Re: Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1

2000-06-04 Thread M A Jones

I don't talk about US domestic matters much because I don't know them much.
But Nader is more than just that. He launched 'consumerism' in other
countries too, so I'm interested. I'm old enough to remember the hoo-hah
about vehicle safety in the 1960s and the susbsequent rise of consumer
groups + issues in Britain. I thought then and I think now that it is all an
utter distraction from what really matters; it is based on the crassest kind
of self-seeking, privatising solipsism which boils great social/historical
issues down to what's in it for me qua passive selfish consumer. What really
mattered then and now for eg is not car safety but less cars and more public
transport. What Nader did is help legitimise the care and ensures its social
apotheosis to its current iconic status. That's disastrously bad. That's the
essence of Nader's social constituency, what's more, and it cannot be the
basis of a national issue-driven mass politics, except by default, ie
because the real thing (a real mass socialism) is missing.  But it's NOT
missing any more. Seattle q.v. Therefore Nader remains a mere distraction
and he and his ilk should indeed be revealed for what they are: a peculiarly
rotten kind of little-Napoleon petit bourgeois politicking.

Lou has hit the nail on the head again.

Mark Jones
http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
- Original Message -
From: "Rod Hay" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2000 5:03 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:19866] Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1


 The political criticism of Nadar is valid, but the personal attack on him
is
 misguided and fundamentally irrelevant.

 Rod

 Louis Proyect wrote:

  Yes, but not that much further. My parents, who lived on my dad's
middle
  class income of about $25,000 a year back in those days, bought a
$100,000
  house in the NVA suburbs at the same time--it wasn't shabby, but it
wasn't a
  mansion. You probbaly could have done better in the city in those days
of
  white flight and before the city became fashoonable again.
 
  The main point is that it wasn't an $85 per month furnished room.
 
  be bought. If he stayed silent on no-fault, it was not because he was
  bribed,
  but because there are serious consumerist arguments against it. There
are,
 
  The problem with Naderism is that we have to accept the honest motives
of
  the leader pretty much as a given. It is in the nature of nonprofits,
  especially inside-the-beltway types like Public Citizen, to make
decisions
  ON BEHALF of the public. It is inherently undemocratic. Even in the
  nickle-and-dime nonprofit I was president of the board of, there were
  constant complaints about the Executive Director making unilateral
  decisions--like starting a program in Africa, spending money on an
  ambitious direct mail program, etc. He once told me in private (I was
the
  only person he ever really confided in) that he modeled the organization
on
  the small businesses he ran in Utah, where he 'made everything go', even
  when it took big risks. We fired him in 1990 after he went totally
  overboard on certain financial matters. But with Nader you won't even
get a
  board that has the gumption to challenge him. He is just too powerful
for
  that. This, IMHO, sends the wrong kinds of signals to the left when the
  Greens nominate a guy like him. After accepting the nomination in 1996,
he
  made a unilateral decision to lowkey the campaign. And today he is
  considering unilaterally whether to run as a Reform candidate, I'll
betcha.
 
  Louis Proyect
  Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/

 --
 Rod Hay
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 The History of Economic Thought Archive
 http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html
 Batoche Books
 http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/
 52 Eby Street South
 Kitchener, Ontario
 N2G 3L1
 Canada






Re: Greenspan's Waterloo

2000-06-04 Thread Timework Web

Gene Coyle asked,

My question is this:  If "international competition conditions allow" them
to raise prices, why don't they?  I. e. why wait for the excuse and/or the
pressure to raise prices?  What businesses live for is raising prices --
they don't hang back.  I've never understood this "rising labor costs" as
the cause of inflation.

Jim didn't address Gene's central question, "why wait for the excuse
and/or the pressure to raise prices?" My suggestion: in the absense of a
change in cost structure, an increase of price (presumably enabled by a
monopolistic position) would jack up the profit margin relative to other
industries and thus hypothetically attract competing capital into the
higher profit industry, which in turn would lead back to price
competition. I'm not sure how much weight to give any story about prices,
though, in a world (this one) where competition doesn't necessarily mean
price competition. Rising labor costs surely don't underlie the high price
of Nike running shoes.


