Re: Krugman's IQ drop..
Ian Murray wrote: [Jim Devine, did PK ever take an ethics class? Or a political theory class? Has he ever *worked* in a Fortune 500 firm?] June 4, 2002 Greed Is Bad By PAUL KRUGMAN Greed is bad. Property is theft. Same core (misunderstanding) of capitalism, and both subject to Marx's critique of Proudhon. I think it was way back on the SPOONS marxism list that I argued that the attack on greed was never, in effect, an attack on corporate or capitalist wealth, it was an attack on greedy workers, greedy welfare mothers, etc. When Jan was trying to organize a clerical workers union at ISU back in the mid '70s there were some clerical staff who actually thought fighting for higher wages was close to Unamerican (this was at the time of Ford's WIN program). American workers are neither greedy nor lazy enough. :-) I once actually evoked from one of my brighter (and more conservative) students the plaintive cry that I was teaching people to be envious. Carrol
RE: Krugman's IQ drop..
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26553] Krugman's IQ drop.. -Original Message- From: Ian Murray To: pen-l Sent: 6/3/2002 10:32 PM Subject: [PEN-L:26553] Krugman's IQ drop.. [Jim Devine, did PK ever take an ethics class? Or a political theory class? Has he ever *worked* in a Fortune 500 firm?] I don't know what courses he took, while I doubt that he ever worked for a F500 firm. I know he worked for the US Postal Service for awhile... I don't see why the headline assertion Krugman's IQ drops applies. This column isn't dumber (or smarter) than usual. He's pointing to a real change, but misinterpreting it. The fact is that old-style corporations _were_ fatter and nicer than the new ones. The difference was not that GM was generous motors though: back in the 1950s 1960s, GM and its ilk had to deal with a much more powerful labor movement, combined with lingering memories of 1929 and massive class struggles. They used to follow a paternalistic strategy of giving job security, real pensions, etc., as a way of getting employee loyalty -- and thus encouraging production. That strategy is largely dead. I don't know if it would be as profitable today as it was back in the 1950s 1960s because of the intensified competitive environment corporations face. Back when GM acted the role of being generous, it was the dominant firm in an oligopolistic industry protected from most foreign competition and thus could follow a long-term strategy (or take advantage of its situation to rest on its laurels and let the future go hang). Now it's hard to think of anything but the current quarter's bottom line. Of course, things could change as new oligopolies develop, not to mention new class struggles and new financial collapses. JD
Sustainable development
Brazil´s Elites Fly Above Their Fears [...] Despite a lackluster economy, a $2 billion-a-year security industry is thriving across Brazil. Brazilians are armoring and bulletproofing an estimated 4,000 cars a year, twice as many as in Colombia, which is in the midst of a 38-year-old civil war. A wealthy Sao Paulo businessman, who spoke on the condition his name be withheld, said he allows his daughter to boogie at nightclubs only under the eyes of a commando turned bodyguard. In a city where the wealthy are known for ostentation, many are now buying low-profile economy cars to fool kidnappers and thieves. [...] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42332-2002May31.html -Frank G. _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Decline and fall of Barbara Kopple
Newsweek, November 1, 1976 In 1973, a group of coal miners in Brookside, Ky., struck the Eastover Mining Co., a subsidiary of the Duke Power Co. Barbara Kopple, a young filmmaker who had worked on such documentaries as Hearts and Minds and Gimme Shelter, took a couple of cameras and a small crew to the scene of the action. The result of that visit - which lasted three years - is HARLAN COUNTY, U.S.A., a passionate and often suspenseful documentary that emerged as the surprise hit of the recent New York Film Festival. Newsday, October 6, 1990, Saturday, ALL EDITIONS IN HARLAN COUNTY, U.S.A., Barbara Kopple's Academy Award-winning 1976 documentary about a violent and inspiring coalminers' strike, an old woman whose father died of blacklung disease sings a sound track full of rousing union anthems, including: Which side are you on? Which side are you on? There are no clear sides, no real villains, no bracing victories in Kopple's new union documentary, American Dream. When the Hormel meatpackers in Austin, Minn., go on their long, exhaustively documented strike, they wind up fighting each other more than they battle management. This film has just one union song, at the very end - Solidarity Forever . . . Our Union Makes Us Strong - and by then, the lyrics are ironic. ADWEEK, October 14, 1996 Leo Burnett is working on a new campaign for Reebok to succeed the current This is my planet effort. Reebok representative Dave Fogelson said the new advertising will take a new, documentary approach. He confirmed that Academy Award-winning documentary director Barbara Kopple has been signed to direct some spots. The Times (London), April 25, 1998, Saturday New York got its first glimpse this week inside the couple's [Woody Allen Soon-Yi] romance in a new film by the Oscar-winning documentary-maker Barbara Kopple, called Wild Man Blues. The film, to be released in London on May 8, captures fly-on-the-wall footage of the couple on a European tour with Allen's jazz band. Already, however, New Yorkers are asking whether the film is just propaganda for the actor. A slick corporate film plugging Allen, one critic complained. A public relations corrective, sniped another. The documentary stirred debate because the first potential director, Jerry Zwigoff, rejected the project when Allen refused him the right to the final cut. The Boston Herald, May 31, 2002 Friday ALL EDITIONS My parents settled in the Hamptons almost 30 years ago. My father still lives in a glorious stretch of land at the eastern tip of New York's Long Island. He attends church every day and has a community of neighbors and friends who go about their lives without glitz and glamour. They know about the legendary Hamptons social scene from what they read in the local newspapers. They know of the money, the excess and the reckless self-indulgence from what they see around them - the mansions squatting in former potato fields and the SUVs clogging the roads. The Hamptons has a burgeoning population of retirees like my dad. But filmmaker Barbara Kopple did not find many of these extraordinarily ordinary people when she invaded the place last summer to make The Hamptons, a so-called reality miniseries that premieres Sunday at 9 p.m. on WCVB (Ch. 5) and concludes Monday. This is show biz, baby. And The Hamptons operates with a lot of heat and not much light. The film is sumptuous with lavish pastel princes and princesses of posh. There are throbbing beats of summer and crystalline views of a place that, really, is fairy-tale gorgeous. Kopple, an Academy Award-winning documentarian whose Harlan County USA looked at West Virginia coal country, has traveled a long way. Now she mines for glitter. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
