good question
Title: good question Subject: News from sister Lynne REPUBLICANISM SHOWN TO BE GENETIC IN ORIGIN The discovery that affiliation with the Republican Party is genetically determined was announced by scientists in the current issue of the journal NURTURE, causing uproar among traditionalists who believe it is a chosen lifestyle. Reports of the gene coding for political conservatism, discovered after a decades-long study of quintuplets in Orange County, CA, has sent shock waves through the medical, political, and golfing communities. Psychologists and psychoanalysts have long believed that Republicans' unnatural disregard for the poor and frequently unconstitutional tendencies resulted from dysfunctional family dynamics -- a remarkably high percentage of Republicans do have authoritarian domineering fathers and emotionally distant mothers who didn't teach them how to be kind and gentle. Biologists have long suspected that conservatism is inherited. After all, said one author of the NURTURE article, It's quite common for a Republican to have a brother or sister who is a Republican. The finding has been greeted with relief by Parents and Friends of Republicans (PFREP), who sometimes blame themselves for the political views of otherwise lovable children, family, and unindicted co-conspirators. One mother, a longtime Democrat, wept and clapped her hands in ecstasy on hearing of the findings. I just knew it was genetic, she said, seated with her two sons, both avowed Republicans. My boys would never freely choose that lifestyle! When asked what the Republican lifestyle was, she said, You can just tell watching their conventions in Houston and San Diego on TV: the flaming xenophobia, flamboyant demagogy, disdain for anyone not rich, you know. Both sons had suspected their Republicanism from an early age but did not confirm it until they were in college, when they became convinced it wasn't just a phase they were going through. The NURTURE article offered no response to the suggestion that the high incidence of Republicanism among siblings could result from their sharing not only genes but also psychological and emotional attitude as products of the same parents and family dynamics. A remaining mystery is why many Democrats admit to having voted Republican at least once -- or often dream or fantasize about doing so. Polls show that three out of five adult Democrats have had a Republican experience, although most outgrow teenage experimentation with Republicanism. Some Republicans hail the findings as a step toward eliminating conservophobia. They argue that since Republicans didn't choose their lifestyle any more than someone chooses to have a ski-jump nose, they shouldn't be denied civil rights which other minorities enjoy. If conservatism is not the result of stinginess or orneriness (typical stereotypes attributed to Republicans) but is something Republicans can't help, there's no reason why society shouldn't tolerate Republicans in the military or even high elected office -- provided they don't flaunt their political beliefs. For many Americans, the discovery opens a window on a different future. In a few years, gene therapy might eradicate Republicanism altogether. But should they be allowed to marry?
WORLD BANK: BELARUS HAS FEWEST POOR PEOPLE IN CIS
WORLD BANK: BELARUS HAS FEWEST POOR PEOPLE IN CIS MOSCOW, March 4, 2004. (RIA Novosti correspondent) - Belarus has the lowest number of poor people among the CIS countries, the Belarussian Embassy in Moscow informed RIA Novosti on Thursday quoting the data of the World Bank. Belarus holds 85th place in the world for its poverty level. The share of its population that lives below the poverty line is 22 percent. Russia holds 52nd place. Armenia and Kyrgyzstan share 21st-23rd places on the list, with 55 percent of their population living below the poverty line. Georgia holds 24th place with 54 percent, Ukraine, 73rd with approximately 29 percent and Kazakhstan, 77th with 26 percent. Moldova and Tajikistan, alongside Zambia, Chad, Haiti and Liberia are among the poorest countries, with 80 percent of their population living below the poverty line. On the whole, 41.9 percent of the world's population lives below the poverty line, according to the World Bank. In the USA this figure is 13 percent, in Great Britain 17 percent.
Re: WORLD BANK: BELARUS HAS FEWEST POOR PEOPLE IN CIS
On second thought, this data looks kind of screwy. No way are there fewer people living in poverty in Ukraine and Georgia as a percentage of the population than in Russia. Russian wages are about three times as high as Ukrainian ones, and last time I checked the only fSU country with a higher per capita income than Russia was Estonia. -Original Message- From: Chris Doss [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 13:19:44 +0300 Subject: [PEN-L] WORLD BANK: BELARUS HAS FEWEST POOR PEOPLE IN CIS WORLD BANK: BELARUS HAS FEWEST POOR PEOPLE IN CIS MOSCOW, March 4, 2004. (RIA Novosti correspondent) - Belarus has the lowest number of poor people among the CIS countries, the Belarussian Embassy in Moscow informed RIA Novosti on Thursday quoting the data of the World Bank. Belarus holds 85th place in the world for its poverty level. The share of its population that lives below the poverty line is 22 percent. Russia holds 52nd place.
Re: flaring off
I think it is important to separate the issues of petroleum scarcity and economic determinants. We can argue about both, but the real issue the connection between the two. I think it is painfully clear that the bourgeoisie are not driven forward or backward by an anticipated shortage of petroleum. In a nutshell, the way I would state this is...IS the war in Iraq all about oil? Absolutely not. Is the war in Iraq all about the capitalist production, and overproduction of oil? Absolutely yes. The difference between the two has important practical significance for determining a program of revolutionary opposition. Re Geologists there is little agreement among geologists about total petroleum reserves. I've said this before, but I always enjoy saying it again-- in the industry the saying goes: The geologists are always smiling because they know they can always find the oil. The petroleum engineers are always frowning because they know it's always too expensive to produce. Actually, I think that is one of the best restatements of Marx's analysis of the nature of the commodity, use value and exchange value, I've ever read. dms - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 10:40 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] flaring off I am glad that David responded to my question regarding future trends. I happen to think that Lou gave the correct analysis of the hydrocarbon future. I agree with David on the forces leading toward deflation in manufacturing. The runup in commodity prices, such as steel, may be a short run phenomenon, but water, petrochemicals suggest future price increases.
