a report, albeit brief
Michael Perelman asked me to report on the conference I attended at U of Warwick in Coventry, UK last weekend. It was on Globalisation, Growth and In(equality), organized by the univ's Centre for Globalisation and Regionalisation. Keynote speakers included Ravi Kanbur (of Cornell), Robert Wade of LSE, Adrian Wood from the UK government, Martin Khor of Third World Network, etc. Most participants were trade economists, political economists, and a few from various assorted fields. A good number of participants from the UK were policy makers, engaged in issues of trade and aid. There were a few World Bank consultants from the UK side as well. There were some of us who did sectoral studies. It was good to meet some folks whose writings I read as a grad student. Overall assessment of the conf: very good. It is good to see a good mix like this where development issues are dealt at several levels. I rarely find such types of conf in the US. There were of course those who liked the pecking order (as Jim D would say) but nothing serious really. My paper was on IT exports and inequality in India. A non-rigorous approach to studying inequality but which I believe is easily captured with sectoral data. I also gave a talk to non-academics (mainly) at the U of Sheffield (Center for Japanese Studies) on Japanese industrial practices in the Indian auto industry. It was nice to speak to an audience of about 35 people with far more time than the 20 min that conf typically allot you. London, as always, is a great walking city. Always nice to have a resident give you a tour. Violent crime apparently has increased though crime as a whole has fallen, that was one item which was repeated a couple of times on TV. The Race Relations Committee chair, a British Sikh suggested forced integration (not his words). Some policies are forthcoming based on the commission's report. I suppose the debate between Wade and Wolf were publihsed in the Prospect (US edition). It was in the UK edition. My friend tells me Wade had a problem with the numbers. I guess I have to read it to see what's being debated and how. Cheers, Anthony xxx Anthony P. D'Costa, Associate Professor Comparative International Development University of WashingtonCampus Box 358436 1900 Commerce Street Tacoma, WA 98402, USA Phone: (253) 692-4462 Fax : (253) 692-5718 xxx
RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Nobel Prize
The standard version of the story with the PD, as set forth in Taylor (the inventor), Rapaport, von Neumann and Morgenstern, etc., is that the prisoners cannot communicate. One reason for this is so that they cannot change the payoff matrix by threatening _each other_. Otherwise the dominant strategy will be different. Of course mere promises will be worthless. But promises are not the only things that can be communicated. A threat is just another kind of promise; for a fully consistent game theoretician, *no* statement of the form If you play strategy X, I will do Y, where Y is an action which is costly for the person making the statement, is credible. If you ever have the bad luck to be banged up with a game theoretician, you might quite possibly tap on the waterpipes or something to inform him that If you defect and I get ten years, I'll come after you and kill your family. But he's just going to reply that since it would be costly for you to do so (and you can't gain any pleasure from doing it since this would mean that your utility and his were not independent as required by the vN/M axioms), it would be strictly irrational for you to do so, so he's going to regard it as just empty talk. Leaving you back where you started. There are games in which communication makes a difference; if one prisoner could prove that he was a member of a secret society that would expel him if he failed to avenge a defection (in other words, could make his threat credible), then that would make a difference. But ordinary, garden-variety communication is just cheap talk in most of these models. That's the classic, fully rational theory of games, anyway, wherein is had much fun in deducing all the knowledge that each player might have. Once you introduce bounded rationality, the whole business gets much more murky. dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___
RE: RE: Re: Alzheimer's disease
I hope any relatives of sufferers will take cheer rather than offence in my passing on that the motto of the Irish Alzheimer's Disease Society is: Remember those who can't. dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___
Oracle denies shifting Indian RD centre to China
Hindustantimes.com Oracle denies shifting Indian RD centre to China Reuters New Delhi, March 13 Software giant Oracle Corp denied on Wednesday reports that it planned to shift its research and development centre from India to China. Oracle is not relocating its Indian RD centre to China. India remains an important market for Oracle and we're committed to our research and development operations in Bangalore and Hyderabad, the company said in a statement. Earlier this week, the Press Trust of India news agency reported that Oracle, the world's No 2 software maker, would move its development centre out of the country. Oracle's India development centre has been operating in India for eight years, and Oracle has no plans to alter its aggressive growth plans in either Bangalore or Hyderabad, the statement said. The company also has a global consulting group in Bangalore, India's software hub, and global product support centres in Bangalore and Hyderabad, an emerging technology hub. Redwood Shores, California-based Oracle was among the first global giants to open a development centre in India, where several technology giants have opened facilities attracted by the country's vast pool of skilled technical talent and low costs. Oracle's Indian centre works on a range of products covering its core database, development tools, web technologies and e-business application products. As Oracle consolidates its position in the growing area of Internet-based remote services, India will continue to play a key role in Oracle's global strategy, Derek Williams, Oracle's executive vice-president for Asia-Pacific, said in the statement. Send your feedback at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hindustan Times House, 18-20, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001, India Phone[Board]91-11-3361234©Hindustan Times Ltd. 1997. Reproduction in any form is prohibited without p rior permission.
