Re: Re: Re: query: Game Theory
For anyone interested in game theory, Phil Mirowski's Machine Dreams is great, but it is also about more than game theory. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: query: Game Theory
I like this book a lot, but it is not suitable for undergraduate students. It is not really an introduction, but a critical essay which gets a bit technical at times. I was persuaded by their general position, however. Peter Bill Lear wrote: On Tuesday, January 7, 2003 at 09:26:35 (-0800) Devine, James writes: I've been reading GAME THEORY AND ECONOMIC MODELLING by David M. Kreps. It's a useful survey because it doesn't get bogged down in the technical details (as textbooks do) and provides some philosophical reflection on the whole GT project. Most importantly, it's not a rah-rah book promoting GT but keeps its praise tempered while explaining GT's limitations (even within the narrow confines of the neoclassical world-view). The problem is that the book was published in 1990 and is thus out of date. Does anyone know of a more recent book in this vein? Shaun Hargreaves Heap and Yanis Varoufakis Varoufakis published Game Theory: A Critical Introduction in 1995. Description from Amazon: In recent years game theory has swept through all of the social sciences. Its practi[ti]oners have great designs for it, claiming that it offers an opportunity to unify the social sciences and that it it the natural foundation of a rational theory of society. Game Theory is for those who are intrigued but baffled by these claims, and daunted by the technical demands of most introductions to the subject. Requiring no more than simple arithmetic, the book: * Traces the origins of Game Theory and its philosophical premises * Looks at its implications for the theory of bargaining and social contract theory * Gives a detailed exposition of all of the major `games' including the famous `prisoner's dilemma' * Analyses cooperative, non cooperative, repeated, evolutionary and experimental games. I liked Varoufakis' intro econ book a lot. Not sure if this is useful to you or not. Bill
Re: Re: re: Query: : ?xml:namespace prefix = o
At 04:03 PM 12/06/2002 -0500, you wrote: Hey Ravi- You do know what humour is! Gee...Wasn't sure from your prior note! H I think he's just the sweetest thing alive!!! But I've said that before. Joanna
Re: Re: re: Query: : ?xml:namespace prefix = o
What is belwo is what I see from the web site. Sabri +++ The XML page cannot be displayed Cannot view XML input using style sheet. Please correct the error and then click the Refresh button, or try again later. - --- Required white space was missing. Error processing resource 'http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/pen-l/2002IV/msg02111.html'. Line 9, Position 45 !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML//EN
Re: Re: Query: planned obsolescence
I can see how people draw this analogy between Potlatch and Moka institutions and conspicuous consumption, but I remain sceptical about whether these are substantial analogies. There are many ways of being conspicuous. I guess the main difference I can see is that in Moka and Potlatch the focus is on getting rid of ones wealth, and in particular giving it to other people. Status is gained by outgoing flows, it is not only displayed. By contrast, conspicuous consumption seems to me to be all about showing how good one is at maximising incoming flows. The crucial difference is that in a gift economy, maximising income is the derivative behaviour, rather than the organising principle. I believe that we went over some of this before; at the time I mentioned the book Gifts and Commodities by my teacher Christ Gregory. Here is another which may be closer to the focus of this list: Carrier, J. G. (1994) Gifts and Commodities: Exchange and Western Capitalism since 1700, London: Routledge As for the 'cargo cults', I have found some very amusing archival records from the 1960s, where some people in the Buka, an island in the North Solomons, developed these crazy ideas of communal production and free love (it is chronicled by M. Rimoldi and E. Rimoldi in Hahalis and the Labour of Love, a very interesting but appallingly edited book.) The records show that ASIO, Australia's intelligence service, was very worried about this movement, and in particular, the fact that the Communist Party of Australia seemed to be making overtures to them. The CPA sponsored Francis Hagai, one leader to come over to Sydney to study at an Aboriginal community college; upon arrival he went to conference held by the radical Union of Australian Women. One of the more spectacular features of the Buka movement were its baby gardens - villages set up to produce lots of babies by means of free love (lots of babies = lots of development; actually this was the reasoning of the Administration until about 1970.) Francis Hagai went to King's Cross, the red light district, and is reported to have said