Re: Argentina, Australia and Canada
Louis Proyect writes: > >there are degrees. Japan isn't going to become a neo-colony in the near > >future, but it's clear that US-based companies use their clout to push for > >"opening" the Japanese economy to freer flow of capital, etc., so that US > >companies can buy Japanese assets, etc., at advantageous terms. The US's strategic advantage in this little war so far has been the value of the equity markets, which places Japan at a distinct disadvantage and makes US and UK firms, at least until they buy high in a bubble, masters of the acquisitions universe. In some ways it's possible to argue the US-Japan relationship is 'neoimperial'. Japan's strategic resource base is tied to US foreign policy, and Japan in most ways has no independent foreign policy--this is why there is so little progress with the Koreas, China or even Russia. Japan's 'defense' is tied into a US-Japan agreement that is more limiting and extraterritorial than NATO is in Europe (though the US military has always appreciated things like Mitsubishi avionics). The new phase (which I correlate with a stalled stock market in the US along with liberalization of capital movements, the phony war against terror notwithstanding) , though, is the US push to get inward direct investment into Japan--especially banks, insurance, finance and real estate (which reflects the 'strengths of the US economy in these areas--FIRE industries). This became so obvious when US representatives were proclaiming in public it was time for US interests to re-capitalize Japan's failed banking system (a claim which seemed ridiculous to everyone but the grasping Americans, since it is Japan with all the savings not going anywhere). However, little has been said about what is regulation for these new forces (US led and owned private equity, which finds its apotheosis perhaps in Carlyle Group using CALPERS money). And the need has become glaring with things like Enron and Andersen and the inherhent conflicts of interests at the investment banks (over analysis, consultation, the banks' own investments, and interests of its private equity clients). > > Indeed, inter-imperialist rivalry provoked WWI and WWII. For background on > the last attempt by US imperialism to push Japan against the wall, see > Jonathan Marshall's "To Have and Have Not: Southeast Asian Raw Materials > and the Origins of the Pacific War". Yes, this is an excellent analysis. Many Americans are still in denial over what led to that disastrous war. Dower's 'War Without Mercy' is an excellent analysis of the ideologies used to justify the conflict. Charles Jannuzi
Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism
> Why does a large firm like Ford have many different factories > which exchange commodities (e.g. car parts) with each other but > without using the market? Interestingly enough, Toyota, always rated one of the most 'efficient' and 'profitable' of the Japanese automakers is the least vertically hierchical. It passes risks and distress in the market onto its numerous suppliers and acts as a center for design, marketing and final assembly (with intense quality control processes). It's exact opposite would have to be GM. Besides selling off parts divisions, Ghosn at Nissan is trying to Toyotatize the firm. Actually, the two goals go together. He sells off a parts division and it might get contracts with Nissan, but Nissan and its keiretsu bank are no longer responsible for extending credit and that spun off company will now be placed in direct competition with other possible suppliers. I know that selling off the parts divisions and other holdings have been profitable for Nissan, but I'm not sure about the rest. For example, sharing platforms with Renault might mean more business for Nissan , if Nissan makes the platforms. But it might mean Nissan has to shed even more workers if it neither makes the shared platforms but is expected to pay US levels of dividends to shareholders (the number one being Renault). Charles Jannuzi
: Difference between leadership and command
On 2002.04.17 07:20 AM, "Sabri Oncu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Miyachi wrote: > >> Thank you for your reply >> >> As for decentralized responsibility, party cell duty is >> regular report to central committee and maintain party's >> program. If he has not ability to this duty, simply he must >> give up, or choose to change his duty. Here no command exists. >> Only member's will and passion is required. In a sense This >> type of organization is network-type like Al-Qaeda. On the > contrary, >> for example, in US financial corporations as you, You may > decision >> business yourself, but you must seek profit in decentralized >> responsibility. If you fail to raise profit, you fire. It is > the >> difference between party and corporation. > > I am not sure if there is a serious difference between party and > corporation, except from the objectives. Both are organizations > with objectives. > > If in a "democratically centralized" party, that is, in a party > where leadership is centralized whereas responsibility is > decentralized, what is required is only the member's will and > passion, and there is no command, why do we need leaders, or a > program? Will and passion would suffice, wouldn't they? > > Also, how are we going to decide whose duty is what and whether a > person has the ability to perform his/her duty? > > I think these are important questions to discuss. > > Thanks Miyachi for your contributions, > > Sabri > > P.S: I am against commands of any kind, by the way. Just say > please, please. > Comrade Sabri Firstly, leadership and command are different. Leadership is appeal to action, whereas command require compulsion. If party central committee appeal demonstration or attack, party-members and non-party mass can and must choose to participate in demonstration or attack It is problem of individual's will, not duty. Party committee can't and must not force people participate in its own appeal. If some people reject to participate, it is their decisions and must respect it. But its result is responsible for them,not others. ON the contrary, as you worked in company, although in decentralized network as possible and in responsible post, you must raise profit. It is economical tacit command, even if your action seems to be free. The reason was already described formerly mail. Secondly, who decide member's ability? It is self-decision. Others only recommend but final decision depends on themselves. Stalin degenerate party organization, i.e. Command system, and most of people considers vanguard party as such. It is incorrect. It can prove from Lenin's original paper, mail, etc. That is my opinion, result of study Lenin's original paper, and finally conclusion of experience of 60s world-wide revolutionary movements. I respect mostly your freedom, but unhappily, we live in "Prison society" How can we get liberty? Only by struggle. This is my answer. 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]
Re: Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism
Sabri must have looked at my office. On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 08:43:10PM -0700, Sabri Oncu wrote: > > Shut them down, too. -- JD > > > >> Well, Ian wants to close the business schools > >> and I want to shut down economics departments. > >> What do you all think of Anthropology? > >> > >> Gene > > How about shutting the entire academe down. The current condition > of academe is a complete mess. It is like an "object oriented" > program that screwed up so badly that there is no point of > "deriving new classes" from the already existing "parent > classes". Maybe we can make a fresh start for the better. > > Sabri > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism
> Shut them down, too. -- JD > >> Well, Ian wants to close the business schools >> and I want to shut down economics departments. >> What do you all think of Anthropology? >> >> Gene How about shutting the entire academe down. The current condition of academe is a complete mess. It is like an "object oriented" program that screwed up so badly that there is no point of "deriving new classes" from the already existing "parent classes". Maybe we can make a fresh start for the better. Sabri
RE: Re: Re: Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism
Shut them down, too. -- JD -Original Message- From: Eugene Coyle To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 4/17/02 7:06 PM Subject: [PEN-L:25087] Re: Re: Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism Well, Ian wants to close the business schools and I want to shut down economics departments. What do you all think of Anthropology? Gene
Re: Re: Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism
Well, Ian wants to close the business schools and I want to shut down economics departments. What do you all think of Anthropology? Gene Ian Murray wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Sabri Oncu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "PEN-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 8:30 PM > Subject: [PEN-L:25023] Re: Binary scheme of democracy and centralism > > > Michael writes: > > > > > You are absolutely correct. > > > > > > "Devine, James" wrote: > > > > > >> My impression is that Williamson studies non-market > > >> institutions in order to show that corporate hierarchies > > >> are a good thing. > > > > I don't know whether he studies market or non-market institutions > > but other than that what Jim said was more or less what he told > > me or what I recall from the things he told me: hierarchical > > and/or centralized forms of governance for the institutions of > > capitalism are/can be better than other organizational forms. > > > > Moreover, he had no urge to make use of the word "democracy" as > > he was making his claims. As I heard many times in the business > > world: > > > > "We are a business, we are not a democracy!" > > > > Here is another one: > > > > "We are not in the business of doing good. We do business and > > good comes out of it!" > > > > More or less, that is, as far as I recall. > > > > Sabri > > > > Would that Williamson and his fellow apologists do some actual economic > anthropology and sign up for a stint as a mail room clerk or executive assistant, > a cosmetics salesperson or an air traffic controller or load trucks or be a school > bus driver to see how accurately their categories, narratives and explanations map > the actual lobotomizing practices of today's big firms. > > Business administration depts. are the breeding grounds for authoritarian, > autocratic personalities and they ought to be dismantled and rolled into those > remaining departments that could teach them something about democracy and > manners > > Ian
RE: Re: Re: "totalitarianism"
Michael, please explain what the point of your postings are. I sometimes get the feeling that you do a web-search and then share it with pen-l with no context. It's pretty useless. As for "Totalitarian State Capitalism," I don't think that helps at all. The old USSR wasn't "capitalist." I think these authors see "capitalism" as synonymous with "modern class society." JD -Original Message- From: Michael Pugliese To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 4/17/02 11:58 AM Subject: [PEN-L:25070] Re: Re: "totalitarianism" Telos No. 41, Fall 1979 Andreas Wildt: Totalitarian State Capitalism: On the Structure and Historical Function of Soviet-Type Societies Gabor T Rittersporn: The State Against Itself: Social Tensions and Political Conflict in the USSR, 1936-1938 Notes and Commentary: Antonio Gramsci: Science and "Scientific" Ideologies 4/17/02 11:37:02 AM, Bill Lear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wednesday, April 17, 2002 at 09:24:23 (-0700) Devine, James writes: >>... >>In any event, I don't see the USSR as totalitarian, simply because it didn't >>have very "efficient" labor-power markets (or other markets) of the sort >>that capitalism has. ... >>... >>Yes, there's always a dictionary definition. That's useful for communicating >>with other people, but I think that in this case, the word "totalitarianism" >>has too much ideological baggage. If you want to use the word as a >>rhetorical epithet, that's fine with me. But I don't think it's useful as >>part of a social analysis. In fact, it distorts the analysis. >>... >>Maybe that makes sense in terms of rhetoric, but my concern is with >>political economy, with trying to be scientific. > >Well, if we want to be scientific, I would think we should start with >the dictionary term. I see "totalitarian" as a word that modifies >something else, so I would see the Soviet Union as "state >totalitarian", whereas the US economy is "corporate totalitarian" with >immense support from the state. I see both as forms of totalitarian >control. Decoupling the two loses more than it's worth. > >I think your definition of totalitarian, as a society that does not >have efficient labor-power markets is simply bizarre. The form of >control is what we are talking about, not whether or not it is >effective. If chattel slavery were not effective in exploiting >slaves, we wouldn't cease to call it slavery. > >>It's true that a corporate hierarchy is in some ways like the image of a >>"totalitarian society" but there are also dissimilarities. Similarly, a >>corporate bureaucracy is a lot like the actual situation of the old USSR, >>but there are also major differences. > >There are always dissimilarities between distinct elements of a class >of things. Squares are not circles, but both are shapes, have >centers, perimeters, areas, etc. To say that "shape" has too much >baggage when applied to squares because squares are "pointy" whereas >circles are "smooth" is to ignore the definition of the word "shape" >and its power of abstraction to allow grouping of strongly related >items. I see corporate America and top-down command-and-control >societies as having a tremendous amount in common in the realm of >social control (again, within the US, I'm speaking fairly strictly of >conditions within a firm). > > >Bill > >
Re: US foreign investment
