Re: Grading: deja vue all over again
Jim said this morning: >Question: are grades *all* bad? might they help students >develop self-discipline that might be useful not only for the >employers but for the movement for socialism? students to learn about things they want to learn about. But >it also liberates the "frat boys" for more beer-bashes. Harry, >are you assuming that without the capitalist foot on students' >backs (working indirectly through the professoriat), we will >all automatically turn to self-actualizing activities? i think any system of socialised activity bringing together people and resources needs discipline to make it deliver the goals of the system. i play sport at a very competitive level. i need to grade my self constantly in my training programmes to achieve the desired goals - keeping up in the races. without grades the concept of discipline has no meaning. without discipline there is no achievement. but i also agree with harry that grades become part of the capitalist machine. but it is not the grades which is the fault it is the ethic of the educational message which is at fault. and it is the concept of achievement which i think needs turning on it head. i surely would like to see the future generations (our students) see the world a bit differently to us. i would like them to see through the material aspirations and the hierachical fetishism that the capitalist system requires to continue to extract surplus from workers. i would like to see them reject these values, gain an understanding of subjective consciousness and pursue a collectiveness and environmentally sustainable existence. but i sure as hell want them to do that with verve and if they are planting a tree or two i want it done properly. i want the musicians to play skillfully and the sportspeople to go hard (just for the sake of it). i try to tell students that everyone can get through the hoop (there are no curves in the neck of the woods - which pit students against each other and are admirable training grounds for the capitalist labour process). that in fact the grades are a small thing and take care of themselves if they really dedicate themselves to reading voraciously, discussing, criticising, and seeking. then the challenge is to dedicate one to learning not to the qualification. that just drops out at the end in some trivial way. but without the discipline of structure only the most exceptional student will remain motivated. i also think assessment which does not encourage students to use the knowledge and the skills of reasoning they can chase is futile. so i oppose multiple choice, for example. that is just a pressure technique ideally suited to training capitalist labour process fodder. if we grade carefully and allow it reflect the students' critical faculties, then not only do we teach them system and discipline, but it is a pretty good step in getting those cappo's off all our backs. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: is this pen-l?
>resolve their own disputes; provide institutional memory; promote >continuity; be host to a particular interest group; provide places for >children; most important: confront the users with a crisis (events like the So Michael who are the children? kind regards bill
Re: New Zealand (5 paragraphs)
Thursday June 9 1994 Dear Joan: Some preliminary sources of information about NZ. For a critical account of the efforts of the National Government's attempt to dismantle the New Zealand welfare state in the early 1990s see: Jonathan Boston and Paul Dalziel, _The Decent Society? Essays in Response to National's Economic and Social Policies_, Oxford University Press, 1992. an excellent source of discussion on IR issues, specifically the rather radical Employment Contracts Act see Employment Contracts: New Zealand Experiences, edited by Raymond Harbidge and published by BISAS. this company is selling this book of 256 pages for $A19.95 plus $A3 postage and packing which is a bargain. Their address is BISAS, PO Box 95, Warners Bay NSW 2282. This is near Newcastle so i could get it for you easily if you were interested. I sent an email to a buddy in Wellington (NZ) at the Victoria Univ. and asked him for some articles. I know the same firm who supplies the DX database for OZ also makes a NZ version. If I can get my hands on that it would be pretty helpful. Anyway, I am working on it for you. kind regards from your Research Assistant bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: New Zealand (5 paragraphs)
Pen-L readers please ignore my reply to Brent. I actually pressed the wrong key in haste and sent this letter to the list when it was purely a personal contact with a mate in the Netherlands who is keen to head off the recent visit there by Roger Douglas the ex NZ treasurer. The latter is promoting NZ style reforms in the NL as a solution to their "docile" society. Knowing how keen the NLers are about collective things and public sector involvement in the economy, Douglas is telling the business sector and the public sector that NZ underwent a(wait for it).socialist experience when it privatised and decentralised and degenerated its society. a brief reply to Brent about small economies having to address the unviable nature of welfare states. my short answer is that NZ merely has translated the idea of a welfare state for all into a welfare state for a few priviliged educated and professional workers and business interests. The big indicator of how well NZ is going is the so-called revival of the CBD in wellington (the seat of Govt). sure enough it is now thriving. the fancy street side cafes and the plush restaurants and the like are doing big business. but head out to Porirua (a commuter suburb with a high degree of public housing and maori populace) and the picture is far from good. user pays ahs forced families to share public housing - it isn't the best housing at the best of times but with two or more families squashed into one house it is a disgrace. user pays on telephones has meant the poor has to give up this link to the world. and pay as you talk public telephones are prohibitive. public transport costs are user pays and are again prohibitive. meanwhile back in downtown wellington the accountants and business heads and lawyers and so on are enjoying lifts in their real incomes, ritzy cafes, and cheaper imported goods. This lot also are making a killing on real estate transactions as poorer housing and land is sold due to failure to pay mortgages by the poor. The NZ solution is to say that around 20 per cent of the population are useless and would be better of dead, and then transfer resources to the top 20 per cent (in income and wealth terms). And although they are growing fairly quickly at the moment albeit from a low base, most of the action is coming from favourable terms of trade on primary commodities. This is about as sustainable as ...well whatever the analogy is! TO say they had a revolution in economic structure is nonsense. they still rely on primary commodities and they will still face the boom and bust as they have in the past as the ToT fluctuate. It is just that now, when times get tough the poor will be closer to the bone than ever. in OZ we have semi-rejected this approach, although we have embraced elements of it which have been equally destructive on real incomes and employment of the worse-off (and more generally). We have also cut back our public sector and this has left a hole in many service areas. But small countries do not have to abandon welfare provision by public sectors. indeed, the trend in OZ is for high tech industries with high prody to employ less and less. the role for the public sector in providing sensible green career paths for our youth is more justified now than ever before. the trick is to make the welfare state supportable. and that means SHORT TERM redistribution of income via the tax and transfer system. in OZ (as in NZ) the top companies and income earners pay (and have long paid) pittances in taxation. we have both been fairly non-progressive direct taxing nations. also we gave out heaps of public cash in protection in the hope that the infants would grow into robust industry. the lazy bastard capitalists just pocketed the funds, priced up to the tariff, and sat in their fat chairs. We have also redistributed cash to them via our incomes policy (which saw a 13 per cent shift in factor shares over a 7 year period in the late 1980s into the 1990s). the resulting investment performance has been pathetic and culpable. so i say that it is no long term thing. in the SHORT RUN small nations need to get tougher on their private sectors and also use their public sectors more imaginatively. the NZ solution was to use their public sector in a very unimaginative way - bash the shit out of those least able to cope and give to those who already had too much. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: the end of good capitalism? (fwd)
Gil gives us some music anthology maybe roemer and those other radical GE theorists had this playing in the background as they theorised > Footnote: interestingly enough, the members of the Canadian >rock group Rush are probably as conservative as the other, more >politically notorious Rush. They (particularly the drummer, Neil >Peart, who writes the lyrics) are on record as favoring the >philosophical dispensations of Ayn Rand. Cf their song-fable "The >Trees" (sorry, can't remember which album, though I could go home and >check) for their libertarian (actually anti-egalitarian) philosophy >in a nutshell. kindEST regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: Fact vs. Value
Dear Allan what exactly is a fact? >Is that a fact? On Fri, 17 Jun 1994 04:46:08 -0700 BILL MITCHELL said: >so i do not acknowledge any distinction between the objective and the >subjective. i understand the argument that people use to justify it - but to >deny it is not to state a fact. dear Gil according to first hand reports mass slaughter of jews and russians and others occurred in the 1940s. as a value community we accept that this event occurred. you can call it a fact but i call it an extension of our values. after all, the nazis then and now would say different things about the events. once again an extension of their (heinous) value system. but the context in which i raised this point in the first place was in the science/non-science, orthodox/marxism debate. i said and i say it again, mainstream economics which you seek to borrow tools and concepts on to advance radical conclusions which can be advanced more securely and "honestly" in the radical paradigm, uses the fact/value distinction to seek authority for their own values. they have a particular (untestable) set of theoretical postulates which they seek to impose on everythin they see as (so-called economic). they seek endorsement for this prejudicial imposition by an appeal to some trumped up notion they call (borrowing from elsewhere) science. despite the fact they never test their hard core because it is untestable, and ignore observational equivalence problems, they claim that data is an objective entity (facts) which can give testimony to their "positive" theories (that is, theories which are meant to be free from values). just the point that they choose an individual as the basis of analysis shows their values. so w.r.t. the holocaust - science according to this lot should help us explain it by examining your so-called facts. sure we agree something happened then, but neither the nazis or the non-nazis can explain it in terms that are independent of their values. so these facts you seek to distinguish will always just sit their to comfort our prejudices. you see the holocaust in all its abhorrence b/c of certain values you have - the "facts" comfort these values although comfort can be a negative thing. the nazis see it as a sigh that their (vile) aryan ideals have a manifestation and a praxis. comfort again. neither of you can explain it in any "independent" terms. so why bother with the distinction? i say it just gives mainstream economic all the fuel they need to push this stupidly apologist positive/normative distinction. as to preachers and evangelists - well recall my Joan Robinsn quote about economics being a branch of theology - it is all a matter of faith. i go along with that for sure - it just happens i think that my faith might pull a few fiscal levers in the direction of the unemployed, or in the direction of some environmentally sound things to do, and is far better than some other nutcase chanting to the heavens and passing a bowl around to expand his/her/their personal fortune(s). kind regards and amen bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: facts and values e
Dear Barkley i was surely not giving any credence to the denials - spare the thought. i have said that events can even be shared across value groups. but ultimately to go from an acknowledgment of what we choose to term events (without any certainty that anything exists i should add), to using the events to explain the behaviour is where the f and v distinction collapses. that is all i have been saying here. Both orthodox and non-orthodox paradigms must invoke values to frame enquiry. what i have been leading up to is this: gil says i insulted him by saying he was mainstream but still maintains the popperian line that testing is achievable using objectified data. my view is that a radical economics recognises the impossibility of value-free testing and therefore frames enquiry in different ways. they can still use empirical means etc but are not seduced into any simplistic view of science arising from it. mainstream economics touts the line that positive and normative economics are separable. so according to my definition which is one of my demarcation criteria, i might be the only radical in the world. but i doubt it. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: Facts & Values
Dear Alan
your summary position was useful and gave me room for thought. i do not think
that my position can be summarised as being that of a person with a (dangerous)
little dose of sociology of knowledge or that of a non-reflective or
pretentious sceptic.
i agree of-course that we can agree to call certain things "facts of the
matter" for the sake of discussion. but as you say, there is no such thing as
an "uninterpreted fact", which you seem to dismiss as a trivial statement
("if that is all they want they can have it").
that establishes the point of my contribution however naive you may see it.
take an example, we might agree on an accounting convention which we call
profits. this is presumably one of your matters of fact. how do we treat this
accounting fact?
you failed to mention that i have been arguing that the goal of enquiry is not
to merely identify matters of fact but to explain them in some way. explanation
is ultimately the domain of the subjective. the matter of fact profits is
interpreted in one way or another depending on whether you believe say, in a
surplus mechanism or say, a marginal productivity world. the facts cannot
independently say which mechanism (surplus or MPT or any other for that matter)
is the true one. it comes down to your own prejudices and beliefs. so a useful
way of proceeding in the first instance is to understand why a neoclassical
person, for example, says profits are a return to exchange behaviour and why
for a marxist, they are a return to the particular social ownership of capital
resources.
a radical, according to this, knows the fact that they interpret profits in a
way which captures their pardigmic belief, the mainstreamer, i think, attempts
to hide the resort to belief by asserting that the axiomatic structure is
independent of ones values. The latter assertion then allows them to parade as
scientists and gain the accrued status that this connotes.
it is not an inconsistency to say that it there is no f & v distinction when it
matters. that statement in itself is a reflection of my beliefs and hence the
arguments in this area when pushed always recurse back to i think it is because
i do.
kind regards
bill
***
William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\
Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about
The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here
Callaghan NSW 2308v
Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: quote of the day
Dear Bruce the "facts" about the aussie federation is that it is heavily dominated by two major parties, loosely the conservatives (liberals - who are pretty right right now but used to be a sort of neoclassical synthesis sort of party) and the non-conservatives (labour party - who are historically the political arm of the trade union movement and used to embrace socialism and nationalisation, but who are now on the right too, and full of middle class educated types who eschew the worst features of new right rationalism) because of the preferential system for the lower house, it is virtually impossible for anyone from a small party to get a seat there and it is the legislature - the senate being a house of review with little legislative agenda. there are rare times when independents get a lower house seat but when they do they are virtually irrelevant to the legislative program. it is a common sentiment that a vote for an independent is a waste of vote. there have been notable times when in the distribution of preferences though the votes going to minority parties or individuals have had an effect in the outcome. two notable examples: 1961 - the conservative liberals (who were in power for 23 years in total post war up until 1972) won the election by one seat after receiving, rather perversely, communist party preferences. this is depsite the "fact" that the liberals had in the late 40s and early 50s tried to declare the communist party illegal without success. the period 1954-1973 - was marked by a split in the labour party between the anti-communist roman catholics (who formed the democratic labour party and paraded on the "reds under the bed" banner) and hte non-roman catholic wing of the trade union movement (the australian labour party). the split meant that the ALP could never win power in the lower house depsite getting close to 50 per cent of the vote consistently overall. the DLP lost favour as the church lost relevance in the 1970s. the only way a minority party/individual can have an influence is in the upper house and there are notable cases here which i have written about here before (viz 1975). the influence of these small groups tends to wane after a small period, although there is some sentiment that there has been a change in voter sentiment away from the 2 major parties. i doubt it. they have little funds and with TV being the way to get the political message across they do not really stand a chance. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: Fact and Value (over and out)
Dear Bruce: you have decided it is over and out yet you finish with 3 beguiling questions which presumably are not intended to be purely rhetorical. as one was directed to myself i will offer the final summary reply and also then say over and out. you found Alan's argument (reproduced as follows) to be persuasive. On Sun, 19 Jun 1994 23:17:32 -0700, Alan G. Isaac wrote > I will offer a couple heuristic arguments to try to clarify further what > I mean by there being a fact/value distinction that anyone entering a > discourse must acknowledge. One way of pointing to this is to note that > we do not attempt to resolve disagreements about matters of fact by > attempting to determine the differences in our values (i.e., by turning > to a different matter of fact). (Of course, sometimes we explain a > person's views on matters of fact by their values.) Another way of > pointing to it is to note that once we raise a question about a matter of > fact, we do not generally attempt to resolve the question by trying to > find the right values. I am hoping that y'all will see these as > indicating a sense in which participation in a discourse requires making > a certain kind of fact/value distinction. I found it to be unpersuasive. (1) we often resolve disagreements about matters of fact by attempting to determine differences in our values. How else could I understand what a mainstreamer says about profits or unemployment or anything? The point is that when I look at profits (an accounting convention which we call a fact I suppose) I see a manisfestation of a surplus, whereas a mainstreamer looks at the profits and sees marginal rewards to capital productivity. In other words, even the convention which we both observe (profits) is not a shared experience - we do not even agree on the fact although we call it the same thing and maybe even measure it at the superficial exchange level in the same way. The only way to understand the discrepancy b/tw the observations is to call up our values. (2) values are fairly immutable once developed. so to say "we do not generally attempt to resolve the question ...[about a matter of fact]...by trying to find the right values" misses the point badly. First, we will only see the same "facts" if our values are the same. Our values will filter out the "facts" that others with different values will observe, even if everyone is observing the same thing. these "facts" are always value dependent. Of-course we don't go around altering our cultural and ideological outlook to allay our fears that someone thinks profits is a marginal return to K prody, whereas we thought it was a manifestation of surplus. We simply refuse to believe the former story. We hold our faith and frame enquiry accordingly to help reinforce this faith. I do not think we can ever find truth - even if we stumbled on it, how would we know it? What does it look like? Feel like? Sound like? All we find are things out their to reinforce our faith. I have been generally confused by the position Alan and Gil have taken here. They seem to pump out this positivist line about f & v distinctions arguing the need for it as a means of disciplining discourse and more. But then Gil says that (not verbotem): "of-course I never said anything about objectified facts" and Alan said (not verbotem): "of-course there is no such thing as an uninterpreted fact". both statements are anti-positivist and dare i say it - In total agreement with my position which has not wavered in this debate. So despite all the rhetoric I am left confused about their real position and agenda. Are they positivists, who believe that the F & V distinction can be made and that Facts provide independent and objectified data upon which positive theoretica axioms can be confronted and tested? Or are they not? In terms of economics, there is only one paradigm which makes the F & V distinction that both Alan and Gil have been making (despite their lapses towards my own position as noted above). The mainstream paradigm trades on it, although even then most of the hard core of the paradigm is impossible to test (even if we believed such testing could be done). I have been saying that as radicals we do not make this crude and incorrect distinction and recognise facts for what they are - extensions in phenomena space of our values. We can still proceed to use them to glean advanced understandings of our own thought structures and value sytems. We can still use them to build models which provide policy advice to Governments. Which brings me to your question Bruce: >is this fact / value distinction still >too close to supporting the normative / positive dichotomy used by the >apologetics of neoclassical economics? Answer: YES Over and Out kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-21502
Re: The Use of Pen-l
Michael i can only conclude from your stats that Doug hasn't got enough to do at work. and therefore should take my job so i can write more pen-l things. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: education & state
Tuesday 6/9 I should say at the outset that my recent relative quietness relates to the fact that I am now Head of Department here rather than my lack of interest in the topics. I have a huge workload and some, if not all, relates to recent State intervention in our uni system, more about which later. It is a very interesting time for me. the unis are becoming very managerial and i go along to meeting with the admin (who have separated themselves in their management bunker from the rest of us) and listen to how i am a manager now and must incorporate the management goals into my own and all of this. In a manner of words I inform them I am a Marxist class warrior and that i have lunch in the student cafe (they have a well appointed executive lunch room - with wage slaves to wait on them). It is fascinating to get very close to the way in which this group operates and to see how the class system perpetuates itself with deals and back slaps and nods and downright chicanery all with public money I should add. Which brings me to today's topic - education and the state. In OZ, there is both private and state education and it is essentially polarised on a socio-economic basis. the better off go to the private schools and the less well off typically attend the state (free) schools. Our tertiary sector is all state run with minimal fees (barring one or two weirdo private places which call themselves unis but which are not part of the post secondary allocation into tertiary places. the State gives money though to the private schools on the grounds that all children should receive some public money. It is a disgrace. Some of the schools who charge enormous fees get more $s from the government under the State Aid funding than the poorest public schools. The system of education is the principle means of further polarisation of social classes. More private students get into tertiary edn and hence the better paying jobs. The public system has been progressively run down as States have adopted rationalist new right type lines about pruning back public sector activity. This happened during the 80s. I have bitter battles with those who say they are on the left who continue to send their children to private schools to give them the best education. (Interestingly, of those who get to tertiary levels from State schools, their performances are superior usually than the private school kids who make up the bulk of the univ. places). Which relates to Jim's point about how we make the State work for us. Even though the state schools have inferior resources and generally offer "sort of" child minding during work hours, any serious left thinking person should keep their kids in these schools and fight like heel to have them resourced better and run better. To slink off to the private edn sector is no answer. Each one of us can redress the resource difficulties at the school in our own ways. We can make sure our own kids get a good educational approach. But it is our responsibility to the children of the less well off parents to give them the same help as we give our own kids. That to me, defines in part, a left strategy and prior, a left morality. It is also the best way of making the State account for itself. Those of us with lots of education, who can articulate argument, and who know how to navigate institutional bureaucrasy to get info and to get to decision makers are best placed to influence the direction of public education. Otherwise the private schools will continue to pump out the future leaders of business and government and perpetuate the hegemony of the capitalist classes. If the parents empower themselves in the public system then the State has to become more accountable. To opt out and take a selfish individualistic approach to child rearing (only worry about your own) is to abandon any hope that the State can function to meet our needs. The obvious goal is as Jim says to make the State and the People the same with same interests and same hopes. Effective action in the education system is the way to go. A private education system can never achieve this goal and is the classic vehicle for perpetuation on inequality. I would have no private schools. Kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: Education and State
This is what happens when you write something to pen-l even though you know
time is limited. someone or more give good replies and the snowball starts. but
i will be brief and to the point (hopefully).
