Million demonstrators in France
At 30/04/02 23:46 +0100, I wrote: It is therefore a matter of *principle* for a left winger in France *to* vote for Chirac in the next round of the presidential elections and to argue why, and to argue why it is also necessary to continue the criticism of Chirac and to get a better left vote in the assembly elections, and to continue campaigning for progressive causes outside the assembly. Yesterday was encouraging. This united front promises some further opportunities for leftists within it. Provided they do not fall into the trap of all unity and no struggle within the united front. But with a million on the streets, why should they? The battle of principle however must also be won against those who distort marxism to argue that it would be class teachery to vote for Chirac in the present circumstances. IMHO of course. Chris Burford London
Re: Million demonstrators in France
The battle of principle however must also be won against those who distort marxism to argue that it would be class teachery to vote for Chirac in the present circumstances. IMHO of course. Chris Burford It makes no sense to vote for Chirac since his policies as Prime Minister in the past were exactly those that created openings for the far right in the first place. As an aggressive defender of neoliberalism under the rubric of European unity, he provoked two opposed responses. The socialists and the left challenged the need to enrol France in a race to the bottom. The far right instead proposed that France move in a more nationalist direction, including a ban on immigration. In any case, Chirac's return to power will only boost the ranks of the far left and the far right in much the same way that centrist, do-nothing governments did in Germany in the 1920s. Ultimately, there will be a battle between socialists and fascists just as there was in the past. For success in such a battle, we need to build the ranks of the left while sharpening its understanding of class principles. The same sort of attempts to dull this understanding that took place during the 1920s and 30s are obviously at work today. The Irish Times, December 21, 1995, CITY EDITION Strikes in France expose gulf of incomprehension between rulers and ruled Negotiations will open today in France in an attempt to solve the country's worst social crisis in nearly 30 years. Kathryn Hone in Paris examines the long term implications of a winter of discontent BYLINE: By KATYRYN HONE DATELINE: PARIS FRANCE will not be having a traditional Christmas this year. Those Christmas tills that usually ring throughout December have been largely silent throughout the three weeks of a national upheaval on a scale not seen since May 1968. Everyone is a little poorer. Despite the uneasy social truce as trains return to the rails, everyone is wondering what will happen in the new year, astonished both the French and their European partners, not just because no one saw it coming but also because of the depth of popular feeling it unleashed. France, which seemed sullen but anaesthetised under its new President, Mr Jacques Chirac, suddenly woke up. As many as two million people were motivated to march in the streets of their cities. The drop that made the vase overflow, as the French say, was the attempt by the Prime Minister, Mr Alain Juppe in an excess of zeal to introduce several fundamental reforms at the same time. On top of the heaviest rise in indirect taxation for years and a freeze on public service pay, he loaded a rationalisation plan for the indebted state railway company, SNCF, an end to civil servants hard-won retirement privileges, and a streamlining of the social security system, imposing limits on health spending. What was new about the strike that followed was that it managed to retain the sympathy of a majority of the public, despite the hardships and loss of income it produced. Deprived of trains, people walked or hitched or cycled to work, but most doggedly maintained that the rail workers and bus drivers were right to protest. Into the breach opened by striking railway workers, postal staff, teachers or electricians surged in a huge wave of general discontent. Its target was not only rejection of the so-called Juppe Plan to reform the health service but a more general rejection of France's elite ruling class. Many political leaders, including Mr Juppe and President Chirac, are the product of the exclusive Ecole Nationale d'Administration (ENA), a training college for senior civil servants and decision-makers. The resulting enarques as they are nicknamed, or graduates from other grandes ecoles, make up the bulk of the country's politicians, captains of industry, economic advisers and ministerial cabinets. Such an education tends to produce technocrats more inclined to see politics as economic management than as involving decisions with human dimensions. The sociologist, Mr Edgar Mario pointed out this week that these elites have been trained in compartmentalised thinking which tends to dismiss all aspects that are not quantifiable, such as anguish and human suffering. They are seen as having sold out to what another sociologist and supporter of the strikes. Mr Pierre Bourdieu, described last week as the new Leviathan market forces and global competition. While the technocrats in ministerial offices talk about meeting the Maastricht criteria and qualifying for a single currency, down at street level people see nothing but higher taxes, more belt-tightening and the threat of unemployment. Our problem, one postal worker said this week, is that for 10 years we have been asked to make sacrifices, but we can no longer see what the object is. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. In response to the anguish of a generation exposed to mass unemployment,
TractorDrivers
ORIGINAL MESSAGES: On Tue, 30 Apr 2002 14:21:11 -0700, Michael Perelman wrote: Nobody's mind will be changed at this point about Stalin. ProyectReplied: I don't know. A few more obscure google trolls dumped indiscriminately into PEN-L might persuade me to mount a 1930s Soviet poster of an apple-cheeked tractor-driving farmworker on my living room wall.Louis Proyect, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 04/30/2002 ONLY POSSIBLE RESPONSE IS: Quite. Hardly the comprehensive approach some suggested, in an earlier mesage. Hari
Union education in economics
Bill, Do you have available the current percentage of unionised workers in the total number of wage and salary earners in New Zealand ? In 1985 it stood at about 44 percent and in 1995 it was about 23 percent. I just want to know if this decline has continued (at least in some countries the decline appears to have been halted or even reversed). The PSA library site has some relevant documents but somehow I couldn't access them (?). Thanks Jurriaan
Re: Re: Million demonstrators in France
I completely agree with Louis. Additionally, as the crisis deepens due to the maintaining policy of Maastrich's European integration, we are not ensured of not experiencing the come back of death penalty and xenophobia under Chirac as under Le Pen. Sunday, I shall not go and choose between plague and cholera. RK