Re: Haiti expert
I'd love to find someone who could talk about the history political economy of Haiti on my radio show next week - e.g., how did it get to be so poor? Any ideas? Doug * About the history and political economy of Haiti in particular: Alex Dupuy: http://www.wesleyan.edu/wesmaps/course9900/faculty/dupuy431.htm * About the history and political economy of the Caribbean in general: Franklin W. Knight: http://www.jhu.edu/~history/Frank_Knight.html http://www.jhu.edu/~history/knight_cv.pdf -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
The bourgeoisie are the reason Aristide couldn't do anything
LA Times, March 5, 2004 In Aristide's Wake, a Land Long Divided by Class, Color Explodes Looting and attacks on businesses and the rich could lead to deepening of the nation's poverty. By Carol J. Williams, Times Staff Writer PETIONVILLE, Haiti From the palm-shaded swimming pools and marble terraces of this wealthy suburb's hillside villas, the distant squalor of Port-au-Prince looks like a tranquil, opalescent coastal setting. The lavish comforts enjoyed here by Haiti's small class of industrial kingpins inspired former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide to label them rocks washed by cooling waters, while his people, the impoverished masses in the slums below, were the rocks in the sun, taking the heat. In a populist drive to show the rich how poverty feels, Aristide once urged his followers to drag the rocks from the river into the inferno a metaphorical appeal that lives on after his departure as armed supporters continue to loot and burn the businesses of the upper class in a frenzy of revenge. Aristide sold people that image, that we were the rocks in the water, said Michael Madsen, an industrialist of Danish descent who is the embodiment of the light-skinned elite whom Aristide demonized as Haiti's economic vampires. He told his people to take us out, to show us what it was like on the outside. Why didn't he encourage them to come themselves into the water? Because he was incapable of building anything. He only knew how to destroy. Two days before Aristide stepped down, gunmen armed by his Lavalas Party broke into Madsen's Haiti Terminal port freight yard, he said, ransacking the offices to punish him for supporting the political opposition. It wasn't long before desperate slum dwellers began looting the shipping containers in the yard, which were filled with food, clothing and electronics. In the torrent of reprisals unleashed against his perceived enemies in ideology, class and color as his power vanished, Aristide succeeded in sharing the pain of the poor with some of the elite that had never felt it. But the strategy of sacking enterprises owned by Aristide's political opponents promises to only widen the social gap between the industrial dynasties that have controlled the economy for generations and the impoverished masses that will have even fewer jobs. As U.S. Marines patrolling the capital refuse to intervene to halt the looting, the damage could spread. Aristide, who departed early Sunday, had long promised a cleansing flood his party's translation of the Creole word lavalas, whose close French derivation more accurately means deluge. The inundation of the last few days has wiped out the workplaces of thousands and perhaps the gains of the relatively few blacks who succeeded, under Aristide, in penetrating the so-called bourgeoisie. How much longer the attacks on the rich will continue is uncertain, but the damage has dealt a staggering blow to an economy that was already the poorest in the Western Hemisphere and spiraling downward. At least $160 million in property has been destroyed, estimated Maurice Lafortune, head of the Haitian Chamber of Commerce. The loss could represent half this devastated nation's private investment, said importer Sandro Masucchi, whose Honda auto dealership was looted and burned on the morning of Aristide's departure. The roots of the mob rampage run deep in Haitian history. The minuscule population of whites and mulattos as those of mixed black-and-white ancestry are called in Haiti thought to be no more than 1% of the populace of 8.5 million, has long occupied a disproportionate position in the equally tiny echelon of the wealthy. That is a consequence of landownership dating to Haiti's 1804 independence, when some offspring of French colonial masters and African slaves acquired property amid the panicked exodus of the Europeans after the slave revolt triumphed. With no redistribution of land, the haves and have-nots formed along racial lines. Color was so obsessively tied to status then that Haitians put names to 64 racial mixtures and assigned each a place on the social hierarchy. In 1884, British Ambassador Spencer St. John wrote prophetically of the young state's racial fixation. There is a marked line drawn between the black and the mulatto, which is probably the most disastrous circumstance for the future prosperity of the country. Those now heading family empires insist that the color issue faded at the start of the last century, when the same waves of immigration that brought Irish, Italians and Germans to work in U.S. factories also infused fresh blood into Haiti. Business deals and marriage crossed racial lines sooner than in the United States, say the racially mixed third- and fourth-generation descendants of the immigrants. During the 30-year dictatorship of Francois Papa Doc Duvalier and his son, Jean-Claude, the mulatto industrialists prospered and paid little heed to
Japan
BIGGEST JUMP IN 2 1/2 YEARS Manufacturers' capital spending up 15% The Japan Times: March 5, 2004 Capital spending by manufacturers jumped 15 percent in the October-December quarter from a year earlier for the biggest rise in 2 1/2 years, underscoring the strong capital investment fueling the recent economic recovery, the Finance Ministry said Thursday. Helped by the brisk spending on plants and equipment by manufacturers, capital spending on an all-industry basis rose 5.1 percent from a year earlier for the third quarterly expansion, the ministry said. Combined sales at companies increased 3.1 percent in the October-December quarter for the third straight quarterly gain. Combined corporate pretax profits rose 16.9 percent, the sixth successive quarterly increase. The figures are based on a survey of capital spending, excluding investment for software, by companies capitalized at 10 million yen or more. The survey covered 23,997 randomly selected companies, excluding financial institutions, and had a response rate of 79.6 percent. The increase in capital investment was in line with the capital outlay figure for the quarter in Japan's gross domestic product data. The government said last month that October-December GDP expanded an annualized 7.0 percent, spurred by brisk exports and capital spending. A revised figure is scheduled to be released Wednesday. Given such factors as the recent weakening of the yen and strong demand in China, we can expect capital spending at Japanese manufacturers to maintain its strength, said Shinichiro Kawasaki, an economist at Dai-ichi Life Research Institute Inc. But Kawasaki said that whether that will lead to broad-based strength in the economy is far from certain. The focus at the moment is whether a recovery in the corporate sector will spread to employment, he said. That part is still unclear. The big jump in capital spending for manufacturers, which marked the third straight month of increase, was led by a 178.8 percent expansion in the publishing and printing industries and 37.4 percent growth in the transport machinery sector, which includes automobiles. Nonmanufacturers' capital spending rose for the first time in two quarters, up 1.1 percent, led by a 39 percent increase in the transport and communications sector. On a seasonally adjusted basis, capital investment covering all industries rose 4.5 percent. That for manufacturers grew 7.5 percent, while it increased 3.1 percent for nonmanufacturers. Sales by manufacturers rose for the fifth straight quarter, up 2.9 percent, while those by nonmanufacturers increased 3.2 percent, up for the third quarter in a row. Manufacturers' pretax profits grew 2.4 percent for the sixth straight rise. But the pace of expansion fell from the 16.3 percent in the July-September quarter. Pretax profits of nonmanufacturers soared 29.4 percent, up for the third straight quarter. The increase in profits slowed at major manufacturers, which had led the rise in profits in the recent past, the ministry official said. But those for nonmanufacturers showed strong growth in almost all fields, indicating that brightness is spreading in the sector.