To Allan - yes i have a daughter who was born when my spouse and myself were 17
years old. we were marxist idealists then and still are. we both were at uni
and were poor. She went to a rotten school which improved as a result of
constant pressure from us - we used to hassle, and at one stage took the
Education Dept. of Victoria (my home state then) to court and won a case
concerning equal rights for girls in all school facilities. The schools she
went to were never flash, and like most OZ public schools had their share of
drug, violence and related problems.
We always believed that our scholary example and a solid grounding in what i
might loosely call marxist morality (although the set intersects with many
pragmatic aspects of christian morality), would counter the negative aspects of
the school. but the positive things from the school of being one of the crew
and having to learn to cope in a world not endowed with princely resources
which only a few can ever have in our current system was priceless, we felt.
she is now 23 years old. she has just won the faculty prize for the top results
in engineering over 4 years undergraduate study. she is now doing her Phd in
engineering. a women has never achieved like her in that area. she is also a
strong activist on labour and womens' issues. she is caring, honest, very left
wing, and does not rape, take drugs or lie around bored.
my point is that parents can redress the negativity of public education. but
they cannot give the child a sense of what it is like to be one of the crew.
privilege is hard to breakdown once it is inculcated. and my view is that the
curricula in secondary schools is less important (me being a screeing adherent)
than the social experience. and if the educated leftists like myself don't get
down at the grassroots level and cajole and pressure the system it will remain
ineffective and not serving our ideals. to say we can influence it at some
higher level is okay, but the decentralised struggle is the real palce for
action. I can tell you that a headmaster who is faced with two solid and
unyielding parents who know the law, can use the media to embarrass the
bureaucrats is a pretty solid force to have to reckon with.
on morality. yes taking care of your children is very important. but i think
back to kahlil gibran on all of this ("the prophet"), and i would say that i am
responsible morally for all children not just my own daughter. to make sure my
daughter is ok in education, at the expense of other children who cannot afford
the private education is i would conjecture an immoral act. but i recognise it
is a difficult area.
i also recognise that OZ schools may not be as "bad" as your own. But then i
might be believing too much that i read in the press to say that.
Cindy says in reply to me saying (loosely) that
"The obvious goal is as Jim says to make the State and
the People the same with same interests and same hopes."
That "This sounds more coercive than Michael Brun, who wants to let the state
impose a culture but leave room for a counter-culture. Sounds like at least
there'd be a corner left to hide in!"
I was not suggesting a mao-suited bunch of yes men or women here. I was saying
that the State is well suited in economic functions aimed at equalising
opportunities and that sort of thing. but ultimately our aim should be to
become jointly empowered so that the idea of an abstract state which we can
only influence through a distant political process is replaced by more
prescient and reachable decision making.
the state in this sense is not a monolith which functions to suppress
individuals whether they be relaxed and uncompetitive or hyped and competitive
or some other mixture. it should merely be a conduit for all groups to
influence the joint resource allocation to suit all the needs. culture comes
from the grassroots not the other way around. that is why people who care must
stay in the public system at the grassroots - this includes local action
committees to stop rapacious developers tearing down forests and spoiling
beaches, parent action committees in schools and things like that.
to go into the private school system is IMHO merely taking the private gain at
the expense of those who are unable to do so.
Sorry for the lack of brevity
but let a boy lose on the net and that is what happens
kind regards
bill
***
William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\
Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about
The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here
Callaghan NSW 2308
Re: Education and State 7 Sep
>I did not mean to indicate a moral defect in Alan's behavior. Part of the >equation is that children are held hostage in the war against public education. >We are faced with a conflict between being a good parent and a good citizen. Michael, i think i missed a posting as I cannot recall something which would have been prior to this - in context. also this morning i have received about 6 pen-l headers with zero text following. kind regards bill
Re: informal economy
Dear Peder Why not contact a mate of mine - Joan Muysken at the Department of Economics at the Rijksuniversiteit Limburg, in Maastricht. He is researching LTU and other related matters along with some other people at RL. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: south african policy
Ajit said this today: >Mandela has a serious job at hand, and he does >need a lot of capital, like it or not. Now where is he supposed to get capital >from? around 80 per cent of arable land is owned by whites. the majority of the wealth is owned by a smaller set of whites. the lifestyle of the professional white is well heeled, and that of the unemployed black township dweller is very bleak. the tax system is rather unprogressive. they could get a boost of capital immediately by appropriate redistribution of income and wealth, and by introducing a law to stop wealth leaving the country in droves as wealthy whites stash their cast and art etc in places like OZ. i wish to death my own government would ban the entry of these resources! taking an IMF/WB route will never see the townships cleared of the slums nor the current generation of unemployed and soon to be unemployed blacks in dignified work. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: overpriced journals
>Our library in a budget squeeze is looking at journals to cut and so has >been looking at both the usage as well as the cost factors - thus, if a >journal is only used 5 times a year and costs $1,350 versus one which is >used 5 times and costs $100, guess which one will be cut. I think it >makes sense and in fact should happen in all University libraries. > e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well it is the same the world over. As Head of my department I am currently cutting journals from our main library. I have plans to save $11.5k on about 30 journals per annum due to underuse and rising costs as publishers assume institions have elastic demand functions. What they haven't realised is that in OZ there is now a service based on current contents (an abstract service) whereby you can fill out a form on the internet and mail it to this service and within 24 hours receive a copy of the article back by fax or hard copy snail if you prefer to wait a little. That way you do not have to buy the journal for its one good article once in a while. some trial runs in engineering and chemistry faculties at my uni. show that they could have saved up to 80 per cent of their annual library vote (budget) using this service for the articles they actually used in the period instead of subscribing to the journal. the library loves it b/c the shelves become less cluttered and the environment loves it b/c there are less trees destroyed (at least by implication). So department heads everywhere, this is your chance to break the power of the capitalist academic press. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: overpriced journals
>I suspect that the service in OZ (australia) is Carl, the same one we >use here. They pay and charge you for copyrights. An article usually >costs around $7 to $15. >-- >Michael Perelman Michael, you are correct. it is the Colorado Association of Research Libraries-UNCOVER database which we access in Australia (OZ - the queries about the meaning of OZ must be new subscribers). The copyright is paid as part of the price and varies according to the journal. the expensive subscriptions tend also to be expensive per unit also. the average cost per article to OZ is $US11. the costs are charged to departments by the library. we can order it via our library or directly to CARL. hope this info is useful to pen-l persons kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: Feminist separatist economics!
>It's not a crime to go somewhere else for a better audience in feminist >economics, but the fact that we pen-llers call ourselves "progressive" and >don't very often talk about feminism should be yet another red flag that maybe >we are losing some sight as to what being progressive means! I don't > >Separatism ain't gonna work. Or will it? > Heather Grob. Well Heather i was born a male and so can do little about that. I of-course think of myself as a person in much the same i think that you are a person. people have common concerns. separatism certainly doesn't work b/c it excludes any hope of meaningful education. But was exactly is a feminist issue as opposed to a people issue? in OZ we sometimes talk about the plight of our indigenous population (aboriginals) who miss the boat in many ways. but is this a black issue? or rather a people issue and some people relate better to the economic system than others. my conception of being progressive is that, in part, i try to understand how capitalism exploitation uses artificial distinctions b/tw people (like sex, age, ethnicity etc) to divide us and perpetuate uneven outcomes. our aboriginals are in a terrible state b/c they have no jobs, low skills, and poor access to infrastructure. in much the same way as most people who are poor and underprivileged. women also face hardship for other reasons. but is feminist economics a separate analysis? or merely part of the overall understanding we need to reach and share as to why the capitalist system requires uneven outcomes (which are not able to be explained by the usual human capital type nonsense). i obviously think we are all in this together. a solution towards a new green, sharing economy will embrace all the people concerns we have. lack of privilege doesn't discriminate by gender. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: Atlas published
Doug while i do not doubt your motives i have this problem with advertising creeping into the internet. i have been told by my gurus here who are currently selling internet access for commercial users that i am fighting a dead battle. the internet as a free space for people to talk and think etc is gone so they say. it sickens me. our one big development which was largely free of capitalist urgency and exploitation appears to be gone. for me, i just keep sending these pricks objectionable letters which are dismissed as the rantings from the ivory tower. they say we need corporate underwriting to develop. i don't believe a word of it. i keep being reminded of the wisdom of harry braverman and his analysis of how capitalist labour processes seek out every dimension of our lives. so doug i usually am on your side of the debates (make that always) but this time i was offended. and moreover, your ad was deficient. no price mentioned! kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: Atlas published
Anthony writes: >No, I really think that it is appropriate for members to let us >know what is being published by them. I seem to be in the very small minority on commercialisation of the net. mt minority status is typical (that is, not confined to this issue). I am also usually in the minority with Doug and a few others on many issues. the point is that it may be appropriate i guess to inform us if the publisher is the author and so is self-reaping the surplus value. in doug's case the publisher is another of the mega capitalist publishers who is not committed to any cause but to make profits. i merely was saying i resent this intrusion by oligoply capital into our peoples' information system. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: The Cold War
John Rosenthal writes the sort of thing tonight (friday OZ time) that i would agree with wholeheartedly. i was one (of a minority - i'm not getting paranoid about this minority status BTW, having mentioned it twice this week) who criticised herb's all american boy type stuff w.r.t. good and bad struggles. Herb said the USA was virtuous in fighting totalitarianism, although i pointed out (with others) that this fight was selective, inconsistent and resulted in terrible plights for many peoples. i referred to a case i am ashamed of particularly and that is east-timor (BTW it is the 3rd anniversary of the dili massacre tommorrow and big action is planned in the streets of OZ capital cities to keep the memory alive). when John Craven chimed in i must say it was an evocative piece of prose. my impression was (ignore the detail it is just my thinking out aloud) that here is some yankee ex-militarist who probably was part of bombing the shit out of innocent peasants in vietnam, or wherever, or who had helped torture a few here and there, (this is symbolic rather than literal inference) who knew about real politic. in the radical days of the 1960s and 1970s the alternative discussion always stressed the need for a praxis to accomany the theory. student-worker alliances were common in my formative days. Why? B/c as students we knew no praxis. we knew nothing about the life day-in and day-out of exploitation and alienation. As a student i read books by herb gintis and many others, who eloquently provided conceptual frameworks in which i could structure my understanding of things. but without the real politic, the praxis, that structure was useless. in fact, for me, the son of very poor working class parents who were often welfare dependent and relied on handouts (clothing and books and food) to keep me and kin at school, the conceptual stuff herb and the like wrote about merely added sophistication to my gut feelings as boy living under a cruel system of capitalist exploitation. so i learned about struggle on the streets so to speak. all this shit about ad-hom. attacks is a bit ad nauseum to me. i take feyeraband on his word. sometimes it is good for political purposes to act reasonable and pretend you are conducting things as scientists of popperian persuasion might deem appropriate. so no insults, facts, etc. but other times, get the boots out and give it good. what feels right on the night sort of stuff. i do feel that herb was being revisionist. i agree he was not being neo-classical. who is n/c these days anyway. the conservatism has got more radical (extreme) than n/c thinking ever was. but i did think herb was being revisionist. and in that case, what John Craven said about getting to grips with praxis was really apt. if he got emotional along the way, well join the class struggle, and maintain the rage. what i find most distressing in academic life is what John Rosenthal refers to as cuddle type dialogue. i think of this as a middle class distancing from praxis. alternative thought has to embrace what is happening on the streets. capitalist interests being aided by big govt like the USA are not only rendering the souls of the workers arid, but are failing to give their kids jobs and instead are arranging international drug trading to keep the kids in a soporific state where they will fail to realise class identity and be part of class action. but publicly of-course they are good b/c they opposed the USSR which at least did try to have a plan for all its people. its our kids and environment at stake here. who gives a fuck about a few insults here and there. BTW, Michael Perelman said that while i did not want the net invaded by commercial interests, it was inevitable. Sure, I know that. that is the nature of the capitalist system which is running out of ways to realise the surplus. it doesn't mean that i cannot scream, kick and make myself objectionable while it happens. at least i still have a voice. i recall something an old friend's parents told him when he was young. they had lived through the holocaust in poland. they told him, that the nazis thought they had subjugated the jews but what they could never control or win over was their souls and their will. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: The Cold War
Dennis Breslin was fairly forthright this morning and later expresses depression about the election results. Well Dennis, sorry about the results. Your mail was pretty aggressive and perhaps insulting and surely directed at me, among others. But I liked it a lot. It gave me 3 hours of creative thinking while i was out training on my bicycle this morning. The products of that thinking are summarised: 1) where does resistance begin and who does it. your appeal for nice conversation among us "leftist" is fine. but do we academics resist anything? what are our discussions about? Have we the power to influence the prevailing doctrines? I mentioned that when it comes to praxis some hard talk and actions might be useful at times. you took offence thinking i might want to kick herb in the head. (g) what i was referring to was struggle. at the grass roots, when workers are locked out of their workplace and a bunch of cops are moving in to protect capital, when a group of caring citizens are lying under the path of a bulldozer intent on gorging more native rainforests out in pursuit of woodchipping or etc (for profits), when a group of innocent east timorese are facing the brunt of the imperialist indonesian army intent of murdering them and their children. then struggle has to involve boots. in my post grad days at a conservative uni. i was consistently slurred by the orthodox professors as being some weirdo pop sociologist, errant commo, or whatever insult felt right on the day. the problem they had was that i knew there stuff as well if not better than them (certainly in technical terms), yet they knew none of my stuff (radical literature). so it was easy to jump through their pathetic hoops. then i was confronted with the orthodox mafia in OZ ringing up Unis who they had heard i was applying for and warning the people off, writing to editors of journals who they heard i was publishing in or intending to and warning them off. it failed as a strategy. but it taught me that the pretence of civility and sophistication is just that, a pretence. they adopt as blunt a tactics as bosses locking out workers and bringing in the cops when they want to pursue their own interests. so my view is that we have to learn some of the tools of resistance that the unionists use, and the community activists use. when confronted by revisionism in our ranks we should be tough and scrutinise it and make sure it is not the thin edge of the wedge. 2) why is a feeling subordinate to a thought in academic discourse? who said that feelings are not a legitimate source of information about a topic? How can we differentiate thoughts from feelings anyway? This of-course has bearing on value-laden facts type arguments that have raged here before and are still getting bandwidth. by whose system makes argument conform to some sterile rehearsal of so-called logic? BTW, i note Herb commented on Jamie's agreement with me about Hayek being useless as a guide to dynamic reasoning b/c he eschews empirical activity. Herb said yes Hayek does not like data but he still likes him and thinks he is important. some reasoned argument. 3) What is left (and/or progressive) anyway? you were articulating a line where you seemed to be looking left from yourself to some blunt brutes who wanted to do some kicking, and then right to some others and you were expressing some uncertainty. Well when Herb goes from his article in the 1970s about capitalist labour exchange to his current position on markets and individuals i feel something is going on. We are notionally a left group. But it is clear that some ideas are not what i would say conformed to my understanding of being left. I would like to have a talk about this. in OZ, the left has undergone a few changes since the last war. In the 70s for example, the Labour party was invaded by the growing number of educated middle class professional social democrat types who said they were left. they were uneasy bed-partners with the blue collar union types who previously were the left. of-course they were less racist, sexist and had a eye to the environment. In the 1980s, another metomorphis has occurred on the left. now the party (in OZ it has been in power since 83) adopts free market thinking, endorses and pursues privatisation, allows workers to lay idle in the pursuit of low inflation via tight money, has reduced taxes and govt spending, has cut real wages and redistributed income to profits, and has adopted a foreign policy which has allowed imperialist interests to prevail (indonesia in east timor, USA against Iraq etc etc). fucking hell this is the left! and when they won the 93 election the leader said he thanked the "true believers", a reference to the famous days in the late 40s when the labour govt was truly socialististic and tried to nationalise banks etc, and talked about the beacon on the hill for the true believers. now the so-called left isolates people like me and brands us as dangerous, uncou
2 year position in OZ
