Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Jurriaan, this thread is finished. We don't need to go round and round on the same subjects. As you can see by the messages from Jim and Ravi, many of us are trying to raise the level of discourse here. I know that I'm violating my own principles by addressing you directly, but I have not succeeded in communicating off list so far. I'm also trying to encourage new people to jump in. I have recently had to unsub you twice for overposting. You have already posted twice today. Please behave yourself. You have a lot to contribute, so please try to contain yourself. JurriaanOn Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 06:12:18PM +0100, Jurriaan Bendien wrote: > > this is sort of circular isn't it? or is it that only the rest of us are > > to learn? > > That depends on your definition of agreement and disagreement. Obviously I > am not arguing that only "the rest of us" should learn. For Marx, learning > is a process of dialog. > > J. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> this is sort of circular isn't it? or is it that only the rest of us are > to learn? That depends on your definition of agreement and disagreement. Obviously I am not arguing that only "the rest of us" should learn. For Marx, learning is a process of dialog. J.
Re: Wasting bandwidth. Was Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Michael Perelman wrote: > David asked me to make the call. Here it is: just about everybody on > the list knows about Alan Greenspan and the savings-and-loan scandal. > Just about everybody on the list knows about Alan Greenspan and Ayn > Rand. > > <...> > > There are people here with valuable information that could benefit > others on the list. I would like to hear from them rather than rehash > well-known topics. > apologies for (a) my response to jurriaan [sp?] and (b) the use of the greenspan debate in the example in my post pleading for better formatting. --ravi
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Jurriaan Bendien wrote: > I do not take > badly to disagreement, I take badly to disagreement from which nothing is > learnt, and that is quite a different story. > this is sort of circular isn't it? or is it that only the rest of us are to learn? --ravi
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Hopefully, we can move on to more useful communications. On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 03:12:32PM -0800, Devine, James wrote: > David Schanoes writes: >To JD: Yes people make their own history, but not as people > but as > members, agents, representatives of their class. < > > this kind of statement exemplifies what's wrong with the self-style "orthodoxy" > among Marxists. People aren't people. Instead, they are mere representatives of > their class. If so, how can one talk to them? how can they "make their own history" > except as "dependent variables" in some automatic process? > > Jim D. > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
David Schanoes writes: >To JD: Yes people make their own history, but not as people but as members, agents, representatives of their class. < this kind of statement exemplifies what's wrong with the self-style "orthodoxy" among Marxists. People aren't people. Instead, they are mere representatives of their class. If so, how can one talk to them? how can they "make their own history" except as "dependent variables" in some automatic process? Jim D.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Joanna is correct here. One problem with list communication is that people challenge one another by name and then the challenged party responds ad infinitum boring everybody but the people involved. No useful purpose is served by such exchanges. On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:46:55AM -0800, joanna bujes wrote: > Jurriaan Bendien wrote: > Rather than sitting in on moral judgement about me, why don't you > explainthen how it is that the shit is able to rise to the top. What do > you know about Greenspan ? > > The shit rises to the top because the game is not about innovation or > creativity or productivity...but about collaboration. Those who > collaborate in the class war that occurs on every social level rise to > the top. Those who by virtue of class membership are already at the top, > stay at the top. > > I make no moral judgments. I make the observation that you take badly to > disagreement. I am also tired of posts where you call people "pricks" > and then conclude with lyrics advocating the power of love. > > Joanna -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Your remarks are irrelevant, because it ignores what currency hedging expresses. > One more point-- your remarks to Joanna Bujes are completely out of line and > have no place in public communications. Okay Mr FBI, perhaps you ought to get it on with Joanna. You just try to show how smart you are, like Joanna, so you belong together. Perhaps you two could set up a rating bureau. I am not participating in this discussion any more. J.