Re: flaring off
dmschanoes wrote: I think it is painfully clear that the bourgeoisie are not driven forward or backward by an anticipated shortage of petroleum. PEARL HARBOR THE FIRST ENERGY WAR History Today, Dec, 2000, by Charles Maechling Charles Maechling sees the US oil embargo against Japan as the direct origin of the decision to attack the United States in December 1941. DECEMBER 7TH, 1941 -- in the words of President Franklin Roosevelt's stirring war message to Congress, `... a date that will live in infamy' -- marks the devastating Japanese naval air raid on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, that sank or crippled the US battle fleet and plunged the United States into the Second World War. In the summer of 1941 Japan had been at war on the mainland of Asia for four years. After amputating Manchuria from China in 1932, it had begun a full-sale and brutal invasion of China itself. A Japanese army of over a million now occupied the principal Chinese cities and large stretches of the interior. The Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek still, however, refused to sue for peace in spite of the loss of so much territory, and the drain of Japanese manpower and supplies continued unabated. Just as today, Japan in 1941 was heavily dependent on outside sources for the minerals, petroleum and other raw materials needed to fuel its economy. The aim of Japan's programme of conquest, therefore, was to convert China into an economic vassal, the first step in carving out a continental economic system -- the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, also to embrace Korea, Indo-China, Malaya, and Indonesia. The plan was to insulate the region from world-wide depression by allowing raw materials to flow into Japan for conversion into manufactured goods for the limitless Chinese market, thereby ensuring freedom from Western economic domination. Japan's limited energy resources was the plan's Achilles' heel. Despite minimal civilian petrol consumption, and a largely unmechanised army, Japan's oil consumption since 1931 had climbed steadily from a level -- unbelievably low by modern standards -- of about 21 million barrels a year to over 32 million barrels in 1941. (Japan's current annual consumption is about three billion barrels.) The most imperative defence requirement was to ensure ample reserve stocks for the powerful and growing Imperial Navy, and to this end Japan had accumulated a stockpile of around 54 million barrels with 29 million reserved for the Navy. In 1941, Japan's dependence on outside sources for petroleum products was similar to what it is today. 90 per cent of the country's needs were made up by imports which in the late 1930s varied from a low figure of 30.6 million barrels in 1938 to 37.1 million in 1940, the excess going into the stockpile. But there was one enormous difference from today -- before the Second World War, the vast reserves of Saudi Arabia and the Middle East had yet to be developed, and 85 per cent of Japan's imports came from one monolithic supplier. Japan's private OPEC was the United States of America, then the world's leading exporter. And by 1941 relations with the United States had deteriorated to the verge of war. It had not always been so. The United States had opened Japan up to the outside world in the nineteenth century. President Theodore Roosevelt had been responsible for securing a favourable settlement for Japan after the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, and Japan had been a de facto ally in the First World War. Despite resentment over restrictive US immigration laws, among the educated classes there was a considerable reservoir of good will for the United States full: http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m1373/12_50/68147614/p1/article.jhtml -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: Japan
The article is very interesting. I think a lot can be gained from posing and investigating a simple question re Japanese capital spending, Why Now? China's demand input to the Japanese economy is not now qualitatively higher than it was 3 years ago, and if, as the article notes, manufacturer's capital spending is highest in transportation machinery sector, i.e. autos, we really need to know how much of that is export oriented for China, and how much is direct spending on productive capacity in China and other countries, and how much is targeted for domestic markets. In the US, we know that the capital spending upsurge in the 90s was pre- dicated on the 13 year period of liquidation of fixed assets in key industries and reduction in real wages. Does the 10-12 year stagnation of the Japanese economy include the same type of alteration in the relationship between dead and living labor? dms
FW: Ellsberg defends Kerry against Republican charges of treason
This appeared on Daniel Ellsberg's list and I thought it might be of interest. Peter Hollings -Original Message- From: Ellsberg.Net Email List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 4:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Ellsberg defends Kerry against Republican charges of treason Ellsberg.Net Email List www.ellsberg.net The Salon Interview: Daniel Ellsberg By David Talbot February 19, 2004 [excerpts] Feb. 19, 2004 | They fully supported America's decision to go to war in Vietnam. In fact, they firmly believed that the U.S. should have fought the war even more aggressively. This would, of course, have cost more American lives and even more Vietnamese lives. And it risked certain confrontation with China, even nuclear war. But damn it all, they were for it, if that's what it took America to win! This is the position George W. Bush claims he held as a young man during the Vietnam War. It was also the position held by his top policymakers and advisors, like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle. In fact, they still think it, as Bush made clear to Tim Russert on Meet the Press. Yes, they ached for a fuller, that's right, bloodier war, one with no political restrictions on our military, as Bush put it. But here's where it gets complicated: They didn't actually want to shed any of their own blood. Bush, as we all know by now, used family pull to get into the safe haven of the National Guard, where we are absolutely certain he kept at least one dental appointment, but are somewhat vaguer about the rest of his service record. As for his vice president, well, he had other priorities . . . . John Kerry has a much better war story to tell the American people than Bush: He not only served, he was a hero who saved men's lives. So the president's aggressive political machine, as ever taking the offensive when it senses its own weakness, is trying to find a way to wound Kerry before Bush loses any more blood. Here's the new GOP line of attack, as demonstrated by Republican Party chairman Ed Gillespie, New York Times columnist David Brooks, the National Review, and all the usual TV frothers (none