I am writing this as Head of the Economics Department at the University of Newcastle, NSW Australia. Newcastle is about 140 kms north of Sydney on the east coast. it is sub-tropical and today is a sunny and warm 25 (spring). winter averages sunny and 17 centrigrade. N/c is the 6th largest city in OZ and is a port (350,000 people). The Dept. has about 30 people employed teaches a lot of IR, Labour, Development, Macro, Econometrics and is definately Left of centre. I guess most of the staff (although not all) are interventionists and keynesian in macro. there is a small core of marxist thinkers. i have funding for a Lecturer B (about 41K per annum $A) from salary savings. It should be in Macro and Labour. Our hierarchy is Lect A (tutor), Lec B, Lec C (Senior Lec), Lec D (Associate Prof), Lec E (Full Prof). There is no room for any bargains to be made. Our wage structure is set by arbitration and as yet no deals are made outside of that. I also have very little other money to provide enticements, and my personal attitude (in case you havn't guessed from my usual ravings) is that if you are seriously academic, then the job is enough. capitalist type incentives abhor me. I can offer about $1000 p.a to help with travel here and there. you would get a nice office and full access to the internet. The university has a housing office who i get get to help you find a place to live. it is very easy (being a regional town) to live in a rurul area close to work. the beaches are great (pacific ocean). as they say in OZ "Life is a Beach" i would love to get a young post grad fresh out who wanted some experience and a chance to work in a good dept. in OZ. alternatively someone who wanted study leave teaching would be okay. but the money is at a basic lecturer's salary. i need someone by Feb 95. i need to process forms by early jan 95. so if youare interested email me and we can talk about it. pass this on to peole who may be interested also. i can also offer the cash as two one year appointments if two people in separate years wanted positions. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[PEN-L:3594] Re: Arguments: labor exploitation and boycotts
Dan Epstein said in reply to Jim's >One problem with boycotting toys made in China is that there >> aren't very many toys currently that aren't made in China. > that " Most of the battery operated >crap deserves to be recycled into something more productive, in >my opinion. > To Jim: who cares if we had no toys along the lines of those currently in toy shops and dominated by cheap plastic junk which tend to reinforce what i would call destructive role models (required in part by capitalism to maintain the status quo). a toy can be a stick fallen from the tree or a bit of shell from the sea shore or etc. i have this view that the toys derived from capitalist work processes inhibit imagination and creativity rather than the opposite. and surely the USA can make some pens and paper and some balls and bats. anyway - happy new year everyone - health and non-material happiness. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3606] Re: Arguments: labor exploitation and boycotts
>Yo Bill! I think ya really got something here. By the way, what toys >do you play with? >Regards >J. Case > >PS How bout australian baseball bats? There could be a business opportunity >here?! > While baseball is creeping into our sports agenda, like macdonalds and other american things, cricket still remains the passion - 5 days of play for 6 hours a day, sometimes nothing seems to be happening, sometimes there is not even a result, but we love it. I want to say a few things about Tavis's input which i have some ambivalence with - i agree on one level, but very much disagree on another. Yes, we have an overriding responsibility to humanity no matter where they live or what they look like. Yes, it is easy to sit in an advanced economy, earn a living, have a house, and ponder the higher level matters which obviously impinge on the welfare of others. But that is the rub. (a small matter which was not included in Tavis's email was that many of the products which come out of China now, are not made in factories like ours but are really made in forced labour camps. There is a lot of evidence which came out in Australia last year about this. Many product lines were mentioned and the brand names noted.) Back to the rub. The world, that is the sum of the countries, cannot afford to go on consuming at the rate it currently is. It cannot also not afford to go on breeding at the rate it currently is. I would advocate not only boycotting products from uncouth regimes around the world, but also we should everyday try to minimise the products we buy from the capitalist system. my own child hardly had a "commodified" toy, relying on things like sticks and shells (to coin a genre rather than anything literal). She is now doing her phd is very creative and innovative and doesn't signal childhood deprivation. but the only way the capitalist process is going to come to a crunch is if we drive it to crises. so i am not saying let the rest of them suffer while we consume away. all of us have a responsibility to nature to withdraw from consumption. we spend most of our income on what might be called green things. we are replanting acres of land with native trees and it costs a high proportion of our own income. the amount the capitalists get from us is minimised. we reject most products which are packaged. we rip the packaging up in the supermarket and leave it behind. it sends signals. we grow as much of our own food as we can. so if we follow Tavis's idea and allow the rest of the world to become advanced capitalist nations that is hardly progress. for a start they are likely to have more polluting methods than we have (less democratic resistance), and they do have appalling working conditions. to enslave them in capitalism is hardly progress. Look at the soviet union now, people on the street dying in the cold b/c they cannot afford housing. and it is simply not feasible to encourage markets with the attendant need for mass consumption in the world at large. the natural system will die sooner rather than later. fundamental change is required in our economies, rather than replicating our destruction across the globe. So i guess i believe if things get really bad the citizens will revolt and take over the production processes and gear them to sustainable and green production with an emphasis on individual freedom. capitalism does not equate to individual freedom. And while Jim is a mate of mine, I would prefer his father-in-law to go broke along with all the rest of them. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3636] Re: Mixed messages
Micheal and Paul share similar concerns about Pflaum. Me too. Micheal says: >I was just thinking about this tonight, about how no one had complained >so far about Peter Pflaump flooding the list with his crackpot >libertarianism. Since Pflaump posts gobs of inappropriate material, >and he is neither progressive nor an economist, I could easily see him >getting lots of flames here, but these haven't materialized. I admire >the list's restraint, which is obviously greater than my own. well i just said to myself after wading through the first 3 messages and trying to find some argument, coherence, relevance, community-type ideas (pen-l community) that the guy was like one of those old fashioned "god is coming, doom is nigh" zealots who had no interest in debating anything with any of us so i just deleted messages from then on. i also thought that as this list is moderated can't we technically stop offerings coming from that email source? Anyone the mind boggles as to why a person would behave like this. somewhat tangential to say the least. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html ***
[PEN-L:3676] Re: PC
>Peter Pflaum writes: > >"Can someone explain the PC on this list - that some views don't belong >strikes me as very strange" peter : my experience is that we have good variations in views here. i for one am often on the outer w.r.t. to what might be a collective view. but always we have a debate about things. read the word again - a debate. your offerings appear to be unco-ordinated, unrelated verbal diatribes. it might help a bit if you addressed yourself to the community a bit. like "g'day pen-l this is what i am thinking today about xxx, what do others think" and then follow the debate. but you just flood our mailboxes in a most insensitive and impersonal manner. i have not met personally many of the people on pen-l but i sort of feel they are my mates who i have a solidaristic and affable relationship with. how about getting with it and then it wont seem very strange to you. otherwise i am sure there is some list you will feel at home in. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3738] Re: Black unemployment rate
Doug said this morning (Sat OZ time): >TIght labor markets are good for black people. Blacks have gained in part >because manufacturing is gaining smartly. Manufacturing employment was up >273,000 Dec 93-Dec 94 (no revisions in establishment survey, so >year-to-year comparisons are fine), with over half the gain, 140,000, >coming since August. >So guess who will be the first casualties when the Fed finally gets its way? This is what Arthur Okun's Upgrading Hypothesis was all about - all boats rise in a high tide - and it is why governments should attempt to maintain high pressure economies at all times. everyone gains in high pressure, but the disadvantaged gain disproportionately. of-course, as Doug intimates, they lose big in the downturn. i would be interested to know however about the basis of the recovery. my own empirical work on upgrading in OZ in the current recovery confirms okun's predictions that disadvantaged groups are gaining relatively more of the jobs, but unlike Okun's predictions that higher productivity and earning would also be forthcoming, most of the new jobs are in low prody (service) areas and are fractional (part-time) and are at below ave. pay rates. is this similar in the USA? kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html ***
[PEN-L:3790] Re: exports
>Past attmepts to elicit discussion on the key role of exports in US >economic expansion haven't got very far. Maybe Devid Sanger's NYT, >Jan. 15 piece will help wake up the network, which hopefully will start >to engage in a critical discussion of this all-important subject. >Sanger writes: "There is widespread acceptance of the notion that if the >American economy is going to expand, it will do so through exports of >goods, services, and information. Even Warren Christopher says so." >Radical economists should either reject this "notion" with reasoned >arguments, or accept it, and study the contradictions of such a policy. The same is being said here over the last 5-10 years. OZ has been well and truly abandoned by the UK (for 20 years) and Europe in general. So we are pushing hard into Asia - Japan is our biggest trading partner and China soon to be. While the economics of it are worth discussing I haven't time today. But the politics is also very interesting for the left. The push trade argument is overwhelming our concern for human rights in SE Asian countries. We play doggie with Indonesia b/c it is an "expanding market we have to be into" yet overlook (and officially sanction) the worst violations in East Timor. The list goes on. I would think it better that we accept a lower material standard of living, give nature a break, and work at destroying morally repugnant regimes - but instead our so-called left Labour Party Government called the latter "our wonderful trading partners". kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3831] Re: child care & the market
>On another list, an irrepressible born-again market enthusiast we'll call >only H.G., after dismissing public jobs programs as "a joke" and "a waste >of money," declared that government should do no more than finance child >care, not provide it - provision being best left to private providers. In >an answer to a follow-up question, H.G. said yes, all of 'em, when asked if >these include nonprofits, co-ops, and/or MacKids. >Any comments from pen-l'ers on other countries' experiences with public >child care? Is the state a terrible provider? My god Doug, is that a "come in spin" plea or what?at.? My reply to the mysterious H.G. on that list was as follows. In OZ, child care is provided by both the state and the private sector. Long day care is dominated by the State. The Federal Budget actually subsidises private day care firms to spread the work around a bit. The waiting lists are longer at the public centres b/c they are considered to be a superior service. THere is this on-going debate here about why the state should do it, sponsored of-course by the capitalists who don't care about the kids but the profits they would get if they could get rid of the public involvement. the only way the private firms can compete with the public sector (given the superior service of the latter) is via subsidies. another case of having a market for the sake of it, rather than any benefits it bestows on the consumers. in OZ we like public services. they are in most cases responsive to consumer needs (more so i should add than most of the large private firms, especially the banks - who are trying at present to get rid of all customers with account balances below $1500 - in other words the average bloke in the street), have shown a great deal of innovation, provide better nutrition in the long day centres, are more likely to have educated staff, and are cheap and accessible. private day care subsidies equal the allocation in the federal budget for public child care. beat that. so i think that H.G. person is entirely wrong on this assertion in the case of child care in OZ at any rate. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html *** Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA 212-874-4020 voice 212-874-3137 fax
[PEN-L:3852] RE: Childcare
Cindy said: >In defense of the mysterious HG, who was willing to have the >government pay for child care but not provide it, hasn't the >superiority of government child care as described here in >many posts rested primarily on the fact that the government >can afford to pay more? Is there some reason to believe >private child care would not improve if it were funded by >the government at the same rates as the wonderful university >centers we're hearing about? Aren't matters of financing >being confounded with management issues? exactly. I mentioned the other day that in OZ the federal budget allocation to private long day centres which make profits is about (a few $ here and there) the same as they spend on the public centres. Yet the public day care is overwhelmingly favoured by the consumers b/c of higher quality service, better hours, and the like. the fact is that the public sector manages this function significantly better (on average) than the private sector "firms". management for the public sector is about looking after kids and giving them creative things to do all day, and making sure they get fed properly (although i note they do not have a full vegetarian menu - so that is a blip!). the managerial function in the private firms is about making a profit by keeping costs as low as possible. the kids are incidental to the surplus creation process. just like a plastic toy really, or a tonne of coal. So i would not defend the mysterious HG one bit. His (oops - a bit of the mystery just got exposed) claims the superiority of private sector management acting to price incentives. in OZ at least, this claim is patently false in child care. the only reason the private sector can stay in business is b/c of public subsidy. the only reason the public sector subsidises the private sector when it is patently a lower grade service is b/c of this weird belief that having private sector involvement is intrinsically good, keeps the industry honest and provides competition. Sorry to disappoint, but all of these reasons are meagre free market dogma and do not bear empirical scrutiny. Kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3861] RE: Childcare
Justin said: >The question was whether publically provided care _could_ be adequate, or >good. Possibly privately provided care could be if properly funded--elite >private centers show that it can. But the university childcare examples >show that the the mere fact of public provision need not undermine and may >enhance provision. I don't suppose anyone but committed pro-planning >socialists--I know a few who aren't mad--object to the idea of privately >provided childcare. The problem, though, is that in the present context, >private childcare means a two tier system: good and relatively expensive >care, provided under moderately exploitative (for the providers) >conditions for those who can afford it, and mediocre or worse McKids care >provided under highly exploitative conditions for those who can't. That's >not an argument aginst private care. I must be a committed pro-planning socialist (now I see it all :-) knowing that. I think you have made the case against the private health care. It either becomes part of the elitist system of class reproduction or it puts our kids onto the misery queue. Lets argue this issue. Is everything reasonably considered a product which can be the basis of surplus extraction? Just b/c private centres can exist either with massive public subsidy or through the higher income earners being prepared to pay the high fees. but so what? I don't think that kids care should be considered a product. Of-course, being a CPPS i also don't think education per se should be a product. but capitalist production is always concerned with the bottom line. Caring for kids really has no bottom line. that is why the state should take full responsibility for child care. i fail to see how this applies only to CPPSs. The capitalist system also will require stable types who learn not to be anti-social. cheapo child care centres cannot help here. and child care for snobs is about as bad as privately provided schooling, but we have had the public school/private school debate before and i was in a minority of about one on that one. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3863] Re: the causes of unemployment
Micheal: >How much do you think that the relative weights would be for two causes of >unemployment: corporate rationalization and the export of jobs? I am not sure (in OZ corporate rationalisation 0.4 and export of jobs 0.1) and the rest deficient AD - which of-course impacts on both the above so my arithmetic is appalling. BTW, the bloody pope is out here in OZ this week telling gays to stop being gay, telling single mums to stop enjoying themselves, telling women to know their place beside the man and to honour and obey, telling us all to be as holy as him - what a joke it all is. he is out here beatifying some nun who lived in the last century. they searched around and found some old duck who had cancer and stayed alive b/c she believed in this nun, so they told the pope to get her on the road to being a saint. now they are saying at last "australia is a consecrated country and we are part of the world". strange about that, I always thought okay about being an aussie anyway. and i am sure the aborigines who have survived in this harshly arid place for 30,000 years without refridgerators felt okay about their karma too. anyway now the bloody crackpots (tents we call them b/c they dress up in tents), are searching round for a second miracle so pope baby can come back and make her truly blessed. but the pertinent point for this audience (apart from my anti-clericalist, anti-right-wing-nazi-sympathising-vatican rantings - who else do you share things like this with?) is that senor pope has a theory of unemployment. Centesimus Annus (1989) has been rammed down our throats this week. Pope baby says that following the communist experiment we know know the cost of the failure to respect private property. property includes (paul II) says the capacity of its owner to trade without hindrance. one pro pope commentator yesterday said "following in the tradition of the austrian economists, John Paul writes: 'economic activity, presupposes sure guarantees ofindividual freedom and private property, the principle task of the state is to guarantee this security. so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labours and thus feel encourated to work efficientlty and honestly. ...the state could not directly ensure the right to work. Pope Paul II explicitly equates a just price with one that is mutually agreed upon through free bargaining. ...he does not favour wages that are fixed by "law at unemployment levels". "it is work that man [...sexist...], using his intelligence and exercising his freedom, succeeds in dominating the earth [get a load of that - dominate the natural world]..in this way he makes part of the earth his own, precisely the part which he has acquired through workhe must co-operate with others so that together all can dominate the earth." he is critical of welfare states "by intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State lease to loss of human energies and an inordinate increase in public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending." in fact this is a whole fucking orthodox economics course in one encyclical. maybe i can hire the pope to come and teach first year micro, although we would have to alter our radical ways in my place. any michael, forget all this left wing analysis, get down on your knees, say a few hail marys, and listen to carol give us the good oil. as the rolling stones used to sing, oh carol don't ever give your heart away. maybe the vatican can liquidate a few raphaels too. might help. anyway folks its friday night in OZ, i tired from work and training, and i had to tell you about the pope's visit and his economics wisdom. amen, and holy holy holy. see ya later bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html *** this is papal economics. it goes like this.
