Re: Re: Re: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-23 Thread Rakesh Bhandari

I had written:

Krugman [suffers] an astonishing logical lapse here.

He assumes rather than proves that current investment is determined 
by either  current or expected consumption. Marx refers to this as 
the stupid dogma that the aim of capitalist production is consumption.

ok but as consumer demand then gives and final sales suffer, couldn't 
firms be forced to scrap old technologies and excess capacity and 
invest in those processes that lower costs faster than prices are 
falling?

  Moreover, for those investment projects that are meant to meet a 
long term trend couldn't a drop in immediate consumption be favorable 
as firms may decide that it's favorable to build on the trend and 
thus take advantage of lower depression prices in materials, wages 
and possibly interest rates?

In short, Krugman does not show clearly why the drop off in final 
sales will compound rather than have little effect or even possibly 
ease the  fundamental problem of weak investment demand.

Michael responded;

Andrew Carnegie used to follow Rakesh's strategy.  It worked for him, but then
the long term trend for steel was very strong.  Fiber optic cable ???

The theoretical point here is--to use Hayek's metaphor--that the 
continuous flow of the river of investment can vary independently of 
the level of the tide (sales of final goods) at the mouth. The upper 
reaches of the volume of water is affected by the immediate flow of 
the tributaries to the maintstream (variations in new and replacement 
technology). In any given period there is no obvious correspondence 
bttween changes in the upper reaches and the sale of final goods; nor 
between the sale of final goods and employment. Moreover, as Marx 
first and Hayek later recognized, it is generally the case that in a 
slump the revival of final demand is an effect rather than a cause of 
revival in the upper reaches of the stream of production.

Even in the absence of a high tide at the mouth of the river, the 
recession could be exited on the basis of replacement investments (in 
which new technology would be embodied) or new supplemental 
investments in, say, the completion of  high speed connectivity 
(assuming the overcoming of regulatory hurdles).

Intel's investment surge seems predicated on the belief in just this 
possibility.

I am not saying any of this will come to pass. My point here is to 
challenge the dogma implicit in Krugman's analysis that the aim and 
driving force of capitalist production is consumption.

There is also the question of the possible overlap in the 
Perelman-Brenner critique of Keynesianism and the Hayekian one!

Rakesh








Re: Re: Re: Re: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-23 Thread Michael Perelman

Where did Hayek use that metaphor?  Also, I discussed the overlap between H*yek and
Marx before in my Marx book, but the overlap I emphasized was in the relationship
between crises and problems in coordination via the market.

Rakesh Bhandari wrote:


 The theoretical point here is--to use Hayek's metaphor--that the
 continuous flow of the river of investment can vary independently of
 the level of the tide (sales of final goods) at the mouth. The upper
 reaches of the volume of water is affected by the immediate flow of
 the tributaries to the maintstream (variations in new and replacement
 technology). In any given period there is no obvious correspondence
 bttween changes in the upper reaches and the sale of final goods; nor
 between the sale of final goods and employment. Moreover, as Marx
 first and Hayek later recognized, it is generally the case that in a
 slump the revival of final demand is an effect rather than a cause of
 revival in the upper reaches of the stream of production.



 There is also the question of the possible overlap in the
 Perelman-Brenner critique of Keynesianism and the Hayekian one!

 Rakesh

--

Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]





Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-23 Thread Rakesh Bhandari

Where did Hayek use that metaphor?

The Austrian Critique, The Economist, 11 June, 1983 pp.45-8 as 
reported in GR Steele The Economics of Friedrich Hayek. I think 
Justin's interest in Hayek only extends to the socialist calculation 
debate, not his theory of capital and business cycles?



   Also, I discussed the overlap between H*yek and
Marx before in my Marx book, but the overlap I emphasized was in the 
relationship
between crises and problems in coordination via the market.

I do think there is a question of whether there is any similarity in 
Hayek's (implicit) critique of Keynesian demand management and your 
and Brenner's criticism of the contradictory effects of Keynesian 
stimulus policies.

If I remember correctly, Marxists such as John Strachey in the Nature 
of Capitalist Crises and Leo Huberman in Man's Worldly Goods tried to 
show how  Marxian theory captured the strong sides of the Hayekian 
and Keynesian diagnoses of the Depression while presenting a clear 
alternative in both theoretical and practical implications.

rb




RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-22 Thread Max Sawicky

no i meant you weren' t the only one w/claims to pre-K
vision.

mbs


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Devine, James
 Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 5:44 PM
 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
 Subject: [PEN-L:23086] RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around
 
 
 Max, I don't understand your point. It sounds like PK is leaning 
 in the EPI
 direction on this one.
 
 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
 
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Max Sawicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 11:32 AM
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: [PEN-L:23076] RE: Krugman Komes Around
  
  
  Not so fast Sparky.
  
  http://www.epinet.org/Issuebriefs/ib175.html
  
  http://www.epinet.org/webfeatures/econindicators/jobspict.html
  
  http://www.epinet.org/briefingpapers/bp121.html
  
  
  mbs
  
   [Maybe I should sue because of violation of my intellectual
   property rights
   (see 
  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/faculty/jdevine/talks/ESTalk020502.htm) ;-)
   ... still, this is a pretty good article.]
  