that of course Australia is so developed, they have huge baby gardens! It was like the intelligence communities' worst nightmares all come at once. Great fun to write up, though. My personal view is that wacky as some of their ideas were, such movements often did manage to organise communities in ways which have been extremely hard to emulate. Sometimes this lead to immense frustrations, but I do believe that the lowly position projected for New Guineans in the world economy has to be factored into estimates of the 'irrationality' of cargo cults. There can be no spectacle as amusing as commodity fetishist economists promising the world to people if only they abandon their cargo beliefs; few people, however, warned the villagers their aspirations would have to be adjusted to the level suitable to pauperised third world rabble. (On this latter topic, there is a very interesting ethnography by M.F. Smith called Hard Times on Kairiru Island which deals with the deep existential drama of impoverishment - not loss of property, but loss of position: The Kairiru villages used to be on top of their own political, social, economic and cosmological world, now they are not. They're hard times indeed.) Thiago On 16/10/2002 6:23 AM, Michael Pollak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This however, is a fairly marginal point in my essay; the reality is that so- called cargo cults were often villager-initiated co-operatives and political movements which were opposed because they potentially made more sense than it was safe to allow. That sounds like it'll be a great book Thiago; I look forward to reading it. But when it comes to describing capitalist consumption as irrational, emotional and directly analogous to tribal practices, I think you should skip over positional goods and obsolescence theorists and go straight to the locus classicus, Veblen's _Theory of the Leisure Class_. His whole book is built on making parallels between modern society and those described by anthropology. And the essence of conspicuous consumption for him is explicitly the same as potlatch: to destroy wealth conspicuously in order to signify one's status. He thinks that everything that is high status in modern society can be revealed to be wasteful, and the more high wasteful, and the more wasteful, the more high status. And his prose is lively and sarcastic and his analyses of wastefulness are great. He has many followers. One updatings that sticks closely to his ideas is Quentin Bell's _On Human Finery_. And one that extends it into multindimensionality is Alison Lurie's _The Language of Clothes_. Both books also follow him in their lively writing and absence of jargon. Michael - This mail sent through IMP:
Re: Re: Query: planned obsolescence
Thanks everybody! I am currently writing a Master's thesis about social movements in Papua New Guinea, some of which are known as 'cargo cults'. The planned obsolescence and positional consumtion stuff seems very relevant in terms of understanding what's left out of the contrasts made by anthropologists writing in this field. Often, there is a distinction set up between the irrational worship of things within 'cargo cults' - or Melanesian societies generally - and the rational knowledge of things in our own society. So, for instance, we find Peter Lawrence praising the 'progress' made in improving cars from year to year, whilst condemning 'static' societies and their kooky ideas; one example he cites is of a landlocked people who pooled their resources and bought a boat. My concern isn't that buying boats to sit in your village yard may be a pretty silly thing to do (it also may not be), but rather that the road of development which ostensibly leads people away from such behaviour isn't quite what it seems, that it involves, amongst other things, playing a different game of status. These subtleties are very hard to communicate to one's colonial subjects, and require disciplining people in certain ways. This however, is a fairly marginal point in my essay; the reality is that so- called cargo cults were often villager-initiated co-operatives and political movements which were opposed because they potentially made more sense than it was safe to allow. Thiago - This mail sent through IMP: www-mail.usyd.edu.au
Re: Re: Query: planned obsolescence