Revolution(s) In Our Time (Argentina)
Revolution(s) In Our Time (Argentina) by Li'l Joe and Connie White In the photos shown on Indymedia (below), we couldn't tell whether or not the Argentinian police were armed with guns as well as sticks. If they had sticks only, that would indicate that they relinquished the Brukman textile factory to the workers and retreated from fear. On the other hand, if they were armed with guns and, nonetheless, relinquished the plant to the workers, this implies a solidarity with the workers BY REFUSING TO SHOOT THEM! In the case of the former scenario, it's cool. To quote from Marx, the workers, by such victories feel their strength more, and see the relative weakness, or rather, indecisiveness of the bourgeois state. Such victories embolden the workers, and the workers in other factories have discussions as to how to do the same. If the second scenario were the case, this too is cool, in that the message is that the Argentinian police refused to open fire on the workers who were occupying bourgeois property. Trotsky wrote (we believe in the Transitional Programme) that, by their very nature, sit-down strikes, i.e. plant occupations, raise the question of whose property is this any way?! From the Marxist perspective, we understand this to mean that the capitalist mode of appropriation -- the result of the capitalist mode of production -- is ownership based on buying and selling. Thus, the Argentina workers' occupation of the Brukman textile plant is implicitly an expropriation of the product(s) of social labour -- i.e., the factory -- and is the first stage in the expropriation of the expropriators. The State exists as special bodies of armed men, with prisons, etc., at their disposal -- it exists to preserve the capitalistic mode of appropriation and, inadvertently or consciously, to defend capitalist property. The capitalist mode of appropriation -- the result of the capitalist mode of production -- results in capitalist private property. But, the capitalist mode of production, that is, commodity production on the basis of wage-labour, results in industrial production based in social labour. The contradiction of the private appropriation of the products of social labour is resolved only when the class of producers expropriate the means of social production and, thereby, abolish commodity production and the system of wage-labour itself! If the Argentinian police refused to open fire on the workers defending the Brukman textile factory, this does not necessarily mean that they recognize that the products of social labour ought to belong to society rather than to capitalists. But, at minimum, it means that, because of the contradictions in their social being and individual consciousness, the [individual] cops -- being sons and daughters of the working class and are compelled by their job description to protect the property of an alien class, the capitalist class -- are susceptible to working class pressures, i.e., the pressures of their [working class] parents, siblings, neighbors and friends. A socialist revolution -- that is, the seizure of the productive forces by the working-classes and toiling masses -- is not possible without significant elements of the military coming over to the side of the proletariat and, in the first instance, by refusing to open fire on the working class, and then by consciously going over to the revolution by opening fire on their officers -- brigade after brigade -- until we have division after division of Red Guards, and indeed a Red Army! Hic Rhodus, hic salta! Here is the rose, dance thou here! La luta continua. --- Vicente Balvanera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yesterday, Saturday, the Brukman textile factory was taken over by infantry and police, the workers evicted. The workers stayed in place, refusing to be dispersed in front of the factory. A call was sent out, and a large number of brothers and sisters arrived on the scene. From the limited info we have at present, we only know that the police and infantry retired from the scene, and the following pictures (argentina indymedia) show how the plant was taken over once again. A call has been sent out by the Brukman workers for a permanent security guard to be set up. All fighting class struggle organizations and political parties of the left are participating together to comply with this need. The factory is once again in the hands of the workers. http://www.argentina.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=17095group=webcast Vicente Balvanera http://www.argentina.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=17095group=webcast Vicente Balvanera
Re: Revolution(s) In Our Time (Argentina)
I think Li'l Joe and Connie White are reading too much into the cop reaction, and are probably leaving out some key factors. 1) In Argentina all cops are armed with at least a pistol on their hips. The cops in this picture are no exception. 2) The attempt to kick the workers out of the Brukman textile installation was carried out by the Policia Federal Argentina (PFA), with as many plainclothes police (also armed) as uniformed. 3) If the police didn't succeed it was due to two things: a) Neighbours from that area came out (at least a couple hundred), cut off Jujuy Ave. and banged their pots and pans. This got some media play which resulted in people from ohter parts of the city joining in the protest. b) The last thing the government wants right now is to have any casualties that would cause a massive street protest. I have no doubt that the police are under the strictest orders NOT to shoot. 4) This is the same police force that brutally repressed demonstrators on 20 December 2001, resulting in 5 dead down town. This was done while TV cameras were rolling, which goes to show that they don't give a rat's ass about being identified as having brutally beat up and shot peaceful demonstrators. 5) This is also the same police force that brutally repressed at least two cacerolazos in January, with absolutely no provocation. They tear gassed and fired rubber bullets at peaceful demonstrators. (There are many reports of how they appeared to be enjoying the repression, cracking jokes, laughing, etc.) 6) This is not to say that there might not be solidaritous cops in the PFA. However, as a force they are as fascistic as the Argentine military (with strong neo-nazi influences). I think that, so far, the government's fear of massive street protests is what has resulted in lower levels of repression. However, there is a lot of intimidation currently occurring. For example, neighborhood assemblies in the Capital are routinely under surveillance from cops in cvilian clothes (typically observing from conspicuously parked cars). Police presence in demonstrations is also huge, often outnumbering protesters. In the suburbs of Buenos Aires, where there are many assemblies as well, gangs of thugs linked to the peronist political apparatus have often intimidated and/or beat up assembly members. I suspect that more turmoil lies ahead as the government fails to secure IMF money and their economic program falls to pieces as the peso plumets to new lows. The IMF of course, not recognizing any responsibility for the Argentine crisis, is back in full force (they sent an 18 member delegation for a week and a half) recommending more of the same crap. Unbelievably, the government is still trying to comply Stay tuned, this story ain't over yet. Alan _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Nobel Prize
The standard version of the story with the PD, as set forth in Taylor (the inventor), Rapaport, von Neumann and Morgenstern, etc., is that the prisoners cannot communicate. One reason for this is so that they cannot change the payoff matrix by threatening _each other_. Otherwise the dominant strategy will be different. Of course mere promises will be worthless. But promises are not the only things that can be communicated. A threat is just another kind of promise; for a fully consistent game theoretician, *no* statement of the form If you play strategy X, I will do Y, where Y is an action which is costly for the person making the statement, is credible. If you ever have the bad luck to be banged up with a game theoretician, you might quite possibly tap on the waterpipes or something to inform him that If you defect and I get ten years, I'll come after you and kill your family. But he's just going to reply that since it would be costly for you to do so (and you can't gain any pleasure from doing it since this would mean that your utility and his were not independent as required by the vN/M axioms), it would be strictly irrational for you to do so, so he's going to regard it as just empty talk. Leaving you back where you started. Well maybe, take it up with the architects of the PD, Taylor, Rapaport, vN M, all of whom insist on the noncom condition, frankly, I'm not a game theorist or an economist, just a sometime philosopher and lawyer with an amateur interest in this stuff, and I'm not even interested enough to go back to the books and try to figure thsi won out cause it's not that important to me. It's possible you have a a potebtially interesting critique of standard presentations of the PD, if it isn't already widely known, which I wouldn't know, There are games in which communication makes a difference; if one prisoner could prove that he was a member of a secret society that would expel him if he failed to avenge a defection (in other words, could make his threat credible), then that would make a difference. But ordinary, garden-variety communication is just cheap talk in most of these models. That's the classic, fully rational theory of games, anyway, wherein is had much fun in deducing all the knowledge that each player might have. Once you introduce bounded rationality, the whole business gets much more murky. dd Praps. jks _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: RE: New Book on Marx's Capital-Marx words