Greetings Economists, I've been following Lou Proyect's essay on Argentina, Australia, and Canada. I wanted to observe this series from a different perspective. I will start at a juncture where Lou responds to J. Devine, On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:33:53 -0700, Devine, James wrote: > >getting away from sparring such as the above, it >seems to me that if one wants to understand the >concrete condions, it really helps to have >statistics. Both kinds of analysis seem >relevant, and can be complementary. >JD Let me take this opportunity to clear something up. I returned to PEN-L not to be baited by Doug Henwood. I take the question of development and statistics quite seriously. If Henwood wanted to respond to what I wrote, he could have explained why the statistics instead revealed some deeper truths about Nicaragua and Norway. Instead, he baited me. This all he knows how to do apparently. This is really too bad, since I have earned quite a bit of respect through the posts I have contributed to PEN-L and other leftwing lists. To throw Lenin at me is just a step above red-baiting and the sign of an exhausted intellect. Doyle What I want to write about is collaboration. I am glad to see Lou writing here, and the series he produced is interesting, though I am not in a position to comment on the content of the series. Rather where D. Henwood responds with a one liner to Lou, I think one can look at how people work together and what on the left could build things more. Obviously both Lou, and Doug have conflict. I'm not arguing for them to just get along. I think producing documents like what Lou did is important. He has said in the past he has access to the library at Columbia University, and he has feed back from his list of international leftists to utilize in a paper. These elements probably contributed to the depth of his work on this series of papers. Those though are exceptional circumstances most on the left don't share. I would like to see more development of the underlying methodology that made Lou's work strong with the tools that are available to us on the internet. I think collaboration is an issue that goes beyond Lou's efforts here, but also illustrated by various elements in Lou's series of thoughts. To do substantial work on the internet, we need to better utilize the internet in producing brainwork. I think that instant messaging, working on the same document, archiving and metadata are important issues for the left to advocate and build upon. Documents that are produced need to be accessible to people via more reliable attention to search engines. I am thinking of an anecdote of Venezuela that the press recently reported. According to press accounts the television stations maintained a blackout and biased reporting against Chavez, but that ordinary people using cell phones were able to get the word out anyway. We need to use the 'interactive' tools that the whole left can use to our advantage. Interactive here meaning collaboration technology. To me then applying the example of cellphones to collaboration here I think important work needs to be done in teamwork for online left lists. The sort of one line irritation of antagonists needs to be replaced by common collective work that takes advantage of principles of computing that serves our brain work best. thanks, Doyle Saylor
request for oil information
Dear Mr/Mis/Mrs First of all I read your papers Re: Rentier`s Roaring My name A.Wershfani from Libya I working for Repsol Oil Libya in Finance Department. Currently I am doing a PhD In Finance entitled (Oil Rentier State) Could Please forward me any data on Neo-Classical Economic Rent Theory, Book, or confers papers about it. Look forward to hearing from you A.S.A.P. Yours faithfully. Wershfani A . Wershfani - Postgraduate Research Student, Emergent of the oil city University of Salford Research Centre of Construction & Property Management Bridgewater Building, Salford, Greeter Manchester, M7 9NU, U.K Tel: Direct Line : 00 44 161 2955072 E- mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] E- mail: wershfani @ yahoo.com -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Indian software
ONE-FOURTH MELLON FINANCIAL'S I.T. WORK MOVED TO INDIA The latest financial giant to move much of its information technology work outside U.S. borders, Mellon Financial will soon be sending a quarter of its routine software maintenance chores to India. (A study by the Meta Group consulting firm indicates that an Indian programmer can be hired for one-fourteenth the rate of an American programmer.) Mellon executive Ken Herz says the company hopes to have new work for all U.S. workers affected by the company's decision, and explains: "This project emphasizes our intent to focus Mellon technology talent on growth-related projects and have routine maintenance work done offshore." (San Jose Mercury News 16 Apr 2002) http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/3077722.htm -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WTO chief says Russia can join
The Times of India MONDAY, APRIL 08, 2002 WTO chief says Russia can join AFP MOSCOW: Russia has "every chance" of joining the World Trade Organisation within the next 18 months but still has many laws to pass to secure entry, WTO chief Mike Moore said in an interview published on Monday. "I will be personally very disappointed if Russia does not become a member of the WTO within the next 18 months. I think it has all the chances to do so," Moore said in an interview with the Vremya Novostei daily. However, the WTO head warned that although "real progress" had been achieved in the negotiations, there was alot that remained to be done in harmonising Russian legislation in line with the world trade body's rules. "Your Duma (lower house of parliament) has adopted many indispensable laws. But they need to adopt as many again," he added. Russia must "advance further on the road of reforms ... and open its markets further," Moore said. Russia, which has been seeking admission to the trade organisation since 1993, continues to face opposition from some WTO member states over its determination to maintain agricultural subsidies. "This concerns countries such as Australia, New Zealand and Brazil," Moore said. Other WTO members are insisting that Russia open up its banking and insurance system, agricultural sector and meat industry, the trade body's chief said. Russian Economy and Trade Minister German Gref in February said that Russia's inability to join the World Trade Organisation cost the economy $4 dollars (4.58 billion euros) every year. Analysts say that Russia's parliament must still approve some 30 economic measures -- some of which are still being drafted by the government -- before WTO membership can be assured. Copyright © 2002 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
Re: The exchange value of currencies
At 16/04/02 23:50 +0100, you wrote: >The organic composition of capital is the measure of the exchange value of >currencies. > >Is this a correct application of marxism? > >Chris Burford I appreciate the discussion. But I am wondering if my gentle, wise old communist friend, got it the wrong way round. Perhaps it should be The exchange value of currencies is the measure of the relative organic composition of capital. Chris Burford
State sector to rise in UK for health needs