Here is a section that relates to planned obsolescence from my book, Transcending the Economy. A good deal of our consumption is what Fred Hirsch, following Veblen, described as positional; in other words, consumption that is supposed to signal our status to others (Hirsch 1976). Enhancement of positional consumption does little to make our society better off. I can only climb up a rung on the positional ladder by ensuring that someone else declines. In this sense, positional consumption is a zero sum game that leads to no gain at all for society. In another sense, positional consumption is a negative?sum game fueled by the profit motive. Hemlines rise and fall in order to make people dissatisfied with last year's wardrobe. Fashions change so fast that secondhand stores, such as Goodwill or the Salvation Army, get far more donated clothing than they could possibly sell to their customers, even though much of it is high quality and relatively new. As a result, they end up exporting much of their donated clothing. In one famous study, published in the conservative Journal of Political Economy, three prominent economists, Franklin Fisher, Zvi Griliches, and Carl Kaysen, estimated that more than 25 percent of the selling price of a car came from the cost of model changes that were unrelated to performance (1962). Since 1962, the speed with which new models of consumer goods proliferate has accelerated dramatically, in the automobile industry, but more so elsewhere. Jeffry Madrick recently wrote: The number of new food and household products introduced each year, for example, has increased fifteen? and twenty?fold since 1970. The Gap retail chain revamps its product line every six weeks, and changes its advertising frequently as well. (Madrick 1998, p. 32) The Swiss company that manufactures Swatch watches creates 140 different watch styles each year. I doubt a new model watch is much more accurate than the model that preceded it. The difference is in style rather than the ability to keep a more accurate measure of time. Nike creates 250 new shoe designs each season (Jenkins 1998). While the ultimate purpose of product diversification is to increase profits, the company no doubt imagines that it is doing a service to its customers. In fact, diversification creates another form of waste, in a form that economists describe as search efforts. Writing as an aging basketball player with tender feet, I know that if I find a pair of shoes that fits well, I will never be able to find a replacement with the precise feel and fit, since the style that I buy today will soon be discontinued. The continual need to change fashions reflects an impersonal world in which people communicate their status by displaying fashionable possessions. Since others will always attempt to ape the fashionable, the key to status in this game is the ability to discard old fashions and adopt new ones ahead of the masses. Veblen made his reputation comparing this competition to the Potlatches of the Native Americans of the Northwest. Business preys on this human frailty with advertisements demonstrating that success flows to those who follow the latest fashion, while ridicule and humiliation lies in store for those who either cannot or will not consume appropriately. In this environment, people who are uncertain of their position in the world stand in terror of being out of fashion ?? creating a fashistic world in which frightened consumers discard styles at breakneck speed. In his book, Everyday Life in the Modern World, the French sociologist, Henri Lefebvre, included a chapter, Terrorism and Everyday Life. He observed: Not that fashion alone and independently causes terror to reign, but it is an integral/integrated part of terrorist societies, and it does inspire a certain kind of terror, a certainty of terror (Lefebvre 1971, p. 165). -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: query: George Bernard Shaw
Devine, James wrote: does anyone know where I can find G.B. Shaw's theory of exploitation (based on rent theory)? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine If you want Shaw's own words, why not try The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and Capitalism (1928). (He used the term Woman of course in a general sense to mean both women and men. There is also a Fabian pamphlet Socialism and Superior Brains which deals with this in passing, and also is an interesting anti-elitist argument from a very elitist point of view. Also, and crucially, look at the section on *Das Rheingold* in The Perfect Wagnerite. Shane Mage When we read on a printed page the doctrine of Pythagoras that all things are made of numbers, it seems mystical, mystifying, even downright silly. When we read on a computer screen the doctrine of Pythagoras that all things are made of numbers, it seems self-evidently true. (N. Weiner)
Re: Re: Query: WorldCom and Internet