Tom Walker




Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1

2000-06-04 Thread JKSCHW

In a message dated 00-06-03 21:11:11 EDT, you write:

 The main point is that it wasn't an $85 per month furnished room.
 
 be bought. If he stayed silent on no-fault, it was not because he was
 bribed, 
 but because there are serious consumerist arguments against it. There are, 
 
 The problem with Naderism is that we have to accept the honest motives of
 the leader pretty much as a given. It is in the nature of nonprofits,
 especially inside-the-beltway types like Public Citizen, to make decisions
 ON BEHALF of the public. It is inherently undemocratic. 

These are fair criticisms. They are of a different order and kind than 
corruption, which is what Ralph's former friend charges him with. --jks




Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1

2000-06-04 Thread JKSCHW

Mark Jones has discovered that anything but the self-described express 
movement for the revolutionmary overthrow of capitalsim is a distraction; 
reforms that merely improve people's livesw ithin existing constrints are 
bad. Hey, Mark, why doesn't this distrction theorya pply to a movement for 
more public transit, or national health, or indeed, racial equality? --jks

In a message dated 6/4/00 4:16:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 I thought then and I think now that it is all an
 utter distraction from what really matters; it is based on the crassest kind
 of self-seeking, privatising solipsism which boils great social/historical
 issues down to what's in it for me qua passive selfish consumer. What really
 mattered then and now for eg is not car safety but less cars and more public
 transport. What Nader did is help legitimise the care and ensures its social
 apotheosis to its current iconic status. That's disastrously bad. That's the
 essence of Nader's social constituency, what's more, and it cannot be the
 basis of a national issue-driven mass politics, except by default, ie
 because the real thing (a real mass socialism) is missing.   




Re: Re: Greenspan's Waterloo

2000-06-04 Thread Carrol Cox



Timework Web wrote:

 Gene Coyle asked,

  I'm not sure how much weight to give any story about prices,
 though, in a world (this one) where competition doesn't necessarily mean
 price competition. Rising labor costs surely don't underlie the high price
 of Nike running shoes.

I would like to see more discussion on this. It would seem that at any
time a producer would be setting prices as high as possible before
reduced demand lowered total profit. The same with a merchant. For
example, why should shoplifting cause a rise in prices? That would
imply that before the rise in shoplifting the store was not charging
as high a price as it could have. I'm not an economist, and I have
no idea of what the traps or errors are here.

Carrol




Re: Re: Re: Greenspan's Waterloo

2000-06-04 Thread JKSCHW

In a message dated 6/4/00 12:06:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
writes:

 why should shoplifting cause a rise in prices? That would
 imply that before the rise in shoplifting the store was not charging
 as high a price as it could have. I' 

If there was significant loss due to pilferage, the store might have to 
charge more to nmake up for it and maintain its profit margin.  It is my 
understanding that in retail business profit margins are often tight, which 
is what you expect in a nearly fully competitive market. E.g., you needn't 
buy your shoes here, there area  dozen places nearby that sell identical 
products. If margins were so taught that the story could not raise prices to 
respond to pilerage losses at all, of course, any pilferage would put the 
place of out business, so there is some give, unless of course the place is 
put of nusiness by pilferage,w hich may happen.

Of course the margins for Nike are a different story. The big name shoes are 
not nearly so cpompetitive at that level, and they are free to explit the 
makers of the sgoes with ruth or mercy, but that says without going here. 
--jks




Stock market optimism?

2000-06-04 Thread Louis Proyect

New York Times, June 4, 2000

STRATEGIES

At What Rate Does a Market Really Grow?

By MARK HULBERT 

It is a truism of the investing world: Over the long term stocks grow at an
annualized rate of 10 to 15 percent. 

Sure, equities may do better in some decades, as they did in the 1980's and
1990's, just as they may do worse in others, say, the 1930's and 1960's.
But, eventually, their long-term growth rate will level out within this
range -- a rate economists know as the stock market's "expected return." 