In a message dated 3/21/2002 6:42:04 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've always liked this letter to Kugelmann. Very Hegelian. Very important stress on the importance of theory for revolutionary transformation. Whose translation is this? Andrew Kliman Progress Publisher, Moscow 1969, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels Selected Works in three Volumes, Volume Two page 418. First Printing. I had looked up the letter on one of the Marx Archive (for easy copying) and it lacked the first three sentences. The above is not the entire letter, which I do not have a copy of. I read in the letter a definitive statement on value (magnitude) and exchange value (prices or exchange relations) and the approach to examining "the essence" of phenomena. Thus Marx states: "The vulgar economist has not the faintest idea that the actual everyday exchange relations cannot be directly identical with the magnitudes of value." The letter is reproduced below. Marx to L. Kugelmann in Hanover London, July 11, 1868 . . . . As for the Centralblatt, the man is making the greatest possible concession in admitting that, if one means anything at all by value, the conclusion I draw must be accepted. The unfortunate fellow does not see that, even if there were no chapter on "value" in my book, the analysis of the real relations which I give would contain the proof and demonstrations of the real value relations. All that palaver about the necessity of proving the concept of value comes from complete ignorance both of the subject dealt with and of the scientific method. Every child knows a nation which ceased to work, I will not say for a year, but even for a few weeks, would perish. Every child knows, too, that the masses of products corresponding to the different needs required different and quantitatively determined masses of the total labor of society. That this necessity of the distribution of social labor in definite proportions cannot possibly be done away with by a particular form of social production but can only change the mode of its appearance, is self-evident. No natural laws can be done away with. What can change in historically different circumstances is only the form in which these laws assert themselves. And the form in which this proportional distribution of labor asserts itself, in the state of society where the interconnection of social labor is manifested in the private exchange of the individual products of labor, is precisely the exchange value of these products. Science consists precisely in demonstrating how the law of value asserts itself. So that if one wanted at the very beginning to "explain" all the phenomenon which seemingly contradict that law, one would have to present science before science. It is precisely Ricardo's mistake that in his first chapter on value [On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, Page 479] he takes as given all possible and still to be developed categories in order to prove their conformity with the law of value. On the other hand, as you correctly assumed, the history of the theory certainly shows that the concept of the value relation has always been the same — more or less clear, hedged more or less with illusions or scientifically more or less definite. Since the thought process itself grows out of conditions, is itself a natural process, thinking that really comprehends must always be the same, and can vary only gradually, according to maturity of development, including the development of the organ by which the thinking is done. Everything else is drivel. The vulgar economist has not the faintest idea that the actual everyday exchange relations cannot be directly identical with the magnitudes of value. The essence of bourgeois society consists precisely in this, that a priori there is no conscious social regulation of production. The rational and naturally necessary asserts itself only as a blindly working average. And then the vulgar economist thinks he has made a great discovery when, as against the revelation of the inner interconnection, he proudly claims that in appearance things look different. In fact, he boasts that he holds fast to appearance, and takes it for the ultimate. Why, then, have any science at all? But the matter has also another background. Once the interconnection is grasped, all theoretical belief in the permanent necessity of existing conditions collapses before their collapse in practice. Here, therefore, it is absolutely in the interest of the ruling classes to perpetuate a senseless confusion. And for what other purpose are the sycophantic babblers paid, who have no other scientific trump to play save that in political economy one should not think at all? But satis superque [enough and to spare]. In any case it shows what these priests of the bourgeoisie have come down to, when workers and even manufacturers and merchants understand my book [Capital]
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Nobel Prize
Well maybe, take it up with the architects of the PD, Taylor, Rapaport, vN M, all of whom insist on the noncom condition, frankly, Sorry mate; I'm clearly getting your back up here and I didn't mean to. The fact that communication has to be more than cheap talk if it is to be more than a wheel which doesn't turn anything in the mechanism, is pretty well known in the literature, though it probably came later than von Neumann and Morgenstern. In fact a lot of it is the reason why Harsanyi and Selten shared the Nobel equally with Nash, although they didn't get a film written about them. I'd be wary of relying on Rapaport too heavily; as far as I know, his main contribution to game theory have been a fallacy (the Symmetry Fallacy in the one-shot PD) and joint responsibility for all the horrendous confusion engendered by that book The Evolution of Co-operation (summarised at http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/1/1/review1.html ). Thomas Schelling's Strategy of Conflict is lumps better as a text on game theory from a political science point of view. anyway, whatever. I suspect that diminishing returns has set in on this by now dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___
Re: Re: RE: Nash, Harsanyi and Selten
I thought that Hobbes was a mathematical genius. He was the first to square the circle. Of course this caused great jealousy among the established mathematicians and the Royal Society..;. Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: Ian Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:19 PM Subject: [PEN-L:24111] Re: RE: Nash, Harsanyi and Selten - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] the notion that what's good for a group isn't necessarily good for individuals goes way back. Among others, Thomas Hobbes' LEVIATHAN (circa 1651) relies on this. He didn't exactly need game theory. JDevine == But he'd have enjoyed the stuff if he had greater mathematical proclivities; remember his fits over the Royal Society, one of the first great institutional uses of mathematics as an exclusionary device in professional societies. Ian
game theory
[was: RE: [PEN-L:24200] RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Nobel Prize] Why is it that game theory focuses only on the 2x2 matrix type of game (or the N-person game)? or am I wrong to think that it is so one-tracked in its mind? When I'm wasting my time (in other ways besides silly e-mail discussions), I wonder if a game of solitaire could be used as an analogy for real-world situations the way the 2x2 game is used as a metaphor for some specific social situations. Perhaps Lenin or some other social revolutionary could be modeled as playing freecell, with the chances of victory depend on not only on what's in the cards (the situation created by the conflict of forces relations of production) but also on strategy skill. Maybe this analogy is a way of reconciling determinism and the role of individual leaders. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Davies, Daniel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 8:13 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: [PEN-L:24200] RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Nobel Prize Well maybe, take it up with the architects of the PD, Taylor, Rapaport, vN M, all of whom insist on the noncom condition, frankly, Sorry mate; I'm clearly getting your back up here and I didn't mean to. The fact that communication has to be more than cheap talk if it is to be more than a wheel which doesn't turn anything in the mechanism, is pretty well known in the literature, though it probably came later than von Neumann and Morgenstern. In fact a lot of it is the reason why Harsanyi and Selten shared the Nobel equally with Nash, although they didn't get a film written about them. I'd be wary of relying on Rapaport too heavily; as far as I know, his main contribution to game theory have been a fallacy (the Symmetry Fallacy in the one-shot PD) and joint responsibility for all the horrendous confusion engendered by that book The Evolution of Co-operation (summarised at http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/1/1/review1.html ). Thomas Schelling's Strategy of Conflict is lumps better as a text on game theory from a political science point of view. anyway, whatever. I suspect that diminishing returns has set in on this by now dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___
The Italian murder
- Original Message - From: Franco Barchiesi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Patrick Bond [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Patrick, The guy that was killed, Marco Biagi, was a professor quite well known in Bologna university environments. Defined by people I know there as not so disgusting but definitely a moderate reformist, he has been an advisor to Labour Ministers in both left and the current right-wing governments. Staunch supporter of labour market flexibility, Biagi has played a key role in drafting amendments to Section 18 of 1970's Workers' Statutes (Act 300 of 1970), which, if implemented, will among other things eliminate the justified cause clause for firing workers in establishments with more than 15 employees, and greatly reduce the power of Labour Courts in ordering reinstatements of unfairly dismissed workers. In short, firing workers will become extremely easy (now it's nearly impossible in Italy, aside from retrenchments). His murder comes just 3 days before a massive demo scheduled for 23 March, where more than 1 million people are expected to protest aginst the ultra-neoliberal policies of the Berlusconi government, and two weeks before the 5 April general strike. While the government (joined by employers' organisations) has been quick to blame widespread social opposition for determining objective conditions leading to the crime, the movement has clearly underlined these temporal coincidences to advanced suspects that this is another, rather clumsy, episode of a decades-long 'strategy of tension' with which right wingers and conservative forces have always tried to tame emerging popular movements. In particular, Luca Casarini (who condemned the assassination -- like all the comrades and the left parties -- in the strongest possible terms), has released an interview defining this as a state murder. Astonishing coincidences seem to support these suspects. Last week the weekly Panorama, owned by Berlusconi, published an identity of possible terrorists' targets which had on top of the list academic advisers of government department, particularly the Department of Labour. In the same week, the Ministry of Interior decided to remove the Police escort that Biagi was having. All this is, I think, more than suspect. As for the Red Brigades, they are basically extinct and albeit some obscure groups can appropriate their acronym, it is simply ridiculous to resurrect them as the government is trying to do in order to stygmatise grassroots mobilisations by linking them to the 1970s climate. In any event, the movement will be the worst affected by this act. PS You can post this on Debate if you want Franco
Re: Alzheimer's disease
I hope any relatives of sufferers will take cheer rather than offence in my passing on that the motto of the Irish Alzheimer's Disease Society is: Remember those who can't. dd Thanks for this. I was feeling bad for starting the topic after Jim's response. Best, Sabri
Re: game theory
Jim writes Why is it that game theory focuses only on the 2x2 matrix type of game (or the N-person game)? (it doesn't) or am I wrong to think that it is so one-tracked in its mind? In a word, yes. The 2X2 games are primarily just used for illustrative purposes.
