Free market, enslaved people
Free market, enslaved people by Zbigniew Baniewski 12 June 2002 22:39 UTC Zbigniew, Those of us living in capitalism have some bad news for you. Real world capitalism is not like it is in the textbooks, a free market. It inevitably becomes monopoly capitalism, with the market controlled by the biggest businesses , the small businesses in a jungle, and the state manipulating things in favor of big businesses. On an international level, it is the richer countries controlling and exploiting the poorer countries. The bad things you describe in Poland _are_ real capitalism. To reverse what you say, capitalism is socialism for the rich and market discipline for everybody else. Charles ^ I asked: is it democracy on the work-place level? Zbigniew answers:there is less democracy at workplace, because the people are afraid to lose their jobs. That's capitalism! (see Marx's concept of the reserve army of labor.) I cannot agree. That's just one of the capitalism's features (the one less beloved by the people ;). The market for final commodities may not be free, but it hardly ever is, even in the U.S. Anyway, it's not the free market that defines capitalism. is it democracy on the state level that actually can change the _status quo_? Zbigniew answers: Yes. YES! I can assure you, that if you can only persuade some millions of people, you can really change the status quo... but first you should additionally persuade about 50% of very disappointed electors, that they should took their part in the election. and: There is really full democracy on the state level - but people, tired and very disappointed with s.c. [so-called?] capitalism Yes. So called, because capitalism works in our country as diagnose for current troubles (partially even in official propaganda) - although we cannot see the capitalism here. As I wrote, capitalism means for me free market first.
Re: Free market, enslaved people
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Charles Brown wrote: Those of us living in capitalism have some bad news for you. Real world capitalism is not like it is in the textbooks, a free market. It inevitably becomes monopoly capitalism, with the market controlled by the biggest businesses , the small businesses in a jungle, and the state manipulating things in favor of big businesses. I realize that - but do you agree, that it can't be called a real capitalism? It's exactly what I'm - for my private use - describing as banana republic syndrome. The rich companies are sponsoring some politicians, which are forcing the law, which makes living of that companies much easier... Of course I realize, that it's hard to achieve the ideal - but shouldn't we go for it? So, in conclusion, we (in Poland) have just a bit of capitalism, you, in US, much more - and (as I understand) none of us is living in truly capitalists conditions. After lecture of some books (f.e. Free to choose M. Friedman or The Road to serfdom F.A. von Hayek - and others), in my opinion, the real (it doesn't mean in it's every aspect ideal) capitalism was - as perhaps the best example - United States before 1913. On an international level, it is the richer countries controlling and exploiting the poorer countries. I understand that; of course it depends on the quality of the government of that poorer countries. And, unfortunately, we've got an very uninteresting one. The bad things you describe in Poland _are_ real capitalism. To reverse what you say, capitalism is socialism for the rich and market discipline for everybody else. I read several things, how Ronald Reagan f.e. broke the unofficial agreements among the airline companies, which was resulting in the tickets cheaper 5-7 times than earlier... so, it's possible anyway? pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: the NYT article suggests that the Polish recession was due to the slowdown of the world economy, the central bank's keeping of the zloty high, etc., not due to high taxes. Of course, it's very comfortable explanation for our government; I understand, that Poland isn't in vacuum, and the reason you mentioned has it's influence. But the very bad things are done by bad quality of our domestic law, and systematic limitation of free market, done since 1989 until today. Just one example: do you know, that every company owner should pay a social insurance for every of his workers, which is at the level of almost 50% of that workers salary? Because it's obligatory, it's just hidden tax. payroll taxes aren't especially hidden, but it's true that employers pass the burden on to employees. In our country it's hidden, because it's called as insurance contribution, not tax. Although it is an ordinary tax, because it's obligatory. Whether the social insurance tax is too high or not depends on what kind of benefits are received from it. Just basic (really basic) medical service and very low retiring-pension. It's too much to write; for comparison I'll tell you, that more you can have paying much lower (several times lower) monthly contribution to Commercial Union or similar company. But - whether you'll pay this, or not - you must pay that social insurance tax. Quick and dirty comparison: average payment in our country is about 2000,- zloty. The company owner should additionally pay almost 1000,- more (50% of that salary) to state social insurance company. Although the worker could have better conditions for just 100,- zloty paid to Commercial Union by himself... It's the thing, that makes worker costs very high in our country. Unemployment is the result. In Argentina, they set the market free and it seems to have been a disaster. My comparison to Argentina was mostly in terms of that country's international economic dependence, its obedience to the IMF and the orthodox financial interests, and its committment to keeping its currency high no matter what. I didn't think of Poland as bankrupt (yet). But the Argentina problem was AFAIK mainly keeping its currency high no matter what. The zloty's rate of exchange is floating (yet) pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
Re: re: Free market, enslaved people