of whom found a way to serve his country in Vietnam, or today in Iraq): yes, Kerry was a decorated hero, but he betrayed his fellow soldiers when he came home by denouncing the war, casting shame on their great sacrifice. (Newt Gingrich, another draft-dodging hawk, announced last weekend that Republicans would play the traitor card, by tarring Kerry as a Jane Fonda antiwar liberal.) The fact that most veterans returned from Vietnam as disillusioned with the war as Kerry was -- and that many of these gray-haired warriors are rallying around his campaign today -- puts a bit of a crimp in the Republican strategy. But that has not stopped Karl Rove and company from continuing to bang this drum. . . . TALBOT: The Republicans are attacking Kerry now for betraying his fellow Vietnam veterans by condemning the war after he returned ELLSBERG: They are? Amazing! I don't even like to hear this. It makes me gag. Is this something new, I haven't heard about this? This is just obscene. I hate to hear this. The fact is that Kerry's group, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, upheld the honor of this country. TALBOT: Kerry's GOP critics are saying he's a political waffler because he questioned the war before he went, but then went to Vietnam anyway. And then he publicly denounced the war after he returned. ELLSBERG: As I said, this is making my flesh crawl, to hear George Bush, who went into the National Guard to stay out of Vietnam, even though he supposedly supported the war ... TALBOT: Yes, not only did he support the war, but he thought the U.S. should have fought it harder ... ELLSBERG: You mean he wanted those other guys to fight it even harder. He wanted his fellow airmen, who were not in the National Guard, but in the Air Force, to put themselves much more at risk in killing people in North Vietnam, dodging SAMs [surface to air missiles], while he dodged his monthly duties in Alabama in an outfit that was preparing for war in Europe, should that arise. And of course he's at one with virtually all of the neocons in that respect. Cheney had other priorities during Vietnam and apparently spent the war in a secure location somewhere, I guess in Arizona. Rumsfeld had indeed flown in the Air Force in the 1950s, so no lack of courage there, just to fly those planes takes courage. But I noticed that Rumsfeld, who's exactly my age, did not manage to use his military training in any way in Vietnam. He was too old presumably to go there as a flyer. But there were lots of jobs for him in Vietnam if had wanted, but he chose to sit out the war back here. I joined the service -- the Marines -- just about the same time he did, in the 1950s, which were peacetime years. Nonetheless, when I was 34, and he was 34, I signed up again and went to Vietnam. TALBOT: What year did you go?
Alex Dupuy: Who Is Afraid of Democracy in Haiti?
Alex Dupuy, Who Is Afraid of Democracy in Haiti? June 2003: http://www.trinitydc.edu/academics/depts/Interdisc/International/PDF%20files/Haiti-7.final.pdf. -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: flaring off
Louis Proyect has submitted a portion of a text designed to prove that the bourgeoisie are in fact driven by shortages of energy and that WWII was the first energy war. Careful reading of the full text makes it very clear, however, that neither the actions of the Japanese, nor the US were driven by a natural shortage of petroleum, but by economic competition, that is to say profit, exchange value, capitalism, commodity production. Louis has confused the natural, or use value, with the social, or exchange value, and it is the latter that determines the directions of capital. It makes little sense to talk about the causes of WWII, or any war for that matter, without discussing the period leading up to that war. How a Marxist can pose WWII as a battle for scarce petroleum while ignoring the decade long economic depression leading up to the military conflict is baffling. To talk about that depression without analyzing the massive overproduction leading to that depression is equally baffling. And so what's the difference? Just this (and this is where we get to future trends and practical differences)-- to posit the actions of capital as triggered by natural scarcity, a scarcity that is final, non-social, and not based on the production of exchange values, the expropriation of profit, makes AT BEST opposition to that process Moral, Ethical, and Ahistorical. The entire criticality of history, of revolution, the NECESSITY of revolution with a specific embodiment in a CLASS, disappears from analysis and program. Which might explain why we get URLs to articles that don't prove what they are supposed to prove, instead of answers to Michael's original inquiry. As I said, I do not want to engage in the great hydrocarbon debate, and this, the citing of articles that don't do what they are thought to do, is exactly the reason why. dms
Re: flaring off
DMS wrote: Louis Proyect has submitted a portion of a text designed to prove that the bourgeoisie are in fact driven by shortages of energy and that WWII was the first energy war. Careful reading of the full text makes it very clear, however, that neither the actions of the Japanese, nor the US were driven by a natural shortage of petroleum, but by economic competition, that is to say profit, exchange value, capitalism, commodity production. Louis has confused the natural, or use value, with the social, or exchange value, and it is the latter that determines the directions of capital. Not really. As I pointed out to you previously, oil has a twofold role in the modern capitalist economy. You see only its value as a commodity to be sold on the open market. I think that its military-strategic value, plus its use in capitalist production, transcends its role as a commodity. You can't fly jet bombers with coal. You can't operate trucks and tractors with wind-power. Such vehicles are necessary for the modern industrial economy. It makes little sense to talk about the causes of WWII, or any war for that matter, without discussing the period leading up to that war. How a Marxist can pose WWII as a battle for scarce petroleum while ignoring the decade long economic depression leading up to the military conflict is baffling. To talk about that depression without analyzing the massive overproduction leading to that depression is equally baffling. Resource wars can also occur during a time of a rise in the business cycle. When Great Britain launched the guano wars, it was enjoying good times. Israel has been in a decade long water war, which will be necessary to continue no matter whether the economy is expanding or receding. Oil, water and fertile soil have a special place in the capitalist world economy. It is a big mistake to view them narrowly as commodities. And so what's the difference? Just this (and this is where we get to future trends and practical differences)-- to posit the actions of capital as triggered by natural scarcity, a scarcity that is final, non-social, and not based on the production of exchange values, the expropriation of profit, makes AT BEST opposition to that process Moral, Ethical, and Ahistorical. The entire criticality of history, of revolution, the NECESSITY of revolution with a specific embodiment in a CLASS, disappears from analysis and program. Why are you lecturing me about revolution? I have a 30 year activist history and an FBI file as big as a phone-book. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