This is the rate investors require to compensate them for the risk in
equity investments, and it should remain relatively constant over the long
term. 

But what if it turns out that we've all been too optimistic about the
expected return of stocks? Then asset allocation models would have to be
recalculated to cut their equity weightings. Indeed, huge swaths of capital
would need to be shifted into nonequity asset classes. And certainly
investing the Social Security Trust Fund in stocks, as George W. Bush and
many others have proposed, would suddenly make a lot less sense. 

Well, two of this country's most influential finance professors, Eugene F.
Fama of the University of Chicago and Ken French of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, have just completed research showing that the
expected return from stocks is more than five percentage points a year
lower than previously thought. Though this research has not yet been
published, word of it is beginning to spread. 

Determining stocks' expected return isn't easy, since it requires viewing
the markets over extremely long periods. Professors Fama and French focused
on United States stocks over the last 130 or so years. In particular, they
observed that the stock market's average annual return from 1950 through
1999, at 14.8 percent, was about 6 percentage points higher than it was
from 1872 through 1949, when it was 8.8 percent. 

The key question: Which period represents the rule and which the exception? 

The professors are confident that the last 50 years constitute the
exception. That means we're on shaky ground if we extrapolate recent
decades' stellar returns into the future. 

One of their more compelling points is based on the fact that corporate
America's average annual return on equity over the last 50 years has been
11.9 percent, nearly three percentage points lower than the stock market's
average return over that period. 

This, the professors say, all but proves that stocks' expected return
should be below what their historical return has been over the past five
decades. 

Why is that? If the market's expected return is greater than a company's
return on equity, the rational thing for the company to do is close up shop
and invest its assets in the stock market. Alert balance sheet readers will
note that, because the market's expected return is also the rate at which a
company's future income stream is discounted for valuation purposes, the
present value of such a company's future earnings would be negative. 

In other words, if you believe that stocks' historical return over the last
50 years reflects their genuine expected return, then, in effect, you must
also believe that corporate America on balance has been unprofitable on a
discounted valuation basis over the past 50 years. 

The professors' point is that corporate America's returns on equity, on
average, cannot have trailed the market's true expected return for five
full decades. 

So investors have been overestimating the expected return from stocks: It
should be no higher than their underlying companies' returns on equity, or
three percentage points a year less than the equity market's annual return
over the past 50 years. 

Moreover, returns on equity are widely assumed to be upwardly biased
because they are based on artificially low book values. So even this
overstates expected return. 

Why then have stocks bested what might be called their true expected return
for 50 years? Likely, it is because they have benefited from some
unexpected good news. The professors don't discuss what that good news was,
but it undoubtedly includes America's emergence after World War II as an
economic and political superpower and its winning of the cold war. 

The professors note that unexpected good news is just that -- unexpected --
and its salutary effect on past returns should not be extrapolated into the
future. They don't predict a bear market, but argue that we need to cut our
expectations of future stock market performance, not just for the next few
years but in perpetuity.   


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/




Re: Re: Re: Re: Greenspan's Waterloo

2000-06-04 Thread Carrol Cox



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 In a message dated 6/4/00 12:06:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 writes:

  why should shoplifting cause a rise in prices? That would
  imply that before the rise in shoplifting the store was not charging
  as high a price as it could have. I' 

 If there was significant loss due to pilferage, the store might have to
 charge more to nmake up for it and maintain its profit margin.

I guess I haven't found a clear way to state my question. I also
wanted a critique of the assumption behind my question. That
assumption is that at any given time a producer (or merchant)
is charging the highest price possible for the product. (As in
a break-even curve showing the point at which higher prices
cut sufficiently in to profits as to be self-defeating.) If this
assumption is true, then how can the seller raise the price
(which by our premise cannot be raised higher)?

To put it another way, I'd like to see more exploration (aimed
at the non-economist) of how prices get set.