Worldwatch Institute - World Summit Policy Briefs
The Worldwatch Institute is pleased to send you the fourth in our series of World Summit Policy Briefs, From Rio to Johannesburg: Whats Good for Women is Good for the World, by Staff Researcher, Danielle Nierenberg. The World Summit Policy Brief series highlights and provides recommendations on key environmental and sustainable development issues that will shape this years World Summit on Sustainable Development. From Rio to Johannesburg: Whats Good for Women is Good for the World by Danielle Nierenberg WASHINGTON, DC April 30, 2002 - Throughout the 1990s, several major United Nations conferences stressed the importance of including women in sustainable development. But despite these commitments on paper, there has been far too little action. True and meaningful equity between women and men will take much more than inserting a paragraph here and there in the documents issued at a United Nations convention or in national laws. Gender myopiaor blindness to womens issuesstill distorts environmental, economic, and health policies. Today, a full decade after the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, governments, development agencies, and even some NGOs remain resolutely patriarchal. Despite the widespread belief that women have come a long way in achieving improved social and economic status, they continue to face many of the same obstacles they did ten years ago. And in some cases, these problems have become even more formidable. At the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, women came together as never before and presented their vision of a world in which all women are educated, free from violence, and able to make their own reproductive choices. As a result of this mobilization, the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 called for womens full participation in sustainable development and improvement in their status in all levels of society. The work that began at the Earth Summit did not end in Rio. Because of the efforts made by womens NGOs there, womens health and human rights have made their way into the international agenda. Rios Agenda 21 set the stage for the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, Egypt in 1994. The Cairo Programme of Action reaffirmed womens rights and their equal participation in all spheres of society as a prerequisite for better human development. The declarations and promises made at these conferences were important first steps to improving womens lives, but much remains to be done. Consider the following statistics reported by the United Nations and other health and environment organizations: More than 350 million women worldwide lack any access to family planning services. Over 500,000 women die each year from complications during pregnancy and childbirth. Population growth is still rapid in the worlds 48 least developed nationsroughly 80 million people are added to the planet each year. Many of them are born in places where lack of infrastructure and public services shorten the lives of both the young and old. The largest generation of young people in human history1.7 billion people aged 10 to 24are about to enter their reproductive years. This wave of youth is occurring at the same time that international funding, especially from the United States, for family planning and contraceptives has been cut. As a result, many of the worlds young are left without guidance and the tools to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies, violent relationships, and sexually transmitted diseases. In most of the developing world, the majority of new HIV/AIDS infections occur in young people, with young women especially vulnerable. In sub-Saharan Africa, where AIDS is spreading faster than anywhere else on the planet, women account for 55 percent of all new cases of HIV. Most of these women lack the sexual autonomy to refuse sex or to demand that their partners use condoms. Gender based violence takes many forms and plagues girls and women throughout their lives. One in three women worldwide has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime. An estimated sixty million girls are considered missing in China and India because of sex-selective abortions, female infanticide, and neglect. More than 2 million women undergo female genital mutilation each year, which leads to a lifetime of suffering and psychological trauma. Despite advances in education for both girls and boys, two thirds of the worlds 876 million illiterate people are female. In 22 African and nine Asian nations, school enrollment for girls is less than 80 percent that for boys, and only about half of girls in the least developed nations stay in school after grade 4. In most parts of the world, single-mother households are home to a disproportionate number of the children living in poverty. Globally women earn on average two thirds to three fourths as much as men for the same work. In addition, women perform
protesting Cheney
please forward widely! VP DICK CHENEY, architect of the War on Terrorism, is coming out of hiding to speak at MSU's graduation this Friday. LET'S PROTEST! Friday May 3 Noon NW corner of Kalamazoo Harrison, East Lansing(graduation ceremonies begin at 1 pm at adjacent Breslin Student Events Center) Bring placards with simple slogans. Please tell everyone you know who might be interested. We've had to mobilize this quickly, and we want to make a good showing! Anyone interested in leafleting earlier in the day as graduates and their families enter Breslin should meet in front of Breslin at 10 am. Carpool from Ann Arbor: Meet at 10:30 am from parking lot of the Plymouth Rd. Mall think Kroger's), on the Blockbuster, YS, and Kinko's side. We'll have maps there. (For an MSU map see http://www.msu.edu/dig/msumap/) Why are we protesting Cheney? Let us count the reasons. Regarding the War on Terrorism, Cheney stated (10/21/01, Wash. Post) It is different than the Gulf War was, in the sense that it may never end. At least not in our lifetime. * He's a warmonger and war-profiteer. Cheney spearheaded the 2001 bombing of Afghanistan, the 1991 war in Iraq, and the 1989 invasion of Panama. * As a congressman from Wyoming, he voted against the Equal Rights Amendment, against funding for Head Start, and against a House resolution calling for South Africa to release Nelson Mandela from prison. * He's a hypocrite. In between Bush regimes, Cheney was CEO of Halliburton Industries, an oil company (the world's largest oil-drilling, engineering,and construction services provider) that was doing business with Iraq. * He had extensive ties to Enron: Cheney accepted Enron's campaign contributions,adopted Enron-friendly energy policies, helped Enron commit massive fraud, and refused to cooperate with the congressional investigation of Enron. Sponsoring organizations: Peace Education Center of Greater Lansing, AmericanFriends Service Committee, Ann Arbor Ad Hoc Committee for Peace. Note: please send an email if your group would like to endorse. Phillis Engelbert
Timber!