Chicago school
Title: Chicago school [was: RE: [PEN-L:26551] Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Markets and Diversity} The Chicago school of economics may be dead intellectually, but it clearly isn't dead in practice. (It's called neoliberalism.) Unfortunately, it's the latter that matters. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Eugene Coyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 8:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:26551] Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Markets and Diversity So is the Chicago school. Michael Perelman wrote: Actually, he is dead. On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 05:16:53PM -0700, Devine, James wrote: BTW, Rosen is of the Chicago school (though not one of the most extreme of that school). That school seems to aim to end diversity of economic thought, by winning the game of competition with other schools. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Fwd: [Fwd: Call for Applications]]
---BeginMessage--- Steve, If you happen to know anyone who would be interested in the following, I'd appreciate you forwarding this on to them. Tim A CALL FOR APPLICATIONS The Simplicity Forum is a national network of leaders from a wide range of fields who believe that our current culture of consumption is not only ecologically unsustainable, but also detracts from people's physical and psychological well-being, as well as the health of our community. As a result, we are interested in facilitating a movement toward a simpler, more sustainable, and higher quality of life that is less focused on materialism and consumption. A primary goal of the Forum is to foster and sustain an academic field of studies around voluntary simplicity, consumption, community, and related issues. We are therefore looking for researchers or graduate students who would like to do research that will complement the work of activists and other leaders in developing a social movement toward simplicity. We are open to a wide range of research methodology and scholarly work from a variety of disciplines. We invite applications to join with us in our endeavor. Three applicants will be chosen to attend the Simplicity Forum's second annual gathering at Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio from August 22nd-25th, 2002 (all conference expenses will be covered, including up to $400 for travel). Attendees will have the opportunity to meet with leaders from a wide variety of fields, to discuss issues and challenges facing a movement for simplicity, and to develop potential areas for collaboration and social change. Information about the first gathering of the Simplicity Forum can be found at http://www.simplicityforum.org. All applicants will be included in a small, informal network of researchers with an interest in simplicity and related areas of research. This network aims to foster collaboration, colleague feedback, ideas, and synergies. (If you cannot attend in August, but would like to join the network, please make note of it in your letter of application.) Please send a letter of application detailing your interest in the Simplicity Forum's field of study and your research interests and projects (planned or underway). Please include a CV or resume, which details your academic background and research training and a copy of one writing sample, such as a published or unpublished article, dissertation excerpt or abstract, or research proposal. Examples of work related to the Simplicity Forum's objectives are of particular interest. Please send letter of application to: Kristna Evans 11 Ocean Avenue Rockport, MA 01966 Deadline: Monday, July 8, 2002 Please address questions to Kristna Evans at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---End Message---
Zambia joins plea for food help
Millions in danger of starvation, UN says May 31, 2002 BY MILDRED MULENGA ASSOCIATED PRESS LUSAKA, Zambia -- With his people growing ever more desperate, Zambia's president has become the latest southern African leader to declare a national disaster because of a regional food shortage. Two UN food agencies estimate that 10 million people are on the brink of starvation -- a number that doesn't take into account the 4 million believed threatened in Zambia. http://www.freep.com/news/nw/zamb31_20020531.htm
Climate Changing, U.S. Says in Report
Published on Monday, June 3, 2002 in the New York Times Climate Changing, U.S. Says in Report by Andrew C. Revkin In a stark shift for the Bush administration, the United States has sent a climate report to the United Nations detailing specific and far-reaching effects that it says global warming will inflict on the American environment. In the report, the administration for the first time mostly blames human actions for recent global warming. It says the main culprit is the burning of fossil fuels that send heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. But while the report says the United States will be substantially changed in the next few decades very likely seeing the disruption of snow-fed water supplies, more stifling heat waves and the permanent disappearance of Rocky Mountain meadows and coastal marshes, for example it does not propose any major shift in the administration's policy on greenhouse gases. It recommends adapting to inevitable changes. It does not recommend making rapid reductions in greenhouse gases to limit warming, the approach favored by many environmental groups and countries that have accepted the Kyoto Protocol, a climate treaty written in the Clinton administration that was rejected by Mr. Bush. The new document, U.S. Climate Action Report 2002, strongly concludes that no matter what is done to cut emissions in the future, nothing can be done about the environmental consequences of several