That was beaut, Ravi! As for Worldcom's chances - UUNET might ultimately get 'em through, but it seems it all depends how much corporate clientele they lose in the (very) mean time. Many thanks, Rob. hi rob, i will attempt an answer to some of your questions. yes, if uunet ceases to function there will be significant disruption of the internet. the term 'backbone' is a bit old. in the days when the NSF ran the internet there was a single backbone that at various times was built/run by merit/sprint/bbn/mci/others. now, various high level network service providers have their own backbones which they connect to the backbones of other NSPs using private peering arrangements or using public exchange points. nonetheless, uunet being a pioneer (the uu part - unix to unix - shows their history back to the days when at end points you often connected systems to the internet through them using uucp), a lot of traffic runs on their network and this can cause disruption in connectivity between various endpoints of the internet. additionally MCI still runs the MAE* exchange point facilities which are exchange points for ISPs to interconnect: http://www.mae.net/mae_services1.htm and the above is used by a significant number of tier2 network providers. here's a really good page that provides info on the internet backbone ISPs etc: http://navigators.com/isp.html from a technology point of view, network backbones do seem to be a natural monopoly. new technologies that attempt to use redundant bandwidth by moving traffic around, are emerging, but suffer limitations. you are also right about the excessive capacity now available. while thats true for network capacity (fibre layout etc) i am not sure about exchange points and switches. so, transferring the usage from UUNET to other carriers and switching points might be a difficult process. which makes uunet an attractive acquisition i suppose and hence perhaps it will survive the bankruptcy? for uunet's coverage: http://www1.worldcom.com/us/about/network/maps/ http://www1.worldcom.com/global/about/network/maps/northam/ here's an interesting if crowded map of net coverage: http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/ches/map/ the place to look for internet data: http://www.caida.org/ http://www.nanog.org/ hope i touched on some useful stuff in my long-winded response! --ravi
RE: Re: query
On Fri, 19 Jul 2002, Devine, James wrote: What's a good synonym for autism or dereism? I'm looking for the word that means that one believes that something doesn't exist after one shuts one's eyes (a belief of many very young children) *or that only one's own perceived reality exists.* Berkeleyian idealism has been caricatured as having this implication. It's a pretty nasty thing to do to poor old Berkeley, but if the cause is good, you could wheel out the old limerick: There was a young man who said God, I find it exceedingly odd That this very tree Should continue to be When there is no one about in the quad. dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication may contain confidential or privileged information and is for the attention of the named recipient only. It should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. (c) 2002 Cazenove Service Company or affiliates. Cazenove Co. Ltd and Cazenove Fund Management Limited provide independent advice and are regulated by the Financial Services Authority and members of the London Stock Exchange. Cazenove Fund Management Jersey is a branch of Cazenove Fund Management Limited and is regulated by the Jersey Financial Services Commission. Cazenove Investment Fund Management Limited, regulated by the Financial Services Authority and a member of IMA, promotes only its own products and services. ___
Re: RE: Re: query
Davies, Daniel wrote: There was a young man who said God, I find it exceedingly odd That this very tree Should continue to be When there is no one about in the quad. Dear Sir your astonishment's odd, I'm always about in the quad, And that's why this tree Continues to be, Since observed by yours faithfully, God. Carrol
Re: Re: Query re Angels on a pin
Now you know why Adam Smith chose a pin factory rather than a more modern means of production! -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: Query re Angels on a pin
I'll watch myself vis-a-vis metaphors in the future. JD -Original Message- From: Ken Hanly To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 3/23/02 12:24 PM Subject: [PEN-L:24270] Re: Query re Angels on a pin It was never discussed. There is an extended discussion initiated in Willard McArty's HUMANIST archives initiated by yours truly. But here is a good summary of some of the issues: The image of the dancing angels is found as a jest in Isaac D'Israeli's Curiosities of Literature, 1791: `The reader desirous of being merry with Aquinas's angels may find them in Martinus Scriblerus, in Ch.VII [a satirical work by Pope, Arbuthnot Swift, sometime before 1714 - but which does not in fact contain any such jest], who inquires if angels pass from one extreme to another without going through the middle? And if angels know things more clearly in the morning? How many angels can dance on the point of a very fine needle, without jostling one another?' The question is not raised in any extant medieval discussion. Some details about angels and pins: the image of Angels on the point of a needle appears in Joseph Glanville (1661), and in Nicholas Cudworth's True Intellectual System (1678). Later still it is mocked, but it is possible that someone invented the image earlier than the 17th century. If they did the answer expected would be (a) None, because Angels have