Thursday, May 2, 2002 Trade Panel OKs Stiff Lumber Tariffs By MARTIN CRUTSINGER AP Economics Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. International Trade Commission gave final approval Thursday to the imposition of stiff tariffs on imports of Canadian softwood lumber, ruling that the shipments are harming domestic producers. The decision, on a 4-0 vote, means shipments of Canadian softwood lumber, used extensively in new home construction, will be hit with penalty tariffs averaging 27 percent. The construction industry estimates the tariffs could add $1,500 to the cost of a typical new home. However, in a partial victory for the Canadian lumber industry, the commission ruled that the tariffs will not go into effect until later this month. That will mean Canadian producers will receive a rebate of around $1 billion in bonds they had posted for shipments that had come into the country starting last August. The Canadian companies had been paying an average duty of 32 percent since last year based on an initial determination by the Commerce Department of the amount of subsidies and dumping that were occurring. However, the ITC ruled Thursday that the preliminary fine was not justified. The U.S. government will have to return the punitive tariffs collected through April. Canadian softwood lumber accounts for about one-third of the U.S. market. The ITC vote clears the way for the average tariffs of 27 percent to go into effect once the Commerce Department issues the paperwork needed - probably later this month. The Commerce Department in March had made its final determination of the tariff levels. But the tariffs could not go into effect until the ITC made its final determination Thursday that U.S. lumber producers were suffering harm. John A. Ragosta, a Washington attorney representing U.S. lumber producers, hailed the ITC decision, saying the higher tariffs should provide some relief to the U.S. industry. U.S. companies estimate that nearly 100,000 jobs had been lost and over 100 U.S. lumber mills closed over the past three years because of a surge in Canadian imports. American lumber producers contend that Canada's trade practices overstimulate production there, driving down U.S. prices and harming the U.S. industry. After completing a yearlong investigation, the Commerce Department determined in March that Canada subsidizes its industry by charging low fees to log public forests. The department also ruled that Canada allows its industry to illegally dump lumber in the United States at artificially low prices. The agency set two duties averaging 27 percent for most Canadian lumber producers - an 18.8 percent duty to punish Canada for the subsidies and a second tariff averaging 8.4 percent for dumping. The dumping duty varies by company. Lumber from Canada's four Maritime provinces was excluded from both duties. The United States imported $5.7 billion worth of softwood lumber from Canada in 2001.
Tiered medicine pricing
Affordability of essential medicines: tiered pricing for medicines exported to developing countries, measures to prevent reimportation into the EC, tariffs in developing countries European Commission Working Document, Brussels, April 2002 http://europa.eu.int/comm/trade/pdf/med_wd.pdf
BLS Daily Report
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, MAY 2, 2002: New claims for unemployment insurance dipped last week, suggesting that companies are laying off fewer workers as the budding economic recovery unfolds. The Labor Department reports today that for the work week ending April 27, new claims for jobless benefits went down by a seasonally adjusted 10,000 to 418,000, the lowest level since March 23. In another report, orders to U.S. factories rose for the fourth straight month, a solid 0.4 percent rise in March. The figure was largely boosted by stronger demand for nondurable goods, such as food, clothes, paper products and chemicals, the Commerce Department said. Total nondurable goods were up 1.6 percent in March, the biggest increase in 2 years. Orders also rose for some manufactured goods, including metals, construction machinery, household appliances and defense equipment. The report reinforces the view that the nation's manufacturers -- which sharply cut production and saw hundreds of thousands of jobs evaporate during the recession -- are on the comeback trail. In the jobless-claims report, even with the decline, a government analyst said, the level was inflated as a result of a technical fluke. The distortion is coming from a requirement that laid-off workers seeking to take advantage of a federal extension for benefits must submit new claims. Many economists are forecasting a rise in April's jobless rate to 5.8 percent and estimating that businesses added around 55,000 jobs during the month. The government will release the April employment report tomorrow. Even as the economy bounces back from recession, some economists expect the jobless rate will peak to just over 6 percent by June. That's because companies will be reluctant to quickly hire back laid-off workers until they are assured the recovery is here to stay (Jeannine Aversa, Associated Press, http://www.nandotimes.com/business/story/388937p-3092372c.html). Layoff announcements at U.S. firms bounced back up in April after a drop in March in a sign that the recovering U.S. economy could take some time to gather steam, Challenger, Gray Christmas said today. The outplacement firm said in a monthly report that job cuts announced in April totaled 112,649 or 10 percent more than the 102,315 layoffs announced in March. While the April figure represents a 32 percent decline from the same month in 2001, total job cut announcements so far this year remain perilously close to the record pace of layoffs seen last year, Challenger said. Telecommunications led the pack of downsizing industries -- one in three job cuts took place in the beleaguered telecom sector (Reuters, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20631-2002May2.html). Deaths, injuries and illnesses on the job are happening too frequently in the United States despite annual workplace safety efforts, writes Robert A. Jordan in the Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/122/business/Budget_cuts_imperil_workplac e_safety+.shtml). Nearly 6,000 workers were killed from traumatic injuries and more than 6.3 million suffered other injuries or illnesses on the job