decades' worth of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases already in the atmosphere. Its emphasis on adapting to the inevitable fits in neatly with the climate plan Mr. Bush announced in February. He called for voluntary measures that would allow gas emissions to continue to rise, with the goal of slowing the rate of growth. Yet the new report's predictions present a sharp contrast to previous statements on climate change by the administration, which has always spoken in generalities and emphasized the need for much more research to resolve scientific questions. The report, in fact, puts a substantial distance between the administration and companies that produce or, like automakers, depend on fossil fuels. Many companies and trade groups have continued to run publicity and lobbying campaigns questioning the validity of the science pointing to damaging results of global warming. The distancing could be an effort to rebuild Mr. Bush's environmental credentials after a bruising stretch of defeats on stances that favor energy production over conservation, notably the failure to win a Senate vote opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to exploratory oil drilling. But the report has alienated environmentalists, too. Late last week, after it was posted on the Web site of the Environmental Protection Agency, private environmental groups pounced on it, saying it pointed to a jarring disconnect between the administration's findings on the climate problem and its proposed solutions. The Bush administration now admits that global warming will change America's most unique wild places and wildlife forever, said Mark Van Putten, the president of the National Wildlife Federation, a private environmental group. How can it acknowledge global warming is a disaster in the making and then refuse to help solve the problem, especially when solutions are so clear? Scott McClellan, a White House spokesman, said, It is important to move forward on the president's strategies for addressing the challenge of climate change, and that's what we're continuing to do. Many companies and trade groups had sought last year to tone down parts of the report, the third prepared by the United States under the requirements of a 1992 climate treaty but the first under President Bush. For the most part, the document does not reflect industry's wishes, which were conveyed in letters during a period of public comment on a draft last year. The report emphasizes that global warming carries potential benefits for the nation, including increased agricultural and forest growth from longer growing seasons, and from more rainfall and carbon dioxide for photosynthesis. But it says environmental havoc is coming as well. Some of the goods and services lost through the disappearance or fragmentation of natural ecosystems are likely to be costly or impossible to replace, the report says. The report also warns of the substantial disruption of snow-fed water supplies, the loss of coastal and mountain ecosystems and more frequent heat waves. A few ecosystems, such as alpine meadows in the Rocky Mountains and some barrier islands, are likely to disappear entirely in some areas, it says. Other ecosystems, such as Southeastern forests, are likely to experience major species shifts or break up into a mosaic of grasslands, woodlands and forests. Despite arguments by oil industry groups that the evidence is not yet clear, the report unambiguously states that humans are the likely cause
Re: Comments on a Leo Panitch article in the latest MR
Louis writes: Unfortunately, designating oneself as anticapitalist lacks the precision of something like immediate withdrawal from Vietnam (or legalize abortion now for that matter.) The anticapitalism of this new movement is not only unfocused, it is open to criticisms that the slogan means different things to different participants. For many of the NGO's, it is a term that suggests displeasure with the way capitalism is being operated, not to capitalism itself. Keep in mind, for example, that the guy who runs Jubilee 2000 out of Great Britain is a member of the WEF. Of course, he is anticapitalist in the sense that many people are anti-corruption--but so what? Unless a movement can develop SHARPLY FOCUSED DEMANDS, it will fall apart. Louis, I agree with what you say above. But the movement has been debating this almost from the beginning. One of the most widely asked questions, even during the days of June 18, 1999, was this: What do we want? Further, in 1999, words such as anti-capitalism or anti-imperialism were not part of the vocabulary of the movement. Now, they are. You are looking at a movement whose ties with its past are severed for a variety of reasons. It will take a while until they learn their past that goes many centuries back. In the mean time, criticisms such as yours are more than welcome, as they may help more people to be more critical of themselves. Below is an example of an attempt of the movement to formulate sharply focused demands. Best, ++ May 19, 2002 Dear Friends, We are writing to request your endorsement and organizing support for an anti-war, anti-detentions rally to be held on Sunday, June 9th from 4:00 pm -- 6:00 pm in the Midwood section of Brooklyn (Coney Island Ave. and Newkirk Ave.) So far, NY Taxi Workers Alliance has received endorsements from 9 different organizations. We would very much like to add your name to the list as we build toward a powerful rally. We would also like to invite you to our second planning meeting, to take place on Thursday, May 23rd at 6:30 pm at the offices of Brooklyn Bridges: 388 Atlantic Ave. (subway: A/C/E to Hoyt St.; Walk 4 blocks south to Atlantic Ave., away from the mall) Please reply by either email or phone (212-627-5248) regarding: 1. Organizational Endorsement 2. Contact Info: name, organization, phone number, fax number, email 3. Plans To Attend Planning Meeting on Thursday, May 23rd We have two organizing goals in mind for the rally: first, to express solidarity with the people in the Midwood community where many post-9/11 detainees are from. Even eight months later, the INS and FBI continue to harass residents, creating a repressive environment of fear. We want to break the silence and fear that fill the streets of so many of our neighborhoods, beginning with the Midwood community. Our second goal is to mobilize local and especially working-class immigrant communities to participate in the broader anti-war movement. Our demands of the rally are the following: 1. No More War: Remove All