Wasting bandwidth. Was Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
David asked me to make the call. Here it is: just about everybody on the list knows about Alan Greenspan and the savings-and-loan scandal. Just about everybody on the list knows about Alan Greenspan and Ayn Rand. The argument about whether we should support anyone but Bush or reject both parties also covers familiar territory. Everybody on the list knows that John Kerry and the Democrats are beholden to big-money. Everybody on the list knows the dangers that George Bush represents. To go over and over such matters turns people off, causing them to leave the list. There are people here with valuable information that could benefit others on the list. I would like to hear from them rather than rehash well-known topics. On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 12:23:14PM -0500, dmschanoes wrote: > Ok, since you ask me specifically, I suggest you reread JB's original and > follow up posts, where Greenspan is referred to positively as economic > thinker with an incorrect theory. > > That is fetishization to the max. I didn't merely call Greenspan names, I > pointed out why the labels fit--- scam artist, hack, equivocator in service > of declining living standards, economic drivel in the service of fraud... > etc. > > If "econom ics" doesn't do what the economist claims it does, sustain and > expand the welfare of society, then it is apparent that we must ascertain > what it really does do, and that is to justify the depreciation of such > welfare. And that is not a theoretical exercise. That requires an analysis > of the real history of the real players. > > Does anyone think the response to Friedman, and the neo-liberalist wave > attached to Friedman's coattails should be a critique of his history of > prices? Or should it be an examination of what his "theory" justifies, and > the social reality required to institute his "programs?" > > You make the call. > > dms > > > - Original Message - > From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 12:11 PM > Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime > > > > What does this add to the list. Nobody here supports G. or his policy. > Merely > > calling names is a waste of bandwidth. > > > > On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:21:51AM -0500, dmschanoes wrote: > > > I'm not IN politics. > > > > > > Aint no opinion, it's a fact-- he's a scam artist, paid flack, not > unlike > > > the consultants paid to hype and protect Enron, Tyco, Parmalat. Look at > the > > > record of what he's done, his testimony. > > > > > > Next thing you'll be telling us is that Jack Welch is a great leader of > men > > > and women with a misquided theory, Kissinger is a great diplomat with a > > > mistaken world view, Oliver North is a real humanitarian who made a poor > > > career choice. > > > > > > dms > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 10:10 AM > > > Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal > crime > > > > > > > > > > > What character assassination? He did recommend Keating. He did > tell > > > > > Thailand to eat baht. He did recommend increased SS taxes, and if > you > > > > look > > > > > several years back at his Congressional testimony, you'll see him > > > stating > > > > > that SS was not facing financial ruin due to the pre-collection > scheme. > > > > > > > > I think it is better to say that in your opinion Greenspan is engaging > in > > > > scams, and then show what the scam is, rather than calling him a scam > > > > artist. You last longer in politics that way. > > > > > > > > > > So what article were you reading? > > > > > > > > I am no longer a student, hence I tell what I am reading only to my > wife, > > > my > > > > supervisor or people actually living with me. As I haven't got a wife, > > > that > > > > option doesn't exit. As I don't have job, I don't have a supervisor. > And > > > my > > > > flatmate is not really interested in my intellectual concerns. I'd be > > > > interested to read a biography of Greenspan but I don't know if there > is > > > > one. > > > > > > > > J. > > > > > > > > -- > > Michael Perelman > > Economics Department > > California State University > > Chico, CA 95929 > > > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu > > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
- Original Message - From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 3:35 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime For 2003 as a whole, new money flowing into the hedging industry in the US > is estimated at $72.2 billion, a more than fourfold increase over $16.3 > billion in 2002 and more than double the previous annual record of $32 > billion in 2001. In his latest Congressional testimony, Alan Greenspan notes > that firms have increasingly hedged their currency exposures, which means > the dollar might fall further. Do you understand what this means ? No. Does > David Schanoes know this ? He doesn't. Talk about insignificant. Get with the program JB. Six years ago average daily trading of currencies was 1.5 trillion. That's each day. In financial derivatives alone 18 trillion dollars were traded for 1998. You're at 2003 and you are way way behind the times. Currency hedges were initially developed so corporations could protect their exposure to currency fluctuations and their impact on earnings. The mechanism then became directly its opposite-- a mechanism for aggrandizing earnings based on increased volatility. The decline of the dollar is 1. overstated. remember when the Euro was introduced it was at the official rate of 1.15 to the dollar. 2. symptomatic of trade difficulties, and a beggar thy neighbor attitude, itself symptomatic of the reduced rate of growth of profits. 3. very beneficial to the US as it can redeem its securities with depreciated dollars. So what's Greenspan's point? The Dept. of Commerce through any number of vectors, BEA, Census Bureau, Office of Trade, etc.and the FRB make these statistics available in real time and for free to anyone with an ISP. One more point-- your remarks to Joanna Bujes are completely out of line and have no place in public communications. dms dms