in 2000, the most recent year data was available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Evidence continues to mount that the economy is recovering at a slower pace than in the first quarter. Two reports released yesterday suggest the recent spurt in economic growth is tapering off, with manufacturing expanding at a slower rate last month and construction activity dropping (The Wall Street Journal, page A6). Data compiled by the Bureau of National Affairs through April 29 show that the average first-year wage increase in newly negotiated contracts was 4.2 percent, compared with 3.9 percent in 2001. The median first-year wage increase for settlements reported to date in 2002 was 3.8 percent, compared with 3.6 percent a year ago, and the weighted average increase was 2.2 percent, compared with 5 percent in 2001 (Daily Labor Report, page D-1). A report released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis on April 23 suggests that personal income -- and the economy -- were weaker in 2001 than previously thought. Based on newly available data on wages, salaries, bonuses and other payments to labor, the new figures chop about $90 billion, or about 1 percent, off personal income. These revised figures bolster the case that last year's slowdown really does deserve to be called a recession. According to the new data, real personal income rose by only 0.1 percent from the first quarter of 2001 -- when the downturn officially started -- to the end of the year. That's still relatively mild compared with the 1990-91 recession, but it's consistent with the distress that many Americans felt last year. The downward revisions were the biggest in California, with third-quarter personal income reduced by 2.5 percent below the previous estimate. Close behind were other tech-heavy states, such as North Carolina, Virginia,
day of reckoning for the dollar?
Related to the Business Week article sent to the list last Friday by Jim D. on the danger of the US deficit on the current account and increasing foreign debt, below is an article in last Saturday's Financial Times, which concludes that the day of reckoning for the dollar is close at hand. The article emphasizes that the key problem is that it is not necessary for foreign investors to sell US assets for the dollar to fall. All that is necessary is that foreign investors cease to buy US assets, or buy them at a slower rate. And it argues that there are good reasons to believe that foreign investors may indeed purchase US assets at a slower rate in the coming months: US asset markets are no longer outpacing the rest of the world; the price-earnings ratio on US stocks is almost twice as high as on European stocks (the print version of the article has an impressive graph of this differential in price-earnings ratios, which has increased in recent months); and US bonds have become less attractive. One could add that the Enron scandal and the more general accounting crisis in the US have led many to have doubts about the value of US assets. If the day of reckoning is at hand for the dollar, then so it is for the US economy, which has become increasing dependent on foreign capital in recent years, and which would suffer negative consequences if this inflow of foreign capital were to slow down (rising interest rates, slower investment and growth, higher unemployment, etc.), and especially if it were to turn into capital outflows. Fred Analysts sense day of reckoning for dollar: A fall in capital inflows to the US has alarm bells ringing Financial Times; Apr 27, 2002 By CHRISTOPHER SWANN After a frustrating couple of years, dollar bears in the foreign exchange market are scenting blood. With the US economy supposedly leading the world out of recession, one might have expected the greenback to spring higher. In fact it has fallen by almost 3 per cent over the past month in trade-weighted terms. Currency strategists are asking whether this sign of vulnerability presages the long-awaited fall in the dollar or whether it is yet another false alarm. Defenders of the dollar are quick to point out that the recent weakness of the currency is largely the result of bets by speculative traders. Speculators have taken these positions several times over the past few years, only to be forced to withdraw their bets because fund managers continued to invest heavily in US assets. This argument would suggest that the recent weakness of the dollar could be relatively short-lived. But a rising number of analysts are unpersuaded by this sanguine analysis. This is not just a fire drill for the dollar, it is a real alarm, says David Bloom, currency strategist at HSBC in London. The key problem for the US currency is that investors do not need to sell US assets for the dollar to fall. All that is necessary is that they fail to buy. The bloated US current account deficit, running at about 4 per cent of gross domestic product, means that the US needs to attract a net inflow of around Dollars 1.5bn (Pounds 1.04bn) every day in order to stop the dollar falling. The latest figures from the US Treasury provide strong indications that capital inflows are finally drying up. In January the net inflow into US equities and fixed income was just Dollars 9.5bn. This is weak even compared with the Dollars 17.8bn the US attracted in September. Analysts say the US is struggling to attract funds because its asset markets are no longer outpacing the rest of the world. Over the past few years, just when one source of inflows for the dollar ran dry another would take over, said Ray Attrill, director of research at 4Cast, the economic consultancy. Now it is becoming harder to see how the US can attract enough funds to prevent the dollar from falling. Inflows into US corporate bonds, which funded the lion's share of the current account last year after mergers and acquisitions inflows dried up, are thought unlikely to be as important in 2002. Economists are concerned that recovery has been based on companies rebuilding their stocks after the slowdown and government spending rather than on a pick-up in investment spending. This is low-quality economic growth of the kind that does not boost corporate profits, said Paul Meggyesi, senior economist at Deutsche Bank. It is looking increasingly like the day of reckoning for the dollar is close at hand. Copyright: The Financial Times Limited 1995-2002
RE: day of reckoning for the dollar?