Troops From Foreign Countries 2. End the Occupation Now and Prosecute War Criminals 3. End Communal Violence and Remove Troops From Borders 4. Universal Nuclear Disarmament: Social Programs And Education, Not Military Funds 5. Release the Detainees and Stop the Attack on Immigrant and Civil Rights The rally is the second in a series of NYTWA anti-war demonstrations. The first was a Peace for South Asia Rally in Jackson-Heights that we initiated with a network of other groups in response to the looming war between India and Pakistan. Since then, US-supported and sanctioned wars have increased. To be an effective opposition, we must build a broad based anti-war struggle in this country. Already, millions throughout the world have engaged in mass actions, campaigns and strikes to demand an end to US imperialism and the complicity of their own governments. In the US itself, there has been a growing anti-war movement from coast to coast. We, as community and worker organizers, must mobilize the strength of our community and have our voices heard. We reach out to all of you to join us in holding a rally in Brooklyn calling for an end to war and an end to detentions. To hold an event with true impact, we need your support. We hope to see you at the planning meeting on Thursday, May 23rd at 6:30 PM. Until then, if you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call us at the office and ask for Shomial. Thank you. Shomial Ahmad, Benefits Coordinator New York Taxi Workers Alliance === New York Taxi Workers Alliance 122 West 27th St, 10th Floor New York, NY 10001 email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: (212) 627-5248 fax: (212) 741-4563
Estimating Surplus
For the NIPA aware. If you want to come up with a crude estimate for the total surplus generated by capitalist firms within the US economy, is there anything particularly wrong with simply summing up various data taken from the National Income data in NIPA (table 1.14)? To wit: Proprietors income with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments (line 9) + Corporate profits income with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments (line 20) + Net interest (line 29) And then rounding down a bit (to the closest trillion) to remove profit (surplus) earned by non-capitalist firms (with no employees). I go back-and-forth on the interpretation of net interest and whether it should be included. (Yes I'm aware of Shaikh's work on national accounting but his main issues--e.g., on productive vs. unproductive labor, net versus gross output, etc--are not necessarily relevant to a simple calculation of the surplus). Eric
Comments on a Leo Panitch article in the latest MR
full: http://www.monthlyreview.org/0602panitch.htm Panitch: The effectiveness of the mass antiglobalization demonstrations today is patently clear from the way meetings of the global elites have been put on the defensive, and now proclaim their abiding concern with addressing world poverty every time they get together. But there can be no effective change unless and until well-organized new political forces emerge in each country that have the capacity, not just to protest vociferously, but to effect (although the anarchists may not like this way of putting it) a democratic reconstitution of state power, turn it against todays state-constituted global American empire, and initiate cooperative international strategies among states that will allow for inward-oriented development. Comment: A democratic reconstitution of state power? What in the world is this supposed to mean? Marx and Engels, who supposedly Leo writes in the name of, would never use such an amorphous formulation. Panitch: One of the promising aspects of the antiglobalization movement, compared with the antiwar movement of the 1960s, has been that this movement has increasingly designated itself as anticapitalist. This is an important advance over its self-designation as an anti-free trade or anticorporate movement through much of the 1990s. But, despite its decentralized and participatory visions of another order, the primary objective of that movement has still all too often been to protest the international economic and financial institutions of globalizationbehind which stands the imperial state itself and the multitude of large and small, rich and poor states through which and with which it rules, or seeks to, the globe. Comment: Unfortunately, designating oneself as anticapitalist lacks the precision of something like immediate withdrawal from Vietnam (or legalize abortion now for that matter.) The anticapitalism of this new movement is not only unfocused, it is open to criticisms that the slogan means different things to different participants. For many of the NGO's, it is a term that suggests displeasure with the way capitalism is being operated, not to capitalism itself. Keep in mind, for example, that the guy who runs Jubilee 2000 out of Great Britain is a member of the WEF. Of course, he is anticapitalist in the sense that many people are anti-corruption--but so what? Unless a movement can develop SHARPLY FOCUSED DEMANDS, it will fall apart. This was the lesson of the New Left of the 1960s and early 1970s which sneered at the antiwar movement for not building an anti-imperialist movement that would end all war. In the final analysis, imperialism went its merry way while the New Left imploded trying to build a movement that it lacked the objective capability to bring to a culmination. Panitch: There is considerable suspicion among antiglobalization direct-action militants of those who would seek a seat at the table. But there is also a growing sense that protest is not enough either. If the Internet has been an asset in unleashing the capacity to organize dissent and resistance on the global stage, it has proved no substitute for the hard work of class formation and political organization that the Landless Movement in Brazil and the Zapatistas in Chiapas had to engage in on their own ground. The Internet may also be indispensable as a way of bringing together 50,000 activists and researchers in Porto Alegre to attend hundreds of panels that discuss the various meanings of another world is possible, but it is no substitute for building in each country new parties like the Brazilian Workers Party, post-Communist and post-social democratic, capable of developing new structures of popular democracy as a prelude to and an effect of competing for state power. Comment: Financial Times (London), May 24, 2002 Lula learns to love a free market: Brazil's