no spatial position (Glanville), (b) One, because one pin would need to be animated by one angelic substance, excluding all others (Aquinas, Cudworth, and see Adler, below), or (c) As many as they please (almost everyone else, because `on' can only mean `attending to', and one attention does not exclude others. The argument is not about infinities, nor is it a foolishly unanswerable question. Scholastic philosophers and theologians did not, as far as anyone can see, actually discuss it in those terms. See George Macdonald Ross's paper on Angels in Philosophy 60.1985, pp. 495-511, and my own in Religious Studies 28, pp.221-34. Stephen Clark John O'Callaghan accummulated more information on Philosop, back in 1992: From: John O'Callaghan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't know the historical origin of the particular question about angels dancing on heads of pins, but the Thomist/Aristotelian philosopher Mortimer Adler in his book *The Angels and Us* argues that there could be only one angel occupying the physical location of a pin. Since an angel is incorporeal, it would entirely fill a pin, much as the soul entirely fills the body, since the soul functions as the form of the body's matter. Though I suppose this might be a Thomist argument, it is definitely not St. Thomas'. He is quite clear in several places that the relation of an angel to matter it moves or controls is not that of the relation of soul to body, which is the relation of a substantial form to matter. So: S.T. Ia, Q.51, a. 3, Reply 2 The assumed body is united to the angel not as its form... Q. 51, a. 3, Reply 3 Movement coming from a united mover is a proper function of life, but the bodies assumed by the angels are not thus moved, since the angels are not their forms. Q.76, a.2, Reply 1 Although the intellectual soul, like the angel, has no matter from which it is produced, yet it is the form of a certain matter, in which it is unlike an angel. Q.76, a.6, Reply 3 A spiritual substance, which is united to a body as its mover only, is united to it by power or virtue. But the intellectual soul is united to the body as a form by its very being; but it guides and moves the body by its power and virtue. Q.110, a. 2, reply 1 Our soul is united to the body as its form An angel, however, has not the same relation with natural bodies... ON THE SPECIFIC QUESTION of how many angels can be in one place, this is what St. Thomas had to say: In Q 52, a.1 he specifies that an angel is in a place not as a body is said to be in a place, but by the application of its power to that place. Think of it this way: I am not bodily in your computer screen. Nonetheless, I am there by my communicative power. So an angel does not fill a body like a form, as you suggest, but is present to it by its power. In Q.52, a. 3 he addresses the explicit question: Whether Several Angels Can Be At The Same Time In The Same Place? There are not two angels in the same place. The reason for this is because it is impossible for two complete causes to be immediately the causes of one and the same thing. This is evident in every class of causes. For there is one proximate form of one thing, and there is one proximate mover, although there may be several remote movers. Nor can it be objected that several individuals may row a boat, since no one of them is a perfect mover, because no one man's strength is sufficient for moving the boat; the fact is rather that all together are as one mover, in so far as their united powers all combine in producing the one movement. Hence, since the angel is said to be in one place by the fact that his
RE: Re: query
I wrote: where can I get a time-series/historical graph showing the ratio of U.S. external debt to GDP during the last few decades? Doug replies: Flow of funds, credit market debt or rest-of-world tables: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/data.htm. I notice that the data are only available in bunches of a small number of years. Is there a unified times series somewhere? -- Jim
Re: RE: Re: query
Devine, James wrote: I wrote: where can I get a time-series/historical graph showing the ratio of U.S. external debt to GDP during the last few decades? Doug replies: Flow of funds, credit market debt or rest-of-world tables: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/data.htm. I notice that the data are only available in bunches of a small number of years. Is there a unified times series somewhere? -- Jim Huh? Quarterly since 1952, and annual since 1945, no? You want earlier? Doug
RE: Re: RE: Re: query
I didn't find the tables in the Fed's books, perhaps because I didn't look in the right place. But economy.com had what I wanted. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:22360] Re: RE: Re: query Devine, James wrote: I wrote: where can I get a time-series/historical graph showing the ratio of U.S. external debt to GDP during the last few decades? Doug replies: Flow of funds, credit market debt or rest-of-world tables: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/data.htm. I notice that the data are only available in bunches of a small number of years. Is there a unified times series somewhere? -- Jim Huh? Quarterly since 1952, and annual since 1945, no? You want earlier? Doug
Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Surely Marx did not say either what Justin or Rakesh claim. Rakesh' claim (re Marx) is correct about value in EXCHANGE but does not apply to use value. Air and sunlight etc. are valuable even if not involved in any exchange relationship and their use value is quite independent of labor. Cheers, Ken Hanly Marx recognizes this. His notion of value is a way of talking about exchange value, what makes commodities exchange at stable ratios in a market economy. It has nothing much to do with something's being useful in virtue of its natural properties, although he also says, as someone pointed out, that a commodity with no use value will have no exchange value either. jks _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
I do remember reading a particularly eloquent paper a few years back
('In Defence of Exploitation' I think it was called)
Oops - I see Justin has told you about it already.
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
I have had an extensive argument with someone influenced by Roemer, though he criticizes Roemer for not appreciating the distinction between labor power and labor. But I'll ask you a question: how do you understand the logic by which Marx discovered the distinction between labor power and labor or--to put it another way--that what Mr Moneybags pays for in what is indeed a fair exchange is labor power, not labor time itself? Or do you think said distinction is as superfluous as the so called labor theory of value? Or do you think Marx's understanding of that distinction has to be modified? This I take up in another paper, In defense of Exploittaion, Econ Phil 1995, also available on the net in the old marxism spoons archive. I think that the distinction is valid and it is a very serious flaw in Roemer's critique of Marxian exploitation theory that he misses the significancxe of it. That is something quite independent of Roemer's positive theory of exploitation, the possibility of a better alternative, which independent of his critique of Marxian exploitaion, and (I argue in IDoE) both a necessary complement to Marx's theory and valid in its own right. As to the this positive theory, it is crucial to emphasize that it's not morally or otherwise culpable for people to have to work for others, etc., if there is no credible alternative to this situation where the exploited would also be at least as well if not better off by some measure. So the explication of feasible alternatives to exploitative relations is a necessary part of the charge that those relations are exploitative at all. So, to bring in another bomb into this discussion, not only was Marx wrong on practical grounds to disclaim writing recipes for the cookshops of the future, he was wrong on theoretical grounds: he can't even say that capitalsim is exploitative unless there is a better alternative. Unless there is a better alterntive, it ios not exploitative. I think that Roemer's version loses a lot of the point of Marx's socological analysis, which, as I say, can be maintained without holding that labor creates all value Justin, Marx does not say that. He says that *abstract, general social* labor creates all value. No, he doesn't. You confuse the strict version of the LTV, SNALT (socially necessary abstract labor time) as a mesure of value, with the vulgar version, labor as the source of value. Marx accepts both. He accepts no other source of value but labor. But value lacks a measure or real significance outside market relations in which it comes to dominate society. Anyway, the vuklgar formulation is widely held by Marxists, whether or not Marx holds it, which hedoes. or that price is proportional to value understood as socially necessary abstract labor time. Marx did not think price is proportional to value; contra Bohm Bawerk, he did not come around in vol 3 to implicitly recognizing the productivity of capital. Vol 3 was written before vol 1. Sure he did--not simply directly proportional, but there's a relation. Unless you think Engels and almost the entire tradition of Marxist economics was wrong about the existence of the transformation problem--yeah, I know Foley and those types do. But I disagree with them. I also find it puzzling--as did even Amartya Sen who is by no means a Marxist--that self proclaimed sympathetic critics would find value--abstract, general social labor time--of little descriptive interest in in itself merely because it is not a convenient way of calculating prices with given physical data. I can understand how Samuelson would embrace the redundancy charge and the eraser theorem but the alacrity with