With much internal anxiety and hope that they have not misread the focus groups, Labour's Gordon Brown, has finally increased direct taxes, in order to fund an increase in the National Health Service. This will raise the proportion of the GDP going to the state sector from under 40% to over 40%. It will still be up to 6-7% behind the proportion in some European economies. Although the British Social Attitudes Survey shows a large majority of respondents saying they will pay higher taxes for an improved health service, Labour fears the secret votes for self interest in the privacy of the polling booth, that sent Labour down yet another election defeat in 1992. It cannot have forgotten the populist tax revolt against fuel tax last year. Indeed today's budget has a freeze on petrol duty and vehicle tax. We do not know how closely Labour have done their voters' analysis. They may have decided that the "middle class" are major beneficiaries of the National Health Service, because they get essentially a free insurance against the uncertainties of poor health, which can be ruinous. On the other hand the middle classes are prosperous enough to buy extra care on the margins - a quicker hip operation, and greater privacy in hospital. In many ways the "middle class" with their sharp elbows, get the best out of the present communistic British NHS. The government have timed for today the publication of the report by Derek Wanless of Nat West Bank that recommends major additional expenditure on the NHS over the next 20 years to bring it up to continental standards, AND that state taxation is more efficient than pay as you go, or insurance, to finance it. Expenditure on the NHS is now due to rise at double the rate of inflation, for the next few years. It will go up from £65 billion pa to £105 b in 2007. The Conservatives have abandoned their call in the mid 90's for the state share of the GDP to go down to 35%. They are saying the NHS needs more funding, but they are relying on people being more critical about whether they are satisfied with the delivery by the NHS. They presumably calculate this will raise sufficent doubts, for people in the ballot box to vote for the lower tax party with a muddled conscience. This budget is a sign of New Labour's hidden claims still to be left wing in any form. It is likely that in the next few days, to preempt attack, they will emphasise a New Labour programme of modernising and partly devolving NHS management. The politics of health care are a theme in all developed capitalist countries. Chris Burford London
RE: Re: "totalitarianism"
I wrote:>>Maybe that makes sense in terms of rhetoric, but my concern is withpolitical economy, with trying to be scientific. << Bill writes: >Well, if we want to be scientific, I would think we should start with the dictionary term.< I would say that it's good to be conscious of how people generally use a word, i.e., what's in the dictionary (unless one wants to be stuck in an ivory tower). But I wouldn't "start" with it. In this case, I'd reject the term. >I see "totalitarian" as a word that modifies something else, so I would see the Soviet Union as "state totalitarian", whereas the US economy is "corporate totalitarian" with immense support from the state. I see both as forms of totalitarian control. Decoupling the two loses more than it's worth.< Okay, but this ignores the long tradition of lumping both Nazi Germany and Stalin's USSR under the rubric of "totalitarianism," without any additional words thrown in. If you like dictionaries, I doubt you'll find a dictionary that calls corporations "totalitarian" or refers to "corporate totalitarianism." > I think your definition of totalitarian, as a society that does not have efficient labor-power markets is simply bizarre. The form of control is what we are talking about, not whether or not it is effective. If chattel slavery were not effective in exploiting slaves, we wouldn't cease to call it slavery.< Of course it's bizarre. I did _not_ define totalitarianism as involving ineffienct labor-power markets. Rather, that was a _specific_ reference to the old USSR. Nor did I say that inefficiency meant we shouldn't use the word "totalitarianism" -- because there are lots of other reasons to dump the word. One kind of "totalitarianism" is that of Nazi Germany. One might say that the labor-power markets there were quite "efficient," since it was involved forced labor. That allowed the Nazi elite to attain lots of goals (one standard definition of "efficiency") thought that seems unlikely to work in the longer run. (Of course, the Nazis were pretty desperate at the end, so long-run considerations were more than secondary.) >>It's true that a corporate hierarchy is in some ways like the image of a "totalitarian society" but there are also dissimilarities. Similarly, a corporate bureaucracy is a lot like the actual situation of the old USSR, but there are also major differences. << >There are always dissimilarities between distinct elements of a class of things.< of course. > ... I see corporate America and top-down command-and-control societies as having a tremendous amount in common in the realm of social control (again, within the US, I'm speaking fairly strictly of conditions within a firm).< I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I see the word "totalitarian" as either part of the Cold War ideology (Hannah Arendt, etc.) or as synonymous to "authoritarian" or "bureaucratic" with an extra dose of negative connotations (your usage). The Frankfurt school (including Marcuse) had a notion of totalitarian capitalism (though I can't remember seeing that exact phrase). Marcuse, in his ONE-DIMENSIONAL MAN, saw the hegemony of capital as so strong that the only change that could come was from the edges, from the "lumpenproletariat" or the "Third World." But then 1968 happened, including such things as worker/student rebellion in France, which made the theory seem a little silly. JD
Re: Re: RE: Re: US foreign investment
Lou, I don't think Jim was singling you out. I agree that Doug tweaked the first with the Lenin barb. Ordinarily, it would've passed without notice, except that you two have a history. Like I mentioned a minute ago, nothing outrageous has occurred. Like Jim, I noticed the temperature rising. Nothing for anybody to get upset about.Nothing for anybody to get upset about. Nothing for anybody to get upset about. On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 05:58:36PM -0400, Louis Proyect wrote: > On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:33:53 -0700, Devine, James wrote: > > > >getting away from sparring such as the above, it > >seems to me that if one wants to understand the > >concrete condions, it really helps to have > >statistics. Both kinds of analysis seem > >relevant, and can be complementary. > >JD > > Let me take this opportunity to clear something up. I returned to > PEN-L not to be baited by Doug Henwood. I take the question of > development and statistics quite seriously. If Henwood wanted to > respond to what I wrote, he could have explained why the statistics > instead revealed some deeper truths about Nicaragua and Norway. > Instead, he baited me. This all he knows how to do apparently. This > is really too bad, since I have earned quite a bit of respect through > the posts I have contributed to PEN-L and other leftwing lists. To > throw Lenin at me is just a step above red-baiting and the sign of an > exhausted intellect. > > -- > Louis Proyect, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 04/17/2002 > > Marxism list: http://www.marxmail.org > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RE: Re: US foreign investment
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:33:53 -0700, Devine, James wrote: > >getting away from sparring such as the above, it >seems to me that if one wants to understand the >concrete condions, it really helps to have >statistics. Both kinds of analysis seem >relevant, and can be complementary. >JD Let me take this opportunity to clear something up. I returned to PEN-L not to be baited by Doug Henwood. I take the question of development and statistics quite seriously. If Henwood wanted to respond to what I wrote, he could have explained why the statistics instead revealed some deeper truths about Nicaragua and Norway. Instead, he baited me. This all he knows how to do apparently. This is really too bad, since I have earned quite a bit of respect through the posts I have contributed to PEN-L and other leftwing lists. To throw Lenin at me is just a step above red-baiting and the sign of an exhausted intellect. -- Louis Proyect, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 04/17/2002 Marxism list: http://www.marxmail.org