workers' champion and veteran presidential contender has softened his rhetoric, writes Raymond Colitt In his navy-blue designer suit, sky-blue shirt and bright red tie, the presidential candidate for Brazil's Workers' party is meticulously groomed. Hardly a hair out of place and Luis Inacio Lula da Silva's broad smile reveals immaculate cosmetic dental surgery. It is all in sharp contrast to the rough and ready appearance of the past. When the former metalworker first hit the campaign trail more than a decade ago he was wearing jeans and T-shirt, the uniform of a union activist. Investment bankers and business leaders now compete for time with landless peasants and unions for a slot on the busy agenda of the Workers party champion. Lula, as he is widely known, has not only moderated his appearance but also many of his economic proposals, toning down much of his fiery anti-capitalist rhetoric of yesteryear. (clip) Lula has stepped back from the radical proposals of his early days such as a moratorium on foreign debt or the nationalisation of parts of Brazilian industry.
South Asians Against Nukes
As Pakistanis and Indian Citizens we hold our hands of friendship across borders to challenge the jingoism and war hysteria launched by both our governments. http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/NoNukes.html
Re: Estimating Surplus
Eric Nilsson wrote: For the NIPA aware. If you want to come up with a crude estimate for the total surplus generated by capitalist firms within the US economy, is there anything particularly wrong with simply summing up various data taken from the National Income data in NIPA (table 1.14)? To wit: Proprietors income with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments (line 9) + Corporate profits income with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments (line 20) + Net interest (line 29) And then rounding down a bit (to the closest trillion) to remove profit (surplus) earned by non-capitalist firms (with no employees). I go back-and-forth on the interpretation of net interest and whether it should be included. (Yes I'm aware of Shaikh's work on national accounting but his main issues--e.g., on productive vs. unproductive labor, net versus gross output, etc--are not necessarily relevant to a simple calculation of the surplus). Eric Conceptually and practically, it's difficult to separate the labor income from capital income components of proprietors' income. I think other people have done work on this, but I don't know who. Perhaps the OECD and CBO. Doug
RE: Re: Estimating Surplus
Doug wrote, Conceptually and practically, it's difficult to separate the labor income from capital income components of proprietors' income. Following the recommendation of Mayo Toruno, I'm multiplying proprietors' income by the ratio of (corp profits / (corp profits + employee comp)). This ratio is about 11%. Although Doug is right that conceptual issues are many and complex, I bet that the correct answer would be close to that Mayo suggested. Eric .
RE: Estimating Surplus
Part of properietors' income is really a quasi-wage, and part of wage salary at the top is really a quasi-capital payment. I would say net interest paid (not personal interest received) and rent belong too. mbs For the NIPA aware. If you want to come up with a crude estimate for the total surplus generated by capitalist firms within the US economy, is there anything particularly wrong with simply summing up various data taken from the National Income data in NIPA (table 1.14)?
RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Max wrote, I would say net interest paid (not personal interest received) and rent belong too. I'm not sure about rent as my concern is with surplus generated within an economic relationship involving wage labor (i.e. capitalism). The rental income in NIPA is for PERSONS (except for those who are part of the real estate industry) and a large part of it is imputed rental income that homeowners (pay themselves?) for living in their own houses. Some of it is payments for copyrights, patents, etc, but not too much I think. If you rent out your house to someone else this is unlikely to involve capitalist wage labor. You might earn income from ownership of capital (a house) but this isn't capitalist profit. Of course, I'm not entirely sure whether net interest payments should be included as profit from lending something scarce (money) need not be profit from capitalist activities. But I haven't quite figured this out yet. Eric .
Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Eric Nilsson wrote: Of course, I'm not entirely sure whether net interest payments should be included as profit from lending something scarce (money) need not be profit from capitalist activities. But I haven't quite figured this out yet. Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's an expense for business and an income for households. And yes, rental income of persons includes imputed rent on owner-occupied housing. Check out the imputations table 8.21 http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/TableViewFixed.asp?SelectedTable=185FirstYear=1995LastYear=2000Freq=Year at http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/SelectTable.asp?Selected=N. Doug
RE: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
what about a corporation whose business is rental real estate that includes improvements to the land? max -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Eric Nilsson Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 5:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:26570] RE: RE: Estimating Surplus Max wrote, I would say net interest paid (not personal interest received) and rent belong too. I'm not sure about rent as my concern is with surplus generated within an economic relationship involving wage labor (i.e. capitalism). The rental income in NIPA is for PERSONS (except for those who are part of the real estate industry) and a large part of it is imputed rental income that homeowners (pay themselves?) for living in their own houses. Some of it is payments for copyrights, patents, etc, but not too much I think. If you rent out your house to someone else this is unlikely to involve capitalist wage labor. You might earn income from ownership of capital (a house) but this isn't capitalist profit. Of course, I'm not entirely sure whether net interest payments should be included as profit from lending something scarce (money) need not be profit from capitalist activities. But I haven't quite figured this out yet. Eric .