which academic sympathizers accepted such criticism is little short of astonishing, I must say. Why? The question is, what work does this alleged quantity do? I agree that LTV talk is useful heuristic way to saying that there's exploitation. But we can say that without LTV talk, that is, without denying that there are other sources of value than labor or that SNALT does not provide a useful measure of a significant quantity. Or should we say socialists of the chair rather analytical Marxists? Say what you like. Have you got out of your chair and organized anything lately? I thought Cohen's theory of history was a a more rigorous version of Plekhanov's classic texts? I must say that I found Brenner's criticism of Cohen rather persuasive. Agreed on both counts. B is an AM too. I am not convinced that Marx was given a fair hearing. By the AMs? Not by Elster. But even if you disagree with Cohen, you cannot deny that he was scuruposlous and careful, fairer you could not ask. Roemer's critique isa lso deep. See Gil Skillman's essays in Eecon Phil (same issue that my IDoE was in) and Sci Soc, arguing that Roemer's critique of Marx can be made to work. Anyway, whatever the AMs have said, any hearing MArx get must now match the standards of rigora nd
RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
What's the best book for an introduction/overview/tour d'horizon of analytical marxism? One citation only, please. mbs It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Why? The question is, what work does this alleged quantity do? I agree that LTV talk is useful heuristic way to saying that there's exploitation. But we can say that without LTV talk, that is, without denying that there are other sources of value than labor or that SNALT does not provide a useful measure of a significant quantity. I would have thought that a more important reason for trying to hang onto the LTV is that it embodies a fundamental egalitarian principle; if we believe that my life is equally as valuable as your life, then an hour of my life must be worth the same as an hour of your life, and I think that this ends up implying something like the LTV. dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
jks Out of interest, what's wrong with the labour theory of value? Do the AMs have an alternative theory of value, or do you try to get along without one? Feel free to not answer if it would take more labour than is worth bothering with. cheers dd I don't want to get into this in great detail, but here's the short version. What's called the LTV has two meanings. The lose meaning, intended by most people, is the vulgar version, that labor is the only source of value, which Marx accepts, but not in the sense used by most of its adherents, who think that the vulgar version implies taht workers are entitled, morally, to the value that their labor is the source of. Marx was not interested in claims of justice and would have regarded the labor theory of property underlying this argument as so much ideology. The vulgar version is wrong in any case because there is no reason to deny that there may be many factors, including subjective ones (demand) that go into value. The strict version, used by Marx, holds that price is roughly proportional to socially necessary abstract labor time. This faces the famous transformation problem, roughly that there is no nice way to turn labor values into prices. Marx's own solution is fatally falwed,a s is universally acknowledged. Borktiwiesz developed a mathemaeticall adequate solution (expalined simply by Sweezy in The Theory of Cap Dev.), but the conditions under which it holds are so special and unrealistic taht it is doubtful that the model has much applicability--you have to assume constant returns to scale, no alternative production methods, etc. In addition there is the neoRicardan critique (Sraffa and Steedman, arrived at independently by Samuelson) onw hich labor valuesa rea fifth wheel: we can compute them from wages and technical input, and under especial conditions establish a proportionality to prices, but you can get the prices directly from the other factors, so why bother with the labor values? Finally, there's the point that is key to my mind, which is that the theory have proved fruitless. There is a minor industry of defending the LTV, but the fact is that no one has done any interesting work using the theory for over 100 years. what you have is a case of a situation where Marx used the usual bourgeois theory of his day, which he improved, and shortly thereafter the bourgeois economists developed the subjectivist value theory that had been sort of kicking around quietly (Marx sneers at it offhand in various places), but the Marxists stuck with the old theory because it was in the sacred text, even if after it was clear that it faced insuperable logical problems and was doing no work. There is no interesting proposition of Marxist economics or sociology that cannot besatted better without it. It's fucking time to let go, use the damn thing as a heiristic to explain exploitation,a nd stop pretending that it is true,w hich even Marx didn't think. For more detail, read Howard King, The Political Economy of Marx, 2d ed, and A history of Marxian Economics (selected chapters). jks _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