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: [..] What defines capitalism is not really unemployment, but the class system, i.e., existence of proletarianization, in which the vast majority lack the bonds of feudalism or slavery and also lack direct control over the means of subsistence and production. Isn't it a bit (or a lot) marxist-like definition? Perhaps we can define capitalism in economic way: the conditions are more capitalistic, when the amount of national product, which is redistributed by government, is low. More redistribution - less capitalism (100% redistribution = pure communism). My impression is that the non-Jewish industrialists still had a lot of power in Nazi Germany, while some Nazis became capitalists. But this argument is getting too far away from the thread, so I'll drop it. Just for ending: owners of big companies had excellent times before 1937 (when Schacht was german minister of industry), but in the following years, the needs of the german war machine made big industry almost completely state-dependent (at 1937 the taxes ate 60-70% of the netto income of that big industry companies). Nazi regime it's biggest support got from small business owners. ... capitalism works in our country as diagnose for current troubles (partially even in official propaganda) - although we cannot see the capitalism here. As I wrote, capitalism means for me free market first. Then we're using the term differently. I don't see much point in arguing about the meaning of the word capitalism, so I won't. Perhaps my proposal (redistribution-related definition) could be accurate. It's always a mistake to quote Friedman, since he's so often wrong. Why? Wasn't Chile his (and his Chicag boys) big success? He didn't realize (or rather, he didn't include in his presentation) that if Poland followed that strategy, it would be competing with South Korea and a lot of other countries. Good example! In 1985 national income per capita in South Korea was a half of today's in Poland (they had about 36 millions population in 1985, today in Poland we have about 37 millions). But today average income per capita in Korea is about two times higher than we have in Poland. So, in 17 years they made 4x multiplication of their income per capita, although their today's population is about 47 millions. And it's the result of setting their market still more and more free. Their government is redistributing about 25% of their national income. Our polish government - about 43%. Do you see the difference? pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
Re: Re: Free market, enslaved people
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 08:48:42PM +0200, Zbigniew Baniewski wrote: in my opinion, the real (it doesn't mean in it's every aspect ideal) capitalism was - as perhaps the best example - United States before 1913. By the late nineteenth century, strong competitive forces were destroying US capital, so just before that time, corporations began to amalgamate to negate competition. I read several things, how Ronald Reagan f.e. broke the unofficial agreements among the airline companies, which was resulting in the tickets cheaper 5-7 times than earlier... so, it's possible anyway? I don't know if you mean the deregulation of the airlines, but Doug Henwood on our list had an excellent study in his newsletter. Prices were already falling before that. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Abolition of private property and free market, enslaved people
Marx refer about tax as below in Communist manifest MIYACHI TATSUO Psychiatric Department Komaki municipal hosipital 1-20.JOHBUHSHI KOMAKI CITY AICHI PREF. 486-0044 TEL:0568-76-4131 FAX 0568-76-4145 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable. 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. 3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. 4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. 5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. 6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state. 7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. 8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. 9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country. 10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
RE: Re: re: Free market, enslaved people
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26857] Re: re: Free market, enslaved people I wrote: What defines capitalism is not really unemployment, but the class system, i.e., existence of proletarianization, in which the vast majority lack the bonds of feudalism or slavery and also lack direct control over the means of subsistence and production. Zbigniew Baniewski writes: Isn't it a bit (or a lot) marxist-like definition? Yes. Since the pen-l list is mostly a Marxist group of people, it shouldn't suprise you. However, there are people who use the (non-Marxist) definition, seeing capitalism as simply involving the prevalence of markets. Perhaps we can define capitalism in economic way: the conditions are more capitalistic, when the amount of national product, which is redistributed by government, is low. More redistribution - less capitalism (100% redistribution = pure communism). There's a basic problem with this: capitalism inherently involves a redistribution from workers to capitalists, as the capitalists control the means of production (capital goods) and means of subsistence (consumer goods) so that workers have to pay profits+interest+rent (surplus-value) to the capitalists in return for being allowed to survive. You're only talking about a secondary redistribution, by the government, which only sometimes involves a redistribution from capitalists to workers. Mostly, it's like unemployment insurance, which (in the United States) involves a redistribution from employed workers to unemployed workers or social security which (again, in the U.S.) redistributes from currently-working individuals to the retired, dependents, etc. Mostly, the government uses its resources to preserve the power of the capitalists. ... I wrote: It's always a mistake to quote Friedman, since he's so often wrong. Zbigniew: Why? Wasn't Chile his (and his Chicag boys) big success? I don't consider the forced abolition of democracy (using bayonets