Re: Re: Re: US foreign investment
Why not cool the sparring, to use Jim D.'s expression. Nobody has done anything terribly provocative so far, but let us keep it that way. On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 05:18:55PM -0400, Louis Proyect wrote: > >In other words, if the contemporary statistics > >don't say what you want them to, turn to Lenin > >instead. > > > >Doug > > Better than Lacan. > > -- > Louis Proyect, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 04/17/2002 > > Marxism list: http://www.marxmail.org > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: US foreign investment
Louis Proyect wrote:>>You'll notice that (D) & (E) are practically the same for each country. So can you draw any meaningful inferences about whether the same level of exploitation exists for both countries? Obviously not. Bottom line, we have to avoid the temptation to do economic analysis based on such a reductionist view. There is no substitute for the concrete analysis of concrete class relations.<< Doug writes: > In other words, if the contemporary statistics don't say what you want them to, turn to Lenin instead.< getting away from sparring such as the above, it seems to me that if one wants to understand the concrete condions, it really helps to have statistics. Both kinds of analysis seem relevant, and can be complementary. JD
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: The exchange value of currencies
I wrote:> > Obviously, most of Marx's ideas come from previous political economists and not just from Hume (who developed quantity theory of money, not Locke).<< Romain writes: > This is of Locke: "So far as the Change of Interest conduces in Trade to the bringing in or carrying out Money or commodities, and so in time to the varying their Proportions here in England from what it was before, so far the change of Interest as all other things that promote or hinder Trade may alter the Value of Money in reference to Commodities." (Some Considerations of the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising the Value of Money, London, 1691)< you're right: Locke was the first to provide a coherent quantity theory of money, at least according to Walter Eltis (in The Quantity Theory of Money: >From Locke to Keynes and Friedman. By Mark Blaug, Walter Eltis, Denis O'Brien, Don Patinkin, Robert Skidelsky, Geoffrey E. Wood. Brookfield, Vermont: Edward Elgar, 1995. Pp. ix, 139.) I haven't read the article, but the book review on line says so. History of economic thought is not my forte, except for a small number of dead economists. >> ... it [the quantity theory] applies in very specific situations but fails in other situations. The quantity theory applies best with countries with very poorly developed financial systems if they are at full employment of resources.<< > I have been believing that for years. I do not anymore. There are indeed two specific and different situations, but I now think that the diffrence is between the character of money issuing. There is a true inflation by money, when money issuing is pathogen. That is, if some power (official or criminal, or both) issues a money that can never been destroyed because it does not exist in any liability column of any account. On the contrary, the keynesian "budget deficit" mobilzes the saving it allows, so that accounts are balanced. As for the poorest countries, when they are not subverted by an irresponsible or criminal power, their inflation is the result of both the price of imports and the price of the currency they have to pay import with (at random, the dollar). , I don't want to repeat what I've said elsewhere, but in line with the Chartalist theory, I think that the focus on money is a mistake. I see serious inflation as always and everywhere a political phenomenon. If the state is falling apart (due to civil war, etc.) it can't collect taxes or cut spending (because public support for the state would disappear) -- and no-one will buy its bonds. So the budget deficit leads to the printing of fiat money and inflation. Import prices are crucial to the story, since hyperinflation causes the exchange rate to plummet, raising import prices in domestic terms, encouraging the hyperinflation to continue. Of course, import prices could also rise for exogenous reasons, as you suggest. JD
Every cook can model the UK economy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/budgetinteractive/ interactive model to try altering UK economy, if you do not mind working in pounds. Not every cook can yet be involved in the affairs of state, but we can play at them. (Most of my interventions seem to destabilise the economy.) >We are not utopians. We know that an unskilled labourer or a cook cannot >immediately get on with the job of state administration. In this we agree >with the Cadets, with Breshkovskaya, and with Tsereteli. We differ, >however, from these citizens in that we demand an immediate break with the >prejudiced view that only the rich, or officials chosen from rich >families, are capable of administering the state, of performing the >ordinary, everyday work of administration. We demand that training in the >work of state administration be conducted by class-conscious workers and >soldiers and that this training be begun at once, i.e., that a beginning >be made at once in training all the working people, all the poor, for this >work. Can the Bolsheviks Retain State Power? 1917 Lenin But he did not think of getting the cooks together in a focus group. Chris Burford
Re: Re: US foreign investment
>In other words, if the contemporary statistics >don't say what you want them to, turn to Lenin >instead. > >Doug Better than Lacan. -- Louis Proyect, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 04/17/2002 Marxism list: http://www.marxmail.org
60 Million Emails inc. 600,000 UK $30, 30 Euros, £20 . jbs
Bulk Email CD just US$30, or 30 Euros, or £20 sterling inc. postage and contains: 60 Million World wide email addresses in text format. 600,000 Verified UK email addresses The email addresses have been split and sorted, with seperate easily indentifiable files for each country, and major domains. TO PURCHASE: Please send either a Cheque/Worldwide Money Order/Travellers Cheque; Payable to "Teletech" for either US$30 or 30 Euros or £20 sterling to: Teletech Office 434 405 kings Rd London SW10 OBB United kingdom The CD has simple instuctions and will be sent by first class post as soon as your money has been received. Please Remember to supply a perfectly readable return address. ddnsgrihnmhaymbuljwiclantf
Re: Re: US foreign investment
[13938] Varga, Eugene And L. Mendelsohn. New Data for Lenin's "Imperialism". NY: International, 1940. Hard Cover. Very Good / Very Good. 322 pgs., very light oxidation stains to endpapers, lightly bumped spine ends, slight rubbing to corners, dj lightly rubbed at edges with a few very small tears $10.0 4/17/02 11:57:03 AM, Doug Henwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Louis Proyect wrote: > >>You'll notice that (D) & (E) are practically the same for each country. So >>can you draw any meaningful inferences about whether the same level of >>exploitation exists for both countries? Obviously not. Bottom line, we have >>to avoid the temptation to do economic analysis based on such a >>reductionist view. There is no substitute for the concrete analysis of >>concrete class relations. > >In other words, if the contemporary statistics don't say what you >want them to, turn to Lenin instead. > >Doug > >