[PEN-L:3902] Re: papal economics
Doug replying to Jim (who was just covering himself with his bosses anyway - we all have fear of capitalist retribution - its okay mate). said: >>As the Holy Roman >>Catholic Church was to feudalism, the World Bank/IMF is to >>capitalism. It's a better use of time to attack the latter, no? > >No no no! Don't take anticlericalism away from us! Religion is - often? >always? I'm open to argument - a system of domination and mystification, a >myth that people take literally. Call me old fashioned but it all seems >like superstition to me, and Enlightenment dinosaur that I am, I want it to >go away. > >Religious metaphors are not inappropriate for analyzing what's wrong with >the WB/IMF complex. A system that promises salvation if certain painful >measures are taken; it's based on faith rather than reason and experience; >and it sends its emissaries on "missions." The Vatican & 19th St - hit 'em >both! I saw a movie (at a radical film festival which I organised) when i was a student called "the brickmakers" - it was about the brick making industry in paraguay from memory - but south america for sure. it described the way owners (cappos) leased a mud pit to families who made the bricks. the work was onerous and involved the male standing in water pushing a churner around for days and days on end. the payments for bricks were poverty wages. the problem was that the work was also injurious and the male had a life expectancy of 30 years of age. the male got this disease from being in the clay pool for too long and died. when he died the owner kicked the family out (usually huge b/c they were roman catholics) and got a new worker in. no pensions, no nothing. the last scene was of the mother and several kids leaving the pit (they lived on site in a slum) with some sparse possessions and destined for a life on the streets. the cops kill kids on the street, and the women tends to prostitution. one little kid was dragging thru the mud a huge picture (their only furniture) of the bloody blessed virging mary. the mother said something like god has destined this. jesus christ, i agree Doug. i have enough time in a day to hammer the IMF, the world bank, capitalism in general, local developers who want to chop down trees, local school authorities who wreck kids creative instincts, and the pope and his hierarchy whenever and wherever they raise their sullied heads. i did not add the other day in my post-papal summary of OZ visits that he also raved on about condom use in africa. more and more males are HIV positive, no cure is known, and that fucking idiot is telling them to stop using condoms and to learn the lovely art of celibacy. on celibacy and the catholic church: increasing numbers of catholic priests are now being prosecuted and some jailed now, after extensive (public sector) investigations into the conduct of priests in boys homes and schools run by various catholic orders. one prick has gone away for good i hope after being found guilty of raping 21 boys who were in his care (aged 10-11 years old). the church here (and the pope too - implicitly) have also been found to have covered up the crimes. more and more priests are suddenly resigning from their posts, and cardinals are saying they will be punished by god, as their justification for not coming clean. so jim, maintain rage on all fronts mate. and get a better employer. like a job in the efficient public sector. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3913] Re: papal economics
>Nathan's right: anti-clericalism fought the _established_ church. >Now we don't have that any more. It's fine as far as I'm concerned >if some people have religion. That doesn't alwsys always mean >that they're closed to reason. > Jim: religion is one of things that it is difficult to have choice over. the Roman catholics particularly get innocent minds when they are young and lay heavy guilt trips on them with the most preposterous range of mystical claims about things more reasoned people call natural - including natural body functions. even when they grow older and see beyond it, the guilt often remains to haunt their sexuality and other personal areas of their lives. it is not okay to do this to children. so while Nathan says being anti-religion (read anti-anti-people-and-freedom-religions) is tantamount to being anti-democratic, i have to disagree. democracy requires an equality of choice, and it cannot exist properly when all these loons from the catholic church are behaving as they do. even the liberationist theologians in south america know that. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:3936] Re: papal economics
Nathan says >Of course, we can condemn the individual teachings around sex, but that >is different from calling for the state to disorganize non-state >institutions--which is what anti-clericalism often amounts to in the 20th >century. the advantages of a completely public education system is that groups like the catholics and some middle-eastern minorities who practice clitorectomies on their young girls, and a host of other anti nature forces who exist (certainly in OZ) under the banner of tolerance and freedom of individual thinking are unable to have their kids all day to perpetuate these crimes. the christian church in OZ (as late as the 1960s) used to steal aborigninal children of their parents to give them a white christian upbringing in church missions. the catholic church in OZ (as mentioned last time) is reeling from scandals involving priests in their boys schools (little boys) who have been fucking the kids stupid for years all in the name of pastoral care. there is no evidence of such abuse in public schools. the church has covered this all up and actually hidden the offenders from the detection processes. so i just don't agree Nathan. the state can become the voice of all of us. i do not think that savaging a young girls right to enjoy whatever sexual activity she chooses, or raping young boys so that they grow up unable to fulfill their own sexual needs as adults, is an adequate return on giving everyone democratic freedoms. i also don't think it is playing god to say the state is in the best position to stop this stuff. i would close all private education facilities everywhere. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html ***
[PEN-L:3975] Re: inflation
From: IN%"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 30-JAN-1995 19:36:57.56
CC:
Subj: [PEN-L:3974] Re: inflation
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(PMDF V4.3-13 #6545) id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon,
30 Jan 1995 19:36:39 +1100
("port 2087"@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu) by vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
(PMDF V4.3-12 #8933) id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon,
Eugene writes in reply to Doug:
>What are you saying here Doug? Are you saying
>that high capacity utilization raises costs and thus CAUSES price
>increases?
> That seems implied in what you wrote. But you also imply the other
>assertion, that businesses raise prices to raise (or what is the same
>thing, "protect") profits.
> The argument that rising costs -- whether it is labor or any
>other cost -- makes businesses raise prices has always amused me when
>it comes from some neo-classical or a businessman using neo-classical
>support for the argument. For if a business can raise prices it will.
>It doesn't need an excuse.
well both views are right. capitalist pricing is the principle weapon it the
capitalists have to defend their rate of profit, unemployment is another. in
bad times when demand is falling Kalecki noted that firms will try to defend
profit rate by increasing the margin as sales fall. in high times, when TUBP is
strong and wage demands are likely to be higher, and firms are committed to
hefty overdrafts to pay for the working capital prior to realisation, they will
also try to defend their rate of profit by protecting their margin. in these
times they are very likely to concede to a wage demand, hike up the overdraft
and try to recoup via a price rise, hoping to stay one step ahead of the real
wage resistance from workers. in these times it is very costly in profit volume
to engage in industrial disputation.
so it is a bit of correlation/causation analysis that you seemed worried,
bemused or whatever about Eugene. The class struggle over the distribution of
income is the causa causus of price rises, the rate of cu is a proximate cause,
merely indicating a shift in the ever changing balance of power in the
struggle.
i do not think that business however seeks any excuse to raise prices. that
suggests a far too anarchic system of decision making. i think these bastards
are really much more organised and calculating than that Eugene. They use price
as a strategic tool to target and sometimes defend (when expectations are
amiss) the desired profit rate.
ah (he says, drawing breath and thinking about marx) - for those on pkt as well
- a somewhat more apposite topic relative to this last week, n'est-ce pas!
kind regards
bill
***
William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\
Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about
The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here
Callaghan NSW 2308v
Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
***
My view is that high capacity utilization is associated with
high demand, and is thus a time when businesses can raise prices. The
high capaicty utilization is not the cause of the high prices.
One could argue that either way, prices rise, i. e. inflation,
and things are bad.
Yes, of course it is part of the class struggle. But it seems
to me that we can bring the struggle more sharply into view if we say
that that is what is going on, rather than let our enemies get away
with the implication that bottlenecks and shortages are causing the
inflation.
[PEN-L:4000] Re: capacity utilization
Doug questions whether a 4 per cent US unemployment rate would not do anything other than strengthen labour's hand agin capital. in usual times it would be horrific to capital to have a low ur. but these days with the cappos fractionalising more and more work into smaller unskilled type segments, a 4 per cent ur may just mean lots of casual/part-time jobs in dislocated service centres taken by people who may have only an instrumental attachment to the labour force (in OZ school kids taking bic mac jobs). the unions have always found it hard to organise women in the service sector. the trends now indicate their task is that much harder. the amount of large (one-plant) firms is declining around the world. so it all depends Doug, but 4 per cent now is different to 4 per cent in the 1960s. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html ***
[PEN-L:4082] FORWARDED: Research Assistant Position, LIRU.
>Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 11:55:20 +1000 (GMT+1000) >From: Bill Harley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Research Assistant Position, LIRU. >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Precedence: bulk > >HALF-TIME RESEARCH ASSISTANT/SENIOR RESEARCH ASSISTANT ($14,715-$17,069 >P.A.), LABOUR AND INDUSTRY RESEARCH UNIT, DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT, >THE UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND > >The Labour and Industry Research Unit (LIRU) at the University of >Queensland is seeking to appoint a part-time Research Assistant or Senior >Research Assistant to work on two Australian Research Council funded >projects. The first involves analysis of data on union decline across the OECD >economies and the second concerns union structures in Australia. The main >task of the person employed will be to assist in the organisation and analysis >of large data sets on union organisation in Australia and the OECD, although >a range of other research tasks may be undertaken. > >This position would provide an excellent opportunity for a post-graduate >student with an interest in Labour Studies to link their own research to one >or both projects, to utilise our data sources and to take advantage of the >facilities and expertise within LIRU to develop their research skills. Our >preference is to employ a person enrolled, or intending to enrol, in a higher >degree within the Department of Government, but this is not essential. > >The position will be available commencing in second semester 1995, with the >starting date subject to negotiation with the successful applicant. The >appointment will be for one year at half-time in the first instance, with the >possibility of extension subject to funding. There is a degree of flexibility >available in terms of the weekly hours worked and the length of the >appointment. > >The successful applicant will have a good degree in Political Science, >Sociology, Economics or a related field. Experience of data analysis using SAS >or SPSS is essential. An interest in Labour Studies and/or comparative >research would be an advantage. > >Salary range: $14,715-$17,069 p.a. depending on qualifications and experience. > >Closing date: 17 March 1995. > >Further details can be obtained by contacting Associate Professor Paul >Boreham, Head, Department of Government, The University of Queensland, >Q4072. Telephone: (07) 365 2594. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Please forward applications to Dr Boreham at the above address. > > >-- >Dr. Bill Harley [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Labour and Industry _ --_|\ Telephone: +61 7 365 3062 >Research Unit / * Facsimile: +61 7 365 1388 >Department of Government\_.--.__/ Home: +61 7 846 3563 >The University of Queensland v >Queensland 4072 >Australia >-- > > > ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:4233] Re: Info on WWW and Gopher sites
Hironori I have a list of links to many of the progressive and radical sites (more each week) on my own home page. the URL is: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billeco.html or http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/economics/dept.html (this page is my Department's page (sort of mine) and contains links) or http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html (this is my alternative WWW homepage which differs a little from the first address which is the "official" bill academic homepage - we are having a battle with the stifling forces of bureaucracy who want to "allow" only pro forma shit for brains approved information sources. i threatened to have servers springing up everywhere in my department and cause havoc with the network (by ruining their firewall) if they stifled anyone's creative instincts. they compromised!). anyway all three sources contain many of the links you are looking for although each one does not necessarily mirror the other. happy surfing. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html ***
[PEN-L:4304] Re: alphabetized pen-l list
Well with such a big list my email from pen-l should be huge each day. bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:4318] Re: interesting telephone study (fwd)
> >Tavis cautions Peter -- > >Careful, you may inadvertently be fueling the reactionary causes with >your phone survey there. :) Cross subsidies from long distance to basic >service have long been the government's way of mandating and funding >universal service through regulations. The phone companies have long >complained about the inefficiency as an excuse to deregulate. ..[deletions] > >I do think that the basic point of the survey is valid: Cross subsidies >are distortive and inefficient. Perhaps a plan of requiring the phone >companies to provide cheap service for customers below a certain income >would work better. in OZ there is the same debate. Long distance subsidises local and city subsidises rural. it costs the same to make a local call in the city as it does rural, despite the massive cost differentials in providing the service. also our local calls are fixed rate-non-timed services. so talk or modem as long as you like for 25 cents or so. in OZ also the local provider is a public monopoly which is now facing some trunk competition. My point is that loading the "universal service" obligations on the telephone company via hidden cross subsidies is not a very democratic thing to do, in addition to the economic implications. I resent having to pay substantial rents to ring long distance down the east coast (When it costs virtually nothing to provide the service) to subsidise some large rural grazier who has loads of money and who votes for the right wing conservative (national) party. However, i am happy to help a worker in a rural town keep in touch at a low cost with others around him/her. The point is that i should know the cost of the subsidy so i can make an informed choice as to whether i support it or not. So i have argued here for the abandonment of cross subsidies and for the universal service component to become a obligation of the Govrenment via its budget. That way I can decide along with everyone else if i support such subsidies. By hiding them i have know way of making that choice. of-course, in the OZ case, the lower STD-trunk rates would still be provided by a public provider. so i am against deregulation and privatisation. just more efficient public enterprise and more up front pricing and subsidy. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:4326] Re: library of congress magazine
Alfredo has said what i think are nice things here: >The fact of the matter is that Marx uses dialectics to identify the >most fundamental traits of the capitalist economy. In this economy, >commodities are produced by formally independent firms, and by means >of wage labour. Marx is not talking about particular exchanges, equal >marginal utilities, or trying to determine exchange ratios. They are >quite simply irrelevant in this context. He is talking about the >(re)production of capitalist social relations, and trying to identify >the most general features of commodity production under capitalism. [deletions] >y the way, Skillman's argument for 'marginal' labour inputs in the >labour theory of value, as opposed to socially necessary labour (not >'average' labour, please), is just as pointless. All that can be >shown with this line of argument is that Marx will not fit the >neoclassical box. Well, I am happy with this. Taking it a little further there is a nice part in Capital I (early chapters - my copies are at work and my photographic memory won't work :-) ), where Marx goes beyond talking about individuals. He poses the question that some might infer that a value of a commodity produced by a lazy and unskilled worker would be high, b/c it had more time spent on it (under the quantity of labour time idea). it is here that he introduces the unit of labour power - a uniform and homogenous unit. and the total labour power is to be viewed as a glob or uniform mass of human labour power. there i recall he says that each unit is the same as the other b/c it takes the character of the _average_ labour power of society,..and and that it takes the time in producing a commodity on _average_ what is socially necessary. the latter refers to time needed under usual conditions using _average_ skills and intensity. but alfredo is correct. Marx's intention was not in explaining the relative prices of commodities, but rather to juxtapose the human mass of global labour power and its associated value to the total value produced (including unpaid labour time). the explanation of surplus value is an alien task to neoclassical types and their tools and methods of analysis and as alfredo says, their logical manner, are all alien to that goal. Ricardo was accused of "dropping from another planet" (b/c of his complete misunderstanding of capitalist economy), the same in this debate, might be (kindly) said of gil (b/c of his attempt to hijack surplus methodology and dialectic into an alien task). kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html ***
[PEN-L:4344] Re: Bohm-Bawerk rides again?