murder torture), the forced imposition of free markets, and the extreme increase in the inequality of income along with a totally inhumane system to be a big success. It's true that Friedman and his boys endorsed this success, but the real victors were the U.S. power elite and its CIA, the transnational corporations that were operating in Chile (ITT, Kennakott, etc.), General Pinochet, and the local groups of rich folks. Further, Friedman and his boys also lied about the true nature of this success and the nature of their involvement, avoiding any kind of responsibility for the costs of the imposition of their program. I wrote that MF didn't realize (or rather, he didn't include in his presentation) that if Poland followed that strategy, it would be competing with South Korea and a lot of other countries. Good example! In 1985 national income per capita in South Korea was a half of today's in Poland (they had about 36 millions population in 1985, today in Poland we have about 37 millions). But today average income per capita in Korea is about two times higher than we have in Poland. So, in 17 years they made 4x multiplication of their income per capita, although their today's population is about 47 millions. And it's the result of setting their market still more and more free. Their government is redistributing about 25% of their national income. Our polish government - about 43%. Do you see the difference? I don't know where you get the percentage of redistribution (25% for South Korea). Is it simply the percentage of taxes in their GDP? In any event, it's silly to over-emphasize that percentage, especially since a lot of it (such as military spending or spending on education) isn't really redistribution as most people use that term. What's important is that the SK government used its taxes intelligently to promote economic development (within the context of capitalism). They pursued a non-market/non-free-trade strategy of subsidizing private busineses in a way that would allow them to eventually beat foreign competition, at the same time they invested in education and land reform (so that the program ended up being They also got a lot of help from the United States, because SK had to look good in comparison to North Korea and China as part of the Cold War. It also helped that the U.S. pumped a lot of money into SK as part of having a lot of troops there. Further, during the crucial years from the 1950s to the 1970s, the world economy was growing, along with the U.S. market for SK goods, allowing that country to escape its previous poverty. the MF is saying that Poland can simply imitate SK, without any of the historical conditions listed above being present. He also is wrong to see SK as a free-market success, even though it is a capitalist success (until 1997 or so). regards/pozdrawiam, Jim Devine
Free market, enslaved people
As Poland Endures Hard Times, Capitalism Comes Under Attack By IAN FISHER NYT , 6/12/02 SZCZECIN, Poland In Communist times, no one was louder than Poland's famously feisty shipyard workers about the state's inability to provide a decent standard of living. So now it seems a cruel joke that, as the sparkle fades from the market economy, it is private enterprise that has failed them. Since March, the Szczecin shipyard has been closed, and 6,000 workers have not been paid. When violence loomed, the government stepped in, announcing a plan in May that would, for the first time, renationalize a Polish company. It is certainly very abnormal, said Bogoslaw Rydzenski, 48, a worker. No one could have predicted this. These are hard times in Poland, which grew for nearly 10 straight years into a country of stocked shelves, giant malls and impressive self-confidence a 40-million-strong symbol of Central Europe's post-Communist hopes. Now, the will to continue privatization and other reforms, and even the desire to join the European Union, have flagged. The story is much the same around the region, as the transformation from gangly state economies has brought material comfort, but also insecurity and a new set of inequalities. In Poland, indeed, the very notion that Western-style capitalism will work in the eastern nation that embraced it perhaps most heartily is under attack. There is an apropos graffiti, Krzysztof Bledowski, an economist, said as he sat in a cafe in downtown Warsaw. He pointed across the street to a car parts shop, where someone had scrawled on a wall: Free market, enslaved people. It's the spirit of the day, he said. The mood has shifted. Capitalism is not seen by many people as a system for justice, growth, better times for kids and so on. What is happening now is not economic collapse of the kind that engulfed Russia in the 1990's. Many companies are doing well, and Poland appears set to move into the European Union in 2004. But there is a serious slowdown, compounded by what many experts say is political dawdling and disagreement about how to fix it. Around the region, the cost to top leaders is high: Second terms here are rare, and experts say Poland's new coalition government, led by the socialist Democratic Left Alliance, will be no exception if it cannot reverse this downturn. Last year, growth dropped to just 1 percent. Unemployment this year hit 18 percent, the highest in the post-Communist era, and there are real worries of street disturbances and protests in the largest nation up for joining the European Union, if more people lose their jobs. This downturn, Mr. Bledowski said, is causing a lot of soul searching. People are revising a lot of assumptions and expectations. Some experts worry that the problems at the shipyard in Szczecin (pronounced SHTESH-een), once the German Stettin, may usher in an era of greater economic control by the state. Although the center-left government elected last year says Szczecin is a singular case, there are already calls for intervention over a Daewoo car plant that went bankrupt this year and where angry workers are staging a hunger strike. There is a queue of other potential bankruptcies, and it worries me, said Hubert A. Janiszewski, managing director of Deutsche Bank in Poland. Unlike many other former Soviet bloc states, whose economies