communicating on pen-l
David challenged Lou and Lou responded regarding oil. First of all, please do not challenge people directly on the list. That way, we can avoid flaming [flaring] and people don't find the need to go on and on with interminable challenge and response threads. Also, David made his case already. Merely heaping on more of the same adds little to the discussion. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Marvin Gandall wrote: Teixeira first propounded the thesis with co-author John Judis in The Emerging Democratic Majority, which appeared shortly before the US mid-term elections in 2002 unfortunate timing, because these saw a sharp swing to the Republicans. But Teixeira says the election was an aberration resulting from the effects of 9/11, and a demographic analysis of the vote still points to the long-term ascendancy of the Democrats. This is the same Judis who stumped for contra funding in the 1980s. I don't doubt that more and more people will flock to the Democrats as the Republicans get worse and worse. What is open to question is whether this will address the fundamental problems of American society as the Democrats keep shifting to the right. Teixeira works for The Century Foundation, which is a kind of centrist stronghold with people like the wretched Arthur Schlesinger Jr. on the board. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: The Teixeira thesis
As D.C. goes TCF is pretty liberal on tax, budget, health, and Social Security stuff. Worth reading, I would say. I don't follow Texeira or their other material, which included a big project on homeland security. Of course the center moves all the time. In DC I'm a crazy left-winger. In a meeting at EPI I said you could define the working class as those who must work to finance a standard of living, and somebody said that was a marxist definition. It must have been the way I was dressed. mbs . . . Teixeira works for The Century Foundation, which is a kind of centrist stronghold with people like the wretched Arthur Schlesinger Jr. on the board.
Re: flaring off
I was pointing out the critical rupture the scarcity theory makes with Marx's analysis regarding historical necessity and the agent of revoution-- the essential conflict between the means and relations of production. I, and I'm sure not only I, am well aware of your tendency to make every comment, every analytic disagreement, a personal attack, but really, it isn't about you, nor your history. It's about the quality of analysis, and where it takes us. In that regard, your analysis is, IMO, flawed, and flawed for the above, and other, reasons. To describe the Palestinian conflict as as water war is truly amazing. That's like describing the battle in apartheid South Africa as a battle over fertile soil. Class really does drop out of every bit of these resource scarcity arguments. Nobody's lecturing anybody, least of all you Louis. Really, try and curb your narcissism. And there's no point to waving the bloody shirt about your past service. I, for one, couldn't give a rat's ass. Try instead to answer Michael's question about the direction of the economy. Or even the questions about the WWII piece you posted. Does that sound like a lecture? It's in the ear of the beholder. You have an FBI file big as a phone book? That's impressive. Do you sit on it when you come to the table? dms
Re: communicating on pen-l
Just to set the record straight: Excuse me, Louis challenged ME directly. Remember? I posted first the piece about oil prices as an index to the direction of capital. Lou took exception to my dismissal of scarcity. I responded. Lou responded. I re-responded. Lou re-re-responded etc. If the issue has critical impact to economic analysis, and practical opposition, then why would anyone oppose continued exploration? dms Last for the day. All further responses off-list. - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 11:02 AM Subject: [PEN-L] communicating on pen-l David challenged Lou and Lou responded regarding oil. First of all, please do not challenge people directly on the list. That way, we can avoid flaming [flaring] and people don't find the need to go on and on with interminable challenge and response threads. Also, David made his case already. Merely heaping on more of the same adds little to the discussion. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: The Teixeira thesis
the politically correct definition of the working class is either (1) all those with paid jobs (including CEOs) or (2) those with relatively low incomes. Or course, many want to define it as vaguely as possible, because it plays well politically. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The Teixeira thesis Max B. Sawicky wrote: In a meeting at EPI I said you could define the working class as those who must work to finance a standard of living, and somebody said that was a marxist definition. What's the acceptable definition of the working class? People who bowl non-ironically? Doug
Re: communicating on pen-l
dmschanoes wrote: Just to set the record straight: Excuse me, Louis challenged ME directly. Speaking from personal experience, I can say it's better for your own mental health and that of onlookers if you just ignore him. Doug
Re: communicating on pen-l
This is the second provocation from Henwood in a week. Henwood, you make it sound like I made you crazy or something. I didn't make you crazy. And I never abused you. I challenged your Nation Magazine/Living Marxism/postmodernist politics and you didn't like it. Too bad. If you aspire to be America's Zizek, you'd better get used to criticism. Doug Henwood wrote: dmschanoes wrote: Just to set the record straight: Excuse me, Louis challenged ME directly. Speaking from personal experience, I can say it's better for your own mental health and that of onlookers if you just ignore him. Doug . -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: communicating on pen-l
Lou, Doug was wrong and so are you here. Find a neutral corner and duke it out. Not on pen-l. On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 12:54:25PM -0500, Louis Proyect wrote: This is the second provocation from Henwood in a week. Henwood, you make it sound like I made you crazy or something. I didn't make you crazy. And I never abused you. I challenged your Nation Magazine/Living Marxism/postmodernist politics and you didn't like it. Too bad. If you aspire to be America's Zizek, you'd better get used to criticism. Doug Henwood wrote: dmschanoes wrote: Just to set the record straight: Excuse me, Louis challenged ME directly. Speaking from personal experience, I can say it's better for your own mental health and that of onlookers if you just ignore him. Doug . -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Alleged conflict of forces/relations of production