Re: US foreign investment
Louis Proyect wrote: >You'll notice that (D) & (E) are practically the same for each country. So >can you draw any meaningful inferences about whether the same level of >exploitation exists for both countries? Obviously not. Bottom line, we have >to avoid the temptation to do economic analysis based on such a >reductionist view. There is no substitute for the concrete analysis of >concrete class relations. In other words, if the contemporary statistics don't say what you want them to, turn to Lenin instead. Doug
Re: Re: "totalitarianism"
Telos No. 41, Fall 1979 Andreas Wildt: Totalitarian State Capitalism: On the Structure and Historical Function of Soviet-Type Societies Gabor T Rittersporn: The State Against Itself: Social Tensions and Political Conflict in the USSR, 1936-1938 Notes and Commentary: Antonio Gramsci: Science and "Scientific" Ideologies 4/17/02 11:37:02 AM, Bill Lear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wednesday, April 17, 2002 at 09:24:23 (-0700) Devine, James writes: >>... >>In any event, I don't see the USSR as totalitarian, simply because it didn't >>have very "efficient" labor-power markets (or other markets) of the sort >>that capitalism has. ... >>... >>Yes, there's always a dictionary definition. That's useful for communicating >>with other people, but I think that in this case, the word "totalitarianism" >>has too much ideological baggage. If you want to use the word as a >>rhetorical epithet, that's fine with me. But I don't think it's useful as >>part of a social analysis. In fact, it distorts the analysis. >>... >>Maybe that makes sense in terms of rhetoric, but my concern is with >>political economy, with trying to be scientific. > >Well, if we want to be scientific, I would think we should start with >the dictionary term. I see "totalitarian" as a word that modifies >something else, so I would see the Soviet Union as "state >totalitarian", whereas the US economy is "corporate totalitarian" with >immense support from the state. I see both as forms of totalitarian >control. Decoupling the two loses more than it's worth. > >I think your definition of totalitarian, as a society that does not >have efficient labor-power markets is simply bizarre. The form of >control is what we are talking about, not whether or not it is >effective. If chattel slavery were not effective in exploiting >slaves, we wouldn't cease to call it slavery. > >>It's true that a corporate hierarchy is in some ways like the image of a >>"totalitarian society" but there are also dissimilarities. Similarly, a >>corporate bureaucracy is a lot like the actual situation of the old USSR, >>but there are also major differences. > >There are always dissimilarities between distinct elements of a class >of things. Squares are not circles, but both are shapes, have >centers, perimeters, areas, etc. To say that "shape" has too much >baggage when applied to squares because squares are "pointy" whereas >circles are "smooth" is to ignore the definition of the word "shape" >and its power of abstraction to allow grouping of strongly related >items. I see corporate America and top-down command-and-control >societies as having a tremendous amount in common in the realm of >social control (again, within the US, I'm speaking fairly strictly of >conditions within a firm). > > >Bill > >
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: The exchange value of currencies
James Devine wrote: > Obviously, most of Marx's ideas come from previous political economists and > not just from Hume (who developed quantity theory of money, not Locke). This is of Locke: "So far as the Change of Interest conduces in Trade to the bringing in or carrying out Money or commodities, and so in time to the varying their Proportions here in England from what it was before, so far the change of Interest as all other things that promote or hinder Trade may alter the Value of Money in reference to Commodities." (Some Considerations of the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising the Value of Money, London, 1691) > By the way, the quantity theory of money is a bit like Newtonian physics I agree with that, as the quantity theory absolutely needs an instantaneous and global confrontation between money and goods. Hume had jeopardized his theory in the same time he wrote it, as he saw the prices rising "by degree" (Of money in Essays Moral, Political and Literary, Indianapolis, Liberty Classics, 1985). But what is the adjustment variable, as long as prices, rising 'by degree", have not yet adjusted demand with supply? Of course, it is the variation of stocks. Now, when stocks stop declining, that means that supply matches demand, and there is then no reason left for prices to rise. It would be hard to admit that stocks were declining during inflation (and growth) periods of 16th and 20th centuries, for example. This is the reason why neoclassicists, in order to save their inflation theory, have invented the "rational expectations", thanks to which the instantaneous confrontation may do not exist on the real markets, as it is present into the minds. > it applies in very specific situations but fails in other situations. The > quantity theory applies best with countries with very poorly developed > financial systems if they are at full employment of resources. I have been believing that for years. I do not anymore. There are indeed two specific and different situations, but I now think that the diffrence is between the character of money issuing. There is a true inflation by money, when money issuing is pathogen. That is, if some power (official or criminal, or both) issues a money that can never been destroyed because it does not exist in any liability column of any account. On the contrary, the keynesian "budget deficit" mobilzes the saving it allows, so that accounts are balanced. As for the poorest countries, when they are not subverted by an irresponsible or criminal power, their inflation is the result of both the price of imports and the price of the currency they have to pay import with (at random, the dollar). Best wishes to you, James RK
Re: "totalitarianism"
On Wednesday, April 17, 2002 at 09:24:23 (-0700) Devine, James writes: >... >In any event, I don't see the USSR as totalitarian, simply because it didn't >have very "efficient" labor-power markets (or other markets) of the sort >that capitalism has. ... >... >Yes, there's always a dictionary definition. That's useful for communicating >with other people, but I think that in this case, the word "totalitarianism" >has too much ideological baggage. If you want to use the word as a >rhetorical epithet, that's fine with me. But I don't think it's useful as >part of a social analysis. In fact, it distorts the analysis. >... >Maybe that makes sense in terms of rhetoric, but my concern is with >political economy, with trying to be scientific. Well, if we want to be scientific, I would think we should start with the dictionary term. I see "totalitarian" as a word that modifies something else, so I would see the Soviet Union as "state totalitarian", whereas the US economy is "corporate totalitarian" with immense support from the state. I see both as forms of totalitarian control. Decoupling the two loses more than it's worth. I think your definition of totalitarian, as a society that does not have efficient labor-power markets is simply bizarre. The form of control is what we are talking about, not whether or not it is effective. If chattel slavery were not effective in exploiting slaves, we wouldn't cease to call it slavery. >It's true that a corporate hierarchy is in some ways like the image of a >"totalitarian society" but there are also dissimilarities. Similarly, a >corporate bureaucracy is a lot like the actual situation of the old USSR, >but there are also major differences. There are always dissimilarities between distinct elements of a class of things. Squares are not circles, but both are shapes, have centers, perimeters, areas, etc. To say that "shape" has too much baggage when applied to squares because squares are "pointy" whereas circles are "smooth" is to ignore the definition of the word "shape" and its power of abstraction to allow grouping of strongly related items. I see corporate America and top-down command-and-control societies as having a tremendous amount in common in the realm of social control (again, within the US, I'm speaking fairly strictly of conditions within a firm). Bill