alternately surged and faltered, Poland's trajectory since the early 1990's has been largely up. Economic growth in the mid-1990's hit 7 percent. Unemployment dipped for a time to below 10 percent. Foreign investment flooded in. People felt you could throw in a little money and watch it expand into enormous piles of cash, said Tony Housh, the former leader of the American Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw. But Poland remained two nations economically. Cities, especially Warsaw, prospered, as poverty ground on in the countryside, especially on the many inefficient farms. Many large- and medium-size private business did well, more or less masking big problems in overstaffed nationalized companies, in coal mining, steel and chemical production. Then in 2000 and 2001, the world economy turned, especially that of Poland's main trading partner, Germany. Monetary policies, aimed at staving off inflation, kept the national currency, the zloty, strong and interest rates high. Unemployment surged as companies, feeling the pinch of reduced demand, shed workers. Reduced tax receipts and increased spending by the old government during the elections last September ratcheted up the budget deficit to crisis levels. In the disillusionment with the new economy and the mainstream parties of both right and left, fringe parties, particularly Self Defense, led by a radical populist, Andrzej Lepper, have surged. Mr. Lepper talks often about a middle road between communism and capitalism, greater state protections over the free market a notion that appeals these days
RE: Free market, enslaved people
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26761] Free market, enslaved people In Communist times, no one was louder than Poland's famously feisty shipyard workers about the state's inability to provide a decent standard of living. So now it seems a cruel joke that, as the sparkle fades from the market economy, it is private enterprise that has failed them. it's worse than a cruel joke. The labor union (Solidarity) wanted democracy, not privatization (capitalism). But what they got was capitalism, not democratization. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine As Poland Endures Hard Times, Capitalism Comes Under Attack By IAN FISHER NYT , 6/12/02 SZCZECIN, Poland ¯ In Communist times, no one was louder than Poland's famously feisty shipyard workers about the state's inability to provide a decent standard of living. So now it seems a cruel joke that, as the sparkle fades from the market economy, it is private enterprise that has failed them. Since March, the Szczecin shipyard has been closed, and 6,000 workers have not been paid. When violence loomed, the government stepped in, announcing a plan in May that would, for the first time, renationalize a Polish company. It is certainly very abnormal, said Bogoslaw Rydzenski, 48, a worker. No one could have predicted this. These are hard times in Poland, which grew for nearly 10 straight years into a country of stocked shelves, giant malls and impressive self-confidence ¯ a 40-million-strong symbol of Central Europe's post-Communist hopes. Now, the will to continue privatization and other reforms, and even the desire to join the European Union, have flagged. The story is much the same around the region, as the transformation from gangly state economies has brought material comfort, but also insecurity and a new set of inequalities. In Poland, indeed, the very notion that Western-style capitalism will work in the eastern nation that embraced it perhaps most heartily is under attack. There is an apropos graffiti, Krzysztof Bledowski, an economist, said as he sat in a cafe in downtown Warsaw. He pointed across the street to a car parts shop, where someone had scrawled on a wall: Free market, enslaved people. It's the spirit of the day, he said. The mood has shifted. Capitalism is not seen by many people as a system for justice, growth, better times for kids and so on. What is happening now is not economic collapse of the kind that engulfed Russia in the 1990's. Many companies are doing well, and Poland appears set to move into the European Union in 2004. But there is a serious slowdown, compounded by what many experts say is political dawdling and disagreement about how to fix it. Around the region, the cost to top leaders is high: Second terms here are rare, and experts say Poland's new coalition government, led by the socialist Democratic Left Alliance, will be no exception if it cannot reverse this downturn. Last year, growth dropped to just 1 percent. Unemployment this year hit 18 percent, the highest in the post-Communist era, and there are real worries of street disturbances and protests in the largest nation up for joining the European Union, if more people lose their jobs. This downturn, Mr. Bledowski said, is causing a lot of soul searching. People are revising a lot of assumptions and expectations. Some experts worry that the problems at the shipyard in Szczecin (pronounced SHTESH-een), once the German Stettin, may usher in an era of greater economic control by the state. Although the center-left government elected last year says Szczecin is a singular case, there are already calls for intervention over a Daewoo car plant that went bankrupt this year and where angry workers are staging a hunger strike. There is a queue of other potential bankruptcies, and it worries me, said Hubert A. Janiszewski, managing director of Deutsche Bank in Poland. Unlike many other former Soviet bloc states, whose economies alternately surged and faltered, Poland's trajectory since the early 1990's has been largely up. Economic growth in the mid-1990's hit 7 percent. Unemployment dipped for a time to below 10 percent. Foreign investment flooded in. People felt you could throw in a little money and watch it expand into enormous piles of cash, said Tony Housh, the former leader of the American Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw. But Poland remained two nations economically. Cities, especially Warsaw, prospered, as poverty ground on in the countryside, especially on the many inefficient farms. Many large- and medium-size private business did well, more or less masking big problems in overstaffed nationalized companies, in coal mining, steel and chemical production. Then in 2000 and 2001, the world economy turned, especially that of Poland's main trading partner, Germany. Monetary policies, aimed at staving off
Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
Just a few quick remarks, which will make your view more complete, I hope: On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: In Communist times, no one was louder than Poland's famously feisty shipyard workers about the state's inability to provide a decent standard of living. So now it seems a cruel joke that, as the sparkle fades from the market economy, it is private enterprise that has failed them. it's worse than a cruel joke. The labor union (Solidarity) wanted democracy, not privatization (capitalism). But what they got was capitalism, not democratization. Not quite - what they got, is some kind of banana republic with democracy. I can assure you, we've got a lot of democracy here in Poland. A lot of democracy and still fewer and fewer free market... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine As Poland Endures Hard Times, Capitalism Comes Under Attack By IAN FISHER NYT , 6/12/02 Capitalism? That man supposingly never was in Poland longer than 2-3 days... of course, if he visited our country at all. We never had a real capitalism here since 1939. [..] These are hard times in Poland, which grew for nearly 10 straight years into a country of stocked shelves, giant malls and impressive self-confidence a 40-million-strong symbol of Central Europe's post-Communist hopes. Now, the will to continue privatization and other reforms, and even the desire to join the European Union, have flagged. The story is much the same around the region, as the transformation from gangly state economies has brought material comfort, but also insecurity and a new set of inequalities. In Poland, indeed, the very notion that Western-style capitalism will work in the eastern nation that embraced it perhaps most heartily is under attack. Yes, it's the point of view of the average man from the street. Unfortunately, our current government has it's own business for stopping privatization - it's tied to businessmen, which are making money in the public sector. There is an apropos graffiti, Krzysztof Bledowski, an economist, said as he sat in a cafe in downtown Warsaw. He pointed across the street to a car parts shop, where someone had scrawled on a wall: Free market, enslaved people. Yes, it's the feeling of that average man mentioned; but the market in Poland is still more and more restricted since 1992. [..] Unlike many other former Soviet bloc states, whose economies alternately surged and faltered, Poland's trajectory since the early 1990's has been largely up. Economic growth in the mid-1990's hit 7 percent. Unemployment dipped for a time to below 10 percent. Foreign investment flooded in. People felt you could throw in a little money and watch it expand into enormous piles of cash, said Tony Housh, the former leader of the American Chamber of Commerce in Warsaw. But that man, who wrote all this, supposingly forgot to mention, how fast (and how high) the taxes in our country are raised (each year since 1989). The reader could think: when there is so good, why there is so bad?. [..] Then in 2000 and 2001, the world economy turned, especially that of Poland's main trading partner, Germany. Monetary policies, aimed at staving off inflation, kept the national currency, the zloty, strong and interest rates high. Unemployment surged as companies, feeling the pinch of reduced demand, shed workers. Reduced tax receipts and ...as an obvious result of the Laffer curve-effect... increased spending by the old government during the elections last September ratcheted up the budget deficit to crisis levels. And our new governmnet, blaming the old one for the problems (and it's true!) is spending more, than that old one. A paradox? A stupidity? [..] The government is a little bit afraid that if it imposes radical laws that are opposed by the trade unions that we will have street fights, demonstrations, large political fights, Yes, that's the *official* reason f.e. for privatization slowdown. [..] William V. Carey, a former golf professional from Florida, came to Poland in 1991 [..] His company is flourishing, and he remains optimistic, despite Poland's backward bureaucracy, poor roads (of special concern to a distribution company), and the downturn. And that's one of the symptoms for our banana republic, which can be described as capitalism for just some - and socialism for the rest. There are some large sized companies, which are doing quite well, and (still) many small business (with employment 1-20), which are struggling for survive. Many thousands of them are shut already - the people are unable to pay so high (evident and hidden) taxes. As a result - the government has fewer tax income... and as a result: they're raising taxes again... [..] But, he said, Poland's new business class is learning a rough lesson from the downturn: That there is a lot more to running a company than
RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26773] Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people The NY TIMES writes: In Communist times, no one was louder than Poland's famously feisty shipyard workers about the state's inability to provide a decent standard of living. So now it seems a cruel joke that, as the sparkle fades from the market economy, it is private enterprise that has failed them. I wrote: it's worse than a cruel joke. The labor union (Solidarity) wanted democracy, not privatization (capitalism). But what they got was capitalism, not democratization. Zbigniew Baniewski writes: Not quite - what they got, is some kind of banana republic with democracy. I can assure you, we've got a lot of democracy here in Poland. A lot of democracy and still fewer and fewer free market... is it democracy on the work-place level? is it democracy on the state level that actually can change the _status quo_? I don't think so -- if your characterization of Poland as a banana republic is correct. I would guess it's democracy under the thumb of the IMF, the US, etc. That's hardly democracy. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26773] Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people IAN FISHER NYT , 6/12/02 writes: Then in 2000 and 2001, the world economy turned, especially that of Poland's main trading partner, Germany. Monetary policies, aimed at staving off inflation, kept the national currency, the zloty, strong and interest rates high. Unemployment surged as companies, feeling the pinch of reduced demand, shed workers. Reduced tax receipts and Zbigniew Baniewski writes:...as an obvious result of the Laffer curve-effect... it seems more likely to be explained by simple Keynesian theory: if tax-payer incomes fall due to a recession, government tax revenues fall. increased spending by the old government during the elections last September ratcheted up the budget deficit to crisis levels. And our new governmnet, blaming the old one for the problems (and it's true!) is spending more, than that old one. A paradox? A stupidity? is the new government spending more than the old Communist Party (pre 1989) government? I don't see the behavior of spending more during elections to be surprising at all. It's like Bush deciding to save Florida's wetlands (but not California's), to save the steel industry, to help the farmers -- because there's a mid-term election coming. Is it right to compare Poland to Argentina? JD
Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: Unemployment surged as companies, feeling the pinch of reduced demand, shed workers. Reduced tax receipts and Zbigniew Baniewski writes:...as an obvious result of the Laffer curve-effect... it seems more likely to be explained by simple Keynesian theory: if tax-payer incomes fall due to a recession, government tax revenues fall. Yes. And the main reason of recession in our country is overtaxing. We had really quite nice growth here during 1989-1992. And still during 1993-2000, despite first symptoms of recessions coming... Just one example: do you know, that every company owner should pay a social insurance for every of his workers, which is at the level of almost 50% of that workers salary? Because it's obligatory, it's just hidden tax. increased spending by the old government during the elections last September ratcheted up the budget deficit to crisis levels. And our new governmnet, blaming the old one for the problems (and it's true!) is spending more, than that old one. A paradox? A stupidity? is the new government spending more than the old Communist Party (pre 1989) government? I don't think, that direct comparison of state spendings makes sense here; pay attention, that before 1989 almost all industry in Poland was state property, and since that time some privatization is done already. But seeing, that the polish public state debt is again still growing each year since 1994, it's serious problem. At 1994 we had 42 billions USD debt, now it's 73 billions. I don't see the behavior of spending more during elections to be surprising at all. It's like Bush deciding to save Florida's wetlands (but not California's), to save the steel industry, to help the farmers -- because there's a mid-term election coming. I believe, that USA can spend a lot of money for saving Florida's wetlands, but our economic capabilities are much (much, much...) smaller. Is it right to compare Poland to Argentina? Not yet. But I'm afraid, it could be soon, when the authorities will not set the market free and lower the taxes. Unfortunately, I can't see such will at the people, which are our current government... and because of this still more people are putting their hope in Lepper. Which is good as some kind of threat for current government, but has nothing special to propose - his third way is a socialism similar to that in Belarus pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: Zbigniew Baniewski writes: Not quite - what they got, is some kind of banana republic with democracy. I can assure you, we've got a lot of democracy here in Poland. A lot of democracy and still fewer and fewer free market... is it democracy on the work-place level? is it democracy on the state level that actually can change the _status quo_? Yes. YES! I can assure you, that if you can only persuade some millions of people, you can really change the status quo... but first you should additionally persuade about 50% of very disappointed electors, that they should took their part in the election. The situation is _opposite_ to that described in your post: there is less democracy at workplace, because the people are afraid to lose their jobs. There is really full democracy on the state level - but people, tired and very disappointed with s.c. capitalism (say: conditions caused by banana republic - while in reality we haven't any capitalism here), are voting for socialists and populists (or for socialists describing themselves as right oriented). F.e. our current president, at his first election trial, has promest flats for every young marriaged people. And the people didn't thought how? Will he pay for this from his own pocket?. They didn't realize, that they should pay for such free flats with their taxes first. I don't think so -- if your characterization of Poland as a banana republic is correct. I would guess it's democracy under the thumb of the IMF, the US, etc. That's hardly democracy. Of course, I realize the differences among Poland and Latino banana republic states. Poland it's not Venezuela, but the restrictions of the market are giving similar effect, as I wrote: capitalism for some - socialism for the rest pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26781] Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people This is interesting, Zbigniew. I asked: is it democracy on the work-place level? Zbigniew answers:there is less democracy at workplace, because the people are afraid to lose their jobs. That's capitalism! (see Marx's concept of the reserve army of labor.) The market for final commodities may not be free, but it hardly ever is, even in the U.S. Anyway, it's not the free market that defines capitalism. Regimes such as Nazi Germany and Papa Doc's Haiti had capitalism without free markets. is it democracy