I will answer offlist. Others may contact me if they are interested in my reply. - Original Message - From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:13 PM Subject: [PEN-L] Alleged conflict of forces/relations of production dmschanoes wrote: I was pointing out the critical rupture the scarcity theory makes with Marx's analysis regarding historical necessity and the agent of revoution-- the essential conflict between the means and relations of production. Marx speaks of this alleged conflict a couple of times, but it is an essentially un-marxist proposition. At the very least, it has to be argued for independently, not merely affirmed as you do here by reference to Holy Scripture, when Holy Scripture is itself rather contradictory on the matter. There is a fine chapter on this whole matter in Ellen Meiksins Wood, _Democracy Against Capitalism_. I changed the subject line because this is not intended as a contribution to either side on the subject of energy resources. Carrol
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Acceptable to whom? -Original Message- Max B. Sawicky wrote: In a meeting at EPI I said you could define the working class as those who must work to finance a standard of living, and somebody said that was a marxist definition. What's the acceptable definition of the working class? People who bowl non-ironically? Doug
White House Subp
Title: White House Subp Air Force One phone records subpoenaed Grand jury to review call logs from Bush's jet in probe of how a CIA agent's cover was blown BY TOM BRUNE STAFF WRITER, Newsday March 5, 2004 WASHINGTON -- The federal grand jury probing the leak of a covert CIA officer's identity has subpoenaed records of Air Force One telephone calls in the week before the officer's name was published in a column in July, according to documents obtained by Newsday. Also sought in the wide-ranging document requests contained in three grand jury subpoenas to the Executive Office of President George W. Bush are records created in July by the White House Iraq Group, a little-known internal task force established in August 2002 to create a strategy to publicize the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. And the subpoenas asked for a transcript of a White House spokesman's press briefing in Nigeria, a list of those attending a birthday reception for a former president, and, casting a much wider net than previously reported, records of White House contacts with more than two dozen journalists and news media outlets. The three subpoenas were issued to the White House on Jan. 22, three weeks after Patrick Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney in Chicago, was appointed special counsel in the probe and during the first wave of appearances by White House staffers before the grand jury. The investigation seeks to determine if anyone violated federal law that prohibits officials with security clearances from intentionally or knowingly disclosing the identity of an undercover agent. White House implicated The subpoenas underscore indications that the initial stages of the investigation have focused largely on the White House staff members most involved in shaping the administration's message on Iraq, and appear to be based in part on specific information already gathered by investigators, attorneys said Thursday. Fitzgerald's spokesman declined to comment. The investigation arose in part out of concerns that Bush administration officials had called reporters to circulate the name of the CIA officer, Valerie Plame, in an attempt to discredit the criticism of the administration's Iraq policy by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. In 2002, Wilson went to Niger at the behest of the CIA to check out reports that Iraq was seeking to buy uranium yellow cake to develop nuclear weapons. He reported that Iraq sought commercial ties but that businessmen said the Iraqis didn't try to buy uranium. All three subpoenas were sent to employees of the Executive Office of the President under a Jan. 26 memo by White House counsel Alberto Gonzalez saying production of the documents, which include phone messages, e-mails and handwritten notes, was mandatory and setting a Jan. 29 deadline. The president has always said we would fully comply with the investigation, and the White House counsel's office has directed the staff to fully comply, White House spokeswoman Erin Healy said Thursday. The Novak column Two of the subpoenas focus mainly on White House records, events and contacts in July, both before and after the July 14 column by Robert Novak that said two senior administration officials told him Plame was a CIA officer. The third subpoena repeats an informal Justice Department document request to the White House last fall seeking records about staff contacts with Novak and two Newsday reporters, Knut Royce and Timothy Phelps, who reported on July 22 that Plame was a covert agent and Novak had blown her cover. The subpoena added journalists such as Mike Allen and Dana Priest of the Washington Post, Michael Duffy of Time magazine, Andrea Mitchell of NBC's Meet the Press, Chris Matthews of MSNBC's Hardball, and reporters from The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Associated Press. There have been no reports of journalists being subpoeaned. The subpoenas required the White House to produce the documents in three stages -- the first on Jan. 30, a second on Feb. 4 and the third on Feb. 6 -- even as White House aides began appearing before the grand jury sitting in Washington, D.C. The subpoena with the first production deadline sought three sets of documents. It requested records of telephone calls to and from Air Force One from July 7 to 12, while Bush was visting several nations in Africa. The White House declined Thursday to release a list of those on the trip. That subpoena also sought a complete transcript of a July 12 press gaggle, or informal briefing, by then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer while at the National Hospital in Abuja, Nigeria. That transcript is missing from the White House Web site containing transcripts of other press briefings. In a transcript the White House released at the time to Federal News Service, Fleischer discusses Wilson and his CIA report. Finally, the subpoena requested a list of those in attendance at the White House reception on July 16 for former President Gerald
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Max B. Sawicky wrote: Oh. They like to define things with numbers. So do I, but you've got to have some conceptual scheme if you're classifying workers into working class and not working-class.