Following the deficit debate, I've been hearing about this day of reckoning for 12 years. It must be getting really close! I'd say the key issue in all this is the Bubble. U.S. assets still seem to be over-valued. As for the accounting scandal, it may be that the ingenuity of Euro and japanese accounting just hasn't seen the light of day yet. We can't doubt an equal capacity for chicanery by our capitalist brethren. Perhaps it is greater, if we grant that U.S. capital markets are more honest, relatively speaking, then the rest. Bob Eisner used to point out that those holding dollar-denominated assets who started to bail out ran the risk of taking a bath as the process continued. Paul Davidson would reply that on the micro level, with atomized decision-making, anyone in the midst of such a wave has a rational reason to try and dump before the next fool, leading to the big communal bath. Given the age structure of the U.S. population, with aging Boomers trying to save after leading our dissolute lives, this ought to prop up asset values for another ten years or so. At that point who knows what shape the world will be in. mbs FM: Related to the Business Week article sent to the list last Friday by Jim D. on the danger of the US deficit on the current account and increasing foreign debt, below is an article in last Saturday's Financial Times, which concludes that the day of reckoning for the dollar is close at hand. . .
Re: Re: Million demonstrators in France
Whatever the political differences of analysis, it is disappointing that Louis Proyect can see no occasion to celebrate the massive May Day demonstrations in France. At 02/05/02 08:26 -0400, you wrote: The battle of principle however must also be won against those who distort marxism to argue that it would be class teachery to vote for Chirac in the present circumstances. IMHO of course. Chris Burford It makes no sense to vote for Chirac since his policies as Prime Minister in the past were exactly those that created openings for the far right in the first place. True by no means all of the demonstrators will vote for Chirac against Le Pen. We will not know until Sunday how many do. But the point is not the point that Louis suggests. The issue is not Chirac's policies: it is a choice between a candidate with openly fascist leanings and one without. The presidential election is now symbolic. If the left, and presumably most of the demonstrators on May Day were from the left, maintain this momentum, they will move on after the presidential election to mobilise for the election of socialist and other progressive deputies on policy grounds. In any case, Chirac's return to power will only boost the ranks of the far left and the far right in much the same way that centrist, do-nothing governments did in Germany in the 1920s. I do not understand this muddled assertion at all. For the political battle the assembly elections are much more important. Ultimately, there will be a battle between socialists and fascists just as there was in the past. For success in such a battle, we need to build the ranks of the left while sharpening its understanding of class principles. The same sort of attempts to dull this understanding that took place during the 1920s and 30s are obviously at work today. There seems to be unanimity that the Socialist Party of France did not run an authoritative campaign that led the agenda. The problem with Louis's formulations is that they are stuck in a time warp which appears not to be able to learn from history. While would-be marxists may have a low opinion of bourgeois elections, it was something of a problem that the German Nazi Party did come first in the elections in 1933 and their leader was chosen as chancellor. I find Louis's comments here confused about how a repeat of the historic battle between socialists and fascists will avoid making the same mistakes as in Germany of splitting the vote between social democrats and revolutionary socialists. The question he seems to not answer is the need on occasions for a united front against fascism, which includes dubious capitalists. While I think Romaine Kroes has some interesting points about international finance and while I agree that imposing a neo-liberal agenda to keep Europe competitive, places hard burdens on working people, I cannot accept that it is desirable for working people in France to regard the difference between Chirac and Le Pen as the same as that between cholera and the plague. The consequences are frightening. By contrast the million demonstrators are an encouraging sign of a determination to resist Le Pen, while knowing that the alternatives are far from perfect. Chris Burford
trade talks
No Breakthrough in U.S.-EU Talks By Martin Crutsinger AP Economics Writer Thursday, May 2, 2002; 2:51 PM WASHINGTON -- President Bush and European leaders sought to avoid touching off trans-Atlantic trade wars on Thursday but failed to produce a breakthrough on steel or other disputes. We agreed that discussions should continue, said European Commission President Romano Prodi. Both Bush and the European leaders stressed that they would intensify their efforts to find solutions for various contentious trade issues, including steel and a $4 billion U.S. tax break that the World Trade Organization has ruled as illegal. On the tax break for exporters, Bush said he had given the EU officials assurances that I will work with our Congress to fully comply with the WTO decision. The administration is hoping that it can demonstrate enough good-faith efforts that it will be able to avoid the imposition of penalty tariffs on U.S. exports to Europe in what is the largest trade case the United States has lost before the WTO. The WTO is scheduled to rule next month on the level of those tariffs. The EU is seeking to impose 100 percent duties on $4 billion of U.S. exports but the administration has contended that the level should be around $1 billion. Bush's discussions with the European delegation led by Prodi and Spanish Prime Miister Jose Maria Aznar also covered foreign policy issues, with both sides pledging continued cooperation in the fight against global terrorism. They also explored a common approach to the Middle East, endorsing recent U.S. efforts to restore peace between Israel and the Palestinians. On the most contentious trade issue, a U.S. decision in March to impose 30 percent tariffs on various categories of steel imports, the Europeans said they discussed their unhappiness with this decision but