported that the consumer price index was unchanged in May, following an unexpected 0.7 percent rise in April. Economists agree that April's increase was fueled by a spike in energy prices related to the slowing of oil production by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries in the first quarter (The Wall Street Journal, page A2). A government report that consumer prices didn't rise at all in May would seem a dream come true for Alan Greenspan and his band of inflation-phobes at the Federal Reserve. Instead, it was more like a nightmare. Yesterday's surprisingly benign consumer price report undercut the public case Fed officials have been making that incipient inflation demands an increase in interest rates. But it did nothing to ease their concern that the U.S. economy is growing at such an unsafe speed that inflation is inevitable unless they act. Now the Fed chief confronts an awkward choice. He can raise rates when Fed officials convene at month's end. But that could end the best combination of low unemployment and low inflation the U.S. has seen in a generation, unsettle foreign financial markets and threaten Greenspan's reputation as one Fed chairman wisely immune to conventional economic wisdom. Or he can hold off on raising rates. But that could destroy the price stability the Fed achieved and threaten the internal harmony that has marked his 12-year stint at the Fed. The Fed chairman may reveal which way he is leaning when he testifies this morning before the Joint Economic Committee of Congress. Even saying nothing would be read on Wall Street as affirmation of the still widespread expectation that the Fed will raise rates on June 30 for the first time in 2 years (The Wall Street Journal, page 1). An upswing in average hourly earnings and hours worked boosted real, inflation-adjusted weekly earnings 0.7 percent in May, BLS reports. The gain in real weekly earnings reflected a 0.3 percent advance in average weekly hours and a 0.4 percent increase in average hourly earnings (Daily Labor Report, page D-24). The U.S. economy was still expanding from New York to California in May, with strength in retailing and construction and manufacturing on the mend, the Federal Reserve says. The Fed's latest survey of conditions in its 12 districts found the economy "remains strong, with gains in activity widespread." Labor markets are very tight "in almost all districts," the central bank found. For example, in Cleveland, the Fourth District, "a large number of companies are hiring temporary workers with the hope of making the
[PEN-L:8078] Re: Re: Re: Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
BTW, there is no need to interrupt the anti-imperialist struggle, just make the ADA Platform part of it. It was at one point. Henry C.K. Liu "Henry C.K. Liu" wrote: NASDAQ for the ADA Platform. Productivity is a GOP doctrine. As for tax cut, revive the distinction between earned and unearned income. Keep earned income low and unearned income high. Henry C.K. Liu Brad De Long wrote: Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. Another issue is progressive tax cuts, to contrast with the proposed 15% across-the-board rate cuts being pushed by the GOP. (I'm writing economics resolutions for the ADA convention this week.) mbs I would say productivity... And I am seriously worried about marginal tax rates in the phase-out range of the EITC... Brad DeLong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- "Now 'in the long run' this [way of summarizing the quantity theory of money] is probably true But this long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. **In the long run** we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is long past the ocean is flat again." --J.M. Keynes -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- J. Bradford De Long; Professor of Economics, U.C. Berkeley; Co-Editor, Journal of Economic Perspectives. Dept. of Economics, U.C. Berkeley, #3880 Berkeley, CA 94720-3880 (510) 643-4027; (925) 283-2709 phones (510) 642-6615; (925) 283-3897 faxes http://econ161.berkeley.edu/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:8077] Re: Re: Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
NASDAQ for the ADA Platform. Productivity is a GOP doctrine. As for tax cut, revive the distinction between earned and unearned income. Keep earned income low and unearned income high. Henry C.K. Liu Brad De Long wrote: Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. Another issue is progressive tax cuts, to contrast with the proposed 15% across-the-board rate cuts being pushed by the GOP. (I'm writing economics resolutions for the ADA convention this week.) mbs I would say productivity... And I am seriously worried about marginal tax rates in the phase-out range of the EITC... Brad DeLong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- "Now 'in the long run' this [way of summarizing the quantity theory of money] is probably true But this long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. **In the long run** we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is long past the ocean is flat again." --J.M. Keynes -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- J. Bradford De Long; Professor of Economics, U.C. Berkeley; Co-Editor, Journal of Economic Perspectives. Dept. of Economics, U.C. Berkeley, #3880 Berkeley, CA 94720-3880 (510) 643-4027; (925) 283-2709 phones (510) 642-6615; (925) 283-3897 faxes http://econ161.berkeley.edu/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:8072] RE: Re: RE: Re: Peace Dividend