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> The shit rises to the top because the game is not about innovation or > creativity or productivity...but about collaboration. That's like saying, it all depends on who you want to work with. As a technical writer, you should know that shit is produced through digesting food. Food enters the mouth. For the food to enter the mouth, you must open your mouth, so the food can get in. I distinguish between shit and food, but I'll just say not more than that I won't be eating at your place ever again. > > I make no moral judgments. I make the observation that you take badly to > disagreement. I am also tired of posts where you call people "pricks" > and then conclude with lyrics advocating the power of love. Yeah, it's just innuendo, insinuation and allusion that you do, maybe well-intentioned, maybe not. Well, there's little point these days in disagreeing with people, generally. That's not where it is at. It is not a negative dialectic, but a constructive dialectic we are doing. I do not take badly to disagreement, I take badly to disagreement from which nothing is learnt, and that is quite a different story. For 2003 as a whole, new money flowing into the hedging industry in the US is estimated at $72.2 billion, a more than fourfold increase over $16.3 billion in 2002 and more than double the previous annual record of $32 billion in 2001. In his latest Congressional testimony, Alan Greenspan notes that firms have increasingly hedged their currency exposures, which means the dollar might fall further. Do you understand what this means ? No. Does David Schanoes know this ? He doesn't. Why not ? Because Greenspan checked it out, and few other people did. Schanoes is just talking about steel and oil but it's not very significant. Do you understand the epistemic problem of intellectual property rights in free markets ? No you don't. Do you know about the time factor in financial transactions ? No. I did not call any specific person a prick, I was referring to categories of people and behaviours I personally don't like, so you are lying and being dishonest. I was saying, "if" you are an arrogant female prick, then leave me alone. I am not saying, that you are not allowed to be an arrogant female prick, that's okay with me, but just leave me alone in that case. When you say that I conclude with with lyrics advocating the power of love, you are lying again, because the lyric says nothing about the power of love, that is your interpretation. It is rather a conclusion: to get love (take love) you have to make love, create it, however you do it, and that means more than Joanna making love with her ego. It's a Karmic-type principle about human destiny, you get what you give out, although it may take a while to understand the balance and how the equation is arrived at, it's a very complex argument. Now get off my case, Ms. FBI. You don't know anything about what I went through, and you didn't even understand the meaning of my visit to Oakland. You just leave me alone, best thing. When I think of you I just want to go to the toilet. Kicks against the pricks are one of the UK's fastest rising metal acts. Here is a lyric for you though, from the band Bittersweet: Seven sin of wantonness and Everything that's good is gone Sell it all for glory from the peers Silicone priestess scratch the back and Twist the knife to bone Kick against the pricks and scrape the shins I'm the enemy in the enemies now Swallowed the pill And drank to the fill All these things I carry now In this bittersweet now Try to hold the world there sinking Swimming in a paper cup Try to own the one beneath the skin Held up to the flames still singeing Skin begins to draw and tuck Never told theres not a chance to win What couldn't be, wouldn't be now Swallowed the pill And drank to the fill All these things I carry now In this bittersweet now Hold your hand up to the sky and try So hard to rise above But everything is beating down Swallowed the pill And drank to the fill All these things I carry now In this bittersweet now Jurriaan
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
In summation let me say a couple of things: 1. I am gratified to see a thread sustained that actually considers purpose and cause re "economists" and social struggle. I think far too often the lack of exchange is not a desire to save bandwidth, but simply the result of "short attention span" Marxism. 2. I wear the label of "jeering Marxist" proudly. The icons of bourgeois science and culture-- the officials and officialdom of intellectual and social poverty deserve nothing better than jeering, and a whole lot worse. 3. Re JB's notion on AG being dedicated to empirical examination, and the bourgeoisie not allowing a shallow thinker. From, The Greatest-Ever Bank Robbery, by Martin Mayer, 1990, 1992 (IMO the best analysis of the S&L collapse of the 80s). P. 140: Keating hired lawyers, including four of the largest firms in New York. Arthur Limanrecommended that Keating reinforce Bentson with Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers for Gerald Ford, at the height of his reputation because he had been chairman of the committee that crafted the compromise on Social Security taxation. Greenspan was then a private consultant heading a not very successful firm [my note: Greenspan & Associates] that dissolved in 1987 on his departure to become chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. His specialty was what he once called 'statistical espionage,' and the book on him in that capacity was that you could order the opinion you needed. . Greenspan was paid $40,000 for writing a couple of letters and testifying for Keating. he [Greenspan] hailed his client as representative of the group of new S&L venturers who were going to save the industry. Later, in a fawning and false letter to the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco supporting Keating's application for an exemption from the rule on direct investments, Greenspan expressed confidence that Keating's operation of his S&L could not pose a risk of loss to the FSLIC 'for the forseeable future. Neither Greenspan nor Benston referred to-- or, pehaps, understood--the peculiar accounting conventions that permitted S&Ls to book a stream of profits on unsold land and construction profits. End of quote. There's much more but I don't want to take up too much bandwidth. Did I say scam-artist? flack? hack? a la Arthur Andersen? Fastow? Enron. Mike, there's a difference between name-calling, and calling things by their right name. Shit is shit. And that's Greenspan in 4 letters. The struggle against the bourgeoisie and the bourgeois order requires demystification of their representatives claims to insight, wisdom, integrity. 4. Whatever personal problems JB has with me are purely of his own construction and not important to anyone, least of all me. 5. To JD: Yes people make their own history, but not as people but as members, agents, representatives of their class. So Greenspan leans to whatever side with the most power or money wants him to lean. And he espouses that view. He's paid to do that. He reconciles the current interest and economic need. My name is David Schanoes. I live in NYC. More information available offlist if so desired. dms