RE: RE: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Re Max's what about a corporation whose business is rental real estate that includes improvements to the land? Such an activity would affect general corporate income, I guess. Eric .
RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Doug wrote, Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's an expense for business and an income for households. Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't add to capitalist surplus. For what it is worth: Corporate profits + Estimated profit part of proprietors' income = $767 billion + $84 billion = $851 billion. This is a crude estimate of the amount of capitalist surplus, but it is likely in the ballpark. Eric .
RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Part of profits are paid to households too. I don't see how you can include profits but not net interest paid. mbs Doug wrote, Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's an expense for business and an income for households. Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't add to capitalist surplus. For what it is worth: Corporate profits + Estimated profit part of proprietors' income = $767 billion + $84 billion = $851 billion. This is a crude estimate of the amount of capitalist surplus, but it is likely in the ballpark. Eric .
RE: RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Max wrote, Part of profits are paid to households too. I don't see how you can include profits but not net interest paid. I feel like Reagan, who allegedly was convinced by the last person he talked with ... I think I now would include net interest--these payments go to persons (as a payment for the use of their money capital) but the money to pay them came out of the surplus. And, so, net interest payments to persons should be added to corporate profits and proprietors' profits to get total surplus. (The same holds true for tax payments and distributed profits, both of which are already included in corp and proprietors' profits.) So now, until I received a message from someone else: surplus = corp profits + proprietors' profits + net interest = 767 + 84 + 554 = 1,400 billion dollars Eric
RE: Estimating Surplus
Eric writes: So now, until I received a message from someone else: surplus = corp profits + proprietors' profits + net interest = 767 + 84 + 554 = 1,400 billion dollars How do you like my reformatting Eric? Apparently, I wrote some C programs. Don't like those object oriented languages though. I am yet too see their alleged advantage. What do you say Ravi? Must be getting old. Damn! You see, you received a messeage that would not change your final conclusion. Until the next one, of course. All the best, Sabri
RE: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26574] RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus Doug wrote, Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's an expense for business and an income for households. Eric wrote: Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't add to capitalist surplus. why not? aren't there capitalist households? JD
RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26569] RE: Estimating Surplus Duménil Lévy, if I remember, split proprietors' income 50/50 between labor capital incomes. They also provide a variety of different estimates. Which you use would depend on what your purpose is. For studying time series, most of DL's estimates of the profit rate mostly move together. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Max Sawicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 2:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:26569] RE: Estimating Surplus Part of properietors' income is really a quasi-wage, and part of wage salary at the top is really a quasi-capital payment. I would say net interest paid (not personal interest received) and rent belong too. mbs For the NIPA aware. If you want to come up with a crude estimate for the total surplus generated by capitalist firms within the US economy, is there anything particularly wrong with simply summing up various data taken from the National Income data in NIPA (table 1.14)?
Lanka to renegotiate trade pact with India
The Times of India MONDAY, JUNE 03, 2002 Lanka to renegotiate trade pact with India FARAH MIHLAR AHAMED TIMES NEWS NETWORK COLOMBO: Sri Lanka wants to renegotiate the Indo-Lanka Free Trade Agreement to make it more beneficial to the Island nation and Colombo will send a delegation headed by Commerce Minister Ravi Karunanayake to New Delhi later this week to discuss the matter. Karunanayake told The Times of India on Monday that Sri Lanka would try to include a service category dubbed as 'trade in services' into the existing agreement. The current agreement focuses only on the manufacturing sector we are trying to bring in the service industry so we can include areas like aviation, shipping and education, he said. Sri Lanka is also keen to review the trade agreement because the trade balance between the two countries is hugely in India's favour. We will tell India to look at the trade surplus and see how they can help us and to ensure greater access to Sri Lanka, Karunanayake said. Sri Lankan exports to India stand at 4 billion rupees while Indian exports to Sri Lanka are at 56 billion rupees. The 14-member local delegation, which will arrive in India on Wednesday, will also look at renegotiating certain areas in the agreement pertaining to the garment industry and is expected to ask for more ports of calls for its garment exports. Sri Lanka also wants to send tea exports to Mumbai and Chennai in addition to Cochin and Kolkata. Negotiations that have been previously haphazardly conducted, we will bring into perspective, Karunanayake said. Colombo will also try and urge India to remove certain items including ceramics, rubber goods, solid tyres, fabric and yarn, from India's negative list, local media reports said on Monday. This week's discussions between India and Sri Lanka will be the first round of talks since the trade agreement was signed by the two countries two years ago. Copyright © 2002 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
RE: Japan