US foreign investment
Yesterday Henwood furnished a URL for the Bureau of Economic Analysis--U.S. Direct Investment Abroad : http://www.bea.gov/bea/di/di1usdop.htm I took the liberty of extracting out only the rows that included meaningful data for all columns and added percentages based on the following: 1. Net income divided by Total Assets 2. Employee compensation divided by Total Assets If there is any meaningful economic interpretation that can be gleaned from all this, I have no idea what it is. Just take a look at: http://www.marxmail.org/foreign_investment.htm and compare Nicaragua to Norway. Nicaragua: (A) Number of Affiliates -- 8 (B) Total Assets -- 147 (C) Sales -- 260 (D) Net Income -- 11 (E) Employee Compensation -- 14 (D) divided by (B) -- 0.07 (E) divided by (B) -- 0.10 Norway: (A) Number of Affiliates -- 182 (B) Total Assets -- 19092 (C) Sales -- 12836 (D) Net Income -- 882 (E) Employee Compensation -- 1855 (D) divided by (B) -- 0.05 (E) divided by (B) -- 0.10 You'll notice that (D) & (E) are practically the same for each country. So can you draw any meaningful inferences about whether the same level of exploitation exists for both countries? Obviously not. Bottom line, we have to avoid the temptation to do economic analysis based on such a reductionist view. There is no substitute for the concrete analysis of concrete class relations. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
Mexico
Ignacio, This was posted to another list with the subject line: " Mexico: another crisis pending?" http://specials.ft.com/ftfm/FT3910UGYZC.html What is your take on this? Best, Sabri
Venezuela coup
On 2002/04/16 11:02 PM, "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Binary scheme of democracy and centralism > by miychi > 15 April 2002 21:34 UTC > > >> > 1.Binary scheme of democracy and centralism > > > > > Charles: As Lenin was a dialectician, we can be sure that these opposites are > to be treated in both their unity and opposition, as you do below. Basically > it is a way of relating the masses and their leaders for struggle and for long > term operation of the country. > > ^^^ > > a correct reading of Lenin $B!G (Js work makes clear that Lenin never made a > binary scheme of democracy and centralism. Lenin speaks about centralization > of leadership by the party, decentralization of responsibility to the local > sections, and obligation of regular reporting and publicizing within the > party as condition to realize them, and centralization of secret function > and specification other functions of movement. as for democracy-inner-party > democracy, he regards it as a condition to realize centralization of > leadership and decentralization of responsibility to local sections, in > other words, as a historical concrete or a variable form. > > > ^^^ > > CB: Definitely, democratic centralism is to be treated in a historically > concrete manner. Thus, the unity of democracy and centralism in the Venezuelan > Bolivarian movement is unique. > > > What do you think of the operation of the principle of democratic centralism > in Venezuela as we have learned of the events there ? > > ^comrade Charles Brown^^ I don't know details of Venezuela coup and counter-coup, and character and evaluation of coup and counter-coup is still unclear. There are some explanation that it is conspiracy of CIA or OAS ^or as Chavez says that it is media conspiracy ,not military. But it is clear that non-party mass demonstration facilitated counter-coup. In 1917, anti-war and anti-hunger mass demonstration happened in August, when Lenin did not consider or decide uprising. When mass demonstration mount to reach its top,and begin to build Soviet Lenin returned to Russia and decide uprising finally. And military part of party(lead by Trotsky) occupied Winter Palace, and information sector. Most important is that in August demonstration, mass claimed revolution and built Soviet. Historically speaking non-party mass movement often go ahead of party action or program. This is historical truth.^ Probably similar situation happened in Venezuela. In sum, party and mass movement dialectically intensify each other and in decisive moment small selected member of party and non-party citizen attack central part of power. > > 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] >
Re: Homeland security, homeland profitability
And this. Remember Carlyle Group companies now have a lock on explosive detection equipment under the EG&G/Perkin-Elmer label. http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=860899 HOME - Subscribe - Manage Your Subscription - Contact Us - Advertise - About Us - Help HOME Information Technology Management Issues Homeland Security Procurement Postal News Business Report Career Info Personal Finance Spotlight Commentary Weekly Poll GSA Storefront Chat Published: April 15, 2002 Airport Security Costs Skyrocket By TIM KAUFFMAN The Transportation Department faces significant financial and logistical hurdles as it tries to meet congressional deadlines to screen all checked bags for explosives by the end of the year. "There's a lot more questions than answers at this point,"said Randall Walker, director of aviation for Clark County, Nev., which runs the McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas. Until recently, much concern about the government's move to assume responsibility for airport security has centered upon whether it could buy the equipment and hire and train security personnel in time for a Dec. 31 deadline set by Congress in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001. Now, funding and logistical challenges of installing perhaps 50,000 security personnel and thousands of luggage-scanning machines are emerging as the biggest hurdle in the way of the Transportation Department's fast-paced effort, which could cost upwards of $10 billion. The nation's 429 commercial airports that will come under the government's security program in November have not been told how to comply with the new security mandates. Bomb-detection systems must be installed at all airports by the end of the year to screen all luggage for bombs. But details are lacking. For instance, it is unclear how many machines each airport will receive, where the machines will be located, and who will pay for installation. "Our big worry is we're going to have these machines dropped on us in October and told to meet the December deadline,"said Stephen Van Beek, senior vice president of policy at the Airports Council International-North