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Jurriaan Bendien wrote: Rather than sitting in on moral judgement about me, why don't you explainthen how it is that the shit is able to rise to the top. What do you know about Greenspan ? The shit rises to the top because the game is not about innovation or creativity or productivity...but about collaboration. Those who collaborate in the class war that occurs on every social level rise to the top. Those who by virtue of class membership are already at the top, stay at the top. I make no moral judgments. I make the observation that you take badly to disagreement. I am also tired of posts where you call people "pricks" and then conclude with lyrics advocating the power of love. Joanna
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> unless he works hard to meet their needs. Frankly Juriaan, you surprise me. You, of all people, are perfectly aware of the mediocrity and shalowness that characterizes a lot of economic stars. It is no different in economics than in society at large. The shit rises to the top. I see this daily in the very large corporation for which I work. The high-level managers who make decisions know next to nothing about reality. They don't really need to. No matter what happens: success, bankruptcy, etc., they walk away with the loot. Rather than sitting in on moral judgement about me, why don't you explain then how it is that the shit is able to rise to the top. What do you know about Greenspan ? J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> I didn't think that what David wrote was abuse and character > assassination. Impassioned critique perhaps. Pointing out some very > obvious and noxious facts abut Mr. G That shows more about what you are than about Al Greenspan and David Schanoes. J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Juriaan wrote "..I cannot assess the depth or profundity of AG's economic thinking, but the odds are that the ruling classes do not permit a shallow thinker to become chairman." unless he works hard to meet their needs. Frankly Juriaan, you surprise me. You, of all people, are perfectly aware of the mediocrity and shalowness that characterizes a lot of economic stars. It is no different in economics than in society at large. The shit rises to the top. I see this daily in the very large corporation for which I work. The high-level managers who make decisions know next to nothing about reality. They don't really need to. No matter what happens: success, bankruptcy, etc., they walk away with the loot. Joanna
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
I generally agree with what DMS said in the stuff above the following quotes. I wrote: >> I'd say that many or most people and institutions which are financiers (or finance capitalists) would benefit from the privatization of the SS system. Because of their disproportionate political and economic power, they can have a lot of influence. They are endorsed by some intellectual hacks (usually economists or ignorami) who piously invoke H*yek, Rand, and/or Smith. This represents one faction of the political fight, which is counter-acted by other political forces, including capitalist ones. (George Soros, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry are also in the capitalist camp. Etc.) Unfortunately, labor doesn't have enough power these days to have much say.<< DMS: >And the practical difference is? OK, let's say a hard core of the the financial capitalists... like we would say the hardest core of the capitalists supported Bush, wanted Bush. How could they, did they manifest that? By contributing more to the Repubs-- by a 2:1 margin.< but my point was that "hard-core" finance capitalists disagree with that "hardest core." Cf. Soros. me: >> I am sure that there's some internal debate about what exactly the long-term interests of the finance-capital fraction are. Privatization of SS might destabilize finance over-all and/or help delegitimize US capitalism. The truth of different factions' perspectives can only be determined after the fact. In addition, how does someone like AG reconcile (his faction's perception of) these long-term interests and the impatient greed of individual financiers?<< Dms: >That, the above, is voluntarism. The issue is what are the historical requirements, determinants that bring this issue to the fore, that make it so high profile at this time and place.< No, my perspective isn't voluntarism. My view is that "people make history [the voluntarist or subjective 'moment'] but not exactly as they please [the objective 'moment']." It's a "dialectic" (if I may use that word) between people voluntarily and subjectively trying to change the world, in terms of their self-interests, ideologies, etc., as part of formal and informal coalitions, organizations, etc. on the one hand and objective conditions (social structures of class, gender, ethnic domination, etc.) on the other. These interests & ideologies are limited and shaped by the objective conditions under which they live, but they are not simple reflections of those conditions. People are heterogeneous, as are objective conditions. People's actions (practice) can also change objective conditions. For example, some individual capitalist behavior undermines the _status quo_ (producing crises, etc.) and sometimes can undermine their long-term class interest (undermining the system's legitimacy, etc.) Class-conscious working-class actions can do so, too. Of course, there are also capitalist actions that stabilize the _status quo_ and class-collaborationist actions by working people. The objective "structure" (and its dynamics) that we see is a result of the conflict between all these forces. > Neo-liberalism is not a theory, it is a social policy, an attack by capital, capitalism, capitalists, upon the living standards of the workers and poor, which gained currency at a specific time for a specific reason, having absoutely nothing to do with its economic accuracy. Reconciling different factions perspectives can be done with any of the tools of capitalism-- guns, lawyers, money. The specific circumstances, and the desperation of the economic predicament determines what combinations are used.< Of course, neo-liberalism isn't just a theory. It's an expression of the dominant fractions of capital on a world-wide level. But it isn't the only capitalist trend. Soros, Krugman, etc., represent another capitalist trend. Jim D. BTW, what's your name, DMS?