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26476] Japan It strikes me that Moody's did to Japan what the IMF did to Argentina and a lot of other countries. It will raise the interest rates that Japan has to pay... It's like a movement by finance capital to punish countries that don't live up to neoliberal ideals. But in this case, Moody's isn't held responsible by anyone. Even the IMF has to answer to its stockholders (the US and other rich countries). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Ian Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:16 AM To: pen-l Subject: [PEN-L:26476] Japan [The Guardian] Japan furious at credit downgrade Staff and agencies Friday May 31, 2002 Just as the Japanese government was reassuring the world that its economy was picking up, Moody's Investors Service today cut the country's credit rating by two notches. The move marks the second credit rating cut in six months and ranks Japan, the world's second biggest economy and largest creditor nation, in the same league as Cyprus, Greece and Latvia. The downgrade provoked a furious response from Haruhiko Kuroda, the finance ministry's vice minister for international affairs, who called the downgrade completely inappropriate and demanded an explanation. Of course we want them to reconsider, and we will be requesting that they do just that, he added. The cuts follow similar downgrades last month by Standard Poor, which blamed the lack of progress in government reforms to tackle public debt. Moody's slashed its rating for yen-denominated domestic securities issued or guaranteed by the Japanese government by two notches, to A2 from Aa3. Moody's last cut the rating in December. The agency said the level of government indebtedness will approach levels unprecedented in the postwar era in the developed world, and that as such Japan will be entering 'uncharted territory'. By the end of March, Japan's public debt stood around 675,000 billion yen (£3,800bn) or about 135% of gross domestic product, higher than nearly any other industrialised country. The prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, has promised reforms to clean up massive bad debts at Japanese banks, rein in public spending and turn over money-losing public businesses to the private sector. He has also pledged to cap new government debt issues at 30,000 billion yen. But many analysts say Japan's decade-long economic slump is far from improving, and warn that lawmakers are failing to grasp the magnitude of the crisis. The problems are only made worse by Japan's ageing population, which will force the government to spend more on health and retirement, and by bad loans overhanging private banks. Moody's predicted that domestic debt would worsen over the next few years but that several features would prevent Japan from plunging into a medium-term crisis. Among them were Japan's high household savings rate and the small scale of the government's exposure to foreign creditors. Japan's benchmark 225-issue Nikkei stock average fell 6.33 points, or 0.05 percent, to 11,763.70, erasing morning gains on news of the Moody's downgrade.
Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Eric Nilsson wrote: Doug wrote, Net interest is figured as what biz pays to households, right? It's an expense for business and an income for households. Yes indeed that is the case. I guess such a number doesn't add to capitalist surplus. No but it's a subtraction from it. The concept is that households are the ultimate holder of business debts - financial institutions are just intermediaries. Doug
Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Doug wrote, The concept is that households are the ultimate holder of business debts - financial institutions are just intermediaries. It depends on your theory, I guess. What you say above is reasonable from the point of view of some economists. But in the crude marxist theory I work with, the surplus is what is left after necessary product is subtracted from output. The surplus goes to various economic actors, but it is still the surplus regardless of who gets it or regardless of what story they tell about why they should get it. Going into pendantic mode ... For instance, presuming the ever popular population corn economy, if I lent you 10 bushels of corn. You planted the corn using wage labor and no tools. Say you end up with 20 bushels of corn. If the workers get 4 bushels in wages, then the surplus you have is 6 bushels of corn (20 - 10 - 4). Included in necessary product is the 10 bushels of corn you gave to me. You give it back to me (thank you!). But I also want interest, say $1. You give me this $1 by taking it out of your 10 surplus. You now have 9 of the surplus while I have 1 of the surplus. But the total surplus remains 10. Here, the business profit is $9 while net interest is $1. But, still, the surplus is $10: profit plus net interest. I might CLAIM that I got the $1 as a reward for my risk-taking, waiting, or some other silly idea. Or, because I was the ultimate holder of corporate debt. But, regardless of what I think was the reason I got the $1 it remains a fact that I got $1 of the surplus. At least that's how I see it. Eric ./
Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus
Jim D wrote, Which you use would depend on what your purpose is. For studying time series, most of DL's estimates of the profit rate mostly move together. I am hoping to use it to provide students an estimate of the size of the surplus. A quick and dirty estimate is all I want. If I was going to use it for more serious purposes (to make a contribution to the literature bla bla ;) ) it would likely be a six month process to figure out the best way to calculate the surplus. I work slowly. Eric
Re: RE: Japan