The other axis of evil
The other axis of evil Le Monde diplomatique - March 2002 The other axis of evil by IGNACIO RAMONET We need to be aware that neo-liberal globalisation is attacking the social order on three fronts. The economic front is the most important since it affects all humanity. It is presided over by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation: they form the real axis of evil (1). This loathsome triumvirate creates massive havoc and seeks to impose an economic agenda founded on the predominance of the private sector and the markets, and on profit. Consider the fraud surrounding Enron, Turkey's monetary crisis, the collapse of Argentina and environmental devastation. To add insult to injury, the international conference on financing for development, which will be held this month in Monterrey, Mexico, will undoubtedly recommend that the private sector oversees the development of nations in the South (2). It is scandalous that our leaders, particularly those from the European Union, refuse to take action that might provide for development and liberate two-thirds of humanity mired in poverty. What is needed is to write off poor countries' debts completely; to create a fair and broad-based system governing debt repayment for nations of the South; to obtain guarantees to ensure that the conditions for financing are appropriate and that financing will be used for sustainable development; to ensure that wealthy nations devote at least 0.7% of their budgets to financing for development; to restore balance in North-South trade policies; to implement policies to ensure that every country has sovereignty over its food; to regulate irrational capital flows; to outlaw banking secrecy; to abolish tax havens; and to create an international taxation system governing financial transactions. The second front is ideological, and is silent and invisible. There is a whole industry that aims to convince humanity that globalisation will bring universal happiness. This industry needs the active collaboration of universities and research institutions (such as the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute) and the co-operation of those media (such as CNN, the Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Economist) that are copied by journalists the world over. Armed with information, globalisation's ideological warriors have created a dictatorship that depends on the passive complicity of those it subjugates (3). Media manipulation officially began when the Pentagon opened its Office of Strategic Influence (OSI) following the 11 September attacks. The OSI's explicitly Orwellian mandate was to spread misinformation aimed at brainwashing the international press and influencing public opinion and political leaders in friendly as well as unfriendly countries (4). Reminiscent of the darkest years of the McCarthy era and the cold war, a virtual ministry of disinformation and propaganda, operating under the aegis of the US department, has been charged with disseminating an official version of the truth. Such activities are usually associated with the world's more grotesque dictatorships. The third front is military. The offensive opened after 11 September and seeks to provide the globalisation movement with an effective security apparatus. The US was initially tempted to assign responsibility for this task to Nato but subsequently decided to go it alone; it has the means to do so with spectacular efficiency (see Paul-Marie de La Gorce). The war in Afghanistan against the Taliban and al-Qaida has convinced Washington that it would be futile given the scale of the undertaking to ask for more than token assistance from key military allies (such as the United Kingdom and France) or even Nato (5). Demonstrating its contempt, Washington neglected to consult its allies before declaring recently that a US attack on Iraq was imminent. High-level European protests, which have had no impact on the Bush administration, are already quietening down. Vassals are supposed to kneel in supplication, and the US aspires to exercise absolute political power. In some ways it is the first proto-global state, notes journalist William Pfaff. The US is already potentially the head of a modern version of universal empire a willing empire whose members are volunteers (6). The
RE: Re: game theory
I wrote: Why is it that game theory focuses only on the 2x2 matrix type of game (or the N-person game)? Gil answers: (it doesn't) or am I wrong to think that it is so one-tracked in its mind? Gil again: In a word, yes. The 2X2 games are primarily just used for illustrative purposes. yes, but do three- or four-person games ever produce useful results? are other game metaphors used besides I move and you move of the standard prisoner's dilemma box? I know about games such as the dollar auction, which probably can be modelled using standard game-theory tools, but it's hardly ever mentioned outside of books such as Poundstone's PRISONER'S DILEMMA. That book also mentions various other games, including one invented by John Nash that involved movement of pieces on boards divided into hexagonal spaces. (It was sold commercially for awhile and seems the basis of Avalon-Hill-type war games.) Are any of these various non-standard games given any kind of attention? How about, as I mentioned in my original missive in this thread, card games such as solitaire? Am I right to say that game theorists concentrate only on the simplest possible games, because those are the easiest to analyze? Jim Devine think outside the box -- like our cats.