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> That, the above, was/is the sole and whole reason I took issue with JB's > characterization of AG as a deep economic thinker with a wrong theory. One thing David Schanoes is very good at is falsely presenting somebody else's point of view. On previous occasions he has written to me or about me all sorts of abusive mails showing that he neither understood the issue nor what I was saying. Now he does it again. I did not say that AG is a deep economic thinker, I said I respected his efforts to understand the empirical economic facts rather than simply shooting off a formula like many economists do because they think wisdom equates with mathematics. I cannot assess the depth or profundity of AG's economic thinking, but the odds are that the ruling classes do not permit a shallow thinker to become chairman. J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
I didn't think that what David wrote was abuse and character assassination. Impassioned critique perhaps. Pointing out some very obvious and noxious facts abut Mr. G Joanna Jurriaan Bendien wrote: Well I think that substantiates your argument and my argument. I think David Schanoes is entitled to his viewpoint, but surely if a pithy article is written in the NYT explaining what is wrong with Greenspan's idea, then that helps us much more than a bunch of abuse and character assasination ? J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
- Original Message - From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 12:16 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime Well, since I'm being addressed specifically, let me violate the three and out rule: > dms writes: > >Let's not forget to whom Mr. Greenspan is beholden: and that's not von > Hayek, Ayn Rand, or Adam Smith, it's finance capital. And finance capital > wants SS privatized so it can get the rake off. Ever since the collapse of > 2000-01, Wall Street has been trying to re-establish support for this jd writes: > "finance capital wants"? How can a fraction of the capitalist class "want" something, as if a large number of people share identical consciousness? This formulation fetishizes socio-economic categories and (in addition) makes it hard to talk to non-Marxists. It veers toward conspiracy theory or Hegelianism. DMS: That's like asking how can the steel producers, steel capitalists, want tariffs and import restrictions. How? They, the fraction, form groups, organizations and lobby for such things. They,the fraction now organized as a group, advocate it in their press, their internal and external discussions, their contributions to political candidates who will carry the water forward. That's how. It's how the airline industry did it with Bush prior and since the election. How the pharmaceutical indstry got its way with Medicare prescription coverage, etc. etc. JD: > Instead, I'd say that many or most people and institutions which are financiers (or finance capitalists) would benefit from the privatization of the SS system. Because of their disproportionate political and economic power, they can have a lot of influence. They are endorsed by some intellectual hacks (usually economists or ignorami) who piously invoke H*yek, Rand, and/or Smith. This represents one faction of the political fight, which is counter-acted by other political forces, including capitalist ones. (George Soros, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry are also in the capitalist camp. Etc.) Unfortunately, labor doesn't have enough power these days to have much say. DMS: And the practical difference is? OK, let's say a hard core of the the financial capitalists... like we would say the hardest core of the capitalists supported Bush, wanted Bush. How could they, did they manifest that? By contributing more to the Repubs-- by a 2:1 margin. JD: > I am sure that there's some internal debate about what exactly the long-term interests of the finance-capital fraction are. Privatization of SS might destabilize finance over-all and/or help delegitimize US capitalism. The truth of different factions' perspectives can only be determined after the fact. In addition, how does someone like AG reconcile (his faction's perception of) these long-term interests and the impatient greed of individual financiers? Dms: That, the above, is voluntarism. The issue is what are the historical requirements, determinants that bring this issue to the fore, that make it so high profile at this time and place. Neo-liberalism is not a theory, it is a social policy, an attack by capital, capitalism, capitalists, upon the living standards of the workers and poor, which gained currency at a specific time for a specific reason, having absoutely nothing to do with its economic accuracy. Reconciling different factions perspectives can be done with any of the tools of capitalism-- guns, lawyers, money. The specific circumstances, and the desperation of the economic predicament determines what combinations are used. JD: > I agree that Greenspan is one of the anti-SS "finance capital" faction. A lot of our political work involves convincing people that the Fed and Greenspan aren't apolitical technocrats but are instead financier partisans, rather than taking this fact as Revealed Truth. DMS: That, the above, was/is the sole and whole reason I took issue with JB's characterization of AG as a deep economic thinker with a wrong theory.