Re: RE: Re: Re: The US Dollar (spend it fast as youcan)

[Rakesh Narpat Bhandari]

Michael Lind (The Next American Nation) makes the point
that patents, IP, and professional licensure (i.e.,
tenure!) are the upper-class (white overclass) variant
of protectionism.

Consistent free-traders should be willing to do away
with those barriers to trade as well.  How do laissez
faire econ profs justify tenure?

mbs


You do know that unlike say Krugman and deLong the economists 
Bhagwati and Srinivasan have been very vocal critics of IPR regimes 
and regional trade acts (Srinivasan was critical of Big Boy Wonder 
Summer's greater indulgence for the latter in the early 90s, I 
believe, and they had some exchange in a learned journal, no?). I 
believe that Doug was a reader for Lord Meghnad Desai's forthcoming 
Verso book on globalization I very much look forward to reading his 
analysis of contemporary capitalism. (I certainly don't want to read 
anymore of his--i believe--wrong-headed technical analysis of the 
transformation problem.)
Michael told me not to insult anyone, so I will hold back my comments 
on the neo-nativist and self-proclaimed Listian Lind, who was hidden 
in a trojan horse offered to the left by Buckley and co. But once it 
was brought within the gates, I for one was not surprised that out 
came another faux intellectual windbag like Jim Sleeper whose good 
friend he is.
Yours, Rakesh

Re: Re: Re: Re: The US Dollar (spend it fast as youcan)

[michael perelman]

It is not protectionism, like the violence instigated by the US is not
terrorism.  Protectionism (terrorism) is what the other guy does.

Jim Devine wrote:
 
 Michael wrote:
 It may be that intellectual property laws may be the most effective form
 of protectionism devised so far.
 
 except that it's not the kind of thing that's called protectionism. It
 protects individual corporations or other property-holders, not the
 domestic markets of countries. It's an extension of normal property
 rights like patents, copyrights, trade marks, etc. The owners of
 intellectual property can easily take their property and move to another
 country.
 
 max writes:Michael Lind (The Next American Nation) makes the point that
 patents, IP, and professional licensure (i.e.,
 tenure!) are the upper-class (white overclass) variant of
 protectionism.Consistent free-traders should be willing to do away
 with those barriers to trade as well. How do laissez faire econ profs
 justify tenure?
 
 professional licensure is definitely a form of protectionism as the word is
 usually used.
 
 BTW, I used to have a colleague who wanted to reject tenure on the basis on
 laissez-faire principles. The college said: either take tenure or leave. He
 stayed, eventually ending up in the administration.
 
 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine

-- 

Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
 
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]