Re: New Democratic World
Chris writes: This question concretely becomes one of whether the major transnational financial corporations would oppose a more peaceful, juster world. Not necessarily. They would be treacherous friends. They might tolerate a small measure of regulation in order to continue to extact superprofits on a world scale. Nevertheless some of them might temporarily support initiatives for a more stable, juster world. I believe your theory and, based on that, your offered strategy heavily depend on the above assumption. If this assumption is not correct, then the rest collapses. Juster world, I don't know, but of course some of them may want a stable and peaceful world, so that they can continue their exploitation. It is also possible that some of them support initiatives for a more unstable world and war, again for the same reason. We will see, although I don't expect a major inter-imperialist war any time soon. (By the way, aren't there enough wars already?) However, I don't see how they can be friends of any kind with the working class and other working people, regardless of whether they are progressive or not. I guess I spent too much time at large money management firms. On another note, the working class and the working people of the world already make more than 95% of the world population, and an alliance among them is more than welcome. Why would I be in this so-called antiglobalization movement, if I thought otherwise? As far as I can see, we are about to engage in the same old fight between reformists and revolutionaries(not necessarily Marxist-Leninists). I am sure everybody here heard enough of such fights, so let us leave this at that. Sabri
Re: RE: Re: game theory
Am I right to say that game theorists concentrate only on the simplest possible games, because those are the easiest to analyze? Yes, but so do physicists. Quantum mechanics is essentially the theory of hydrogen atoms, helium at a stretch. No one has the faintest idea how to do the math for anything as complicated as gold, much less uranium. jks _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
RE: Re: RE: Re: game theory
Am I right to say that game theorists concentrate only on the simplest possible games, because those are the easiest to analyze? jks: Yes, but so do physicists. Quantum mechanics is essentially the theory of hydrogen atoms, helium at a stretch. No one has the faintest idea how to do the math for anything as complicated as gold, much less uranium. yeah, there's an analogy with physics: the Newtonian two-body problem (with one object rotating about another) is easy, but the three-body problem is very difficult (unsolvable without special assumptions?) the four-body problem? But in economics, there are other ways analyze the world besides micro-theory (including game theory), e.g., institutional analysis (with endogenous tastes, etc.) where macro-phenomena shape and determine the nature of micro-phenomena. We don't need to stick to the physics analogy, micro-determinism, etc. Game theory should be treated as just one small tool, not as the be-all and end-all of economics -- the way it is these days, when it seems as if most orthodox economics Ph.D. dissertations are about game theory. Down with all orthodoxies! JD
Re: Re: New Democratic World
Sabri Oncu wrote: As far as I can see, we are about to engage in the same old fight between reformists and revolutionaries(not necessarily Marxist-Leninists). I am sure everybody here heard enough of such fights, so let us leave this at that. Whether the fight takes that form or not depends (or should depend) on given historical conditions. If we are talking about the U.S. I believe the divide _at this time_ is between those whose hopes reside in a mass movement (whether they think in terms of reform or revolution) and those whose hopes reside in reforming or persuading various power centers (The Democratic Party, the U.S. Ruling Class, the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, the Labour Party) to do good things. The conflict between reform and revolution will remain, but it can be put on the back burner as it were. To see the havoc putting that conflict first does, subscribe to the AUT list. To see the havoc that the hope to transform power centers does, just keep on reading the poster you are responding to. Carrol
BLS Daily Report
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, MARCH 21, 2002: RELEASED TODAY: The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) rose 0.4 percent in February, before seasonal adjustment, to a level of 177.8 (1982-84=100), the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports. For the 12-month period ended in February, the CPI-U increased 1.1 percent. The Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) increased 0.3 percent in February, prior to seasonal adjustment. The February level of 173.7 was 0.8 percent higher than the index in February 2001. Real average weekly earnings decreased by 0.1 percent from January to February after seasonal adjustment, according to preliminary data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This decline was due to a 0.2 percent increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), which was partially offset by a 0.1 percent increase in average hourly earnings. Average weekly hours were unchanged. Higher prices for clothing, medical care and airline fares contributed to a mild 0.2 percent rise in consumer inflation in February. The advance in the Consumer Price Index, a closely watched gauge of inflation, matched January's increase, the Labor Department reports. Excluding energy and food prices, the core rate of inflation rose 0.3 percent in February, following a 0.2 percent rise. Even with the slight pickup in consumer inflation, falling prices for new cars and trucks, computers and home furnishings provided shoppers with some bargains (Jeannine Aversa, Associated Press http://www.nandotimes.com/business/story/316419p-2706517c.html). A key gauge of U.S. economic activity remained flat in February following four straight months of gains, suggesting a rocky economic recovery in the months ahead, the New York-based Conference Board said as it reported that its Index of Leading Economic Indicators remained steady at 112.4 last month, following a revised 0.8 percent increase in January. Analysts had forecast a 0.1 percent gain. The U.S. economy has quickly turned from recession and is now firmly in recovery, said Conference Board economist Ken Goldstein. But the road ahead is far from smooth, with sluggish profits and weak export demand restraining growth (Hope Yen, Associated Press, http://www.nypost.com/apstories/business/V6476.htm). Housing starts rose in February to the highest level in more than 3 years, government figures showed today, suggesting that the construction of new homes will underpin a rebounding recovery. At an annual pace, builders began work on 1.769 million homes last month, up 2.8 percent from a 1.721 million rate in January, the Commerce Department said. That is the most homes started since December 1998 and reflects the fastest pace of single-family housing construction in more than 23 years (Bloomberg News, The New York Times, page C7). Boosted by a sharp 7.4 percent gain in single-family homes, housing starts in February zoomed to their fastest pace in more than 3 years, the government said Wednesday, an encouraging sign for the emerging U.S. economic recovery (The Wall Street Journal, page A2). In a recently released study of the 10 industries that employed the most women from 1995 to 2000, the General Accounting Office found that the gap between the salaries of men and women had widened for managers in seven of those sectors. The largest widening was in entertainment and recreational services, where female managers were earning just 62 cents for every dollar made by a male manager in 2000, down from 83 cents in 1995. Only three industries showed improvement for women -- albeit slight. The biggest gain was in educational services, where the figures rose to 91 cents on the dollar, from 86 cents. The GAO report is supported by other studies, including one conducted by the Women's Research and Education Institute in Washington showing that overall managerial salaries for women slipped to 71.3 cents in 2000 from 78 cents in 1995. Variations in lifestyle choices might justify the existence of a wage gap. So, too, might the varying levels of experience and managerial responsibility that the GAO study couldn't measure. What these factors don't explain, however, is why the gap has grown (Jeffrey L. Seglin, who teachers at Emerson College in Boston and is the author of The Good, the Bad, and Your Business (John Wiley Sons), in The New York Times, March 17, Money Business, page 4). Louis Uchitelle calls inflation the wild card of the recovery in his column in The New York Times, March 17, Money Business, page 4, writing under the heading Economic View. Inflation as measured by the Consumer Price index fell precipitously to an annual rate of 1.1 percent in January from 3.2 last June. Rarely has inflation fallen that much, so quickly. Wages went in the opposite direction. Despite the recession, companies kept giving raises, he contends. There was still enough pressure
Re: Re: Alzheimer's disease
On 2002.03.22 03:12 AM, Sabri Oncu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope any relatives of sufferers will take cheer rather than offence in my passing on that the motto of the Irish Alzheimer's Disease Society is: Remember those who can't. dd Thanks for this. I was feeling bad for starting the topic after Jim's response. Best, Sabri Comrade Sabri Are you Alzhiemer's? If it is so, very sad. But As psychiatrist, I recommend you to participate in social activity, and take anti-inflammatory drug such as ibprofen.It delays progress Alzhiemer'. Yours sincerely MIYACHI TATSUO Psychiatric Department Komaki municipal hosipital 1-20.JOHBUHSHI KOMAKI CITY AICHI PREF. 486-0044 TEL:0568-76-4131 FAX 0568-76-4145 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roemer and Exploitation
Roemer and Exploitation by Veneziani,R (pgr) 20 March 2002 14:59 UTC CB NOTES: What does this formulation gain over private ownership of the basic means of production, or private property ? RV: (1) in Roemer's model DOPA is necessary. This is not a theoretical statement but a technical one. (2) DOPA stands for Differential Ownership of Productive Assets. The qualifier Private (making the acronym DPOPA) can be taken as granted. This does not seem to me the weakest bit of Roemer's account. ^ CB: I am trying to determine whether Roemer is trying to differentiate what he is saying from the way Marx and Engels articulate this issue. Or does he believe he is making explicit something that Marx and Engels make implicit ? Or ? Why different words ?