Carrol




Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Full employment II (today's perverseworld)

2000-06-04 Thread Joel Blau

As always, the issue is what they count, and whether it is countable. For
example, a purely quantitative approach to welfare reform can count the
increased employment among welfare mothers and ignore the decline in parental
supervision that such work demands. In fact, the commodification of child care
epitomizes the stereotypical post-welfare reform job--mothers who used to care
for their own children on welfare were lazy until the 1996 law improved their
character by forcing them to work caring for somebody's else children at low
wages. Studies like those conducted by Manpower venerate work and work effort,
but never total up its social costs. Sure, quantitative analysis has its place,
but given Manpower's  tunnel vision about  welfare reform, it seems ill-suited
to capture the social transformation that is taking place.

Joel Blau

Brad De Long wrote:

 What's your beef with MDRC?
 
 mbs
 
 
 I am very dubious about these studies. First, Manpower Demonstration
 Research Corporation is among the quantoid (and therefore tunnel-visioned)
 of the institutes researching welfare. . . .

 It appears to be that they count things...





Re: The Nader campaign, part 1

2000-06-04 Thread Michael Hoover

 In a nutshell, Nader is attempting to connect the dotted lines between the
 social movements and trade unions of today with the anti-monopoly and
 populist traditions of the pre-1917 left. This is the left of small
 shopkeepers, farmers and "citizens" who need to restore the vision of
 Jeffersonian democracy. In his Concord Principles found at votenader.com,
 he states:
 "Control of our social institutions, our government, and our political
 system is presently in the hands of a self-serving, powerful few, known as
 an oligarchy, which too often has excluded citizens from the process.
 "Our political system has degenerated into a government of the power
 brokers, by the power brokers, and for the power brokers, and is far beyond
 the control or accountability of the citizens. It is an arrogant and
 distant caricature of Jeffersonian democracy."
 I personally am somewhat suspicious of appeals to "Jeffersonian democracy",
 particularly in light of his treatment of the American Indian.
 Louis Proyect

Re. Nader, he may be only person to ever critique free market system in
*Homes and Gardens* magazine, saying that it "only stimulates one value
in society - the acquistive, materialistic, profit value.  Hoe about
the justice value? the health value? the heritage-for-future-generations
value? the accountability-in-government value the enforcement-of-
consumer-environmental-worker-laws value?" (August 1991, p. 144)

Of course, it is RN's name recognition that got him into above magazine
and it is his name recognition that explains Green Party willingness
to nominate him a second time despite his 1996 'non-campaign' (which
should have been seen as betrayal).  

Nader appearance in *Homes and Gardens* is indication of limits of his 
politics.  His anti-corporate theme reminds of not-so-Progressive Era 
advocacy of using gov't to prevent economy from imposing hardships on 
individuals unable to help themselves and to promote social reforms that 
would lead to social progress.  While number of such reforms were enacted,
middle-strata progressivism had conservative effect of undercutting more
substantive democratic demands and reducing pressure for great changes.
And legislation to control monopolies was largely ineffectual anyway.

RN's rhetoric may sound populist theme but his modus operandi has always
been 'reform from above': lobbying, testifying at hearings, influencing 
rulemaking process, presenting research findings, organizing 'astroturf' 
(in contrast to grassroots) efforts.  And while he is identified with
'public interest' causes, Nader has been contributor to interest group 
'hyperpluralism' given his association with founding (or co-founding)
over 50 organizations during his career.

'Leftish' types in US have tendency to call for 'home grown' examples
of 'good' politics and Nader's reference to Jeffersonian democracy
keeps with that tradition.  Despite his view that nature ratified
exclusion of women, African-Americans,  Native Americans from ranks
of autonomous people and public realm, there was a radical TJ.  More-
over, Jefferson's words have been used in ways and by folks that he
would never have intended (Seneca Falls Declaration, Frederick Douglas, 
Martin Luther King, Jr., for example).