Gil (who i quite like reading but often disagree with) responds on several writers who (sort of) defend marx: [deletions] > 4) In seconding Alfredo's comments, Bill appears to suggest that >one can't account for surplus value using neoclassical "tools and >methods of analysis." Roemer's work seems to prove this claim false. >Let me (kindly) ask Bill: are you insisting that one can't >study exploitation and class conflict in a capitalist economy without >Marx's labor theory of value and dialectical method? Or could it be >that there are valid, but possibly different, insights to be gained >by alternative approaches? > >I'm not being facetious; this strikes me as a compelling question: >does one have to be a Marxist in the traditional sense to be a >(legitimate) radical economist? > On the issue of dialectics v. formal deductivism - I was not (nor i think alfredo was not - but he talks for himself) suggesting that marx eschewed using argument based on if-then and therefore etc. of-course he did. he was deductive and inductive. but the reference to being dialectic is important. Marx was unlike the writers of his time (and n/c since) in that he saw analysis as a layered task. sure, analyse what you see is compelling, but in the case of capitalist exchange fundamentally flawed. Marx's insight, which to me is _his contribution_ is that he saw below or beyond the simple exchanges and the appearance of freedom. He was aware fully of the value-price problems that Gil raises. There is ample evidence of that in his own writings. That is what part II of Capital III is about. marx believed this transformation merely "modified" the abstractions in Capital I. in the Critique of Pol Econ. he also addressed the issue and was fully cognisant of the need to have a section dealing with competition. I came across an excellent quote from Engels's preface to Capital 11 where he aggressively takes on orthodoxy "if they can show in which way an equal average rate of profit can and must come about, not only without a violation of the law of value, but on the very basis of it, i am willing to discuss the matter further with them. (p.18 - moscow edition). he was (knowing marx had written to him revealing the transform would come in III) shutting up the rodbertians who were moaning about the contradiction b/tw ricardian law of value and the reality of capitalism. indeed an essay competition was held on this point. so marx's reasons for going through Capital I and II (knowing that he would modify I in III) were many: (a) the methodological one - he wasn't ultimately interested in explaining relative prices. rather he wanted to root the exchange conditions in production. (b) marx essentially opposed orthodox price theory. so i believe he was interested in using value theory for it usual (then) purpose to determine prices (maybe his interest was in broad commodity prices rather than the millionth price). he was not to be "blinded by competition" - and wanted to see under the competition to the exploitative relations. he wanted to debunk the demand and supply stories which had prices and hence profit and rents being in some way produced and earned by K and Land. the link b/tw profit and the exploitation of labour was obscured by treating profit on K as being pre-existent as ricardo has done. so Capital I sought to show that surplus value creation was a separate process to the capitalist competitions across industries which determined the final configuration of equil. prices of commodities. Then in Capital III he goes back into competitive mode to make sure he can explain the final configuration of prices, recognising that an indiv. cappo may not realise the quantum of surplus value actually produced on their site. so capital I establishes surplus as a prior quantity to market prices and was the source of profit. and to explain capitalist commodity prodn as a particular form of comm. prodn, and to show surplus as a prior quantity, marx had to go the value route in Capital I. in gil's logic form, marx believed that it was "logical" to establish the properties of a commodity prior to embedding it with capitalist analysis. that is why he had to show how things (price determination) are altered b/tw SCP and CCP. this was a clear example of marx using the usual logic of his time. but where the dialectic enters is that marx (unlike smith and ricardo who used similar logic), added the historical analysis to his problem of value. to differentiate CCP from other forms where exploitation is more visible and not reinforced within the economic exchange process itself. maybe that is a step to answering gil's point. sorry to go on but this is one of my pet likes. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of N
[PEN-L:4349] Re: Bohm-Bawerk rides again? -Part 2
In my reply to Gil this morning (OZ time) i did not have time to address the last question. It is an important and sensible one. So lunch time arrives and here is my view. > >I'm not being facetious; this strikes me as a compelling question: >does one have to be a Marxist in the traditional sense to be a >(legitimate) radical economist? > Answer: YES Rationale: of-course, a category usually contains as much within it as it leaves out. so in that sense, one can call themselves whatever they like. readers of pkt will know this has come up before. i call myself a pk economist but see that as being a marx-kalecki connection with keynes a bit player, whereas the likes of paul davidson scream blue murder about that and see the centre of pkt as being keynes and his GT. so what is radical? the austrians are radical compared to John Bates Clark MPT. radical in cf to what? an assumed orthodoxy? what is it? but that is the uninteresting way to approach it b/c i suspect that gil has a particular slant (as most of us do when we think about the terminology). For me, the prevailing orthodoxy, while containing a plethora of strands (and we have been through this before in the roemer, information, p-a etc debates in 1994), has a few hard core propositions that bear on the issue. they can be outlined in a number of different ways, but pertinent to the debate at hand, the best vehicle for explication is the (a) "where do profits come from?" question, supplemented with (b) "do workers sell labour for a wage" question. Introducing the qualifier "legitimacy" to the answer, then to me a radical in the common usage of the word in the economics community says in relation to the two questions: (a) ultimately from capitalist exploitation, and appropriation of a surplus generated in production. note the role that the class (capitalist) plays. it is active, historically specific, _deterministic_, and necessary. the role is defined by property relations, the actions manifesting in production, and the continuance of the productive relations being reliant on successful generation and appropriation of surplus. there are no extra-economic means which guarantee the continuance of the capitalist (as there are in say feudalism where religion and manorial politics ensured that the lord could take a surplus each year). if the cappo misses the boat in a year or so then they join the queue of labour power sellers. (b) No, they do not sell labour. they sell the commodity LP which exchanges for a socially necessary wage payment. the labour use value of LP creates more than the wage. so it is this relation which is not like a simple commodity exchange b/c it has _both_ horizontal and vertical (power, exploitive) relations. that is what (legitimate) radical means to me. as marx was the exemplary expositor of this reasoning the link b/tw him and radical is essential. however, gil uses the word "traditional" to qualify marxist. now what is a traditional marxist? someone who like a pedant follows every word, prediction, etc? someone who takes the analytical insights mentioned above to analyse capitalism in the 1990s, which differs from the capitalism of marx's day, b.c now we have a state who underwrites capitalist profit via its budget, both directly via handouts to cappos and indirectly via the personal welfare net (more or less). I fit into the second lot BTW. But i wouldn't call anyone radical in this sense if they bypassed marx in analysing capitalism. roemer, for example, is not radical. kind regards bill ** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html **
[PEN-L:5924] Re: Who is Peter L. berger?
Dear Trond
He wrote a book called society in man/man in society which was a standard
first year sociology text and very influential in the development of sociology
in the 1960s when it was still a young discipline.
the essential thesis was the simultaneous influence that we have on the society
we live in and which it has on us. it represented the basic paradigm of
sociology of the day.
it does not examine this from any marxist class categories.
kind regards
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6037] Re: Rethinking Overdetemination
Jerry wrote: > >The rejection of classical music including operas by many also, I think, >has an anti-intellectual component to it. > well i think this depends on what cultural-economic enviroment you have grown up in. classical music in the capitalist western world (say, australia) tends very firmly to be what i would term "ruling class" entertainment. there is no popular classical culture in OZ. the working class typically would not listen to it and would associate it with the well to do groups who are either capitalist or their working class managerial lackeys. in that sense, an opposition to the tool of the ruling class is in fact a highly intellectual position to take. it reflects in that context a heightened sense of subjective class consciousness which should be encouraged. in OZ, opera and symphony is for the snobs. it may not intrinsically be anything, but its history suggests that it has been a vehicle where the rich ruling class (and hangers on) enjoyed the fruits of their exploitation. in that sense, the medium is polluted and like the system that has used it, it should be buried as a cultural artifact. and besides - it doesn't swing. kind regards bill ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### +61 49 215065 Fax: +61 49 215065 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html "only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money." (Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6059] re: rethinking overdetermination
Jim writes: >It seems to me that _any_ kind of music can be turned into >"ruling class music": there's rock, but there's also homogenized >corporate rock; there's rap, but there's also manipulative >corporate rap; etc. well i wasn't talking about the way the cappos steal every good idea that "free" people have. I think braverman's final chapters (labour and monopoly capital is a good insight on this process, btw). i was rather talking about the genre (or as michael put it - the milieu) that classical music is placed in. the pomp. the class structure so clearly evident at the concert halls...so if the workers happen to like the stuff they usually have to take bleachers seats well below the snobs up in the better areas. the demand for obedience on the part of the audiencesitting like stuffed shirts.the requirements to stand and cheer bravo as a social artifact rather than any spontaneous outburst of glee (imagine getting up in the middle of a symphony just as it went wild and shouting bravoand stomping in your seat, etc.no way. obedience. the obedience that the ruling class who are sitting above you...who's show it really is.(we are only there b/c of upward mobility and increased incomes).requires from you. the conduct, the dress, the cost all signals a conformity that translates well into the work place when you have to confront the bosses. i haven't seen such processses at jazz and rock concerts. > >Classical music has become upscale muzak for sensitive yuppies, an aural >marker of "sophisticiation" popular in cafes, boutiques, and Jeep >Explorers. Most of the classical canon is a relic of when the bourgeoisie >was vital - Adorno said that the Beethoven concerto, with the soloist >interplaying with the orchestra, but not dominant as in later Romantic >concerti, was the high point of bourgeois individualism. Now products of >that high bourgeois moment entertains the higher salariat, but I doubt >their minds are much on the subtleties of the sonata form, or >soloist-orchestra relations. yep. and baahkla > At the risk of upsetting bill mitchell, I shall defend >classical music, thereby proving to many that I am an >elitist dog, or whatever (g'day mate!). People should know >that bill himself favors a type of advanced jazz that I am >not sure would be favored by the masses or workers either... advanced jazzhmmm...what exactly is that? the music that began with the suffering of african slaves transported to the usa to work for the rich. yep, i like it. >More generally the point has been already been made >and I shall repeat it, that music, whatever its source or >funding, is viewed as revolutionary or daring or subsersive >or innovative at one point in time (the well-tempered scale >in the Baroque era, rock and roll in the mid-1950s) tends >to become accepted, coopted and just plain boringly >conservative and elitist at a later time. Who realizes now >that Baroque dance suites were once considered shockingly >.sensual? exactly. i said yesterday that nothing about the form concerns me. it is the historically-specific context that bothers me. the same argument goes for the artifacts of capitalist production. can an assembly line be a tool that socialism might use? some would say the form is independent of the context. well yes, but all we know of the assembly line is capitalism. the same goes for classical music in OZ. it is the tool and plaything of the rich and the would-be rich (doug's salariat). and i repeat, it doesn't swing. kind regards bill ps. at least we are not talking about clinton, america, or something similar for at least 2 or 3 mails! ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### +61 49 215065 Fax: +61 49 215065 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html "only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money." (Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6421] Re: Human Rights: Modern Definition
>
>Fellow PENers,
>
> Is anyone else irritated by the ceaseless, one-way rantings of
>our comrade from Buffalo? Personally, I'm not quick to be bothered by
>things like this. Deleting is easy enough. But when it's missive after
>missive, apropos of nothing but his own "education" campaign, I think
>the purpose of a discussion list like PEN-L is being seriously abused.
>
Rob
when i was young i used to go with my old man down to batman avenue in
melbourne (by the river) and all the soap box people were there each sunday
afternoonranting endlessly about all the most important things in their
world. some never attracted a single ear. but blithely they went onalmost
in abstraction of the surroundings. i used to think to my very young
selfwhy the fuck do they spend so much time having so little influence?
our mate at buffalo only raises one question for me.what is the value of
his time.
of-course, he might be a speed typist
i guess the other question is what motivates another person to totally
disregard the rest of us in our pen-l "community" and not try at all to engage
us in conversation.
hmmm.
kind regards
bill
p.s. now jim has installed me as the culture maven i thought it best to tell
you i am listening to rage against the machine right now .on my cd player
at workpretty cool. almost classical at that
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6457] This is what conservatives do.....
Dear Pen-L and PKT
this was a report in the Sydney Morning Herald today detailing how our new
conservative treasurer conducts himselfit also says something about the US
economy.
kind regards
bill
October 3, 1996
Costello's global gaffe
By PAUL CLEARY, TOM ALLARD and JENNIFER HEWETT
The Treasurer, Mr Costello, was the centre of an international storm
yesterday after sparking a surge on world financial markets when he revealed a
confidential briefing with the United States' top economic adviser.
At a press conference in Washington on Tuesday, Mr Costello disclosed
highly sensitive details on US interest rate policy that he attributed to a
discussion with the chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Dr Alan Greenspan.
Dr Greenspan had apparently told Mr Costello that inflation was well under
control in the US and that there was no need to raise interest rates.
Mr Costello deepened the crisis by claiming later that reports of his
remarks had been "fanciful".
However, ABC Radio has a tape that contradicts this claim.
In a day of extraordinary reaction to Mr Costello's gaffe:
US bond rates dropped.
A US bond trader said calls were coming in from around the world
asking "who the hell is this Costello bloke?"
The Australian head of trading for the US bank Chase Manhattan said
it was "very unusual, to say the least", to quote Dr Greenspan after a
meeting.
The shadow Treasurer, Mr Evans, said Mr Costello was not fit to be
Treasurer.
The Prime Minister's office went to ground.
It has also been disclosed that Mr Costello made his remarks despite
confirmation by the US Federal Reserve - known as the Fed - that the meeting
with Dr
Greenspan was private.
Mr Costello, who is in Washington for the International Monetary Fund's
annual meeting, refused to make any further comment last night.
A spokesman for the Prime Minister referred journalists to the Treasurer's
office and said Mr Howard had no comment.
Asked earlier about reports of his comments, Mr Costello told AP-Dow
Jones: "I don't comment on US interest rates."
He was then asked whether Dr Greenspan had indicated the Fed's intentions
on interest rate, and replied: "Wouldn't know. You better ask him. I never
quote on other countries' interest rates. That's fanciful if it suggests to the
contrary."
The shadow Treasurer, Mr Evans, said Mr Costello had shown that he was
unfit to be Treasurer.
"No finance minister or treasurer in living memory anywhere in the world
has committed an indiscretion on this scale," he said.
A bond trader from a large US investment bank told the Herald: "Last night
we were getting calls from all around the world asking who the hell this Costello
bloke was.
All the US banks were asking, "what the hell is going on?'"
The Australian head of trading for giant US bank Chase Manhattan, Mr Peter
Burgess, said yesterday: "I think it took awhile for people to work out
who the hell
[Mr Costello] was and what was he doing talking about Greenspan so
bluntly.
"It is very unusual, to say the least, for someone to quote Greenspan
directly after a
meeting, particularly on such a sensitive topic."
US financial market pundits have bet billions that concerns about rising
inflation
would prompt the Fed to raise interest rates this year.
Mr Costello said at his press conference: "Well, I don't think there's any
expectation
at the moment that rates are going to rise ..."
On inflation, Mr Costello added: "He [Dr Greenspan] indicated to me that
he saw
no threats to inflation down the track."
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6529] Re: Why raise the minimum wage? (fwd)
>A student asked why raise the minumum wage? He made the argument that any
>rise in the minimum wage would shift product supply curves inward thus
>leading to rising prices. This inflation would be exacerbated by rising
>incomes which would shift product demand curves outward. So, the student
>said, any policy that raises the minumum wage would just lead to inflation
>and unemployment, and why would we want that?
>
>Any suggestions about how to respond to this student?
>
To enid
the "high wage economy" is the answer.
perhaps the student might consider the impact on cost via higher productivity
(most people in the min wage territory are in labour intensive work which is a
battle between person and machine and able to be fudged by the person
somewhat).
also while real incomes would rise in the first instance, there is clear
evidence that economies (up to capacity) are quantity adjusters not price
adjusters. maybe if demand rises at full capacity the result would be price
rises.
where does the unemployment arise in the above reasoning?
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6625] Re: why raise the minimum wage (fwd)
Doug in reply to Paul Z
>We're not talking about Bill Gates hiring a few workers out of revenue to
>perform unproductive labor. We're talking about giving half the U.S.
>workforce a big fat raise - that is, bringing the minimum wage to within
>hailing distance of the present mean. All the faux Marxoid sophistry you
>want to summon can't hide the fact that that would involve massive
>transfers of resources and a massive shift in class political power. Those
>are desirable goals, but impossible under existing arrangements.
>
>Am I alone in thinking this?
>
make us a duo at least doug. there is a tendency on the left to deny that wage
share shifts of large proportions don't cause unemployment and chaos. they seem
to have been brought up with MPT and don't want to believe that and so they
enter this position of self-denial.
rowthorn said (paraphrasing) that the "working class cannot afford to be too
successful" - meaning that the system is engineered by those seeking a desired
rate of profit to ensure they get it. the workers suffer if they organise too
well and grap some surplus back.
it is not a MPT story at all but works largely through macro variables.
the experience of the mid 70s really hammered the point home after the long
golden period of growth after the war. the unions got too successful.
it also exemplifies my position on unions for which i have been severely
critized on this list (by doug as well as others). by spending efforts on
trifling about wages and conditions they are falling prey to the capitalists.
instead if they had have organised to challenge control and ownership things
might have been very different.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6641] NZ Elections - Early News
To all those who thought that the Presidential election was the only show in
town this year, i can tell you that a major swing in right-left sentiment has
occured in NZ today.
The latest news is that a firm trend is now apparent and the privatising,
welfare-raping, public-sector destroying, employment-contracts act criminals -
The National Party which has ruled over the last 7 or so years will lose power.
The Labour Party (much changed since the Rogernomics days) will form a
coalition with the Alliance (a combination of rather left group - which was
formed from people who left the Labour Party when they were last in power
acting like conservatives; maori groups, women's groups and green groups).
The alliance has vowed to scrap the Employment Contracts Act, buy back some of
the privatised enterprises, restore free health and open up education again.
NZ First (a centre party made up largely of the better nationals who couldn't
hack the destruction that the Nationals were guilty of) will also be in the
Coalition.
The leader of the Labour Party, Helen Clark will be the first woman PM.
NZ can look forward to a better future now especially the poor. The rich who
have eaten greedily at the expense of the poor over the National period will
now face the judgement day.if Alliance can keep Labour to their promises.
Brings a smile to my face.
even though it is a small countrythis is a much more significant event that
whether clinton or dole wins.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6656] Re: NZ Elections - Early News
>
>A question: do the "new," Rogerless Labour Party and their partners in the
>Alliance have much in the way of a positive agenda, or are they just saying
>No to Rogernomics and its National Party successor?
>
The following agenda is the best i remember:
Economy
Repeal further tax cuts (already legislated)
repeal Emp. Contracts Act (very significant change from the right)
But keep targetting low inflation via monetary policy
the likely coalition partners however also would abolish or increase the
inflation target, reintroduce tariffs, restrict foreign investment
Health
business related reforms abandoned, free care for kids
coalition partners - abolish all user charges (back to free health for all)
Social Welfare
abandon the cuts made by nationals - (1991 levels indexed and restored)
increase support for families
Environment
abolish ozone depleting things
carbon tax
increase polluter-pays charges
money for organic farming developments
Defence
abandon the latest Anzac frigate deal (joint with OZ)
coalition partners - withdraw from ANZUS and five power agreements
Education
increase funding
reduce tertiary fees
coalition partners = more money, free tertiary educ (back to old days)
that is a summary. there were other things relating to maoris and the like.