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Ok, since you ask me specifically, I suggest you reread JB's original and follow up posts, where Greenspan is referred to positively as economic thinker with an incorrect theory. That is fetishization to the max. I didn't merely call Greenspan names, I pointed out why the labels fit--- scam artist, hack, equivocator in service of declining living standards, economic drivel in the service of fraud... etc. If "econom ics" doesn't do what the economist claims it does, sustain and expand the welfare of society, then it is apparent that we must ascertain what it really does do, and that is to justify the depreciation of such welfare. And that is not a theoretical exercise. That requires an analysis of the real history of the real players. Does anyone think the response to Friedman, and the neo-liberalist wave attached to Friedman's coattails should be a critique of his history of prices? Or should it be an examination of what his "theory" justifies, and the social reality required to institute his "programs?" You make the call. dms - Original Message - From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 12:11 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime > What does this add to the list. Nobody here supports G. or his policy. Merely > calling names is a waste of bandwidth. > > On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:21:51AM -0500, dmschanoes wrote: > > I'm not IN politics. > > > > Aint no opinion, it's a fact-- he's a scam artist, paid flack, not unlike > > the consultants paid to hype and protect Enron, Tyco, Parmalat. Look at the > > record of what he's done, his testimony. > > > > Next thing you'll be telling us is that Jack Welch is a great leader of men > > and women with a misquided theory, Kissinger is a great diplomat with a > > mistaken world view, Oliver North is a real humanitarian who made a poor > > career choice. > > > > dms > > ----- Original Message - > > From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 10:10 AM > > Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime > > > > > > > > What character assassination? He did recommend Keating. He did tell > > > > Thailand to eat baht. He did recommend increased SS taxes, and if you > > > look > > > > several years back at his Congressional testimony, you'll see him > > stating > > > > that SS was not facing financial ruin due to the pre-collection scheme. > > > > > > I think it is better to say that in your opinion Greenspan is engaging in > > > scams, and then show what the scam is, rather than calling him a scam > > > artist. You last longer in politics that way. > > > > > > > > So what article were you reading? > > > > > > I am no longer a student, hence I tell what I am reading only to my wife, > > my > > > supervisor or people actually living with me. As I haven't got a wife, > > that > > > option doesn't exit. As I don't have job, I don't have a supervisor. And > > my > > > flatmate is not really interested in my intellectual concerns. I'd be > > > interested to read a biography of Greenspan but I don't know if there is > > > one. > > > > > > J. > > > > > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu >
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
dms writes: >Let's not forget to whom Mr. Greenspan is beholden: and that's not von Hayek, Ayn Rand, or Adam Smith, it's finance capital. And finance capital wants SS privatized so it can get the rake off. Ever since the collapse of 2000-01, Wall Street has been trying to re-establish support for this privatization.< "finance capital wants"? How can a fraction of the capitalist class "want" something, as if a large number of people share identical consciousness? This formulation fetishizes socio-economic categories and (in addition) makes it hard to talk to non-Marxists. It veers toward conspiracy theory or Hegelianism. Instead, I'd say that many or most people and institutions which are financiers (or finance capitalists) would benefit from the privatization of the SS system. Because of their disproportionate political and economic power, they can have a lot of influence. They are endorsed by some intellectual hacks (usually economists or ignorami) who piously invoke H*yek, Rand, and/or Smith. This represents one faction of the political fight, which is counter-acted by other political forces, including capitalist ones. (George Soros, Ted Kennedy, and John Kerry are also in the capitalist camp. Etc.) Unfortunately, labor doesn't have enough power these days to have much say. I am sure that there's some internal debate about what exactly the long-term interests of the finance-capital fraction are. Privatization of SS might destabilize finance over-all and/or help delegitimize US capitalism. The truth of different factions' perspectives can only be determined after the fact. In addition, how does someone like AG reconcile (his faction's perception of) these long-term interests and the impatient greed of individual financiers? I agree that Greenspan is one of the anti-SS "finance capital" faction. A lot of our political work involves convincing people that the Fed and Greenspan aren't apolitical technocrats but are instead financier partisans, rather than taking this fact as Revealed Truth. BTW, above "fraction" refers to an objective part of the capitalist class (a position in the class structure) while "faction" refers to an organized political grouping or alliance. Jim D.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