pledged to continue negotiations to avert a full-blown trade war. Prodi told a joint news conference that the EU officials had discussed with Bush the legitimacies of U.S. safeguards which we believe are certainly harming us. The EU has threatened to impose tariffs of its own on $335 million of U.S. exports, targeted to inflict maximum damage on states Republicans are hoping to carry in future elections. Prodi said the two sides agreed on steel that discussions should continue without any prejudice to our respective rights in the WTO. ... We both intend to play it by the WTO rules. European Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick scheduled two extra days of discussions before and after the one-day EU summit to give them more time to search for ways to defuse the various trade disagreements. Congress this week added another element to the trade tensions as the House passed a new farm bill that would boost U.S. agriculture spending by 70 percent, greatly expanding subsidies that farmers receive. The European Union, which is under heavy criticism for its own farm subsidies, attacked the U.S. legislation Thursday, threatening to bring a case against the United States before the World Trade Organization. The United States is increasing trade-distorting support for (American) farmers that will harm developing countries. This is what we are fiercely opposed to, EU spokesman Gregor Kreuzhuber said in Brussels. Many trade experts fear that the world's two biggest trading powers are on the brink of a tit-for-tat trade war over steel that could seriously harm the world trading system and the global economy's fragile rebound. The $4 billion tax break for thousands of U.S. companies who export was ruled an illegal trade subsidy earlier this year by the WTO. The administration would like for Congress to overhaul U.S. tax law to bring it into compliance with the ruling but is seeking time from the EU to accomplish the task. In the steel dispute, the United States on March 20 began imposing tariffs of up to 30 percent on certain imported steel products, using a section of global trade rules that allows temporary tariffs as a safeguard against import surges. In response, the EU is reviewing a target list of $335 million in American exports to Europe for retaliatory tariffs it may impose as soon as June. The items include citrus from Florida; apples and pears from Washington and Oregon; textiles from North and South Carolina; and steel from Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. All are either presidential battleground states or states where the GOP is fighting to win congressional races this fall. Analysts note that Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, on a recent trip to Europe, said the administration probably would grant a significant portion of exemptions being requested so some of the targeted steel imports could avoid the higher tariffs.
RE: day of reckoning for the dollar?
Fred writes: Related to the Business Week article sent to the list last Friday by Jim D. on the danger of the US deficit on the current account and increasing foreign debt, below is an article in last Saturday's Financial Times, which concludes that the day of reckoning for the dollar is close at hand. The article emphasizes that the key problem is that it is not necessary for foreign investors to sell US assets for the dollar to fall. All that is necessary is that foreign investors cease to buy US assets, or buy them at a slower rate. And it argues that there are good reasons to believe that foreign investors may indeed purchase US assets at a slower rate in the coming months: the day of reckoning always seems to be at hand these days, but (given the uncertainty of the future) may never happen. If we knew ahead of time when it would happen, we'd be able to get rich quick. (Of course, if we were rich now, maybe we could precipitate it if we wanted to.) The fact is that the inevitable can be postponed. But in the current political economy, postponement simply to increase the problem in the future. To be specific, let's consider the three bears (for the US). The baby bear (as I've called it) is corporate overindebtedness. This has already lead to a massive slide in business fixed investment, which chased that famous burglar Goldilocks out of the house in 2001. That depression of investment doesn't seem to be going away, while Goldie is trying to be avoid being surrounded in the woods. But the Mama Bear (I think -- I'll have to check my ursology) is excessive consumer indebtedness. As part of the Fed's and the government's 2001 bear-baiting, this critter is standing up on her hind feet, threatening to rip poor Goldilocks from limb to limb. She is being kept away by abnormally high asset prices, due to the still-overvalued stock market and the housing bubble (inflated by the Fed's rate cuts during 2001). I have a hard time believing that this bear will be kept at bay when Papa Bear comes crashing in. This is the US current account deficit, which is leading to rising external debt -- and debt service. I recently compared the US GDP to the GNP. The latter is the same as gross national income and does not include the production that the US does to pay foreigners for our obligations. It's just recently that the GNP went below the GDP (it used to be that the US benefited from debt service and the like) after the GNP/GDP ratio has been falling since 1979. The US is hardly in the same league as Argentina on this score, but the fabled growth spurt of the late 1990s was not as good as advertised partly because some of that growth went to pay debt service or to other flows of income outside the country. (And there are lots of other reasons, as I'm sure Doug will explain in his book. For example, as Dean Baker has emphasized, depreciation sped up.) The rising external debt encourages the dollar to fall in the near future (if not now as the FT says). It can be delayed, but that simply makes the external debt and debt service larger. This means that it's more likely that the dollar will fall _quickly_ when it falls, especially given the dynamic of speculation. (The hungry Papa Bear is more likely to leap when he's hungry.) A large fall is more of a stagflationary shock to US economy than if the authorities were able to find a way to let the air out of the foreign exchange bubble slowly. And el Maestro Greenspan will have as hard a time as Arthur Burns did if there's this kind of shock. JDevine
Re: RE: day of reckoning for the dollar?