But TJ also played important role in making 1787 non-majoritarian 
constitution legitimate.  Despite riding wave of reinvigorated 
egalitarianism stemming from French Revolution to the presidency
in 1800, he did not (contrary to Federalist expectations) 'rip up'
the document or dismantle established gov't institutions.  Instead, 
he began attaching democratic label to the constitution.  Fact of 
matter is that Jefferson was part of US 'duopoly' that Nader opposes, 
a duopoly that has existed throughout country's history.  In any
event, invoking TJ - who was simultaneously individualist,
communitarian, republican, democratic - is call to go 'back to 
future' that only partially was.Michael Hoover  




Re: Re: Greenspan's Waterloo

2000-06-04 Thread Jim Devine

At 06:25 AM 06/04/2000 -0700, you wrote:
I'm not sure how much weight to give any story about prices,
though, in a world (this one) where competition doesn't necessarily mean
price competition. Rising labor costs surely don't underlie the high price
of Nike running shoes.

the Nike issue is about high prices rather than rising prices (inflation). 
Nike is able to charge a high price (relative to costs) at this point of 
history because it has monopoly power. That monopoly power doesn't give 
them either the wish or the ability to continually raise prices in a way 
that reverberates through the entire economy (i.e., cause inflation).

In order to have inflation, it's not only that businesses have the ability 
to set prices, but there must be a reason for them to do so (like rising 
labor costs due to a small reserve army of labor or rising demand for 
products or rising raw material prices). Except for the role of 
price-setting power (in general) in helping to cause inflation and 
inflationary persistence, the identities of individual companies is rarely 
relevant to a macroeconomic process such as inflation.

(I guess you'd say that because the oligopolistic steel and auto producers 
were like spiders at the center of the economy's web, i.e., since those 
industries could stimulate inflation in the rest of the economy, President 
Kennedy's jaw-boning and President Nixon's price controls for the 
commanding heights made sense. But that era is long over. US capitalists 
are extremely competitive these days -- and struggling to re-attain secure 
positions.)

Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~JDevine




WOMEN AND DEVELOPMENT:[NAD Regional News] Week May 16-25 \ IssueFocus: Gender\Women (fwd)

2000-06-04 Thread md7148


Especially check out the child mortality figures, and number of women
loosing their lives during pregnancy and childbearing. 580,000 die during
"peregnancy and delivery" each year, 99% of them in developing countries.
In Morocco, maternal mortality is 25 times higher than Europe. It is HIGH
time to get alarmed about intensifying global inequalities and
injustices!!

United Arab Emirates, the capitalist oil state, is applying a program of
pre-marriage screening to prevent disease among new born in the same
family. Inter-marriage is a common practice in the United Arab Emirates,
however the idea here is to modernize patriarchy through capitalist
measures, without ensuring real safety for women and children. The purpose
is not to liberate women, but to conform oppressive gender practices to
the necessities of capitalist modernization! Beat your wives, but do the
western way kind of thing!

Mine


NAD Regional News

Week May 16-25 \ Issue Focus: Gender\Women 
a newsletter that covers current Arab issues and press news on
development and gender. 


CONTINENTS 
1. United Arab Emirates: Pre-Marriage Screening Aids Disease Prevention 
2. Brother kills sister for 'honour' in Jordan
3. Sudan's Bashir orders all female prisoners freed
4. Kuwaiti women marked first anniversary of rights decree
5. Bahrain jails women activists
6. Morocco ponders plan to give women more rights
7. Morocco: Maternal Mortality Is 25 Times Higher Than Europe


***

1. United Arab Emirates: Pre-Marriage Screening Aids Disease Prevention 

May 18,2000  UN Wire
Pre-marriage screening and diagnoses can help avoid 60% of malformations
 and nearly 100% of hereditary diseases in newborns, according to the
Central Maternity and Childcare Department of the United Arab Emirates'
Ministry of Health. "Marriage in the same family has social benefits in
the Arab world, but it leads to several health problems among children," a
department report said. "Screening of parents has become a significant
step to ensure the health of children." Intermarriage plays a major role
in the spread of genetic disease, like thalassemia and anemia, in addition
to other chronic diseases such as diabetes. The department's premarital
screening program includes registration of family medical histories.
Doctors also screen blood samples for potential blood diseases, assess
dietary systems of mothers for malnutrition, and offer advice and
medications to eliminate potential problems (Dubai Khaleej Times, 16 May).