   The W Scenario
   By PAUL KRUGMAN
   First comes the victory parade. Later we'll find out if we won.
  
 




RE: RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-22 Thread Devine, James

I'll have to call my lawyer and cancel the lawsuit... 

Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine



 -Original Message-
 From: Max Sawicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 3:04 PM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: [PEN-L:23087] RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around
 
 
 no i meant you weren' t the only one w/claims to pre-K
 vision.
 
 mbs
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Devine, James
  Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 5:44 PM
  To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
  Subject: [PEN-L:23086] RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around
  
  
  Max, I don't understand your point. It sounds like PK is leaning 
  in the EPI
  direction on this one.
  
  Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
  
  
  
   -Original Message-
   From: Max Sawicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
   Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 11:32 AM
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Subject: [PEN-L:23076] RE: Krugman Komes Around
   
   
   Not so fast Sparky.
   
   http://www.epinet.org/Issuebriefs/ib175.html
   
   http://www.epinet.org/webfeatures/econindicators/jobspict.html
   
   http://www.epinet.org/briefingpapers/bp121.html
   
   
   mbs
   
[Maybe I should sue because of violation of my intellectual
property rights
(see 
   
 http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/faculty/jdevine/talks/ESTalk020502.htm) ;-)
... still, this is a pretty good article.]
   
The W Scenario
By PAUL KRUGMAN
First comes the victory parade. Later we'll find out if we won.
   
  
 




Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-22 Thread Ian Murray


- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 3:26 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:23088] RE: RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around


 I'll have to call my lawyer and cancel the lawsuit...

 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine

==

That'll be $8million please.


Enron Bankruptcy Lawyers' Bill: $8 Million


By Carrie Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 22, 2002; Page E04



In every scandal, there are winners and losers. The lawyers usually
are among the winners.

Consider U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York, where Enron Corp.'s law
firms filed more than $8 million worth of bills for their first month
on the job.

Weil, Gotshal  Manges, Enron's lead lawyers in the bankruptcy
reorganization, asked for $5.4 million for their services in December.
The figure includes $3 million in lawyers' time -- including $700 an
hour for senior partner Ira Millstein and $685 an hour for partners
Greg Danilow and Martin Bienenstock -- $169,883 for copying and
$89,799 for computer research, according to court documents the law
firm filed filed Wednesday.

Andrews  Kurth, another firm representing the debtors, requested
$1.54 million in fees and $78,838 in expenses. Cadwalader, Wickersham
 Taft of New York asked for $237,734. LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene  MacRae
racked up $650,000 in lawyer and paralegal time and $56,000 in
expenses. And Togut, Segal  Segal sought $208,829 in fees and another
$36,241 in expenses.

The lawyers weren't the only ones lining up this week. Ernst  Young
Corporate Finance LLC charged $586,609 for providing restructuring
advice from December to late January.

No word yet on when Judge Arthur J. Gonzalez will review the bills.







RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-22 Thread Devine, James

Is someone suing Krugman for writing a puff-piece about Enron? 

Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine

 
 That'll be $8million please.
 
 
 Enron Bankruptcy Lawyers' Bill: $8 Million
 
 
 By Carrie Johnson
 Washington Post Staff Writer
 Friday, February 22, 2002; Page E04
 
 
 
 In every scandal, there are winners and losers. The lawyers usually
 are among the winners.
 
 Consider U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York, where Enron Corp.'s law
 firms filed more than $8 million worth of bills for their first month
 on the job.
 
 Weil, Gotshal  Manges, Enron's lead lawyers in the bankruptcy
 reorganization, asked for $5.4 million for their services in December.
 The figure includes $3 million in lawyers' time -- including $700 an
 hour for senior partner Ira Millstein and $685 an hour for partners
 Greg Danilow and Martin Bienenstock -- $169,883 for copying and
 $89,799 for computer research, according to court documents the law
 firm filed filed Wednesday.
 
 Andrews  Kurth, another firm representing the debtors, requested
 $1.54 million in fees and $78,838 in expenses. Cadwalader, Wickersham
  Taft of New York asked for $237,734. LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene  MacRae
 racked up $650,000 in lawyer and paralegal time and $56,000 in
 expenses. And Togut, Segal  Segal sought $208,829 in fees and another
 $36,241 in expenses.
 
 The lawyers weren't the only ones lining up this week. Ernst  Young
 Corporate Finance LLC charged $586,609 for providing restructuring
 advice from December to late January.
 
 No word yet on when Judge Arthur J. Gonzalez will review the bills.
 
 
 
 




Re: RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around

2002-02-22 Thread Ian Murray


- Original Message - 
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 3:52 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:23093] RE: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: Krugman Komes Around


 Is someone suing Krugman for writing a puff-piece about Enron? 
 
 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
 


If the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory is true, yes. ;-)

Ian