What does this add to the list. Nobody here supports G. or his policy. Merely calling names is a waste of bandwidth. On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 10:21:51AM -0500, dmschanoes wrote: > I'm not IN politics. > > Aint no opinion, it's a fact-- he's a scam artist, paid flack, not unlike > the consultants paid to hype and protect Enron, Tyco, Parmalat. Look at the > record of what he's done, his testimony. > > Next thing you'll be telling us is that Jack Welch is a great leader of men > and women with a misquided theory, Kissinger is a great diplomat with a > mistaken world view, Oliver North is a real humanitarian who made a poor > career choice. > > dms > - Original Message - > From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 10:10 AM > Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime > > > > > What character assassination? He did recommend Keating. He did tell > > > Thailand to eat baht. He did recommend increased SS taxes, and if you > > look > > > several years back at his Congressional testimony, you'll see him > stating > > > that SS was not facing financial ruin due to the pre-collection scheme. > > > > I think it is better to say that in your opinion Greenspan is engaging in > > scams, and then show what the scam is, rather than calling him a scam > > artist. You last longer in politics that way. > > > > > > So what article were you reading? > > > > I am no longer a student, hence I tell what I am reading only to my wife, > my > > supervisor or people actually living with me. As I haven't got a wife, > that > > option doesn't exit. As I don't have job, I don't have a supervisor. And > my > > flatmate is not really interested in my intellectual concerns. I'd be > > interested to read a biography of Greenspan but I don't know if there is > > one. > > > > J. > > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> Follow the cash. It's that simple. If it were any more difficult, > Greenspan would be flipping burgers at McDonald's. Okay. J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
And one last thing: Let's not forget to whom Mr. Greenspan is beholden: and that's not von Hayek, Ayn Rand, or Adam Smith, it's finance capital. And finance capital wants SS privatized so it can get the rake off. Ever since the collapse of 2000-01, Wall Street has been trying to re-establish support for this privatization. Greenspan's oh so erudite, rational, and even pained, advocacy of reduced benefits is the overture to the next act of this dismal play. It's not about theory. It's NEVER about theory. It's about cash. Mean Green. Dead Presidents. The Eagle. The Benjamins. That bulge in my pants that is my wallet and means I am happy to see you. Follow the cash. It's that simple. If it were any more difficult, Greenspan would be flipping burgers at McDonald's. That's a fact.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> Next thing you'll be telling us is that Jack Welch is a great leader of men > and women with a misquided theory, Kissinger is a great diplomat with a > mistaken world view, Oliver North is a real humanitarian who made a poor > career choice. That is why I associate with few Marxists, because they like to jibe and jeer more than think. J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
I'm not IN politics. Aint no opinion, it's a fact-- he's a scam artist, paid flack, not unlike the consultants paid to hype and protect Enron, Tyco, Parmalat. Look at the record of what he's done, his testimony. Next thing you'll be telling us is that Jack Welch is a great leader of men and women with a misquided theory, Kissinger is a great diplomat with a mistaken world view, Oliver North is a real humanitarian who made a poor career choice. dms - Original Message - From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 10:10 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime > > What character assassination? He did recommend Keating. He did tell > > Thailand to eat baht. He did recommend increased SS taxes, and if you > look > > several years back at his Congressional testimony, you'll see him stating > > that SS was not facing financial ruin due to the pre-collection scheme. > > I think it is better to say that in your opinion Greenspan is engaging in > scams, and then show what the scam is, rather than calling him a scam > artist. You last longer in politics that way. > > > > So what article were you reading? > > I am no longer a student, hence I tell what I am reading only to my wife, my > supervisor or people actually living with me. As I haven't got a wife, that > option doesn't exit. As I don't have job, I don't have a supervisor. And my > flatmate is not really interested in my intellectual concerns. I'd be > interested to read a biography of Greenspan but I don't know if there is > one. > > J. >
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
> What character assassination? He did recommend Keating. He did tell > Thailand to eat baht. He did recommend increased SS taxes, and if you look > several years back at his Congressional testimony, you'll see him stating > that SS was not facing financial ruin due to the pre-collection scheme. I think it is better to say that in your opinion Greenspan is engaging in scams, and then show what the scam is, rather than calling him a scam artist. You last longer in politics that way. > > So what article were you reading? I am no longer a student, hence I tell what I am reading only to my wife, my supervisor or people actually living with me. As I haven't got a wife, that option doesn't exit. As I don't have job, I don't have a supervisor. And my flatmate is not really interested in my intellectual concerns. I'd be interested to read a biography of Greenspan but I don't know if there is one. J.