Max Sawicky wrote: Bob Eisner used to point out that those holding dollar-denominated assets who started to bail out ran the risk of taking a bath as the process continued. How's that any different from any other speculative market? People sell stocks in a bear market, it drives the value of their remaining shares down, they sell more, etc., until you have a selling climax. How could prices ever go down in Eisner's world? Doug
RE: Re: RE: day of reckoning for the dollar?
Don't know. After the tornado takes me, I'll ask him. Maybe he was referring to a consideration inhibiting a possible decision by foreign governments. - mbs Bob Eisner used to point out that those holding dollar-denominated assets who started to bail out ran the risk of taking a bath as the process continued. How's that any different from any other speculative market? People sell stocks in a bear market, it drives the value of their remaining shares down, they sell more, etc., until you have a selling climax. How could prices ever go down in Eisner's world? Doug
Re: Re: Re: Million demonstrators in France
On Thu, 02 May 2002 23:24:33 +0100, Chris Burford wrote: While would-be marxists may have a low opinion of bourgeois elections, it was something of a problem that the German Nazi Party did come first in the elections in 1933 and their leader was chosen as chancellor. This is not really how Hitler came to power. Hitler's seizure of power was preceded by a series of rightward drifting governments, all of which paved the way for him. The SP found reasons to back each and every one of these governments in the name of the lesser evil. (This is an argument we have heard from some leftists in the United States: Clinton is not as bad as Bush; Johnson is not as bad as Goldwater, etc. The problem with this strategy is that allows the ruling class to limit the options available to the oppressed. The lesser evil is still evil.) The last lesser evil candidate the German Social Democracy urged support for was Paul Von Hindenburg, a top general in W.W.I.. The results were disastrous. Hindenburg took office on April 10 of 1932 and basically paved the way for Adolph Hitler. Hindenburg allowed the Nazi street thugs to rule the streets, but enforced the letter of the law against the working-class parties. Elections may have been taking place according to the Weimar constitution, but real politics was being shaped in the streets through the demonstrations and riots of Nazi storm-troopers. As these Nazi street actions grew more violent and massive, Hindenburg reacted on May 31 by making Franz Von Papen chancellor and instructed him to pick a cabinet above the parties, a clear Bonapartist move. Such a cabinet wouldn't placate the Nazis. All they wanted to do was smash bourgeois democracy. As the civil war in the streets continued, Papen dissolved the Reichstag and called for new elections on July 31, 1932. On July 17, the Nazis held a march through Altona, a working class neighborhood, under police protection. The provocation resulted in fighting that left 19 dead and 285 wounded. The SP and CP were not able to mount a significant counteroffensive and the right-wing forces gathered self-confidence and support from centrist voters. When elections were finally held on July 31, the Nazi party received the most votes and took power. But the results had been decided long ago due to the spinelessness of the reformists. -- Louis Proyect, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 05/02/2002 Marxism list: http://www.marxmail.org
re Garbis Altinoglu
1) Garbis was in jail for some 10-12 years (I forget) tortured Hi Hari, Would you send me your e-mail address as I don't have it? I would like to get in touch with Garbis. His name makes me think that he is of Armenian origins, although it can be Greek, too. By the way, almost all leftists who ended up jail in those days got tortured. I remember a few friends taken from our student dormitories and they were normal people before they went in but when they came out years later they were psychological disasters. Anyway, send me your e-mail address please. Best, Sabri
India, China to work closely at WTO on common interests
Hindustantimes.com April 20, 2002 India, China to work closely at WTO on common interests PTI Kolkata , 19-04-2002 India and China would work closely on areas of common interests at the WTO including agriculture and environment, a senior government official said on Friday. Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry Additional Secretary SN Menon said that a group of officials from the Chinese communist party and government recently visited Delhi to discuss areas in which the two countries could work together. He said the two areas which had been initially identified for cooperation were agriculture and environment. More would be identified in future as discussions took place since China was a new signatory to the WTO. Explaining India's stand, Menon said that the farm sector could not be opened up as the farming community of the country would be exposed to the onslaught of the developed world which were heavily subsidising their own agricultural sectors. He was speaking at 'WTO -- the ongoing negotiations at Geneva - post Doha' organised by Bengal National Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The official added that the same concern was echoed by China, on the basis of which the two countries had decided to work in close cooperation. Send your feedback at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ©Hindustan Times Ltd. 1997. Reproduction in any form is prohibited without prior permission.