But i think the coalition will not return to rogernomics and the labour party
is much changed since those days.
i don't think there will be a huge buy back of privatised enterprises.
the abandonment of ECA though i very significant and it signals a return to the
very protected award wage system.
there is hope doug!
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6660] scandinavian unions
Robert
>as for bill's antipathy towards unions, i'm with gompers: "MORE!"
>(gompers was, after all, a socialist... ;> ) i don't think unions
>can ever go wrong by demanding more, as long as they do it for the
>whole working class (including those not working) rather than some
>sector, (like the unionized or the skilled). the swedish and
>norwegian unions did it right -- they moderated the wage demands of
>those at the top in return for full employment, bringing up the
>bottom, and levelling the wage structure.
Well the scandinavian unions might have done that. of-course, in sweden they
also
explicitly gained wage increases in an economy which was floating on the export
of armaments (presumably to terrorists and imperialists). But recent history
(and i
note robert says "did"), doesn't bear that well, except perhaps for norway
(although
trond might be able to say more about that).
The following table is taken from a book i am writing at present and leaves out
all
the other oecd economies. it shows that to fight inflation, unemployment has
been
pushed up so the capitalists are not threatened by wage cost pressures. if the
unions
were in control of the situation how come there has been an abandonment of full
employment
in finland, sweden and to a certain extent norway. the USA looks good - no?
Average Average
1963-73 1974-79 198319871991 1995
UR INF MI UR INF MIUR INF MIUR INF MI UR INF MIUR INF MI
--
OZ
2.0 4.0 6.0 5.0 12.2 17.2 9.9 10.1 20.0 8.0 8.5 16.5 9.5 3.2 12.7 8.5 4.6 13.1
Finland
2.2 6.2 8.4 4.5 12.9 17.4 5.4 8.3 13.7 5.1 4.1 9.2 7.6 4.3 11.9 17.2 1.0 18.2
Norway
1.9 5.3 7.2 1.8 8.7 10.5 3.4 8.4 11.8 2.1 8.7 10.8 5.5 3.4 8.9 4.9 2.5 7.4
Sweden
1.9 4.9 6.8 1.9 9.8 11.7 3.5 8.9 12.4 2.1 4.2 6.3 3.0 9.7 12.7 7.7 2.9 10.6
US
4.5 3.6 8.1 6.7 8.6 15.3 9.6 3.2 12.8 6.2 3.7 9.9 6.8 4.2 11.0 5.6 2.8 8.4
OECD8.3 9.3 17.6 7.3 7.8 15.1 6.8 6.1 12.9 7.6 5.5 13.1
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6667] Re: info
Michael
with this listprocessor you can block mail from certain users and domains.
the only problem is that the spam artists operate (usually) a moveable feast of
mail addresses.
in the first instance you can write to the postperson at the domain the mail
came from and request the account be disabled for spamming.
hope you succeed.
kind regards
bill
>X-Listprocessor-version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
>
>I am trying to figure out how to block this person from spamming us with
>commercials. If anybody has any ideas, please let me know.
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6789] Re: postings on penl
Susan wrote among other things.
>
>Shutting off Tell is being as Stalinist
>as a Stalinist. Requesting a self-imposed limit on postings/day for all
>members may be a more civil way to address the problem,(unless the
>anarchists among us decide to oppose such a rule!)
>
>
Count me among the international anarchists. No rules. all this stuff about
pressing the delete key taking a lot of time is just plain. I can
appreciate people complaining if their mail box is of a finite size. but how
many are in that position? further, the titles he/she puts on his/her posts are
very indicative. the screening process is very easy in fact.
i do agree with doug though that shawgi tell is a strange characterone-way
communication doesn't at all seem to be what a progressive and active left
movement should be aspiring to. i like to talk to people not at them.
but susan also made a telling point. I have often complained about the
americo-centricity of this list. and sometimes i have tried to inject a world
view. usually, it never runs, b/c the list is hammering away at a discussion of
what toothpaste bill clinton is using or somesuch. or what the fed is doing.
it is terribly alienating being an australian person on this list at times.
and this alienation reflects in the lack of communication b/tw the americans
and the ROW.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6813] Re: Shawgi and Censorship
Jerry - i don't quite get it. his reaction to post to your mailperson about
being bombarded with multiple (did you really send 30 of each) emails back from
you seems appropriate. He gets the message with one returned mail...in the same
way you return normal mail if it is "not known at this address" (at least in
OZ).
i do not like much of tell's posts b/c i feel they are generally outlines of
basic marxist principle which i think i learned long ago. but i still think he
has not contravened any of the "rules" of pen-l which appear when you sub.
maybe he is anti-socialbut i wear yellow socks and shorts to work so
what. eccentricity is a safeguard against conformism.and conformism is
exactly what the capitalist system requires from us.
if you want block protection against him/her then just delete every mail (blair
had some useful ideas). it takes less than a second to do this. if we wnat to
innovate some "private property" rules on pen-l then michael should organise a
pen-l convention on-line and talk it through and then we vote. of-course, if
there are any rules i would leave. For those on pkt, we had this nonsense about
this time last year. the list, in my view, has not recovered since.
i also found shawgi's claims to be always willing to talk rather odd. the style
of his posts are not communicative at all.
kind regards
bill
>Oh My! Poor Shawgi -- victim of censorship!
>
>Responding to Maggie's suggestion yesterday that we make it a "two-way
>street", I sent Shawgi's messages back to him.
>
>Read what the poor victim and outspoken opponent of censorship on the
>Net did next .../Jerry
>
>
>Hi:
>
>This is to officially register a complaint with the postmaster at pratt
>regarding the harassment coming from Gerald Levy (user id is
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]).
>
>Gerald and I both subscribe to an internet discussion list, PEN-L. Over
>the last two days he has taken whatever I have posted to PEN-L and sent
>me over 30 copies of each post. I consider this a form of harassment.
>He is clearly abusing his mail privileges, using them as an outlet for
>harassment.
>
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6824] Re: New Zealand living standards
>
>For those followers of New Zealand on the list, the following NZ
>Press Association item will be of interest, particularly since the
>period covers most of the economic restructuring which began in 1984.
>(Note that Statistics New Zealand (SNZ) is the semi-commercialised,
>but still state-owned, Department of Statistics.)
The data is hard to interpret. Could you append it with some distributional
data?
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6826] Re: New Zealand living standards
>What about spending per household on yachts?
>
>Yeah, that's a serious question. NZ has, by far, the highest per capita
>rate of recreational boat ownership. Boat ownership in NZ is certainly not
>limited to the wealthy, moreover, and extends to a large percentage of
>working class families.
Both australia and NZ are outdoor places and aquatic. but jerry, there is a
significant difference b/tw a 60 metre america's cup boat that hangs around the
wealthy moorings in wellington or auckland, and the working class "mirror" which
dad and mum tow behind there clapped out sedan to the beach in summer.
it is hardly a sign of wealth to own a little skiff or dinghy like a mirror.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6870] Re: reform or revolution? revisited
>
>Suppose one is teaching intro econ to "typical" (?) university students,
>which means mainstream range of conservative, and some liberal ideas,
>including many who will either in school or later go into "business."
>
>Do you (I'm asking for your personal opinions here) teach that corporations
>*must* e.g. open non-union shops, invest abroad where labor is cheaper,
>skimp on quality, etc., in order to compete in capitalist markets, thereby
>reinforcing those tendencies in those who are or will be in business; or
>
>do you teach that unions can increase productivity; "environmentally
>friendly commodities" can be profitable, and the like, thereby reinforcing
>liberal tendencies at the cost of pushing "socialism" away?
Dear Blair
I don't teach first year but i do teach 2nd year. i tell my students that i
think there in an ineluctable logic to capitalism - a dynamic which defines the
system.distributional conflict (arising from ownership disparity), the
role of the rate of profit and the impossibility of full employment (much less
the desirability of itgiven environmental concerns and production
techniques).
within that logic...there are some things which will make it work better
for the systemthat is the cappos. i say to them that most nearly all things
that a re better for people are worse for cappos and vice versa.
so para (a) above is right.
and para (b) creates conflict and crises.
i tell them that within capitalism it might be possible to escape and create
community -based green production cultures where people and nature replace the
rate of profit as the goal and ownership becomes a second order of smallness
issue.
but i don't resile from agreeing that unions can create unemployment and are
open always (through petty greed) to being divided and conquered.
that's a start
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6896] Re: Off Limits: USA
>Tomorrow, I hope that I can remember myself, I am going to ask all posters
>from the U.S. to hold off posting to pen-l to encourage those from other
>countries to introduce themselves or to tell us how pen-l could serve them
>better.
>
>We have probably 100 people from outside of the U.S. We get quite a bit
>from Canada, some from OZ or NZ, and occassionaly something from Europe.
>
>Let's hear from you.
hmm, michael
tomorrow has already started for us OZzes. and how can you reconcile this with
the statement that the sun never sets on america given the pervasiveness of
yankee corporate capitalism and accompanying (junk) culture in the world.
the question is when does tomorrow begin?
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6905] Re: I'm afraid to say this...
>I'm afraid to say this, but isn't a USA-free day a case of (gasp)
>CENSORSHIP?
>
>if so, it's a good idea. Maybe, some time, we could have a USA-free
>day for the world as a whole, not just for pen-l.
>
i warming up for when us OZ types and etc will rule pen-l for 24 hours at
least. (note how i assign the rest of the world minus US and OZ as "etc", i
have been learning my lessons well .).
anyway, i am still waiting to know when tomorrow begins. then the flood of
emails will begin.
topics to be discussed:
1. the role of trade unions in a community-based green society
2. how governments have to find value in the bottom 20 per cent.
3. why listening to classical music stops the revolutions.
4. why censoring the USA for the whole world is a breakthrough.
among others.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6906] Re: Off Limits: USA
>This is a very good proposal to give us one day a week for picnic. I would
>like to add to his proposal this one: We should have one day a week
>"European Forum," One day "Asian Forum," and one day "Third World Forum."
>We shoud set aside one day to air each forum. The US posters should be
>silent just one day a week so that we can hear other voices and other
>peoples' concerns.
>
>Fikret
>
Okay the netherlands is in europe - i know that.
japan is in asia - i know that
ghana is in the (i hate this colonialist term) "the third world" - i know that
so where is OZ svp?
in all three probably!
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6909] Re: that toothpaste
>At 5 pm on Friday Chuck said: > >>I heard that the Fed is putting interest rates up. Didn't know >>who said it, but one rumour is enough to keep us going for >>another day > whatdyamean. i also heard that Clinton changed toothpaste brands >yesterday. Maybe he knew something we didn't then? > >later > >bobbie >univ. of washington yeh i heard it to. randy uni of california >>> >>>he used to use stripe non-flouride, but now since he has been >listening to bartok, he has got sophisticated and evidently went to >>>that new gee-whiz brand. >>> >>>hope this helps >>> >>>Cindy Lu >>>Federal Reserve >>>Chicago >> >hey, cindy >got any news on those rates? > >Danny Jones Junior III >Americans for Truth >>>Dear Pen-L >>> >>>i am from australia and i would like to talk about global american >>>imperialism. >>> >>>Kind Regards >>>Bill > >Hey man, chuck here. Which state of the US of A is australia in. Haven't heard >of that one? > >Chuck >American Foundation for World Studies >Uni of Mass. and then micheal had to come along and put a dampener on the conversation. but i guess we will all find out everything ...surely the issues will burn for longer than the next 24 hours. so now the philistines move in and take over pen-l. well alex g'day mate. what do you want to talk about. Californian electoral hopes for clinton. where's that anyway? anyway at the moment i am working on my phillips curve book and several papers that arise. i am going to florence to talk about european unemployment in november. the prevailing wisdom over there (exemplified by the LSE-Oxford mafia - try reading Layard, nickell and jackman) emphasises supply side factors - still. innappropriate benefit systems, excess tax rates, real wage expectations that don't match trends in productivityand they couch all stuff in terms of of so-called hysteretic systems (which make them sound different to the banal but related new classical nonsense). and they do have certain concessions for AD deficiency. my line is that there has never been a time when governments couldn't decrease unemployment with fiscal and monetary policy if they tried. so why is un so high? b/c everyone has been persuaded that inflation is an enemy and so governments have deliberately allowed un to remain high. the persistence is nothing more than the longer term effects of deficient demand. and growth bursts haven't been long enough to fully absorb the pool. so why is inflation the evil? it isn't. it is a convenient tool used by the bosses to keep a RAU up at desirable levels. profits might not be as high as they could be if full capacity was the norm, but the hegemony of the cappos is less under threat and the un. has allowed them to systematically destroy the unions and turn them into a sickenly weak divided self-destructive movement unable to capture the needs and spirit of the women and youth. my own work shows how incomes policy clearly controls inflation in times when growth is above (the pitiful) average. in oz, IPs work. when they have been relaxed or modified to resemble free market bargaining, wages growth has been way above the IP periods. one question for europe and that little joint to the north east of us is why do IPs work here and not there? i am also pushing this line that governments have a strong role to play. the problem we have talked about before and i have been sort of out there as usual not in the mainstream of pen-l. too little AD - poor jobs performance. too much - the environment dies. the world can't cope with AD levels common in OZ or the USA. so what can we do. we used to teach expenditure-switching strategies to get us out of trade deficit/unempl dilemmas. well in a way that is what i say again. the 1980s period of new classicana left us with a legacy of a rising rump of RAU. people who are dispossessed. it also left us with a lot of privatised public assets, lower public spending and lower taxes. we need more AD to get this rump offering value. but we can't have it in the private (polluting) sector. the challenge for government policy is to create value among the bottom 20 percent. get them generating value in community-based green employment. this means we abandon the gainful work classification. redefine unemployment-employment. i don't go for shawgi type revolutions anymore. the time is passed for that. we have to sneak up on them. but meanwhile the world is dying from pollution. the sneaking up has to start now. so that is the stuff that i am throwing the hardest econometrics at right now. it is looking good from my angle and will come out in print early in 1998 (edward elgar). kind regards bill -- ## William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department
[PEN-L:6910] Re: Off Limits: USA
>
>Obviously, I have a preference for issues that concern directly
>the third world; but, overall speaking, in the 'global context' we
>are submerged, there is little that would not influence in one way
>or another, at the end, the lifes of people in the third world (and
>viceversa). I have to admit that 'I have had it' with the international
>financial institutions (WB, IMF, IADBs, etc.), because of their
>overwhelming pressure on the third world, but *also* because I
>believe they are terribly effective and dangerous at proliferating
>the most orthodox mainstream economics, all over the world (at the
>level of politics, but also research and teaching). And this worries
>me, be it for its present *and also* its long term impact...
Beste Alex
hoe gaat het u? ik hoop dat je zijn wel. (i can add all those strange dutch
sounds too if you like).
so when were you ever enamoured with SAPs? how could they ever do the world any
good when the US President gets to appoint the WB President and the US
dominates both institutions?
i don't know of a single country that has benefitted from the programmes
(either IMF and/or WB). why should they? they are just orthodox economic
policy.
what amazes me is how little mapping there is b/tw the disasters of SAP
experiments and the mainstream of our profession. if i banged my head up
against the wall once, i might attribute the pain to some random occurrence.
twice i might start getting clever and three times i would get it i think.
how many countries have gone under SAP misery since 1980? 80 or so. when are
these bastards going to get it. the evidence is in. labour markets don't work
like they think. the programmes don't work.
btw, alex, isn't it good that the spelling has improved on pen-l today. we
finally spell labour right, programmes...etc.
anyway,
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:6919] Re: I'm afraid to say this...
>> 4. why censoring the USA for the whole world is a breakthrough.
>
>Though of course we wouldn't even be talking to each other like this if it
>weren't for the Pentagon.
>
there is a fallacy in this argument Doug. you assume there is a uniqueness to
phenomena. but path dependency can be non-unique and depends vitally on
starting values.
in this case we communicate via email b/c of the beginnings of the net in
military intelligence in the usa. but if that hadn't have happened it still
might have happened via another path.
so is tomorrow over?
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7054] Re: anti-intellectualism against and in the left
verne said:
>>Anti-intellectualism has a long lineage in America that rarely gets
>>mentioned in this now tedious debate. Economics qua economics is as
>>subject to the politics of expertise and the vernacular as is "discourse
>>analysis". This is why we need (political) public intellectuals, like Mr.
>>Henwood and the Dollars and Sense people.
>
Doug said:
>But really, we popular types should stay out of theory, right? The hell
>with that. I had my first confrontation with theory at Yale in 1971, a very
>early beachead for the French invasion. In continued with it at the
>University of Virginia English department. I've read it, I have friends who
>adore it, I understand what it's about. What it's about is nowhere near as
>profound as its style affects. I'm not just some Mike Royko sounding off
>between beers.
>
verne said:
>>On the other hand most of the complaints about the form that
>>"post-modern" writing takes seem to be specious complaints about the
>>language of philosophy itself. The complaints are more applicable to
>>Hegel than to Baudrillard, and this is all fine, but Marx would bash and
>>bash and bash the young Hegelians only to be a singularly excellent
>>reader and critic of Hegel. (Baudrillard is an idiot and a straw man.
>>Isn't there a bias in even picking him as an example of a "post-modern"
>>intellectual.)
Doug i hardly think you have to provide your cv to have credibility. it oozes
out of you. and i am not a WSJ type at all. yet i agree very much with your
sentiments.