[no subject]
My nephew asks: Do you know of any good articles or web sites that comprehensively discuss the Romanian transition and expelling of Ceaucescu? I answer, No, but I know lots of smarties on PEN-L who surely will. If I remember, Ceaucescu was shot, not expelled, for starters... Bill
Ceaucescu and Romanian transition
My nephew asks: Do you know of any good articles or web sites that comprehensively discuss the Romanian transition and expelling of Ceaucescu? I answer, No, but I know lots of smarties on PEN-L who surely will. If I remember, Ceaucescu was shot, not expelled, for starters... [sorry for post without subject.] Bill
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: Why classify workers into working class and not working class? You meant to say classify people into 'working class' and 'not working class'? Even Michael Eisner is a worker, at least for a little while longer. So are bond traders. Doug
Re: Stewart found guilty on all counts in obstruction trial - Mar. 5, 2004
ravi wrote: bad news for doug ;-). Good news for the reputation of the stock market, though! Wall Street will sleep peacefully knowing that Martha's decorating her cell. Doug
Re: Stewart found guilty on all counts in obstruction trial - Mar. 5, 2004
I, for one, am now more willing to invest my nest-egg in Wall Street! Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 12:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Stewart found guilty on all counts in obstruction trial - Mar. 5, 2004 ravi wrote: bad news for doug ;-). Good news for the reputation of the stock market, though! Wall Street will sleep peacefully knowing that Martha's decorating her cell. Doug
Re: Ceaucescu and Romanian transition
Reactionary coup in Romania http://www.workers.org/marcy/cd/sam90/1990html/s900104.htm An excerpt from this report written at the time: What the millions saw on U.S. television, for instance--the burning of public buildings, the shooting up of libraries--is characteristic of the period long ago when the bourgeoisie, in fear of discontented and rebellious peasants, redirected their hatred against the boyars (the landlords) into anti-Semitic channels. Anti-Semitism has disappeared as an official policy. But we are seeing its recurrence in another form. How else can one take the proclamation that the anti-Christ (meaning Ceausescu) was fittingly killed on Christmas Day? The forces of deepest reaction now claim control of the Bucharest government. This is a recrudescence of the vicious, reactionary clericalism that dominated the political scene there for the whole period stretching from the first to the second world wars. Bill Lear wrote: My nephew asks: Do you know of any good articles or web sites that comprehensively discuss the Romanian transition and expelling of Ceaucescu? I answer, No, but I know lots of smarties on PEN-L who surely will. If I remember, Ceaucescu was shot, not expelled, for starters... [sorry for post without subject.] Bill
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Michael Hoover wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/05/04 3:14 PM Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: Why classify workers into working class and not working class? You meant to say classify people into 'working class' and 'not working class'? Even Michael Eisner is a worker, at least for a little while longer. So are bond traders. Doug oh brother... I'm not saying that worker = working class. A worker is someone who works; a member of the working class is someone with little or no property who must earn a paycheck to stay alive. Doug
An injury to one is an injury to all....
We find that the centering of the management of industries into fewer and fewer hands makes the trade unions unable to cope with the ever growing power of the employing class. The trade unions foster a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. Moreover, the trade unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the working class have interests in common with their employers. These conditions can be changed and the interest of the working class upheld only by an organization formed in such a way that all its members in any one industry, or in all industries if necessary, cease work whenever a strike or lockout is on in any department thereof, thus making an injury to one an injury to all. Instead of the conservative motto, A fair day's wage for a fair day's work, we must inscribe on our banner the revolutionary watchword, Abolition of the wage system. http://www.iww.org.au/history/tombarker/preamble.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31981-2004Mar4.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31981-2004Mar4.html What Wal-Mart Has Wrought By Harold Meyerson Friday, March 5, 2004; Page A23 LOS ANGELES -- This city obliterates its past, so it shouldn't be surprising that few Angelenos remember the role that unions played in making Los Angeles the epicenter of America's epochal post-World War II prosperity. But the greatest new housing boom in world history didn't descend on L.A. through some random selection in the 1940s, '50s and '60s. The huge housing tracts were initially clustered around correspondingly huge aerospace factories, whose unionized workers could afford to buy new homes. That was then. Since the Cold War's end, the aerospace industry and other unionized manufacturing here have drastically downsized. The service sector waxed as manufacturing waned, but most nonprofessional service-sector jobs are nonunion and low-wage. The great exception was supermarket work. For decades, the industry and its union -- the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) -- signed contracts that gave supermarket workers employer-paid health insurance and decent wages. Five months ago, however, three major chains put forth a new contract that would turn supermarket employment into low-wage work with few benefits. Sixty thousand workers across Southern California either struck or were locked out. So many shoppers refused to cross the picket lines that the three chains lost more than $1.5 billion in sales. But late last week, the union threw in the towel. The contract that the unhappy but increasingly desperate workers ratified created a lower pay scale for all new hires. It virtually ended the markets' responsibility for new workers' health coverage: Employers agreed to contribute $4.60 hourly for current workers' health plans but just $1.35 hourly for those of future employees. In the words of one union (but not UFCW) leader, the contract is the beginning of the road to the Wal-Martization of the industry. Like many of his peers, this union chief is livid at the industry, but he is also angry at the UFCW. For months the union treated the strike not as a national battle but as a regional one. The union did not organize community and consumer support groups that could have rallied against the chains; it was very slow to leverage union pension funds to go after the corporations' finances. In short, the union really had no plan to win the strike if the companies held out -- and since their outlets outside Southern California were unaffected, the companies could hold out better than workers subsisting on meager strike benefits. In fact, this was anything but a regional strike. The union's contracts will expire in other parts of the country later this year, but now its strike fund is depleted and the companies can point to the new contract as setting the pattern for the industry. Close to 1 million unionized supermarket jobs may now be downward-bound. And while Americans have focused, understandably, on the ongoing evisceration of manufacturing jobs, the downscaling of service-sector jobs in the age of Wal-Mart poses no less a threat to the existence and idea of a working-class career. Fortunately, the defeat of the supermarket strikers wasn't the only union news in the past week. Last Thursday two of the nation's most proficient organizing unions (there aren't a lot of them) announced that they were merging. UNITE, the clothing and textile union, and HERE, the hotel and restaurant union, agreed to join forces in what will be a remarkable organization of largely immigrant workers in routinely low-wage industries. UNITE and HERE may well be the two most tenacious unions out there: UNITE fought for 17 years before organizing J.P. Stevens, while HERE's successful strike against the Frontier Hotel on the Las Vegas Strip -- a strike that ran six years,