I'll take your word for it, except that I was only using tax cuts for the rich as an _example_, not the _only_ form of "stuff we don't like." Also, tax cuts in 1986 and 1997 have _cumulative_ results after they are enacted. '86 was not a tax cut, but a big rearranging of the deck chairs. It was supposed to be distributionally neutral, but it turns out to have benefited the very top of the income distribution to some extent (nothing to compare with '81 though). You know, it's like Jesse Jackson used to say: if we were to go back to the tax structure that we had in 1980, the government would have much larger revenues. Repeat this over several years and you see accumuating government debt and thus higher government interest payments every year. This is true in and of itself. The problem is whether this is a realistic counter-factual. Federal revenues relative to GDP have been extremely stable for 25 years, even with the '81 tax cuts. So the comparison to an unreformed 1980 tax code, which could have pushed up revenues to 24% of GDP (as well as putting a lot more folks into high tax brackets) is at least debatable. Wouldn't you say that the increases in Medicare and Medicaid spending are not benefits to the patients as much as payment for the increases in medical costs? More went to vendors than to patients; that's true. Also state governments did well finagling the rules for Medicaid reimbursement at the end of the 1980's. It's easy to show this, just by comparing medical inflation to the total change in spending. I didn't say the peace dividend was purely devoted to making M/M beneficiaries better off. It did go into those programs, however. It's better than cutting these types of spending (or keeping them constant in the face of medical-cost inflation), but we shouldn't see it as "stuff we like" but as a necessary evil": it's a shift from the military-industrial complex to the insurance company/HMO/medical complex. It fits with my point that the US government (like almost all capitalist governments) is dominated by competition among blocs of nasty folks rather than simply marching to the military's beat. I think here we have a difference in emphasis, not fundamentals. Not even close. If the war costs $20 billion that will be a lot. The surplus is over $100b. I'll take your word for it, but what about "reconstruction" costs, the creation of a Kosovar showcase proving that the US/NATO was right all along? (Remember all the $$$ that went to make showcases out of West Berlin, West Germany, Taiwan, and South Korea.) What about the new role for the US armed forces, imposing the US standards of morality on tin-pot dictatorships all around the world? My bet is the EU will pay more for reconstruction. Congress can't even work itself up to reconstructing public facilities in the U.S. How it will pay for doing that in Kosova is hard to imagine. Unlike merely blowing things up, in spending the Congress has much more power relative to the President. How much for that and all the rest, who knows. The war itself was estimated to cost $15b for a year, so as I said $20b would be a lot. Of course, the surplus will disappear if there's a recession. On the other hand, the establishment of a new permanent war economy would prevent a recession. The surplus projections go out for 50 years. They factor in recessions as to magnitude, but not for timing. Hence if the basic projection is right, recessionary effects in one or two years would be offset in latter years. With 4.2UE, the U.S. doesn't need military spending. The real wonder is why the EU doesn't go in for it in a big way. mbs
[PEN-L:8070] Re: embargo of Serbia
I want to thank both Doug Henwood and Michael Hoover (on pen-l) for having provided some concrete answers to my inquiry regarding the recent and current status of the economic embargo against Yugoslavia (not just Serbia), although presumably the Serbian province of Kosmet (hi, Jim, :-)) will be exempt. I have already expressed my view that this is a very important issue in terms of how things will evolve in the region in the postwar period, if that ever arrives. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 12:46 PM Subject: Re: embargo of Serbia Still catching up, so I don't know if anyone answered Barkley's question about the embargo, but a quick glance at the subject headings looks like a no. Anyway, these two documents are from the White House web site. Doug http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/1999/5/ 4/11. text.1 THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate ReleaseMay 1, 1999 FACT SHEET New Sanctions Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia During the Washington Summit April 23-25, NATO allies agreed to intensify economic sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) and maximize the pressure on President Slobodan Milosevic to accept NATO's conditions for securing a durable peace in Kosovo. These sanctions reinforce the military action NATO has undertaken to reverse the ethnic cleansing