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Gee, I think it proves my point: that Greenspan, rather than being an erudite thinker with a misguided theory, is a scam artist, not unlike Keating,Skilling, or Fastow, hired to justify whatever the bourgeoisie need next in terms of cash flow. What character assassination? He did recommend Keating. He did tell Thailand to eat baht. He did recommend increased SS taxes, and if you look several years back at his Congressional testimony, you'll see him stating that SS was not facing financial ruin due to the pre-collection scheme. So what article were you reading? dms - Original Message - From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 7:56 AM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime > Well I think that substantiates your argument and my argument. I think David > Schanoes is entitled to his viewpoint, but surely if a pithy article is > written in the NYT explaining what is wrong with Greenspan's idea, then that > helps us much more than a bunch of abuse and character assasination ? > > J. >
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Well I think that substantiates your argument and my argument. I think David Schanoes is entitled to his viewpoint, but surely if a pithy article is written in the NYT explaining what is wrong with Greenspan's idea, then that helps us much more than a bunch of abuse and character assasination ? J.
Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
[god bless intertemporal optimization] [New York Times] February 29, 2004 The Social Security Promise Not Yet Kept By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON SOCIAL Security retirement benefits are going to have to be cut, Alan Greenspan announced last week, because there just is not enough money to pay the promised benefits. President Bush said those already retired or "near retirement age'' should not worry. They will get their promised benefits. That, in short form, was the story carried on front pages and television news programs across the country. But there is an element that was forgotten in the rush of news. It dates back 21 years to the events that catapulted Mr. Greenspan into national prominence and led to his becoming chairman of the Federal Reserve. Since 1983, American workers have been paying more into Social Security than it has paid out in benefits, about $1.8 trillion more so far. This year Americans will pay about 50 percent more in Social Security taxes than the government will pay out in benefits. Those taxes were imposed at the urging of Mr. Greenspan, who was chairman of a bipartisan commission that in 1983 said that one way to make sure Social Security remains solvent once the baby boomers reached retirement age was to tax them in advance. On Mr. Greenspan's recommendation Social Security was converted from a pay-as-you-go system to one in which taxes are collected in advance. After Congress adopted the plan, Mr. Greenspan rose to become chairman of the Federal Reserve. This year someone making $50,000 will pay $6,200 in Social Security taxes, half deducted from their paycheck and half paid by their employer. That total is about $2,000 more than the government needs in order to pay benefits to retirees, widows, orphans and the disabled, government budget documents show. So what has happened to that $1.8 trillion? The advance payments have all been spent. Congress did not lock away the Social Security surplus, as many Americans believe. Instead, it borrowed the surplus, replacing the cash with Treasury notes, and spent the loan proceeds paying the ordinary expenses of running the federal government. Only twice, in 1999 and 2000, did Congress balance the federal budget without borrowing from the surplus. Both parties have treated the surplus Social Security taxes as "cash flow to the government," which has been allowable since the Johnson administration started counting Social Security as part of the federal budget, not as a separate budget, said C. Eugene Steuerle, a tax policy advisor to President Reagan. He said that voters were promised in 1983 that the federal debt would be paid off with the surplus Social Security taxes. The fact that this has not happened and the debt has soared shows that "government usually can only deal with one objective at a time,'' Mr. Steuerle said. Back then, he added, the prime objective was to settle on a Social Security tax rate that would back the system and not have to be tinkered with for decades - not how the surplus would be handled. He said using the surplus to pay routine bills makes sense to those who believe the government will have tax revenues in the future to repay the borrowed money. President Bush asserts that making his existing income, gift and estate tax cuts permanent will spur growth that will, in turn, generate more tax revenue in the long run, making that repayment more likely. Claire Buchan, a White House spokeswoman, said that making the cuts permanent will "promote prosperity for American workers'' and that older employees can expect full benefits. But Mr. Greenspan's new remarks have brought that into question. Other officials have raised doubts. In June 2001, Paul H. O'Neill, President Bush's first Treasury secretary, said all that Americans expecting benefits have is "someone else's promise'' that the paper held by the Social Security Trust Fund will be redeemed with taxes paid later by others. Michael Graetz, a Yale Law School tax professor and tax policy adviser in the administration of President Bush's father, said it was in the nature of Washington to spend surplus tax revenues. "Unless they put the money in a lockbox, which they haven't, the politicians are going to spend the money," he said, and say they will repay the loans with future taxes. Mr. Greenspan said nothing last week about returning to a pay-as-you-go basis. Doing that would put about $40 a week in the pockets of workers making $50,000 annually. Some argue that the surplus taxes are being used to help finance income tax cuts, which Mr. Bush wants made permanent. Mr. Greenspan told Congress earlier that Mr. Bush's tax cuts should be kept in place. The biggest beneficiaries would be the top 400 taxpayers, whose average income in 2000 was $174 million each. They paid 22.2 cents on the dollar in federal income taxes and, under the Bush tax cuts, would have paid about 17.5 cents. Over all that year, Americans paid 15.3 cents on the dollar of income