***

2. Brother kills sister for 'honour' in Jordan

A 27-year-old mother of five was shot and killed by her brother to clear the family 
name because he suspected her of "immoral behaviour".

May 18, 2000  Arabia on Line
AMMAN (AFP English) - A 27-year-old mother of five was shot and killed by her brother 
to clear the family name because he suspected her of "immoral behaviour", newspapers 
reported Thursday quoting official sources. Hikmah Mohammad was shot several times 
near a mosque in eastern Amman by her 30-year-old brother, who was then arrested by 
police, they said. The man had waited calmly by his sister's bullet-riddled body for 
police to come and collect him, one official told the English-language Jordan Times. 
"The brother told investigators he killed his sister because of rumours and suspicion 
of the victim's immoral behaviour," the daily reported, quoting an official source. 
"Her husband works in Ma'an (southern Jordan). Her brother told us that he suspected 
that his sister was seeing someone and decided to kill her," the source added. The 
state prosecution has launched an investigation into the murder. The latest case 
brings to eight the number of such killings since the start of t!
!
he year.
© 2000 AFP 



3. Sudan's Bashir orders all female prisoners freed

President Omar Hassan al-Bashir has ordered the release of all female prisoners held 
in the country.

May 21, 2000  Arabia on Line
KHARTOUM (Reuters) - President Omar Hassan al-Bashir of Sudan has ordered the release 
of all female prisoners held in the country, a newspaper reported on Sunday. "The 
woman bears the cost of economic reform during time of economic pressure and sanctions 
and in the absence of state support," the independent Akhbar al-Youm quoted Bashir as 
saying at a gathering in Khartoum. Bashir, who also announced that pregnant and 
nursing women would face no punishment, said women had suffered most from displacement 
in Sudan's 17-year civil war. Over 75 percent of women in Sudan's prisons are thought 
to be from mainly animist and Christian south Sudan, where rebels are fighting for 
autonomy from the Muslim, Arabised north. Most were convicted of making or selling 
alcohol, which is banned under Sudan's strict Islamic Sharia laws. Sudan's Islamist 
authorities usually order prisoner releases on national days and when 

Re: Re: The Nader campaign, part 1

2000-06-04 Thread JKSCHW

Lots of silliness here. All effective reform "legitimate" the system by 
making it work better, or at least less destructively, for those on the 
bottom. If you oppose reforms on this basis, you will cut yourself off from 
all political activity except for PL-ish demand for total revolution NOW! 
Moreover, reforms are achieved by affected the process of legislation and 
regulation. So, if you accept that refiorms are good and necessary, you have 
to support lobbuing for and otherwise trying to effect them through the 
esrablished channels. Otherwise, you will be out in the streets yelling for 
reforms that will be implemented, if at all, without your participation. 

A small point. The Sherman Antitrust Act was and is a moderately effective 
reform  that has been fairly successful in promoting competition. It is the 
international model for antitrust law in Europe, and, i understand, 
eslsewhere.

The comments about Jefferson and the Constitution are almost too silly to 
discuss. J was no great fan of the C, which he did not sign precisely because 
of its comparative conservatism, And as for the anti-majoritarainsim od the 
C, and especially the Bill of Rights, is that such a bad thing? Some people 
might think that it is the anti-majoritarianism of the C that is precisely 
its glory, in providing discrete and insular minorities a defense against 
majoritarianian oppression. --jks

In a message dated 6/4/00 2:44:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 Nader appearance in *Homes and Gardens* is indication of limits of his 
 politics.  His anti-corporate theme reminds of not-so-Progressive Era 
 advocacy of using gov't to prevent economy from imposing hardships on 
 individuals unable to help themselves and to promote social reforms that 
 would lead to social progress.  While number of such reforms were enacted,
 middle-strata progressivism had conservative effect of undercutting more
 substantive democratic demands and reducing pressure for great changes.
 And legislation to control monopolies was largely ineffectual anyway.
 