And the bond ratings companies gave Enron consistently good ratings. On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 05:46:35PM -0700, Devine, James wrote: It strikes me that Moody's did to Japan what the IMF did to Argentina and a lot of other countries. It will raise the interest rates that Japan has to pay... It's like a movement by finance capital to punish countries that don't live up to neoliberal ideals. But in this case, Moody's isn't held responsible by anyone. Even the IMF has to answer to its stockholders (the US and other rich countries). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Ian Murray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 11:16 AM To: pen-l Subject: [PEN-L:26476] Japan [The Guardian] Japan furious at credit downgrade Staff and agencies Friday May 31, 2002 Just as the Japanese government was reassuring the world that its economy was picking up, Moody's Investors Service today cut the country's credit rating by two notches. The move marks the second credit rating cut in six months and ranks Japan, the world's second biggest economy and largest creditor nation, in the same league as Cyprus, Greece and Latvia. The downgrade provoked a furious response from Haruhiko Kuroda, the finance ministry's vice minister for international affairs, who called the downgrade completely inappropriate and demanded an explanation. Of course we want them to reconsider, and we will be requesting that they do just that, he added. The cuts follow similar downgrades last month by Standard Poor, which blamed the lack of progress in government reforms to tackle public debt. Moody's slashed its rating for yen-denominated domestic securities issued or guaranteed by the Japanese government by two notches, to A2 from Aa3. Moody's last cut the rating in December. The agency said the level of government indebtedness will approach levels unprecedented in the postwar era in the developed world, and that as such Japan will be entering 'uncharted territory'. By the end of March, Japan's public debt stood around 675,000 billion yen (£3,800bn) or about 135% of gross domestic product, higher than nearly any other industrialised country. The prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, has promised reforms to clean up massive bad debts at Japanese banks, rein in public spending and turn over money-losing public businesses to the private sector. He has also pledged to cap new government debt issues at 30,000 billion yen. But many analysts say Japan's decade-long economic slump is far from improving, and warn that lawmakers are failing to grasp the magnitude of the crisis. The problems are only made worse by Japan's ageing population, which will force the government to spend more on health and retirement, and by bad loans overhanging private banks. Moody's predicted that domestic debt would worsen over the next few years but that several features would prevent Japan from plunging into a medium-term crisis. Among them were Japan's high household savings rate and the small scale of the government's exposure to foreign creditors. Japan's benchmark 225-issue Nikkei stock average fell 6.33 points, or 0.05 percent, to 11,763.70, erasing morning gains on news of the Moody's downgrade. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael -- odd message from your server
Michael and others --- To be safe, update your antivirus software and scan your drives! I just got a message titled: Re: ALERT - GroupShield ticket number OA131_1023248015_MEXCMBX01_3 from the pen-l e-mail server. GroupShield is a server antivirus software program. The full text of the message is below. The message indicates that my posting to pen-l had an executable file attached that was _removed_ by the e-mail antivirus software. No one is likely to get this file sent to them, therefore. I didn't attach such a file (knowingly). I was replying to either a message from Doug or Jim D that might, or might not, have had this file attached (although no attachment was indicated on their messages). But why GroupShield would not have caught it I don't know. I already had the most recent virus definitions from Norton--and my scan of my hard drive didn't reveal any virus. And a search of Norton's virus encyclopedia didn't reveal any virus associated with the removed file. A search of the web didn't lead to any file named andrea_sniffs_flowers [1].exe which was the file removed by GroupShield. I am using the web-based e-mail system from my school--perhaps something on their end is infected--I'll warn them. You might want to check into what happened on your end. Eric Text of message : Action Taken: The attachment was quarantined from the message and replaced with a text file informing the recipient of the action taken. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: -487170048,29494337 Subject: [PEN-L:26583] Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus Attachment Details:- Attachment Name: andrea_sniffs_flowers[1].exe File: andrea_sniffs_flowers[1].exe Infected? No Repaired? No Blocked? Yes Deleted? No Virus Name:
Re: Michael -- odd message from your server
I don't think that it is on my computer. I run both Norton and Macafee to be sure. I just sent your message to the tech. On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 09:13:51PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael and others --- To be safe, update your antivirus software and scan your drives! I just got a message titled: Re: ALERT - GroupShield ticket number OA131_1023248015_MEXCMBX01_3 from the pen-l e-mail server. GroupShield is a server antivirus software program. The full text of the message is below. The message indicates that my posting to pen-l had an executable file attached that was _removed_ by the e-mail antivirus software. No one is likely to get this file sent to them, therefore. I didn't attach such a file (knowingly). I was replying to either a message from Doug or Jim D that might, or might not, have had this file attached (although no attachment was indicated on their messages). But why GroupShield would not have caught it I don't know. I already had the most recent virus definitions from Norton--and my scan of my hard drive didn't reveal any virus. And a search of Norton's virus encyclopedia didn't reveal any virus associated with the removed file. A search of the web didn't lead to any file named andrea_sniffs_flowers [1].exe which was the file removed by GroupShield. I am using the web-based e-mail system from my school--perhaps something on their end is infected--I'll warn them. You might want to check into what happened on your end. Eric Text of message : Action Taken: The attachment was quarantined from the message and replaced with a text file informing the recipient of the action taken. To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: -487170048,29494337 Subject: [PEN-L:26583] Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: Estimating Surplus Attachment Details:- Attachment Name: andrea_sniffs_flowers[1].exe File: andrea_sniffs_flowers[1].exe Infected? No Repaired? No Blocked? Yes Deleted? No Virus Name: -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