campaign waged by Serbian security and paramilitary forces against the Kosovar Albanians. To implement this agreement, President Clinton signed an Executive Order on April 30, 1999, which strengthens sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). This Executive Order adds to the measures already in place under Executive Order 13088, which entered into effect on June 9, 1999. The sanctions consist of: -The blocking of all property and interests in property of the Governments of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), Serbia, and Montenegro; -A general ban on all U.S. exports and reexports to and imports from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), including specifically the export of petroleum and strategic goods; and -The elimination of loopholes by strengthened provisions on evasion. The current exemption from Montenegro will remain in force, reflecting the strong U.S. support for the democratically-elected, multi-ethnic government of that republic. Special consideration will also be given to the humanitarian needs of refugees from Kosovo and other civilians within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Finally, the Executive Order provides appropriate licensing authority for sales of food and medicine, consistent with the President's April 28 announcement. The State Department continues to enforce an embargo against the shipment of arms and related materiel to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) under the Arms Export Control Act. ### - http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/1995/1 2/8/4 .text.1 THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ___ For Immediate Release December 8, 1995 TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES: On May 30, 1992, in Executive Order No. 12808, the President declared a national emergency to deal with the threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States arising from actions and policies of the Governments of Serbia and Montenegro, acting under the name of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in their involvement in and support for groups attempting to seize territory in Croatia and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina by force and violence utilizing, in part, the forces of the so-called Yugoslav National Army (57 FR 23299, June 2, 1992). I expanded the national emergency in Executive Order No. 12934 of October 25, 1994, to address the actions and policies of the Bosnian Serb forces and the authorities in the territory of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina that they control. The present report is submitted pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1641(c) and 1703(c) and covers the period from May 30, 1995, to November 29, 1995. It discusses Administration actions and expenses directly related to the exercise of powers and authorities conferred by the declaration of a national emergency in Executive Order No. 12808 and Executive Order No.
[PEN-L:8068] Re: RE: Re: Peace Dividend
I wrote: I think that there is some truth to Makara's statements though. There may have been a "peace dividend," but it was mostly spent on stuff we don't like, like tax cuts for the rich. . . . Max writes: The only tax cut stacked towards the rich since 1986 was in 1997. The ones you refer to were in 1981, before the defense spending slow-down. I'll take your word for it, except that I was only using tax cuts for the rich as an _example_, not the _only_ form of "stuff we don't like." Also, tax cuts in 1986 and 1997 have _cumulative_ results after they are enacted. You know, it's like Jesse Jackson used to say: if we were to go back to the tax structure that we had in 1980, the government would have much larger revenues. Repeat this over several years and you see accumuating government debt and thus higher government interest payments every year. The cost of the '97 cut was noteworthy, but probably doesn't stack up to the increases in Medicare and Medicaid spending since 1986. I don't have the number in front of me (though it's within eight feet of me). That was where the peace dividend went, for all practical purposes. Wouldn't you say that the increases in Medicare and Medicaid spending are not benefits to the patients as much as payment for the increases in medical costs? It's better than cutting these types of spending (or keeping them constant in the face of medical-cost inflation), but we shouldn't see it as "stuff we like" but as a necessary evil": it's a shift from the military-industrial complex to the insurance company/HMO/medical complex. It fits with my point that the US government (like almost all capitalist governments) is dominated by competition among blocs of nasty folks rather than simply marching to the military's beat. Now much of it would go to budget surpluses if the Clintonoids have their way, which looks likely. We shall see. ... Note the big Clinton fold on anti-ballistic missiles was in January, well before the Balkans. The conditions for more hardware purchases were already in place. Without doubt the Balkans affair has solidified them, but they could have been safe in either event. I was using the ballistic missiles as an example of the trend before the Balkan war. The process of Clinton caving to