America, which represents the governing authorities of most U.S. and Canadian airports. Each airport has unique challenges based on layout, passenger traffic and available space. For instance, the Las Vegas airport is the seventh busiest in the country, but it is likely to need more bomb-detection devices than the busiest airport, Atlanta, because almost all of its passengers are either arriving or departing whereas most of Atlanta's passengers are connecting to other flights. Some relatively small airports may need many machines because their design requires many checkpoints. For instance, Kansas City International Airport has about one-third the passenger traffic of Las Vegas but has about as many security checkpoints because the airport lacks a central corridor to process passengers. In many cases, airports do not have the floor space and physical quarters to accommodate the additional personnel and baggage-screening machines. Some may have to close gates to free up space. The Las Vegas airport, for example, would have to close eight gates to accommodate the 60 explosive-detection systems it will need, Walker said. "There is no one-size-fits-all solution,"he said. Airports also are struggling to find work space for the additional personnel they soon will be receiving. The Transportation Department's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) originally estimated about 30,000 baggage screeners would be needed, based on the number of screeners used by private security firms before Sept. 11. Agency officials earlier this year raised that estimate to 40,000 and now are saying they may need at least 50,000 workers. Those additional personnel require more work space, more break rooms and more lockers at airports, airport officials say. The need for space raises another question: Who will pay for it? Airlines now rent space from airports for security checkpoints, offices and employee accommodations. Because the government is taking control of security from airlines, many airports say it should pick up the cost as well. "We have a running tab, and we're going to keep asking TSA for reimbursement,·said Joe McBride, spokesman for the Kansas City International Airport. The Transportation Security Administration has personnel at more than a dozen airports studying these issues, agency spokesman Paul Turk said. "We're working with the airports now, and we will continue working with the airports,"Turk said. "Things will be accomplished. We have deadlines to meet. We will meet them." Transportation on March 21 submitted a supplemental appropriations request for this year seeking $4.4 billion, spokesman Bill Mosely said. But the request does not include money to renovate airports to accommodate the bomb-detection machines, Mosely said. So far, TSA has committed to spending $175,000 per airport to in
Homeland security, homeland profitability
This makes interesting reading if you want to see who is lining up for the 38 billion dollars going to the homeland security budget: http://www.cq.com/homeland/hsse.pdf Rumsfeld has had to make some important decisions. One, before 9-11, was whether or not to stop the current anthrax vaccine program (which was centered on BioPort and a couple other biotech startups). I don't know where Rumsfeld's portfolio is invested, but it seems likely to be with pharmaceuticals (he was the head of one firm that is now part of the enormous Pharmacia) and defense, which finds a nifty convergence in stuff that is anthrax-related (because of the vaccine development programs and treatments against nuclear, biological and chemical--NBC-- warfare agents). Here is one example which, if nothing else, probably shows that for testing purposes the distribution of weaponized anthrax was never as controlled as we thought, though this venture is at pains to point out that they use other bacillus to test: http://www.cyclopss.com/news/pharma1.html Cyclopss Completes First Phase Of Pharmacia Decontamination System Salt Lake City, UT (November 13, 2001) - Cyclopss Corporation (Symbol OZON, OTC) announced today that it has completed the first phase of a decontamination system development contract with the New Jersey based pharmaceutical company PHARMACIA (Symbol PHA, NYSE). Cyclopss is utilizing a proprietary ozone technology to develop a new process for the decontamination, disinfection and aseptic maintenance in the manufacturing and packaging of certain of PHARMACIA'S products. With the initial proof of concept phase completed the contract will proceed through two more phases, the construction and testing of the Pathfinder Prototype System, and finally a fully functional Ster-O-Zone system that will be validated in plant by PHARMACIA. The PHARMACIA system is being designed to destroy all dangerous pathogens, including Bacillus Subtilis and Bacillus Stearothermophilus spores which are from the same genus as Bacillus Anthracis, the viral spore that causes Anthrax. "The Bacillus family of spores have long been identified by the FDA as the most difficult of spores to kill," says Dr. Durand Smith, President and Director of R&D at Cyclopss. He continues, "These Anthrax surrogates are regularly used in biological studies to reduce the danger to microbiologists. The government study regarding ozone's effect on Anthrax, undertaken at Los Alamos Laboratories, used yet another look alike spore from the genus, Bacillus Globigii." Management stated that one of the primary interests driving the potential for the use of ozone technology by the pharmaceutical manufacturing, and packaging industry, is the fact that it creates only oxygen as a by-product of its killing action, leaving no other residual chemicals behind to potentially interact or degrade the sometimes sensitive pharmaceutical products. CYCLOPSS announced late last month that it had completed a development and installation contract for a Ster-O-Zone ozone decontamination chamber for a nationally recognized biological testing lab. This product was also designed to destroy all pathogens including not less than 99.9% of Bacillus spores. In this system, laboratory carts and equipment used in biological testing are wheeled into a stainless steel chamber and treated with ozone gas for 30 minutes. The chamber has recently demonstrated the ability to effectively destroy these spores on mail that may have been cross contaminated from postal equipment that has come in contact with Anthrax laden letters. Management further stated, that while the development of both of these products was underway long before the current Anthrax threat, they may prove to be very timely and effective weapons in the war against Bioterrorism. CYCOPSS is a world leader in the development of environmentally friendly technologies and applications that are used in the cleaning and disinfection of foods, laundry, and surfaces for industries as well as consumers. Back to Cyclopss News Copyright ｩ 1997-2000, Cyclopss Corporation, All Rights Reserved. Questions or Comments? Email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Terms of Use
Re: EU demands for dismantling the CAP
What they learned from the US: protect your trade bloc, overburden the WTO with excessive demands so as to derail any possible consensus coming out of the next round of talks, and pursue strategic trade unilaterally or bilaterally where appropriate. When things heat up emphasize 'consultation', and when you lose a WTO case, ignore the results as best as possible. The question is, Are the E. and S.E. Asians ready to play the same games? Charles Jannuzi