RE: Re: Economists beware!
...some men rob you with a six gun...others with a fountain pen... Woody Guthrie on bankers. --- Original Message --- From: Charles Jannuzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 3/20/02 9:09:19 PM Italian guerilla group blamed for economist's murder I condemn this brutal and senseless act of violence. Where are the investment bankers? Well, they are busy either helping to run the government or the businesses that will further enrich Berlusconi. Like with the Bushes, it's hard to tell the difference. Reminds me of a Housemartins' song: Paupers will be paupers Bankers will be bankers Some save money in a jar Some own oil tankers Don't shoot someone tomorrow That you can shoot today A bit too incendiary, apparently, for the major label CD retrospective, but it was one of their catchiest songs. Given that the real dangers to Italian democracy constantly come from the right, the story is prime for a conspiracy theory. Again, Berlusconi benefits most from the guy's death. Now this one story I'd actually like to hear what Antonio Negri has to say. Charles Jannuzi
FW: Re: AUT: Re: Berlusconi Government Aide Murdered in Italy
--- Original Message --- From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Nestor=20McNab?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 3/21/02 1:36:14 AM There is a very good possibility that it is. I enclose the press release of the COBAS Confederation (Italian base unions) which makes interesting reading. In solidarity, nestor --- cwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone else feel that this might actually be another of the Italian governments 'sacrifice fly balls' to start a scare? This kind of stuff is very convenient at times when a crackdown looks to be in order. Chris Italian government aide murdered PRESS RELEASE Preceded by a bomb near the Ministry for Internal Affairs with TV cameras which saw nothing, pre-announced by a secret service report which claimed that government advisers were in the sights of terrorists, there arrives, as punctual as clockwork, the murder of Professor [Marco] Biagi, who (by yet another curious coincidence) had his armed escort in Bologna removed on 1st January last. This exemplary action in its cold-blooded rituality of death is a chilling message to the entire labour movement, to all those who have taken to the streets to demonstrate against the policies of social restoration on the part of the centre-right government, those who are building the mobilization towards the general strike. It is an explicit invitation to stay at home... As the government starts to topple under the weight of social conflict the bombs and murders start - once more the strategy of provocation and/or tension rears its head. Whoever they may be, the murder is manna from heaven for the Berluskoni government and Confindustria [the Employers' Federation] who have already started a reactionary backlash against the legitimate demands of the workers and the movement of struggle and have announced police and judicial reprisals against the social opposition. The murder of Professor Biagi is intended to spread fear among the workers and throughout the country. The Cobas [Base unions] will not allow themselves to be intimidated. We believe that we must double our efforts in the struggle until such a time as the government retracts the changes to Article 18 and Maroni's White Book, to pensions, severance pay, education and tax. In the face of so much hesitation and withdrawals among the ranks of the mainstream unions, Cobas also believes that it is indispensable to go ahead with the General Strike of all workers at some point during the month of April (the 19th being the most probable date at the moment), a strike which needs to be reinforced through a national demonstration in Rome. For the COBAS CONFEDERATION Pino Giampietro [trans. NMcN for A-Infos] = In solidarity, Nestor http://www.geocities.com/nestor_mcnab/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: RE: Re: game theory
Jim writes yes, but do three- or four-person games ever produce useful results? are other game metaphors used besides I move and you move of the standard prisoner's dilemma box? Re the first question: for the most part, analyses of games that generically feature several players are not limited to the three- or four-person case. Re the second question, yes, abundantly. Game theory has provided the microfoundation for much, maybe most, of modern microeconomics, and as such has been developed way, way beyond its simple roots. I know about games such as the dollar auction, which probably can be modelled using standard game-theory tools, but it's hardly ever mentioned outside of books such as Poundstone's PRISONER'S DILEMMA. That book also mentions various other games, including one invented by John Nash that involved movement of pieces on boards divided into hexagonal spaces. (It was sold commercially for awhile and seems the basis of Avalon-Hill-type war games.) Are any of these various non-standard games given any kind of attention? How about, as I mentioned in my original missive in this thread, card games such as solitaire? Am I right to say that game theorists concentrate only on the simplest possible games, because those are the easiest to analyze? In general, no. They may start with the simplest cases, but usually extend the results to the most general case possible. For example, the analysis of strategic bargaining models started with the bilateral, 2-player case, but now has been extended to the n-player case. Grab any recent graduate text on game theory, Jim (Fudenberg and Tirole, and Myerson, are two good ones), you'll see how general the development has been. Gil
China Labour Bulletin on Oil Workers
http://www.iso.china-labour.org.hk/iso/article.adp?article_id=2059
Difference on evidence of deheimnisvolle der Warenform in firstedition and fourth edition of Capital
Title: Difference on evidence of deheimnisvolle der Warenform in first edition and fourth edition of Capital On 2002.03.22 00:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 3/21/2002 6:42:04 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've always liked this letter to Kugelmann. Very Hegelian. Very important stress on the importance of theory for revolutionary transformation. Whose translation is this? Andrew Kliman Progress Publisher, Moscow 1969, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels Selected Works in three Volumes, Volume Two page 418. First Printing. I had looked up the letter on one of the Marx Archive (for easy copying) and it lacked the first three sentences. The above is not the entire letter, which I do not have a copy of. I read in the letter a definitive statement on value (magnitude) and exchange value (prices or exchange relations) and the approach to examining the essence of phenomena. Thus Marx states: The vulgar economist has not the faintest idea that the actual everyday exchange relations cannot be directly identical with the magnitudes of value. The letter is reproduced below. Marx to L. Kugelmann in Hanover London, July 11, 1868 . . . . As for the Centralblatt, the man is making the greatest possible concession in admitting that, if one means anything at all by value, the conclusion I draw must be accepted. The unfortunate fellow does not see that, even if there were no chapter on value in my book, the analysis of the real relations which I give would contain the proof and demonstrations of the real value relations. All that palaver about the necessity of proving the concept of value comes from complete ignorance both of the subject dealt with and of the scientific method. Every child knows a nation which ceased to work, I will not say for a year, but even for a few weeks, would perish. Every child knows, too, that the masses of products corresponding to the different needs required different and quantitatively determined masses of the total labor of society. That this necessity of the distribution of social labor in definite proportions cannot possibly be done away with by a particular form of social production but can only change the mode of its appearance, is self-evident. No natural laws can be done away with. What can change in historically different circumstances is only the form in which these laws assert themselves. And the form in which this proportional distribution of labor asserts itself, in the state of society where the