the Pentagon has been pretty steady since he entered office. It is also true that the US/NATO war against the Serbs will probably end the US government's current budget surplus Not even close. If the war costs $20 billion that will be a lot. The surplus is over $100b. I'll take your word for it, but what about "reconstruction" costs, the creation of a Kosovar showcase proving that the US/NATO was right all along? (Remember all the $$$ that went to make showcases out of West Berlin, West Germany, Taiwan, and South Korea.) What about the new role for the US armed forces, imposing the US standards of morality on tin-pot dictatorships all around the world? Of course, the surplus will disappear if there's a recession. On the other hand, the establishment of a new permanent war economy would prevent a recession. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8065] RE: Re: Peace Dividend
. . . I think that there is some truth to Makara's statements though. There may have been a "peace dividend," but it was mostly spent on stuff we don't like, like tax cuts for the rich. . . . The only tax cut stacked towards the rich since 1986 was in 1997. The ones you refer to were in 1981, before the defense spending slow-down. The cost of the '97 cut was noteworthy, but probably doesn't stack up to the increases in Medicare and Medicaid spending since 1986. I don't have the number in front of me (though it's within eight feet of me). That was where the peace dividend went, for all practical purposes. Now much of it would go to budget surpluses if the Clintonoids have their way, which looks likely. As for hiding stuff in the budget, it is the defense budget that hides at least some of the secret stuff, not the reverse. A possible exception is the Dept of Energy budget, which includes nuke-related stuff. Note the big Clinton fold on anti-ballistic missiles was in January, well before the Balkans. The conditions for more hardware purchases were already in place. Without doubt the Balkans affair has solidified them, but they could have been safe in either event. It is also true that the US/NATO war against the Serbs will probably end the US government's current budget surplus Not even close. If the war costs $20 billion that will be a lot. The surplus is over $100b. The squeeze on domestic rests specifically in the caps. Right now Clinton is on the right side in proposing the caps be raised, albeit modestly, with the Repubs advocating the contrary. There is much less squeeze on entitlements in general, since they are not subject to the caps. Clinton recently proposed an increase in Medicare benefits. The big exception is the welfare deform, but in this case the squeeze stems from policy views on welfare, not from fiscal imperatives. Incidentally, I was impressed by a point in 'Wall Street' (which I've finally gotten around to reading), where DH, channeling Marx, points out that public debt is a safe and often unproductive (socially speaking) haven for capital. Which raises the question, why is the executive committee of the bourgeoisie proposing to eliminate the public debt? mbs
[PEN-L:8063] Re: Th Voice of Asian Economic Nationalism
"Henry C.K. Liu" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/17/99 12:46PM Which explains why they have modified their stand a little bit. Indeed, Clinton said at one stage if the economy of East Asia is harmed, then workers in the United States will be retrenched. I don't know if he was influenced by what I told him or not. I don't want to ask for credit, but the point is that they are coming around to realize that this is not just destroying us. It's destroying them too. In the end, they will not be able to survive. (( Charles: Henry, what is meant by this "destroying" ? I thought we were in an era of unprecedented prosperity. Won't this Wall Street bull run forever ? CB
[PEN-L:8061] Re: We all shouted, 'Heil Hitler'
This is like a scene out of a Fassbinder movie. It Hitler had won WWII, Germany would look very much like it is today. Henry C.K. Liu Louis Proyect wrote: Los Angeles Times, June 17, 1999, Thursday, Home Edition The path to peace; German force savors 'moral' postwar debut; Balkans: many older ethnic Albanians recall Nazi troops in WWII as liberators from Serbs. Today's soldiers are happy to hold their heads high. MARJORIE MILLER, TIMES STAFF WRITER PRIZREN, Yugoslavia For the German army, returning to Yugoslavia for the first time since World War II as part of a NATO peacekeeping force marks a final break with a terrible past. The deployment of German combat troops and Leopard-2 tanks into Kosovo province means that the Bundeswehr at last has become a "full partner in NATO with all of the rights and responsibilities" of the other members, said Lt. Col. Dietmar Jeserich. It is a proud moment for the Germans. But many Kosovo Albanians sided with the Nazis during World War II, and today, some of them do not distinguish between the past and present German armies--both of which, to their way of thinking, accomplished the same feat: freeing them from Serbian rule. "This is a second liberation," said Ali Majo, 68, a native of this city in southwestern Kosovo. "I can't describe how it felt when we saw German soldiers come to liberate us again." So much for moral victories in the Balkans.