Sweezy complained long ago about the vacuous nonsense that trades as
neoclassicana - essentially from 1st year under grad to 5th year post grad it
is the same simple stuff - mostly devoid of substance. yet it becomes
increasingly unintelligible behind the smokescreen of maths (which i might say
in terms of an view of mathematics aesthetics is mostly second rate and clumsy
maths - who cares it fools the majority of the profession). it is designed to
hide the essential lack of substance of the discipline.
The stuff dished up by the post moderninists is in the same category - a few
simple and easy to understand ideas - clothed in the most tortured, jargonised
codefor the cogniscentimakes it sound erudite. makes it sound deep.
makes it sound authoritative.who is going to challenge it? mostly it is
unintelligible.
the simple idea that values intrude in the objective/subjective distinction is
simple enough. the relativism of our lives is simple enough. why clothe it in
sophistry?
it might be that their is an aesthetic in all of it which escapes me. but then
i hate classical music too - remember - its also for the snobs and aspirers.
so yeh, doug i agree. give em hell.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7057] Re: anti-intellectualism against and in the left
>
>A prerequisite for giving any theory hell by critiquing it is first
>*understanding* that theory. I haven't heard Doug give a critique of *any*
>of the writers that he refers to. I have only heard him *dismiss* those
>writers and their theories. Perhaps he does have a critique of
>post-modernism but so far it reads more like sounding off between beers
>(IMHO).
>
Jerry
>
doug has given a strong critique based on the style and form of theoretical
reasoning. i agreed with him. the substance of pomo is pretty simple in fact.
but it is so hidden by the need to make it sound like something really deep
that you lose the essence. The development of theory is not independent of the
way in which it is developed and the style it is presented.
anyway, i am not in here to bat for doug. he can get his WSJ'eeze out and
speak for himself
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7158] Re: Pomo: Swimming or drawning
>
>I think pomo is seen as difficult to engage because it's core concept is that
>there is more than one truth. If one can't preach the ultimate truth, then
>one can't be a hero. If one can't be a hero, one will take her/his toys and
>go home.
>
Maggie said the above.
the trouble with truth and relativism it that it is too easy to descend into
absurd depths to avoid argument. using structure to avoid engagement.
relativism is perfectly consistent with marxism - historically specific modes
of prod after all.
i also agree with some ideas of post modernism which emphasise the relation of
self to what might be truth. is there an absolute truth? we will never know.
how would you recognise it if you got there. as a reaction against christianity
and god-based fetters on individuals i think this is useful.
but on the phenomena level that we operate day to day and which is the starting
point of political struggle there is surely truth - and although i see what i
see b/c i am me - objectivity. the obvious example is comparing me to the young
child being macheted to death by barbaric savages in say rwanda. that is truth.
i am not and the child is being slaughtered.
just to remind my self that the phenomena might have
impacts on "me" (as a relative entity in space which i define myself), i
occasionally cut my self shaving.it hurts. the machete is a fact.
so for me i am not looking for heroes. but i am also not looking to hide things
which we can agree are beyond our own subjective entities. what we think of
these things, of-course, depends on our ideology and so ultimately our
interpretations are subjective.
i also don't think it is an argument to list a heap of authors that somebody
says are post modernists and then demand that any one who wishes to criticises
post modernism as a "paradigm" must individually address the writings
and provide detailed line by line critiques. i have read some (majority) of the
writers so far mentiones but certainly not all nor even 70 percent. it is to me
tortured prose for the cogniscenti. it doesn't embrace me at all. fine.
there is an aesthetic which those within it appreciate. but even the bloody
opera (in OZ) now has by the stage big screens explaining everything as it goes
with simple english translations for the "common folk" to entice them to come
along and to demystify it a bit (of-course, dare i say it has probably helped
all the snobs who pretended they knew what was going on anyway!!). (BTW, i
haven't witnessed this first hand - no way! - i've been reliably informed as
they say).
but the point must be that a paradigm forms and many strands operate within it.
in that sense there is a definable theory and praxis. it is legitimate to
criticise a paradigm at that level without disaggregating it. one might say
there is not such level of generality. okay lets argue that.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7161] Re: Pomo and Opera
bloody hell, i have stirred up an opera fan..better stop this line of
analogy immediately.
paul concludes:
>
>So what has all this to do with pomo. Well, surely they (or someone)
>has to translate their foreign tongue into one the majority of us
>can understand. Unless they do, they will be like the conservative
>opera companies, catering only to those who know the language, or who
>care only for the sound and not for the content.
>
that is what i was saying.
kind regards
bill
ps. looking for an opera CD to smash. hmmm, don't own any. better turn the
radio over to classical fm and then i can smash the receiver!
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7165] Hmmm
Dear Pen-L
I went to a university once.
Once of the lecturers there hated me.
He/she kicked me out of the class.
I won't tell you why.
So fuckin what!
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7192] Re: Henwood - Swimming or drawning?
>
>> Antonio Callari (or E. King-Callari- is this the decentred self?)
>
>Ah? It's the damned eudora system that will not differentiate between me
>and my wife; so ours is a joint signature (E. stands for Elisabeth, and she
>is not responsible for anything I say)
>
a poor workperson blames their tools (capitalist plot saying #1043).
but you malign eudora wrongly. you can easily set up eudora to work on the same
executable for two separate pop accounts entirely. you just have to have two
*.ini files (each with different information) in separate directories. so for
EC you would set up the pif to access the executable (wherever it is) and then
in her directory you add the line to her ini file.
eg.
c:\eudora\eudora.exe
c:\eudora\eudora.ini
this is your information
then set up a directory
c:\eudora\eliz
and use the c:\eudora\eudora.exe file as the executable
and make it read c:\eudora\eliz\eudora.ini (Which access her pop account).
there is of-course another way to do it if you share pop accounts. eudora has
the main signature and also an alternative which is user selectable before you
hit the send key.
i don't even use it myself but don't blame the software for your own lack of
knowledge. it is pretty neat software.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7211] Re: another off-list communication
Sorry for the empty message i just sent. the mailer is giving a little trouble
today.
anyway, the new idea i comment on is "People and Their Ideas".
jim said:
>
>My criticism (explicit or implicit) of the Post-Modernist
>authors and their tradition are NOT personal attacks. There's
>a big difference between a person's ideas and his or her
>personality.
>
i have thought about this issue often, usually in the context of movements and
officials of movements etc. and my place in them.
i have sometimes concluded that i would find it difficult to invite a rabid
liberal (this is in the OZ context - a conservative, pro-business, pro-rich
prick for short) into my house no matter how "nice" they were. to what extent
does behaviour become characterisations of thought.
i understand that the SS commanders like himmler and co were lovely people.
they loved their kids, family etc. were kind to their friends. but they lost
the right to live in my mind b/c of their ideas.
so i guess i am not as tolerant as jim. if someone is right-wing,
pro-capitalist, pro-the-rich - they become my class enemy. yes, they might
still be "working class" but they are in the so-called "contradictory
location".
i then wouldn't give them the time of day no matter how many "superficial"
things they might have in common with me. like sports, music, etc etc.
the thought that is always in my mind is that if they were left unfettered what
would they do?
everything i would hate. destroy the planet some more, make other peoples'
lives miserable and line their own fucking pockets.
it makes it hard.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7339] Re: Affirmative Action in public employment and
Rakesh says:
>
>Or is it that the more whites (an interesting category) feel that they may
>lose political power due to their impending minority status, the more they
>will insist on the right to maintain prejudices "for their own"? Is this
>why California has been the site for both Props 187 (the attack on
>trabajadores sin papeles) and 209, that whites imagine themselves here as a
>group headed for minority status? And do whites imagine themselves in this
>paranoid way in no small part because census data, kept in racial
>categories, continuously reminds them of how they will soon be "pinced" ,
>as best-selling immigration expert Peter Brimelow puts it, in between
>Blacks, Hispanics and Asians?
>
>
I understand your sentiment but you should be careful not to rescind into racism
yourself. your emphasis on "whites" as an oppressive colour disturbs me.
oppression is system-specific. i don't see too many whites in rwanda
oppressing.
rather you should focuc on the ruling class not by colour but by its
association with capital.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7345] Re: Affirmative Action in public employment and education
>This last condition does point to the competition inherent in the condition
>of wage labor and the possible discriminatory use of unions to protect jobs
>for a favored group or "race." But I wouldn't expect a dogmatic Marxist
>like you to be critical of unions. Of course ultimately the answer to this
>problem would have to be the abolition of wage labor, not the timid utopia
>of affirmative action.
>
Rakesh
perhaps you better consult the pen-l archives and go back to the french strike
period before you stereotype me.
and you can still get the distance you want in analysing the affirmative action
backlash without even mentioning colour. that was the point i was making.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7353] Re: racism, affirmative action, etc.
>Obviously, but one complicating point: according to the LA Times exit poll,
>48% of women (race unspecified) voted for Prop. 209. From looking at the
>exit poll figures, it looks like only a third of the California electorate
>consists of white men, and not all of them voted Yes. Even if all white men
>voted in unison, they'd need lots of help from nonwhite nonmen to pass
>odious legislation.
>
Doug presents a somewhat different perspective than the one we have had over
the weekend. perhaps we can stop the white stuff and just start attacking
"males". then we would have to account for the 48 per cent of the women.
hmmm, simple (dogmatic) stereotyping is not easy, is it?
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7429] Re: more irreality
Speaking of performativity.
while i was out training this morning (on my cycle) i sure has hell thought i
went up a steep hill. and when i thought i was over the other side, i sure as
hell thought it seemed easier to peddle fast. and when i returned home (or what
i think is home) i sure as hell felt tired in the legsbut then i guess i
can't be sure that i have any.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7960] Re: M-I: market socialism and fire insurance
>
>Louis: What a joke! Does anybody think that Barclay Rosser would be
>posting all of that highly detailed information about Hungary and China
>to the Marxism list if having this at his fingertips was not part
>of his job?
>Big fucking deal. Do you think that if I wasn't paid to administer Unix
>based client-server applications, I would know about this sort of stuff.
>No way.
Loius, i was happy when you said that your were leaving the list again. in any
dialogue some reciprocity is required. you seem to have a dependence on the
list in some pathetic way by hanging around, yet you treat us all with
contempt.
one can only feel sorry for someone who is so pitiful.
either fuck off or realise the list is pen-l, it has academics, activists,
lawyers, and computer programmers on it among others, and usually we all get
on by expressing our ideas in our own ways which obviously is conditioned in
part by the type of things we do for a living.
and you seem to deny that in any "occupational-specific" knowledge there is not
an aesthetic. in both the seeming esoterica of economics and client-server
protocol there is such beauty to be found which has value in itself. only the
ignorant and desperately unhappy could not see this.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:7822] Re: Stiglitz to WB
>
>Doug writes questioning Stigs appointment to the WB:
>are the probems of the third world the result of
>information asymetry?
well after 14 years or so of SAPs the WB probably thinks it has finally rid
itself of the Third World and if it hasn't quite done the job then it guesses
AIDs will do the rest, and Joe S needed a little retirement sinecure and so
that was it.
kind regards
the cryptic one
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7706] Re: an interesting WWW site
>
>bill, bill, bill,
> I am very sympathetic to green concerns and the need
>to radically alter the system to deal with them. But,
>please, let's not undermine the case with nonsense data.
>For years there have been hysterical forecasts made on the
>basis of misunderstood data. Just to pick on one of the
>points on your list, 4 years to having only half the crude
>oil left? Simply ridiculous.
>Your Old Mate, Bahhhkley
>
My old mate
i made no claims that the stats were in any way solid. but it is food for
thought. even if they are a little correct they give rise for concern. and did
you go to the site and click the more detailed analysis? that is also very
interesting.
the estimates of the difference b/tw :"northern" and "southern" diets are also
very thought provoking, especially when you see the number of fat people
walking around in western societies.
that is all i was hoping to do with this.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7693] an interesting WWW site
Dear pen-l
if any of you are looking for a bit of instant depression, a quick reason to
become vegetarian, a quick reason to ransack your capitalist employer's
capital, and more check out this site
http://www.igc.apc.org/millennium/inds/
it is a site of leading world indicators with back up material and graphs and
tables etc.
for example:
World Population:5,802,373,546
Years Until Insufficient Land - Northern Diet: 9
Years Until Insufficient Land - Southern Diet: 40
Species Extinctions Per Day: 104
Years Until 1/3 Of Species Are Lost: 10
Years Until Half of Crude Oil Is Gone: 4
Years Until 80% of Crude Oil Is Gone: 24
Percent Antarctic Ozone Depletion: 70+
Carbon Dioxide, Years Until Doubling: 61
Water Availability (000 cubic meters/person/year): 10 (estimate)
each has a link to more detailed analysis of the specific indicator.
chilling really (except the link on carbon dioxide which is all about global
warming!!)
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7959] Re: M-I: market socialism and fire insurance
Louis: What a joke! Does anybody think that Barclay Rosser would be posting all of that highly detailed information about Hungary and China to the Marxism list if having this at his fingertips was not part of his job? Here, you want some highly detailed technical information from me?: In Perl, the variable that can be used to represent standard input is $_. In Sybase, the number of rows that are returned in an SQL statement can be limited through the use of the set rowcount command. Big fucking deal. Do you think that if I wasn't paid to administer Unix based client-server applications, I would know about this sort of stuff. No way.
[PEN-L:7847] Data on Labour Managed firms
Dear Pen-l
I am interested in doing some econometric work on labour managed firms in
tandem with a person who has done some theoretical work.
Can anyone (paul p. and my old mate barkley - come in spinners) advise me
on the state of data.
and whether anyone has any they could let me use.
any help would be much appreciated.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned
and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
(Cree Indian saying...circa 1909)
[PEN-L:7918] Re: An insult to Burns?
Louie, still dishing up the "i'm just an ordinary guy who knows
better than anyone what is radical and just goes about being one
in an unassuming ordinary way" talk, i note.
the list is called pen-l. progressive ECONOMISTS net list. got it.
it is not unreasonable that economists might talk about things that relate
to their ambit. the real debate i suppose is whether they are progressive.
so talking about computer programming (although it would interest me) would
seem a bit odd on pen-l.
>
>Ordinarily, I would agree with you, but what in the hell does Peter Burns
>think that he is trying to accomplish by asking me these sorts of
>questions. Do you think the average person is going to have the sort of
>grasp of pricing theory minutiae that a professional economist has? One of
>the reasons I get steamed by these sorts of questions from Burns, Rosser,
>Mitchell, etc. is that they smack of academic insider knowledge. This is
>what these people do for a living.
>
>I could throw around computer programming concepts with a bunch of people
>who haven't been doing it for 28 years like me and they would say, "Wow,
>how does he know all that".
>
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:7932] Re: Re[2]: Re: Che and Cuba
Ken said the following:
>COMMENT: Agreed that the Cuban economy is in considerable trouble
>surely two of the main causes of this are: i) the US led isolation
>of the Cuban economy from profitable export markets, even to the point
>of alienating the US's own trading partners through extraterritorial
>application of US law.ii) the collapse of
>the USSR and beneficial trade relationships with the former communist
>countries. These much more than central planning seems to be the cause
>of Cuba's present woes.
>
Well we have to be careful to net out causality here. logically (another ploy
coming up which is used by academics! - eh louis):
(1) cuba made progress despite the usa blockade. so that hasn't changed.
(2) it could have been central planning.
(3) it could have been the fact that they were basically a dependent state of
the USSR.
(4) when the sugar markets collapsed there, and the aid dried up, cuba stumbles
badly, central planning or not.
(5) so what did central planning have to do with anything?
that is the question. my bet is that central planning did not necessarily lead
to any growth scenarios in cuba. its impact might have been more on equity and
civilised interactions b/tw people. the multipliers coming from the strong USSR
presence in the economy would have kicked irrespective of the type of
allocation and distribution system.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:8261] Re: inflation & deflation
>Lynn Turgeon writes: >>Passell also concludes that most people
>seem to win as a result of overall deflation just as most people
>seem to lose from overall inflation and therefore tend to go
>along with fighting inflation as a national policy. No wonder
>there is inertia among Japanese policy-makers when it comes to
>reversing deflation.<<
>
>How can Passell say such things?? How can he talk about "most
>people"? Debtors win in (unanticipated) inflations and lose in
>(unanticipated) deflations. Creditors get the flip side, losing
>in (unant) inflations and winning in (unant) deflation. The
>Japanese deflationary hegemony seems to me to be similar to that
>of the 1920s (on a more global scale), partly due to the power of
>the creditors and partly a reaction to past inflation.
Adding to Jim:
i am amazed that there hasn't been a consideration of the unemployment that
accompanies deflation and the strong employment growth that typically
accompanies inflation (though not always of-course).
the distributional changes that accompany unemployment (which is always
disproportionately borne by low wage groups anyway) are major. poverty doesn't
seem to stem from losing real income as your holdings of credit diminish with
inflation.
but it sure does correlate strongly with not having an income at all due to
unemployment.
give me inflation any time. all i have to do is to index the nominal economy. a
much easier option that what is confronted in the labour market when a
deflation is on.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:8462] re: Bougainville
>do any of pen-l's ozzies* have any comments on the events
>reported over pen-l concerning Bougainville?
>
>*"ozzies" is ozzy slang for aussies.