 RN's rhetoric may sound populist theme but his modus operandi has always
 been 'reform from above': lobbying, testifying at hearings, influencing 
 rulemaking process, presenting research findings, organizing 'astroturf' 
 (in contrast to grassroots) efforts.  And while he is identified with
 'public interest' causes, Nader has been contributor to interest group 
 'hyperpluralism' given his association with founding (or co-founding)
 over 50 organizations during his career.
 
 'Leftish' types in US have tendency to call for 'home grown' examples
 of 'good' politics and Nader's reference to Jeffersonian democracy
 keeps with that tradition.  Despite his view that nature ratified
 exclusion of women, African-Americans,  Native Americans from ranks
 of autonomous people and public realm, there was a radical TJ.  More-
 over, Jefferson's words have been used in ways and by folks that he
 would never have intended (Seneca Falls Declaration, Frederick Douglas, 
 Martin Luther King, Jr., for example).
 
 But TJ also played important role in making 1787 non-majoritarian 
 constitution legitimate.  Despite riding wave of reinvigorated 
 egalitarianism stemming from French Revolution to the presidency
 in 1800, he did not (contrary to Federalist expectations) 'rip up'
 the document or dismantle established gov't institutions.  Instead, 
 he began attaching democratic label to the constitution.  Fact of 
 matter is that Jefferson was part of US 'duopoly' that Nader opposes, 
 a duopoly that has existed throughout country's history.  In any
 event, invoking TJ - who was simultaneously individualist,
 communitarian, republican, democratic - is call to go 'back to 
 future' that only partially was.Michael Hoover  
 
  




WOMEN AND DEVELOPMENT II:[NAD Regional News] Week May 26-June 1 \Issue Focus: Gender\Women (fwd)

2000-06-04 Thread md7148



NAD Regional News

Week May 26-June 1 \ Issue Focus: Gender\Women
a newsletter that covers current Arab issues and press news on development and gender. 


CONTINENTS
1- OMAN: revises procedures to make Shura vote fairer
2- KUWAIT: Women score victory in rights battle
3- SAUDI: Women to attend council meet for second time
4- DUBAI: Women hit the road as taxi drivers
5- SUDAN: Hundreds of woman inmates released


*  *  *

1- OMAN: revises procedures to make Shura vote fairer

Some 175,000 people, 25 percent of Omanis over the age of 21, will be able to vote for 
the new Shura Council.

May 29, 2000  Arabia on Line
MUSCAT (Reuters) - Oman has revised some aspects of the way its consultative Shura 
Council is chosen in a bid to ensure that elections in July are fairer than before, 
officials said on Monday. Some 175,000 people, 25 percent of Omanis over the age of 
21, will be able to vote for the new Shura Council, which has only consultative powers 
and no say in foreign, defence and security policy. "The procedures regulating the 
nomination and voting process have been carefully revised to overcome irregularities 
of the past (elections)," the Arabic-language Oman daily quoted Interior Minister Ali 
bin Hamoud bin Ali al-Bousaidi as saying, though he did not elaborate. A ministry 
official told Reuters one of the changes was that candidates would register directly 
with provincial governors, instead of with tribal leaders. "In previous elections, 
candidates were reluctant to register their names with the tribal leaders and that 
limited the voters` options," he said. Oman is one of the few stat!
!
es to hold elections in the conservative Gulf Arab region ruled by monarchies. Elders, 
prominent businessmen and intellectuals from Oman's 59 provinces have been selected to 
choose members for the 82-seat assembly, which has a three-year term. Sultan Qaboos 
has the final say in picking council members after the vote. The interior ministry 
official said more than 600 nominees had registered for the polls, including about 36 
women, and final figures would be announced soon. There were 736 nominees at the last 
election, including 27 women. © 2000 Reuters 



2- KUWAIT: Women score victory in rights battle

An activist won permission to take her fight for the right to vote and stand for 
election to the Constitutional Court. 