[PEN-L:8060] Re: Peace Dividend
Petar Makara writes: The cold war is over for a decade now - but there is NO Peace Dividend. NATO has to survive so that hundreds of billions of dollars can be sucked out of the American people. Any excuse to prolong NATO's life - is a good excuse. Glancing at the government's official statistics, there has been a "peace dividend." Since 1989, US Federal "defence" spending has been growing more slowly than the total Federal government spending on goods and services (which does not include transfer payments), than total government spending (including the state local governments), and real GDP. On average between 1990 and 1998, real GDP grew 2.5 percent per year, while total government grew 0.7 percent per year. Federal purchases fell on average by 1.7 percent per year, while "defense" spending fell on average 3.1 percent per year. While the numbers might be wrong (since military spending can be hidden in the budget), I don't think that a sophisticated examination of the numbers would produce vastly different results. Cutbacks in defense spending helped create Clinton's vaunted budget surplus. I think that there is some truth to Makara's statements though. There may have been a "peace dividend," but it was mostly spent on stuff we don't like, like tax cuts for the rich. Further, the military-industrial complex clearly doesn't like military cutbacks. (I can hear them chant "they say cutback! we say fightback!") They have been using their not-inconsiderable clout to promote ballistic missile defense systems and the like, trying to avoid military cutbacks. Clinton, cowed by his brush with the military over allowing openly gay people in and by continued hostility from the Pentagon about his draft dodging, has been going along with them more and more, finally endorsing the ballistic missile defense. He's also found that bombing medicine factories in the Sudan and other foreign policy initiatives can distract people from his being caught committing adultery on the public dime. This use of the military of course has raised their clout. Accordingly, the pace of military cutbacks has slowed since 1993. (This is partly a result of the ending of the fast pace of cutbacks after the Gulf War.) But there are other forces that jockey to control the US government and its budget, who counteract the military's lust for funds. Clinton has shown amazing obedience to the Wall Street/banking crowd, toeing their balance-the-budget line. I don't think that the US war against the Serbs was a matter of the Pentagon and the rest of the military-industrial complex finally getting their way. Though they have a lot of influence, the M-IC crowd likes big spending more than shedding of US blood in wars. (They thus had a big influence on the _form_ of the war against the Serbs.) I think instead that the US power elite is united in the process of asserting the US as the world hegemon, the embryonic world state, with its NATO allies as junior partners, while opening up the "emerging markets" to capital flows and US exports. Of course, this is dressed up with rhetoric about the commitment to democracy and human rights (as defined by the US). It is also true that the US/NATO war against the Serbs will probably end the US government's current budget surplus and push the budget back into deficit territory, squeezing civilian programs further. The effort to assert the US as the new world government will likely bring back a permanent war economy in the future. But I think that rhetoric about there being no "peace dividend" should be dropped. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8055] An analysis of Nato's war by Petar Makara
Terrible injustice was done to the Yugoslav peoples and the Serbs in particular. The question remains... WHY? In the well known movie about American Mafia "Il Padrino", a Mafia boss explains to his colleague why he had to murder his cousin: "It is strictly business - nothing personal!" The cold war is over for a decade now - but there is NO Peace Dividend. NATO has to survive so that hundreds of billions of dollars can be sucked out of the American people. Any excuse to prolong NATO's life - is a good excuse. January 1994: The crisis For many decades the United Nations was a stage of the battle between the two super powers. With the USSR gone it seemed at first that American newly born Empire can use the U.N. as a vehicle to rule the world. Bosnia was the laboratory where this model was to be tested. Most of the "neutral" UN troops that defended Bosnian Muslims were actually NATO troops. But that was clumsy, indirect way to rule the Earth. And what to do with NATO anyhow? Sun-Sentinel, Sunday, January 30, 1994 Editorial by Robert Fabricio (Quote:) The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the very foundation of U.S. Defense strategy, is on brink of a breakup. Manfred Woerner, NATO's secretary general, has lost 30 pounds and developed chronic ulcers in the past year from the strain of trying to keep the alliance together. (End quote) Follow this link: http://www.srpska-mreza.com/library/facts/markale1.html to see how a Sarajevo market massacre was staged to provide an excuse for substitution of "U.N. troops" - with NATO ones. On the ground NOTHING have changed with the "swap". The important change was that NATO's role as the World Policeman