military keynesianism, haliburton style
http://www.sfbg.com/36/31/cover_soldiersoffortune.html -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Million demonstrators in France
Louis writes: Ultimately, there will be a battle between socialists and fascists just as there was in the past. For success in such a battle, we need to build the ranks of the left while sharpening its understanding of class principles. The same sort of attempts to dull this understanding that took place during the 1920s and 30s are obviously at work today. Louis, Why should French socialists not work on building the ranks of the left while sharpening its understanding of class principles and vote for Chirac at the same time to ensure that Le Pen is stopped this time? If they vote Chirac on May 5 does it mean that they support Chirac? Not that if they abstain they will make much difference but why take chances? By the way, here are the votes for the Nazis, SPD (Social Democrats) and KPD(Communists) for the below elections: 1930 September, Nazi (18.9%), SPD (24.5%), KPD(13.1%) 1932 July, Nazi (37.3%), SPD (21.6%), KPD(14.3%) 1932 November, Nazi (33.1%), SPD(20.4%), KPD(16.9%) I got these numbers from Socialism for a Sceptical Age, Ralph Miliband, 1994. Let us forget about everything else and just look at these numbers. Except in July 1932, Communists and Social Democrats put together were beating the Nazis. Now who is guilty? Social Democrats or Communists or both or all the rest other than the Nazis? Again, I am just talking about the numbers. The conditions in France and the rest of the world are different today but how do we know what the future will bring us? Best, Sabri
accounting for growth in China
http://www.atimes.com China's numbers game By Yu Shicun and Francesco Sisci BEIJING - In the early 1990s, groups of researchers from China's Statistical Bureau were sent to Italy for training and seminars. The move was political as well as practical. Italy was more open than many other Western countries to contacts with China in the wake of the Tiananmen crackdown, and the Italian economy, with its vast gray areas, might have been the best model for China, which had similar problems. Senior researchers at ISTAT, Italy's national statistical bureau, were confident that they could teach the Chinese their methods for checking and improving the quality of data collection, which would take into account under-reporting or over-reporting. However, despite the Italians' confidence, 10 years after those seminars many in the world remain skeptical about the numbers provided by China's statistics bureau. The figures might be cooked for propaganda purposes, some economists argue, as China needs to demonstrate high growth to draw in foreign investment and prevent capital flight. These critics point to some discrepancies in the official figures and come up with growth rates far below the official ones. Talks with senior officials in charge of data collection, however, dispel the idea of data that are cooked on purpose. There are not two sets of account books in China, one for official use and one for propaganda use. It is true, however, that even officials in charge of the compilation of the data are not so sure about the numbers they are handling. Therefore, as China has a history of over-reporting to please top officials, everybody suspects there is in fact widespread over-reporting. But the root issue is not that of over-reporting, but of reporting at all. In counties and districts scattered around the huge Chinese countryside, reported figures are produced in meetings. The local officials set the standards, a few points lower than the reported growth rate of some rich town nearby, but a couple of points higher than the poor village down the road. In sum, they have to agree roughly with the state-announced growth goal, and set the numbers at a level at which everybody is happy. Then everybody must be consistent: if state officials call in to check, they must be told the agreed figure. So the reality is not behind a screen, because the people attending those meetings are not trying to hide something. They simply do not know what the local production is, and so they try to cover their backsides, producing figures that won't have their superiors going after them. The same is true with income taxes. In many places, the tax bureau has to come up with a certain amount of money at the end of the year. If it doesn't manage to do so, then it calls a meeting with the big local enterprises, which have to cough up the shortfall, in return for which they will get a piece of land or the permission to erect a new building. These phenomena are widespread and from the foreign perspective they cast a bleak shadow on the reliability of all figures in China. To the officials in charge of numbers, in China and elsewhere, the fact that these incidents are common and well known gives them an opportunity to introduce adjustments, and look at marginal figures that could produce overall consistency. Some official figures give reason to suspect over-reporting (comparing electricity consumption with gross domestic product) or under-reporting (comparing the size of foreign trade with total GDP). So at the end of the day, taking into account all arguments, under the present circumstances, the official figures might well be the most accurate available, but perhaps this is not the point. Over- or under-reporting, unlike the compass, is not a Chinese invention, it has been around for centuries. Ultimately, though, the most important yardsticks are the volume of foreign trade, which is impossible to fudge, taxes collected and state expenses, where the government ought to have a precise idea, and the visible welfare of society, which is certainly apparent in China. These are the historical requisites, and on all these accounts China is faring well. But now this is not enough, as China needs to sell, in theory and practice, its bonds overseas, it needs an international bank rating, it needs foreign trust and investment, it needs domestic trust and investment, for trade and even tax collection. If the local real-estate developer starts thinking he can't make money in Guilin, instead of coming up with the cash for the taxes in return for a new development, he can pack and run. Without trust, the country can collapse like a house of cards. Niall Fergusson in The Cash Nexus traces the link between state revenues and the military in the West from 1700 to 2000. He arrays a vast scholarship to prove that the economy's and state expenses were moved by the necessity of defense until the past 50 years. He argues that the key to the French defeat by