on the state level that actually can change the _status quo_? Zbigniew answers: Yes. YES! I can assure you, that if you can only persuade some millions of people, you can really change the status quo... but first you should additionally persuade about 50% of very disappointed electors, that they should took their part in the election. and: There is really full democracy on the state level - but people, tired and very disappointed with s.c. [so-called?] capitalism (say: conditions caused by banana republic - while in reality we haven't any capitalism here), are voting for socialists and populists (or for socialists describing themselves as right oriented). F.e. our current president, at his first election trial, has promest flats for every young marriaged people. And the people didn't thought how? Will he pay for this from his own pocket?. They didn't realize, that they should pay for such free flats with their taxes first. I don't see anything wrong with housing subsidies, but it's true that someone has to pay for them with taxes. (The U.S. subsidizes middle-class housing, by exempting mortgage interest from income taxes.) Answering my own question about Polish democracy at the state level, I wrote: I don't think so -- if your characterization of Poland as a banana republic is correct. I would guess it's democracy under the thumb of the IMF, the US, etc. That's hardly democracy. Of course, I realize the differences among Poland and Latino banana republic states. Poland it's not Venezuela, but the restrictions of the market are giving similar effect, as I wrote: capitalism for some - socialism for the rest not all restrictions on the market are bad (even in orthodox capitalist economics), since markets often fail to serve even consumers. It seems as if you're talking about state-guaranteed capitalist riches for some -- impoverished state services for the rest. JD
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
Title: RE: [PEN-L:26780] Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people I wrote: it seems more likely to be explained by simple Keynesian theory [than by the Laffer curve theory]: if tax-payer incomes fall due to a recession [described by the NYT article], government tax revenues fall. Zbigniew writes: Yes. And the main reason of recession in our country is overtaxing. We had really quite nice growth here during 1989-1992. And still during 1993-2000, despite first symptoms of recessions coming... the NYT article suggests that the Polish recession was due to the slowdown of the world economy, the central bank's keeping of the zloty high, etc., not due to high taxes. Just one example: do you know, that every company owner should pay a social insurance for every of his workers, which is at the level of almost 50% of that workers salary? Because it's obligatory, it's just hidden tax. payroll taxes aren't especially hidden, but it's true that employers pass the burden on to employees. Whether the social insurance tax is too high or not depends on what kind of benefits are received from it. Is it right to compare Poland to Argentina? Not yet. But I'm afraid, it could be soon, when the authorities will not set the market free and lower the taxes. In Argentina, they set the market free and it seems to have been a disaster. My comparison to Argentina was mostly in terms of that country's international economic dependence, its obedience to the IMF and the orthodox financial interests, and its committment to keeping its currency high no matter what. I didn't think of Poland as bankrupt (yet). regards / pozdrawiam Jim Devine
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: This is interesting, Zbigniew. I can agree with you - but be sure, taking a look at it is better, than living with it... ;) I asked: is it democracy on the work-place level? Zbigniew answers:there is less democracy at workplace, because the people are afraid to lose their jobs. That's capitalism! (see Marx's concept of the reserve army of labor.) I cannot agree. That's just one of the capitalism's features (the one less beloved by the people ;). The market for final commodities may not be free, but it hardly ever is, even in the U.S. Anyway, it's not the free market that defines capitalism. The problem is with oppressive taxation and with many restrictions and regulations, which are partially conflicting with each other. You can never be sure, whether are you OK, or just breaking some law, which you can't know because of it's excess. Regimes such as Nazi Germany and Papa Doc's Haiti had capitalism without free markets. Forgive me for being contrary once again: I don't know the Haiti situation, but in Germany at Nazi times the private industries (the large ones) was fully controlled by the state. The owners were reduced just to some kind of managers, with limited influence. And the programm of the Nazi party (National Socialist) was very similar to that which had polish (and other) communist party before 1989 (I made comparison several years ago). Of course, I'm talking about industry, economic and social-related things only, not about f.e. concetration camps, ban the Jews or something similar. is it democracy on the state level that actually can change the _status quo_? Zbigniew answers: Yes. YES! I can assure you, that if you can only persuade some millions of people, you can really change the status quo... but first you should additionally persuade about 50% of very disappointed electors, that they should took their part in the election. and: There is really full democracy on the state level - but people, tired and very disappointed with s.c. [so-called?] capitalism Yes. So called, because capitalism works in our country as diagnose for current troubles (partially even in official propaganda) - although we cannot see the capitalism here. As I wrote, capitalism means for me free market first. (say: conditions caused by banana republic - while in reality we haven't any capitalism here), are voting for socialists and populists (or for socialists describing themselves as right oriented). F.e. our current president, at his first election trial, has promest flats for every young marriaged people. And the people didn't thought how? Will