was LEGALIZED for the first time. The actual ceremony of substitution of the U.N. blue helmets with the original NATO ones lasted only minutes. NATO's "raison d'etre" problem was solved. NATO expansion = Great Business! New York Times, Sunday, June 29, 1997, Page A1 (front page): "ARMS MAKERS SEE BONANZA IN SELLING NATO EXPANSION" by Jeff Gerth and Tim Weiner (Excerpts from the article - quote): Washington, June 28 - At night, Bruce L. Jackson is president of the U.S. Committee to Expand NATO, giving intimate dinners for Senators and foreign officials. By day, he is director of strategic planning for Lockheed Martin Corporation, the world's biggest weapons maker. Mr. Jackson says he keeps his two identities separate [Wow! Who can believe that!?], but his company and his lobbying group are fighting the same battle. Defense contractors are acting like globe hopping diplomats to encourage the expansion of NATO, which will create huge market for their wares. BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ARE AT STAKE in the next global arms bazaar: weapon sales to the Central European nations invited to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Admission to the Western fraternity will bring political prestige (sic!) but at a PRICE: playing by NATO rules, which require Western weapons and equipment. "THE STAKES ARE HIGH" for arms makers, said Joel L. Johnson, vice president for international affairs at the Aerospace Industries Association, a trade group... The potential market for fighter jets alone is $10 billion, he said. Those jets will require flight simulators, spare parts, electronics and engine improvements. "Then there's transport aircraft, utility helicopters, attack helicopters," Mr. Johnson said - not to mention military communications systems, computers, radar, radios and the other tools of a modern fighting force. "Add them together, and WE'RE TALKING *REAL* MONEY," he said... "To make sure the Senate knew this was an important aspect of U.S. security," Mr. Jackson said, his U.S. Committee to Expand NATO recently gave a dinner for a dozen Senators at the private Metropolitan Club, two blocks from the White House. Over lamb chops and red wine, the Senators heard Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright explain NATO expansion. The guest list included Bernard L. Schwartz, chairman of Loral Space and Communications, a company partly owned by Lockheed Martin. Mr. Schwartz personally donated $601,000 to Democratic politicians for the 1996 election. Lockeed Martin itself gave $2.3 million to Congressional and Presidential candidates in the 1996 election, part of a five-fold increase in defense companies' donations to Democrats from 1992 to 1996. Lockeed Martin wants its F-16 fighters to replace the old Soviet made MIG-21's in the hangars of Central Europe. Norman R. Augustine, Locheed Martin's chief executive, toured Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania and Slovenia in April, drumming up business and supporting the largest possible expansion of NATO... "Norm has an emotional [sic!] commitment to NATO expansion," Mr. Jackson said... NATO was founded in 1949, at the dawn of cold war, TO ENLARGE THE UNITED STATES' POWER IN WESTERN EUROPE... The end of the Soviet empire created the chance to expand the alliance... The Administration says the
[PEN-L:8054] RE: gay pride month
He's the heir. Why else would Clinton nominate him? BTW, there was/is a flap about Clinton's appointment of James Hormel, an open gay, as US ambassador to Luxemburg (or is it Liechetenstein?) I ask: does he have any connection with the Hormel corporation? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8052] gay pride month
From Scott Shuger's SLATE column (copyright Bill Gates): The WP reports that the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest U.S. Protestant denomination and President Clinton's church, has rebuked Clinton for declaring June as National Gay and Lesbian Pride Month, which the SBC finds "contrary to the word of God." (God wanted February.) BTW, there was/is a flap about Clinton's appointment of James Hormel, an open gay, as US ambassador to Luxemburg (or is it Liechetenstein?) I ask: does he have any connection with the Hormel corporation? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8050] China's Culture Of Falsified Accounting Intolerable
The report below is an example of residual feudal culture in China despite 50 years of socialist construction. Feudalism in China has aspects of what modern political science would label as fascist, socialist and democratic. As a socio-political system, feudalism is inherently authoritarian and totalitarian. However, since feudal cultural ideals have always been meticulously nurtured by Confucianism to be congruent with the political regime, social control, while pervasive, is seldom consciously felt as oppressive by the public. Or more accurately, social oppression, both vertical, such as sovereign to subject, and horizontal, such as gender prejudice, is considered natural for lack of an accepted alternative vision. Concepts such as equality, individuality, privacy, personal freedom and democracy, are deemed anti-social, and only longed for by the derange-of-mind, such as radical Daoists. This would be true in large measure up to modern time when radical Daoists would be replaced by