>
OZ Bill here. the situation in Bougainville (B) is pretty complicated. The
people have been trying to take on a couple of huge multinational companies,
the PNG government propped up by the defence aid budget from the australian
government (even though the govt always swore black and blue that equipment
they gave to the PNG govt was only used for peaceful purposes - they lied and
brought shame on us...only slightly lesser in my view, than the way successive
OZ governments have sold out the fretilin in East Timor), and an apathetic
world (also the problem for east timor).
interestingly, the people have taken the companies on (well one of them BHP) in
the Australian courts over pollution damage from the OK-Tedi copper mine
on their island. they have had mixed success but it is a real david and goliath
effort (sort of like the mcdonalds prosecution in the UK). BHP turn up with
very expensive QCs in their fine silks and the B people hire a suburban lawyer
who ties the company up in litigation for ages. at present it is unresolved
although i think the Bs have lostthe undecided question is whether the
Australian courts have jurisdiction. the PNG, when it was initially decided
that they did, combined with BHp to appeal. the PNG govt and CRA and BHP are in
league in all of it. the pollution was a total disgrace and even BHP has
admitted it didn't take the proper safeguards. read: they dump raw and very
damaging poisonous waste into the main water channel of the people in the area
who lost their livelihoods and became ill.
as for the major struggle: well it is a classic National Liberation Struggle.
the Companies are raping the raw materials and destroying the local land
system. the companies say they are giving the people jobs. well yeh, in
dangerous tasks at low pay with high turnover through injury. and hey, they
already had jobs.they ran their own showsfarms etc. they companies
don't even pay the PNG govt much.
so the OZ govt are guilty. the OZ companies are guilty. the PNG govt is
hopelessly corrupt and guilty. and simplistically, the Bs are the fighting this
rather unlikely battle (in terms of resources and technology) against a
monolith with heaps of clout.
CRA has pulled out b/c the costs of vandalism/sabotage became too great and no
white executives were safe anywhere.
that is my view. there is also not enough anger among australians for this and
east timor, b/c in part we are being divided and conquered by our own govt
acting in the interests of capital.
hope this gives some info jim
it is a crying shame.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:8951] Re: Roemer's folly
Louis wrote:
>
>Translation from the Roemer-ese: When some workers "drop out" of bourgeois
>society and go to Vermont with their tools and set up a commune like a
>bunch of lazy grasshoppers, they will eventually fall behind the
>industrious ant workers who remain in bourgeois society, and who keep
>their hair short and drive their cars to their factory job each day where
>foremen yell in their face and where assembly lines keep speeding up and
>where they keep losing fingers... The criteria for Roemer is not lost
>fingers or alienation, it is the bundle of goods you can take home. (What
>was John Roemer doing in 1967 anyhow? Somebody should have slipped him
>some acid.)
>
>Everything revolves around the most narrow and economistic definition of
>progress. You got to get those bundles of goods increased and hours
>required to produce them decreased, come hell or high water. Even if there
>is longer hours and smaller bundles in the short term, the eventual goal
>is to maximize the "income-leisure" bundle.
>
And much more.
I really enjoyed reading this Louis. You later talked about the affinity the
peasants have with their land as being completely ignored also.
I might add to it that this sort of reasoning completely ignores the
environmental aspects. one might imagine that the back to earth farmers out
there without the ritzy comsumer items (and definately worse off!!!) are in
fact an essential move to saving the earth from destruction.
the other income-leisure choosers in the suits etc can't logically have all the
goodies for too much longer. we will all be forced to more community based
farming eventually anyway.
anyway, no love for roemer's work here mate.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:8546] Re: Berkley Rosser, Jerry Levy and Bob Malecki
>Jerry Levy has his closed circle of brilliant Marxist economists trying to
>solve the transformation problem on the OPE list. I understand that the
>bouncer won't let Bill Mitchell and Berkeley Rosser through the front door.
>
Dear Louis:
i can't speak for barkley but i was invited onto OPE, read the emails for a
month, and gracefully resigned.
i felt it was not going to generate practical dialogue. and i didn't have to
punch any bouncer out on my way in or out.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:9248] Re: Models
Dear Louis
there is a coding error on line 26.
kind regards
bill
>to each other. I bet your model doesn't have that. And one last thing, my
>model uses computer techniques to make sure that everything is
>logical. Here's the software that I use:
>
>
>#!/usr/local/bin/sybperl
>
>$zero1 = "0";
>$zero2 = "00";
>$zero3 = "000";
>$zero4 = "";
>$zero5 = "0";
>$zero6 = "00";
>
>while ()
>
> {$labor = substr($_, 1, 1);
>$nature = substr($_, 2, 9);
>$temperature = substr($_, 11, 2);
>$x=$y=@array=@reverse_array=0;
>&conversion;}
>
>sub conversion {
>$orig = $nature;
>
>while ($orig > 0)
>
> {$div = ($orig / 36);
>$round_div = sprintf("%1d", $div);
>$remainder = $orig - ($round_div*36);
>&translate;
>@array[$x] = $translated_remainder;
>
>$orig = $round_div;
>
>$x++;}
>
>$sizeof_array = @array;
>$start_key = $sizeof_array - 1;
>
>while ($y < $sizeof_array)
>
> {$reverse_array[$y] = $array[$start_key];
> $start_key--;
> $y++;}
>
>$length = @liberation;
>
>if ($length == 7)
>{$base_36_vendnum =
>"$labor@liberation[0]@liberation[1]@liberation[2]@liberation[3]@liberation[4]@liberation[5]@liberation[6]$temperature";}
>elsif ($length == 6)
>{$base_36_vendnum =
>"$labor$zero1@liberation[0]@liberation[1]@liberation[2]@liberation[3]@liberation[4]@liberation[5]$temperature";}
>elsif ($length == 5)
>{$base_36_vendnum =
>"$labor$zero2@liberation[0]@liberation[1]@liberation[2]@liberation[3]@liberation[4]$temperature";}
>elsif ($length == 4)
>{$base_36_vendnum =
>"$labor$zero3@liberation[0]@liberation[1]@liberation[2]@liberation[3]$temperature";}
>elsif ($length == 3)
>{$base_36_vendnum =
>"$labor$zero4@liberation[0]@liberation[1]@liberation[2]$temperature";}
>elsif ($length == 2)
>{$base_36_vendnum = "$labor$zero5@liberation[0]@liberation[1]$temperature";}
>elsif ($length == 1)
>{$base_36_vendnum = "$labor$zero6@liberation[0]$temperature";}
>print "$base_36_vendnum\n";
>
>}
>
>sub translate {
>
>@translation_array=("0","1","2","3","4","5","6","7","8","9",
>"A","B","C","D","E","F","G","H","I","J",
>"K","L","M","N","O","P","Q","R","S","T",
>"U","V","W","X","Y","Z");
>
>$translated_remainder = @translation_array[$remainder];
>}
>
>
>
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:8702] Re: market socialism, planned socialism
Anders wrote (in part):
>
>Our side could use some more dreamers. I can't tell you how many political
>actions I've been involved with where the lefties involved will Talk the
>Big Talk (Revolution, etc.) while fighting for a couple of lousy crumbs.
>Almost nobody is gutsy enough to say, "we want real power in 10 years"--not
>Ruling the World real power but running CA's state government or turning
>the temp industry inside-out--let alone to actually plan for it. That
>takes people who are willing to dream, let alone to do the kind of
>theorizing that makes dreams vivid. Unfortunately, most of the radicals I
>know who think that way are on the Right...
>
we have spoken about this in other topics. one thing that irritates me about
the left (i speak of OZ) is their attitude to public schooling. while they are
all committed leftists planning the long haul...they feel justified in taking
their children out of the run-down state education system and putting them into
the salubrious private school education that costs a lot in terms of fees which
they can afford to pay being uni. academics and lawyers and etc and etc.
they justify it by saying their kids are more important than a principle.
i retort...nothing is more important than a principle (a principle defines
itself). either they believe in being in control of a vibrant public sector
(okay - it is no revolution, and is only palliative, and is probably a strategy
which prolongs capitalism, but it is now and it is our lives) or they don't.
their actions always lead me to think they would be the first people i would
"shoot come the revolution".
so i agreebefore we get there there is so much to do - in the community, on
the land, getting little things sorted out and in control. come the revolution,
these bastards and their bastard kids (all with big educations) will probably
take over and be as fucked as the incumbents.
take control nowin little waysthat is my approach and maybe, some time
down the road, the revolution might come and we will have some consistent
practices already in place.
kind regards
bill
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
--
## William F. Mitchell
### Head of Economics Department
#University of Newcastle
New South Wales, Australia
###* E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
###Phone: +61 49 215065
# ## ###+61 49 215027
Fax: +61 49 216919
## http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
[PEN-L:8589] Re: child of NAIRU!
This is an interesting discussion and beats flame wars and cockroaches any day. it seems that they have now gone of to wreck M-I. good riddance. > > Jim once again mustn't have anything much to do and wrote heaps of interesting things > >two points: 1) As suggested by the end of my last missive on this >subject, whether or not the P curve is vertical depends on one's >time-frame. From year to year, it's very flat, maybe even >horizontal. In a 4 year period like the US electoral cycle, it's >L-shaped, with a flat tail. It's only in the long run (of the sort >that happens after we're dead) that it's probably vertical. > well my current work is about regime shifts in the PC. i don't think we should be frightened of using the concept NAIRU although i argued in a 1987 paper that we should follow Kuhn and Lakatos and invent our own terminology to separate us from them. more later on that. it is foolish to get into a lather denying the verticality of the PC at some unemployment rate. i agree with tom that we have some work to do on what we think about or what constitutes employment and hence unemployment. this will be forced upon us by environmental concerns b/c there is not a hope in hell of everyone being able to work using today's technology to produce today's mix of goods and services without the environment collapsing. but that is another story and tom sort of waylaid the debate on the nairu by putting this in. back to vertical pcs. i think there is some positive level of un always required. it might be called the level of informational un. (sort of frictional).clearly information takes time to travel and be absorbed. changing agg. demand will not really affect this. so then if say we are at that rate..capitalist class struggle asideit defines full capacity (in the sense that capital is not the constraint but labour supply is) and the system cannot crank out any more physical output and thus cannot quantity adjust..then whatprices have to adjust. and once you accept that then you are on a vertical pc. the question is at what unemployment rate it occurs. i say low and i say that although there might be spikes of vertical or steep segments along the way, the govt can use AD policies to drive the economy towards that level (environmental considerations aside). we are not giving up anything to admit that such a regime shift - from a persistent or long memory segment of the PC where AD policy can have permanent quantity effects to a vertical segment where it can't --- exists. if you put this into a class struggle context then you have to admit that probably the cappos won't like the un rate to be anywhere near the informational rate. and in that context you get the nairu concept becoming the description of the rate at which the cappos stop using margin push to get a higher profit share. of-course, equally it is the rate where the unions or workers generally stop using wage push to increase their real wages. it moves depending on institutions and other things economic. jim has done a fine job of describing this. >But the fact that the "long run" will never come doesn't mean that >we should ignore the NAIRU completely; to avoid silly >terminological squabbles, however, let's follow bill mitchell to >call it the MERU, the "macroeconomic equilibrium rate of >unemployment," even if it's the same thing as the NAIRU. > yeh lets follow him. sounds like a good term to me. for readers who want the development of the model and the term read William F. Mitchell (1987). "The NAIRU, Structural Imbalance, and the Macroeconomic Equilibrium Unemployment Rate, Australian Economic Papers, June. (always learning things from Paul D.!!,although it is not in capitals eh?) >The MERU is unknown, while it may never be known exactly. It >shifts, probably even due to changes in the actual U rate. However, >there _is_ some unemployment rate below which the balance of power >in labor-power markets starts shifting towards workers, so that >conflict-based inflation rises. That's the MERU. (It's a bit like >Marx's concept of prices of production (Smith's "natural" prices): >actual market prices never attain prices of production for long. >PoPs are based on a violent abstraction, i.e., the assumption of >equalized profit rates, but they do say something about the >tendencies of market prices.) > but it isn't the informational rate. the MERU is probably only a temporary constraint on AD expansion. i am also working on a model where the public sector automatically guarantess the informational rate by acting as a "buffer stock" employer. in other words, its acts to take up any employment slack created by the private sector. the govt gets round the cappos fear of to
[PEN-L:12168] Re: Slagging Di
At 02:39 PM 9/6/97 -0700, you wrote: >Sid says that we should give Disome credit. Maybe so. The National >Football League is filled with "caring" athletes, many of whom have >agents who give them charities as vehicles to get better reputations. > My only offering about the whole sordid business are: (1) In reply to "are you going to watch the funeral?" - Me: what they are going to give the thousands of rwandans a funeral! (2) Where was Camilla yesterday? kind regards bill ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### Fax: +61 49 216919 Mobile: 0419 422 410 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
Re: White Jazz
> >On Sun, 18 Jan 1998, Louis Proyect wrote: > >> Where are the Louis Armstrongs or Charlie Parkers of today? > Denis wrote: >Hip-hopping or DJ-ing in the 'hood, that's where. I've always felt that > Listen to marcus miller "tales" (1995). he attempts to stylise a link b/tw the old and the new jazz. terrifically funky and jazzy. he was miles davis's last bass player and makes a fender jazz bass sound like no other. kind regards bill -- ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### Fax: +61 49 216919 ## Mobile: 0419 422 410 WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
Re: Full translation of Castro speech
At 15:48 22/01/98 -0800, you wrote: >Before you give the Pope too much credit, he is a far cry from Pope John. >Also, the rhetoric is not far from that of Solzhenitsin (sp?). The Pope >has supported just about every repressive regime around the world. He was >the first to recognize the Haitian coup, if I remember correctly. > Yes michael. Before any radical on the left gets too carried away with all this catholic mumbo jumbo they should reflect on the role of the church in countries where people have been brainwashed into believing the nonsense they call their faith. usually pro-capitalist, anti-environment. they tried to expel the liberation theologians. why castro would even have the old bastard in cuba amazes me. kind regards bill ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### Fax: +61 49 216919 Mobile: 0419 422 410 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
Re: Full translation of Castro speech
I said: > >why castro would even have the old bastard in cuba amazes me. > Jim said in reply: > >Response: I think it was more in the order of a tactical compromise >for the purpose of achieving some kind of leverage or authority to >help end the social systems destabilization campain and embargo that >is creating a lot of misery for the people of Cuba. > >Personally, I wish that Fidel had mentioned the Ratline (Vatican >assistance to fleeing Nazi war criminals), the 1933 Concordat with >the Nazis (Pope Pius XI prasing Nazis as "voctors for Christianity >and a bulwark against Bolshevism"), high-level elements of the Church >supporting fascist regimes/despots while preaching against grass- >roots political action and "liberation theology" by rank-and-file >Priests and Nuns (and a few higher level elements like Archbishop >Romero), the Pope's collaboration with the CIA and the misery caused >by destabilization campaigns against Poland and Eastern Europe (while >preaching against secular political action by Priests and Nuns), the >1498 Papal Encyclical commanding either conversion or extermination >of indigenous peoples, the patronizing patriarchy and patriarchal >attitudes toward women, etc etc. me too! and then hold the pope to ransom to force the vatican to sell all their middle class art treasures and other properties they own. although i suppose clinton needs an invasion of some kind or another given his present rather sticky wicket. kind regards bill ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### Fax: +61 49 216919 Mobile: 0419 422 410 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
Re: Ecology and the American Indian
Interesting story Louis but how do you account for the practice whereby some tribes in the plains used to stampede whole herds of bison over cliffs as a quick way of killing them and then picking only bits and pieces of the bodies below. Incredible waste and lack of concern for their natural partners. kind regards bill > One famous counerexample to the view that Indians were >always "in harmony with nature" is the high probability >that the extinction of the sabre-tooth tiger and several >other large mammals in North America probably resulted from >overhunting arising from the initial invasion of the >continent by the human species, the first Native American >Indians to be precise. This does not say that many tribes >later adopted highly ecologically sound approaches. >Barkley Rosser >On Mon, 26 Jan 1998 14:03:20 -0500 Louis Proyect ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Indian religious beliefs are intrinsically ecological since they regard >> nature as sacred. ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### Fax: +61 49 216919 Mobile: 0419 422 410 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/economics/bill/billeco.html
Re: Ecology and the American Indian
>This, along with the disappearance of the saber-tooth tiger, is another one >of those "gotchas" that figures prominently in the right-wing repertory. >Hutchinson, in "Remaking of the Amerind", wrote that the Crow once drove >700 buffalo off the edge of a cliff. This anecdote has made the rounds of >the Rush Limbaugh show, the National Review and other venues. > >What he does not deal with is the question of whether the Crow *wasted* the >meat, but only projected what whites would do in capitalist society into >hunting-and-gathering society. But, even granting the possibility that >Indians left the meat to rot, are we supposed to draw general conclusions >about this one incident? It is amazing that such events are so isolated in >Indian societies. When whites killed millions of beaver and buffalo >wantonly and allowed valuable parts of the animal to go to waste, how can >we even begin to compare our society to their's? This of course is the goal >of Hutchinson and other apologists for capitalism, to legitimize the waste >that our system has institutionalized. > Yes, but i wasn't making any attempt to be relative here. The capitalist societies are rapacious in the extreme and that cannot be attenuated by saying everyone else has baggage in the cupboard too. In general i agree with the interpretation that many of the native american tribes felt as one with nature. kind regards bill ##William F. Mitchell ### Head of Economics Department # University of Newcastle New South Wales, Australia ###*E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ### Phone: +61 49 215065 # ## ### Fax: +61 49 216919 Mobile: 0419 422 410 ## WWW Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/economics/bill/billeco.html