Re: The Teixeira thesis
D. Henwood wrote: I'm not saying that worker = working class. A worker is someone who works; a member of the working class is someone with little or no property who must earn a paycheck to stay alive. Doug So a person who works and does not sell her or his labor-power in the labor market is a worker too? And what happens with the person with some property that depends upon the paycheck to reproduce her or his standard of living (i.e. that has to sell her or his labor-power in order to _reproduce_ herself / himself / and her/his family?)? Matías
liars at work
Title: liars at work Look what the lying motherfuckers are up to. Dan Scanlan - Date posted: 2004-03-03 Indecency Bill Fine Raised Higher Than Expected Members of the House Commerce Committee made two big changes to the indecency bill passed to the full House; they raised the fines by 20, not 10 times the current amount and they included a provision to fine on-air talent. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., passed 49 to 1. House Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, said passage of the bill is a statement that enough is enough. Personal responsibility is as important a freedom as free speech. America's responsible parents seek to raise their children with a strong sense of responsibility for their actions - why should performers be excluded from this expectation? We are not going to accept indecent, irresponsible material on the public airwaves anymore. If performers or broadcasters choose to play with regulators by behaving obscenely during a public broadcast, we can see that they pay for their conduct. Rep. Upton has said he hopes the measure, which has the backing of the administration and 142 co-sponsors, would be on the President's desk by the end of the month. The original bill called for the FCC fines for broadcast indecency to rise tenfold, to $275,000. Now, the measure calls for a fine of $500,000 per violation. The measure requires the commission to hold a license revocation hearing for after three violations for broadcast indecency. The bill establishes a 180-day time period for the agency to make a decision for a broadcast indecency case. There is no set time period to wrap up a case now. Maximum fines for nonlicensees (performers) would be raised from $11,000 to $500,000. The Senate Commerce Committee is said to be crafting its own indecency bill. Kai Aiyetoro LPFM Director National Federation of Community Broadcasters 1970 Broadway Suite 1000 Oakland, CA 94612 510-451-8200 office 510-451-8208 fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.nfcb.org -- --- IMPEACHMENT: BRING IT ON! -- Purge the White House of mad cowboy disease. -- END OF THE TRAIL SALOON Alternate Sundays 6-8am GMT (10pm-midnight PDT) http://www.kvmr.org I uke, therefore I am. -- Cool Hand Uke I log on, therefore I seem to be. -- Rodd Gnawkin I claim, therefore you believe. -- Dan Ratherthan Visit Cool Hand Uke's Lava Tube: http://www.coolhanduke.com
Re: The Teixeira thesis
- Original Message - From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Max B. Sawicky wrote: Oh. They like to define things with numbers. So do I, but you've got to have some conceptual scheme if you're classifying workers into working class and not working-class. Damn, Quine and Donald Davidson on pen-l in one day http://spruce.flint.umich.edu/~simoncu/225/davidson.htm Ian
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Doug Henwood wrote: Max B. Sawicky wrote: Oh. They like to define things with numbers. So do I, but you've got to have some conceptual scheme if you're classifying workers into working class and not working-class. This finally sank through to me only a couple days ago while reading some material on class. I haven't got it clear yet, but this is a start. Why do we _want_ to classify people into classes? Answer: No reason at all. Class is a complex and ever changing set of internal and external relationships, a process. It is _not_ a set of pigeon holes to pop individuals into. It tells us _nothing_ about Individual X to put her into this or that convenient little file folder. It is altogether too static a maneuver. Whether we are thinking in terms of revolution or mass movements for reform, or even simply for mass changes in electoral power, we _know_ that a substantial portion of the working class (however defined) will _not_ be with us. And we cannot predict in advance which sectors of the class will be most vigorously in motion, which will be most backward. Hence mere static classification is of little political or theoretical use. Carrol
Re: The Teixeira thesis
- Original Message - From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] This finally sank through to me only a couple days ago while reading some material on class. I haven't got it clear yet, but this is a start. Why do we _want_ to classify people into classes? Answer: No reason at all. = http://www.sup.org/cgi-bin/search/book_desc.cgi?book_id=3804%203806 The Classless Society Paul W. Kingston Are there classes in America? In The Classless Society Paul Kingston forcefully answers no. Challenging a long-standing intellectual tradition of class analysis recently revitalized by Erik Olin Wright and John Goldthorpe, and insisting on a realist conception of class, Kingston argues that presumed classes do not significantly share distinct, life-defining experiences. 280 pages, 23 tables, 1 figure, 2000. ISBN 0804738068 paper ISBN 0804738041 cloth
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: Why classify workers into working class and not working class? You meant to say classify people into 'working class' and 'not working class'? Even Michael Eisner is a worker, at least for a little while longer. So are bond traders. Doug Why can't we say that Eisner is a capitalist, whether or not he works? -- Yoshie * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: The Teixeira thesis
Ian, This bloody The Classless Society book by Paul W. Kingston costs $21.95. Moreover, this is the papeback price. The hardcover price is $49.50. I am not going to buy it, of course. Too expensive for a working class CEO. By the way, I also happen to be the President as well as the only worker of my corporation. Consequently, I am also the CFO and COO and all the other things. Here in California, anyone can be a CEO provided that they have $800 or so to start a corporation. Maybe we should start a campaing like this: Let us all become CEOs. Wouldn't it be nice if we are all CEOs? Imagine that!.. Best, Sabri
Re: FW: Ellsberg defends Kerry against Republican charges of treason
--- Peter Hollings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This appeared on Daniel Ellsberg's list and I thought it might be of interest. Peter Hollings That it was. Thank-you, Peter. Regards, Mike B) = Beers fall into two broad categories: Those that are produced by top-fermenting yeasts (ales) and those that are made with bottom-fermenting yeasts (lagers). http://profiles.yahoo.com/swillsqueal __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youre looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com