May 29, 2000, 01:47 PM
KUWAIT CITY (Reuters) - Kuwaiti women celebrated a victory in their 40-year battle for 
political equality on Monday when an activist won permission to take her fight for the 
right to vote and stand for election to the Constitutional Court. "This is a great 
victory...This is what we wanted," said Rola Dashti, who jumped for joy when her 
lawyer told her that the Kuwaiti Administrative Court had accepted her argument. It 
referred her petition to the Constitutional Court to decide on whether election laws, 
which ban female participation, violate the constitution. Individuals cannot file a 
case directly to the Constitutional Court. "All we wanted was just one case to make it 
through and we have that," said lawyer and female activist Kawther al-Joua'n. Minutes 
earlier, she had expressed disappointment and vowed to appeal after another court 
rejected similar cases on the grounds of procedural errors. It did not pass judgment 
on the petitions' contents. The legal decisions come one ye!
!
ar after Kuwait's ruler, Emir Sheikh Jaber al-Ahmad al-Sabah, issued a groundbreaking 
decree granting women the right to vote and stand in elections in 2003. But after 
all-male elections in July, Kuwait's parliament rejected the decree in November. Later 
the same month it defeated a similar draft law presented by MPs by just two votes. 
Kuwait's traditionalist tribal politicians and well- organised, influential Sunni 
Muslim political groupings are vociferously against granting women political rights. 
Support from leadership Sheikh Jaber received a delegation of Kuwaiti women earlier 
this month on the anniversary of his decree. They thanked him for his reform bid, 
which at the time triggered bitter debate. This month, the country's leaders voiced 
fresh support for women's political rights, although some activists have accused the 
government of failing to back them strongly enough. Dashti said supporters of women's 
rights would present a new draft law to parliament in a fresh bid!
!
 to amend the election laws. "We are working on all fronts, legal 
 October...Presenting the issue in public is now less problematic than a year ago when 
we had nervous responses. Women will eventually get their rights and will vote in 
2003," said an optimistic Dashti. Kuwaiti women are seen as the most liberated in the 
Gulf Arab region. They head diplomatic missions, run businesses, hold senior posts and 
help steer the OPEC member's vital oil sector.  © 2000 Reuters 



3- SAUDI: 

Re: Greenspan's Waterloo

2000-06-04 Thread Timework Web

Jim Devine wrote:

the Nike issue is about high prices rather than rising prices
(inflation).

No. The Nike issue is about whether prices relate to labour costs.

Nike is able to charge a high price (relative to costs) at this point of
history because it has monopoly power.

Not exactly. There are lots of other running shoes on the market. True,
Nike has a monopoly on *Nike* running shoes. . .

US capitalists are extremely competitive these days -- and struggling to
re-attain secure positions.)

Being extremely competitive is not the same thing as PRICE competition. US
capitalists also compete through product innovation, differentiation and
advertising. If you have any data that suggests US capitalists
*overwhelmingly* compete through price, I'd love to see it. Anecdotally,
the stories tend to run in the other direction. Why are these smart people
spending so many billions of dollars on advertising when all they've got
to do is lop a few pennies off their price tags?


Tom Walker




Excess Capacity in Auto Industry

2000-06-04 Thread Anthony D'Costa

Could anyone suggest some "good" books on auto industry restructuring
globally that specifically ties it to (or discusses) excess
capacity?  They could have been written any time since the late
1960s.  Thanks in advance.

Anthony

xxx
Anthony P. D'Costa, Associate Professor  
Comparative International Development
University of WashingtonTaylor Institute  South Asia Program
1900 Commerce StreetJackson School of International Studies
Tacoma, WA 98402, USA   University of Washington, Seattle

Phone: (253) 692-4462
Fax :  (253) 692-5612
xxx