interconnection of social labor is manifested in the private exchange of the individual products of labor, is precisely the exchange value of these products. Science consists precisely in demonstrating how the law of value asserts itself. So that if one wanted at the very beginning to explain all the phenomenon which seemingly contradict that law, one would have to present science before science. It is precisely Ricardo's mistake that in his first chapter on value [On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, Page 479] he takes as given all possible and still to be developed categories in order to prove their conformity with the law of value. On the other hand, as you correctly assumed, the history of the theory certainly shows that the concept of the value relation has always been the same more or less clear, hedged more or less with illusions or scientifically more or less definite. Since the thought process itself grows out of conditions, is itself a natural process, thinking that really comprehends must always be the same, and can vary only gradually, according to maturity of development, including the development of the organ by which the thinking is done. Everything else is drivel. The vulgar economist has not the faintest idea that the actual everyday exchange relations cannot be directly identical with the magnitudes of value. The essence of bourgeois society consists precisely in this, that a priori there is no conscious social regulation of production. The rational and naturally necessary asserts itself only as a blindly working average. And then the vulgar economist thinks he has made a great discovery when, as against the revelation of the inner interconnection, he proudly claims that in appearance things look different. In fact, he boasts that he holds fast to appearance, and takes it for the ultimate. Why, then, have any science at all? But the matter has also another background. Once the interconnection is grasped, all theoretical belief in the permanent necessity of existing conditions collapses before their collapse in practice. Here, therefore, it is absolutely in the interest of the ruling classes to perpetuate a senseless confusion. And for what other purpose are the sycophantic babblers paid, who have no other scientific trump to play save that in political economy one should not think at all? But satis superque [enough and
Re: Re: Alzheimer's disease
Comrade Sabri Are you Alzheimer's? If it is so, very sad. But As psychiatrist, I recommend you to participate in social activity, and take anti-inflammatory drug such as ibprofen.It delays progress Alzheimer'. Yours sincerely MIYACHI TATSUO Dear Miyachi, I am not Alzheimer's but I suffer from a serious genetic disorder I inherited from my grandfather through my father. Making unnecessary jokes is the name of that disorder. I apologize for any misunderstanding I might have caused. Best, Sabri P.S: Carrol, Thanks for the correction. Hey, I really mean this one.
RE: Re: RE: Re: game theory
I wrote: yes, but do three- or four-person games ever produce useful results? Gil answers:... for the most part, analyses of games that generically feature several players are not limited to the three- or four-person case. N-person games -- where N is large -- seem to produce relatively clear predictions (given their assumptions, natch). (General equilibrium can be seen as an N-person game, but that's hardly relevant empirically.) Do the games where N is close to two (but greater than two) make clear predictions that can be tested empirically? or do they produce results akin to those of the 3-body problem in Newtonian mechanics? BTW, in reference to abstract theory, by useful I mean empirically relevant. At UC Berkeley (where I went), on the other hand, useful is often used to mean it allows me to get tenure or a publication under my belt because it involves fancy math and/or it's similar to models that prestigious people get published. They forget that mathematical models are at best internally-consistent metaphors for empirical reality. They are not ways of describing the ideal forms that Plato saw as being behind the messy phenomenal world, since those forms don't exist. (As with the question of god's existence, I'm an agnostic on this question: but my working hypothesis -- one that has worked so far -- is that the Platonic forms don't exist.) are other game metaphors used besides I move and you move of the standard prisoner's dilemma box? ... yes, abundantly. Game theory has provided the microfoundation for much, maybe most, of modern microeconomics, and as such has been developed way, way beyond its simple roots. Since micro-theory is largely poor (i.e., highly ideological and utopian in its assumptions), that's nothing to brag about. The best stuff, to my mind, is the part on the limits of microeconmics, as with the critique of microfoundations of macroeconmics. Cf. Alan P. Kirman, 1992. Whom or What does the Representative Individual Represent? _Journal of Economic Perspectives_. 6(2), Spring: 117-136. Another example is the classic theory of the second best. Beyond this, the Walrasian stuff -- which meshes well with game theory and currently forms the heart and soul of the official orthodoxy -- seems a step backward from Marshall's more realistic partial equilibrium analysis. It's no accident that a genius like Keynes learned from Marshall rather than Walras and that Keynesian economics lost its coherence as people tried to force it into a Walrasian framework. --- Again, I ask: are there any games besides the standard game theory ones that provide usable metaphors for real-world processes? For example, I think the dollar auction is a pretty good metaphor for the cold-war-type arms race (as metaphors go). Or is that really just a version of the standard game theory? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: a report, albeit brief
It is good to see a good mix like this where development issues are dealt at several levels. I rarely find such types of conf in the US. There were of course those who liked the pecking order (as Jim D would say) but nothing serious really. The pecking order is Paul Krugman's phrase. He used it approvingly. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Anthony D'Costa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 12:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:24191] a report, albeit brief Michael Perelman asked me to report on the conference I attended at U of Warwick in Coventry, UK last weekend. It was on Globalisation, Growth and In(equality), organized by the univ's Centre for Globalisation and Regionalisation. Keynote speakers included Ravi Kanbur (of Cornell), Robert Wade of LSE, Adrian Wood from the UK government, Martin Khor of Third World Network, etc. Most participants were trade economists, political economists, and a few from various assorted fields. A good number of participants from the UK were policy makers, engaged in issues of trade and aid. There were a few World Bank consultants from the UK side as well. There were some of us who did sectoral studies. It was good to meet some folks whose writings I read as a grad student. Overall assessment of the conf: very good. It is good to see a good mix like this where development issues are dealt at several levels. I rarely find such types of conf in the US. There were of course those who liked the pecking order (as Jim D would say) but nothing serious really. My paper was on IT exports and inequality in India. A non-rigorous approach to studying inequality but which I believe is easily captured with sectoral data. I also gave a talk to non-academics (mainly) at the U of Sheffield (Center for Japanese Studies) on Japanese industrial practices in the Indian auto industry. It was nice to speak to an audience of about 35 people with far more time than the 20 min that conf typically allot you. London, as always, is a great walking city. Always nice to have a resident give you a tour. Violent crime apparently has increased though crime as a whole has fallen, that was one item which was repeated a couple of times on TV. The Race Relations Committee chair, a British Sikh suggested forced integration (not his words). Some policies are forthcoming based on the commission's report. I suppose the debate between Wade and Wolf were publihsed in the Prospect (US edition). It was in the UK edition. My friend tells me Wade had a problem with the numbers. I guess I have to read it to see what's being debated and how. Cheers, Anthony xx x Anthony P. D'Costa, Associate Professor Comparative International Development University of Washington Campus Box 358436 1900 Commerce Street Tacoma, WA 98402, USA Phone: (253) 692-4462 Fax : (253) 692-5718 xx x