other radical political and cultural dissidents. (Here a distinction needs to be made between genuine indigenous dissents from those merely playing opportunistically for foreign cash). The imperial system in China took the form of a centralized federalism of autonomous local lords in which the authority of the sovereign is symbiotically bound to, but clearly separated from, the authority of the local lords. Unless the local lords abused their local authority, the Emperor's authority over them, while all inclusive in theory, would not extend beyond federal matters in practice, particularly if the Emperor's rule is to remain moral within its ritual bounds. This tradition continues to the modern time. This condition is easily understandable for Americans whose Federal government is relatively progressive on certain issues of national standard with regard to community standards in backward sections of the union. Confucianism (Ru Jia), through the code of rites (li), seeks to govern the behavior and obligation of each person, each social class and each socio-political unit in society. Its purpose is to facilitate the smooth functioning and the perpetuation of the feudal system. Therefore, the power of the Emperor, though politically absolute, is not free from the constraints of behavior deemed proper by Confucian values for a moral sovereign, just as the authority of the local lords is similarly constrained. Issues of constitutionality in the U.S. political milieu become issues of proper rites and befitting morality in Chinese dynastic politics. To a large extent, this continues to the modern Chinese polity. The ideal Confucian state rests on a stable society over which a virtuous and benevolent emperor rules by moral persuasion based on a Code of Rites rather than by law. Justice would emerge from a timeless morality that governs social behavior. Man would be orderly out of self-respect for his own moral character rather than from fear of punishment prescribed by law. A competent and loyal literati-bureaucracy faithful to a just political order would run the government according to moral principles rather than following rigid legalistic rules devoid of moral content. Confucian values, because they have been designed to preserve the existing feudal system, unavoidably would run into conflict with contemporary ideas reflective of new emerging social conditions. It is in the context of its inherent hostility toward progress and its penchant for obsolete nostalgia that Confucian values, rather than feudalism itself, become culturally oppressive and socially damaging. When Chinese revolutionaries throughout history, and particularly in the late 18th and early 19th century, rebelled against the cultural oppression of reactionary Confucianism, they would simplistically and conveniently link it synonymously with political feudalism. These revolutionaries would succeed in dismantling the formal governmental structure of political feudalism because it was the more visible target. Their success had been due also to the terminal decadence of the decrepit governmental machinery of dying dynasties, such as the ruling house of the 3-century-old, dying Qing dynasty (1583-1911). Unfortunately, these triumphant revolutionaries would remain largely ineffective in re-molding Confucian dominance in feudal culture, even among the progressive intelligentsia. Almost a century after the fall of the feudal Qing dynasty house in 1911, after countless movements of reform and revolution, ranging from moderate democratic liberalism to extremist Bolshevik radicalism, China would have yet to find an workable alternative to the feudal political culture that would be intrinsically sympathetic to its social traditions. Chinese revolutions, including the modern revolution that would begin in 1911, through its various metamorphosis over the span of almost 4 millennia, in overthrowing successive political regimes of transplanted feudalism, would
[PEN-L:8047] Re: Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
At 10:31 AM 6/17/99 -0400, you wrote: Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. how about linking the minimum wage to the salary and perks (including stock options) of Michael Eisner? ;-) Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8045] Unflation
In the wake of yesterday's inflation report, I'd like to acknowledge the piece by Dean Baker of the Preamble Center that immediately followed the previous report, available on their web site. (www.preamble.org) It may be recalled that there was a hubub over last month's report of an inflation spike, including some cackling by locals on the "crisis-of-capitalism" watch. Brother Baker reported at the time that the spike was solely due to oil, was not likely to be repeated, would not spread to other sectors, and could not in any case be curbed by U.S. monetary policy (except at the cost of job loss). mbs
[PEN-L:8044] Minimum Wage, Taxes, Politics
Apologies for interrupting the anti-imperialist struggle, but I'd like to know if there are any thoughts here on how to best index the minimum wage. Possibilities include the CPI, average wages, productivity, etc. Another issue is progressive tax cuts, to contrast with the proposed 15% across-the-board rate cuts being pushed by the GOP. (I'm writing economics resolutions for the ADA convention this week.) mbs