he pay for this from his own pocket?. They didn't realize, that they should pay for such free flats with their taxes first. I don't see anything wrong with housing subsidies, I'm afraid, you're once again making direct comparison USA-Poland. I wish Poland to be comparable to USA, but it cannot be compared at the moment. As it was said by Milton Friedman, when he was visiting Poland at 1989: You shouldn't make the things, which they're making now, when they're rich - you should make the things, which they made much earlier, when they was as poor as you are today (about the aspirations of many Poles to immediately retake the western standards of living). but it's true that someone has to pay for them with taxes. (The U.S. subsidizes middle-class housing, by exempting mortgage interest from income taxes.) The people in our country aren't realizing, that for everything, which is assured by the state, they must pay first. They are thinking, that the state is some kind of good uncle, which will pay for them. [..] not all restrictions on the market are bad (even in orthodox capitalist economics), since markets often fail to serve even consumers. It seems as if you're talking about state-guaranteed capitalist riches for some Not quite. You'll not find any (or perhaps well-hidden) regulations, which will guarantee capitalist riches for somebody. It's tied to taxes, which you can pay (and make earnings), when you have really big turnover - but if you have small turnover, you'll never grow to be capitalist in the future. Or you must just close your company, as many are shut already. -- impoverished state services for the rest. And once again: not quite. I don't want anything from the state. No free flats. No free education. No free health service - because nothing is free! For everything you have to pay - with money, or taxes. But paying with taxes is much more expensive - the tax (and other) clerks want to earn something as well. So, the direct payment will be much cheaper way to buy something - without the state's mediation. And so I prefer to earn and pay for myself (as I'm doing now) - if only the government will not want so much money from me pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Free market, enslaved people
Just some errata: On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Devine, James wrote: [..] -- impoverished state services for the rest. Oh, if you mean the current situation, not the wanted one - you're right pozdrawiam / regards Zbigniew Baniewski P.S. The next posts I'll answer tomorrow.
re: Free market, enslaved people
Title: re: Free market, enslaved people I asked: is it democracy on the work-place level? Zbigniew answers:there is less democracy at workplace, because the people are afraid to lose their jobs. I replied: That's capitalism! (see Marx's concept of the reserve army of labor.) Zbigniew replies: I cannot agree. That's just one of the capitalism's features (the one less beloved by the people ;). Yes, it's one of capitalism's features, and a pretty important one, since capitalism uses unemployment to motivate people to work instead of using corporal punishment and the like. Low unemployment can coexist with capitalism, though: under fascism, police force can substitute for unemployment, while under social democracy, people can be motivated to work for the national interest with corporatist cooperation between management and labor unions (while guest workers are brought in to fill the gaps). What defines capitalism is not really unemployment, but the class system, i.e., existence of proletarianization, in which the vast majority lack the bonds of feudalism or slavery and also lack direct control over the means of subsistence and production. By the way, that's capitalism! was meant to be more rhetorical than analytic. The market for final commodities may not be free, but it hardly ever is, even in the U.S. Anyway, it's not the free market that defines capitalism. The problem is with oppressive taxation and with many restrictions and regulations, which are partially conflicting with each other. You can never be sure, whether are you OK, or just breaking some law, which you can't know because of it's excess. I don't know enough about Poland to disagree or agree with you. Regimes such as Nazi Germany ... had capitalism without free markets. Forgive me for being contrary once again: on pen-l, you don't have to ask forgiveness to be contrary. ... in Germany at Nazi times the private industries (the large ones) was fully controlled by the state. The owners were reduced just to some kind of managers, with limited influence. And the programm of the Nazi party (National Socialist) was very similar to that which had polish (and other) communist party before 1989 (I made comparison several years ago). Of course, I'm talking about industry, economic and social-related things only, not about f.e. concetration camps, ban the Jews or something similar. My impression is that the non-Jewish industrialists still had a lot of power in Nazi Germany, while some Nazis became capitalists. But this argument is getting too far away from the thread, so I'll drop it. ... capitalism works in our country as diagnose for current troubles (partially even in official propaganda) - although we cannot see the capitalism here. As I wrote, capitalism means for me free market first. Then we're using the term differently. I don't see much point in arguing about the meaning of the word capitalism, so I won't. ... I wish Poland to be comparable to USA, but it cannot be compared at the moment. As it was said by Milton Friedman, when he was visiting Poland at 1989: You shouldn't make the things, which they're making now, when they're rich - you should make the things, which they made much earlier, when they was as poor as you are today (about the aspirations of many Poles to immediately retake the western standards of living). It's always a mistake to quote Friedman, since he's so often wrong. He didn't realize (or rather, he didn't include in his presentation) that if Poland followed that strategy, it would be competing with South Korea and a lot of other countries. ... I've got to go, so I'm ending this message here. Jim Devine