Apologies
Michael, I really got our Comrade Miyachi confused, didn't I? It was the last thing I wanted to do or, better said, something I never wanted to do. I had a Japanese friend during my graduate study days and Miyachi reminds me of him: very nice guy from a totally different world. Best, Sabri
Re: Apologies
I thought that his note showed a sincere caring. He may have been confused, but he seemed like a nice person, making a nice gesture. On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 04:32:46PM -0800, Sabri Oncu wrote: Michael, I really got our Comrade Miyachi confused, didn't I? It was the last thing I wanted to do or, better said, something I never wanted to do. I had a Japanese friend during my graduate study days and Miyachi reminds me of him: very nice guy from a totally different world. Best, Sabri -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Apologies
I wasn't following those threads closely, but I think , for one thing, he is concerned with getting information and ideas in English back into Japanese for those who can't read English. It's a real burden for those who take it on. My hats off to him for all his efforts. There is far too much disinformation about Japan and disinformation going into Japan from the west. Charles Jannuzi Re: Apologies I thought that his note showed a sincere caring. He may have been confused, but he seemed like a nice person, making a nice gesture. On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 04:32:46PM -0800, Sabri Oncu wrote: Michael, I really got our Comrade Miyachi confused, didn't I? It was the last thing I wanted to do or, better said, something I never wanted to do. I had a Japanese friend during my graduate study days and Miyachi reminds me of him: very nice guy from a totally different world. Best, Sabri -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Alzheimer's disease
In a message dated 3/21/2002 3:23:50 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I hope any relatives of sufferers will take cheer rather than offence in my passing on that the motto of the Irish Alzheimer's Disease Society is: "Remember those who can't". dd Thanks for this. I was feeling bad for starting the topic after Jim's response. Best, Sabri Comrade Sabri Are you Alzhiemer's? If it is so, very sad. But As psychiatrist, I recommend you to participate in social activity, and take anti-inflammatory drug such as ibprofen.It delays progress Alzhiemer'. Yours sincerely MIYACHI TATSUO Psychiatric Department Komaki municipal hosipital 1-20.JOHBUHSHI KOMAKI CITY AICHI PREF. 486-0044 TEL:0568-76-4131 FAX 0568-76-4145 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is Alzheimer's "Metal poisoning disease," in terms of its impact upon the brain? Not a joke. My mother in law suffers from it but I was involved in the health care movement outside of bourgeois frameworks. It's theoretical. Melvin P.
Re: Difference on evidence of deheimnisvolle der Warenform in f...
In a message dated 3/21/2002 4:34:46 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 3/21/2002 6:42:04 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've always liked this letter to Kugelmann. Very Hegelian. Very important stress on the importance of theory for revolutionary transformation. Whose translation is this? Andrew Kliman Progress Publisher, Moscow 1969, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels Selected Works in three Volumes, Volume Two page 418. First Printing. I had looked up the letter on one of the Marx Archive (for easy copying) and it lacked the first three sentences. The above is not the entire letter, which I do not have a copy of. I read in the letter a definitive statement on value (magnitude) and exchange value (prices or exchange relations) and the approach to examining "the essence" of phenomena. Thus Marx states: "The vulgar economist has not the faintest idea that the actual everyday exchange relations cannot be directly identical with the magnitudes of value." The letter is reproduced below. Marx to L. Kugelmann in Hanover London, July 11, 1868 . . . . As for the Centralblatt, the man is making the greatest possible concession in admitting that, if one means anything at all by value, the conclusion I draw must be accepted. The unfortunate fellow does not see that, even if there were no chapter on "value" in my book, the analysis of the real relations which I give would contain the proof and demonstrations of the real value relations. All that palaver about the necessity of proving the concept of value comes from complete ignorance both of the subject dealt with and of the scientific method. Every child knows a nation which ceased to work, I will not say for a year, but even for a few weeks, would perish. Every child knows, too, that the masses of products corresponding to the different needs required different and quantitatively determined masses of the total labor of society. That this necessity of the distribution of social labor in definite proportions cannot possibly be done away with by a particular form of social production but can only change the mode of its appearance, is self-evident. No natural laws can be done away with. What can change in historically different circumstances is only the form in which these laws assert themselves. And the form in which this proportional distribution of labor asserts itself, in the state of society where the interconnection of social labor is manifested in the private exchange of the individual products of labor, is precisely the exchange value of these products. Science consists precisely in demonstrating how the law of value asserts itself. So that if one wanted at the very beginning to "explain" all the phenomenon which seemingly contradict that law, one would have to present science before science. It is precisely Ricardo's mistake that in his first chapter on value [On the Principles of Political Economy, and Taxation, Page 479] he takes as given all possible and still to be developed categories in order to prove their conformity with the law of value. On the other hand, as you correctly assumed, the history of the theory certainly shows that the concept of the value relation has always been the same — more or less clear, hedged more or less with illusions or scientifically more or less definite. Since the thought process itself grows out of conditions, is itself a natural process, thinking that really comprehends must always be the same, and can vary only gradually, according to maturity of development, including the development of the organ by which the thinking is done. Everything else is drivel. The vulgar economist has not the faintest idea that the actual everyday exchange relations cannot be directly identical with the magnitudes of value. The essence of bourgeois society consists precisely in this, that a priori there is no conscious social regulation of production. The rational and naturally necessary asserts itself only as a blindly working average. And then the vulgar economist thinks he has made a great discovery when, as against the revelation of the inner interconnection, he proudly claims that in appearance things look different. In fact, he boasts that he holds fast to appearance, and takes it for the ultimate. Why, then, have any science at all? But the matter has also another background. Once the interconnection is grasped, all theoretical belief in the permanent necessity of existing conditions collapses before their collapse in practice. Here, therefore, it is absolutely in the interest of the ruling classes to perpetuate a senseless confusion. And for what other purpose are the sycophantic babblers paid, who have no other scientific trump to play save that in political economy one should not think at all? But satis superque [enough and to spare]. In any case it shows what these priests of the bourgeoisie have
signing off
I'm signing off PEN-L for the spring, since I'll be on leave, and it's a bother to download large numbers of e-mail messages on my college's web-based mail server. If anyone needs to reach me for any reason, you can still send mail to me individually. Bon voyage, moi. Peter