What's the best book for an introduction/overview/tour d'horizon of analytical marxism? One citation only, please. mbs John Roemer, ed. Analytical Marxism (Cambs UP 1986). Good essays by Roemer, Elster, Brenner, Allan Wood, Adam Pzrezworski, etc. jks _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
This I take up in another paper, In defense of Exploittaion, Econ Phil 1995, also available on the net in the old marxism spoons archive. Could you provide the URL to your paper? I did a google search but it didn't show up Thanks, Alan _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Rational Choice Marxism edited by Terrell Carver Paul Thomas. Jargon free, very clear. - Original Message - From: Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 7:51 AM Subject: [PEN-L:22150] RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism What's the best book for an introduction/overview/tour d'horizon of analytical marxism? One citation only, please. mbs It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
From: Alan Cibils [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:22155] Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 13:54:07 -0400 This I take up in another paper, In defense of Exploittaion, Econ Phil 1995, also available on the net in the old marxism spoons archive. Could you provide the URL to your paper? I did a google search but it didn't show up Thanks, Alan http://lists.village.virginia.edu/~spoons/marxism/DefenseE.htm jks _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Jks writes: I don't want to get into this in great detail, but here's the short version. What's called the LTV has two meanings. The lose meaning, intended by most people, is the vulgar version, that labor is the only source of value, which Marx accepts, but not in the sense used by most of its adherents, who think that the vulgar version implies taht workers are entitled, morally, to the value that their labor is the source of. But the argument that workers contribute more to the value of output than they receive in compensation does not necessarily imply that either: a) labor is the only source of value or b) that workers are entitled morally to a wage equal to the value of their contribution right?
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
But the argument that workers contribute more to the value of output than they receive in compensation does not necessarily imply that either: a) labor is the only source of value or b) that workers are entitled morally to a wage equal to the value of their contribution right? Right. Moreover the proposition that you state is obviously true, and will be accepted by any sentient being who thinks about the matter for a second. jks _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: HistoricalMaterialism
Hi Justin: I think that the distinction is valid and it is a very serious flaw in Roemer's critique of Marxian exploitation theory that he misses the significancxe of it. OK, good. That is something quite independent of Roemer's positive theory of exploitation, the possibility of a better alternative, which independent of his critique of Marxian exploitaion, and (I argue in IDoE) both a necessary complement to Marx's theory and valid in its own right. we'll have to work through his theory based on differential ownership of assets but let's be clear that even Roemer is ultimately interested in the appropriation of labor by one class of another. As to the this positive theory, it is crucial to emphasize that it's not morally or otherwise culpable for people to have to work for others, etc., if there is no credible alternative to this situation where the exploited would also be at least as well if not better off by some measure. So the explication of feasible alternatives to exploitative relations is a necessary part of the charge that those relations are exploitative at all. So, to bring in another bomb into this discussion, not only was Marx wrong on practical grounds to disclaim writing recipes for the cookshops of the future, he was wrong on theoretical grounds: he can't even say that capitalsim is exploitative unless there is a better alternative. Unless there is a better alterntive, it ios not exploitative. the better alternative is an unwritten book, a book that can only be written by a revolutionary working class in the act of creating a socialist society in order overcome the immiseration, degradation and slavery visited by this one on them. I think that Roemer's version loses a lot of the point of Marx's socological analysis, which, as I say, can be maintained without holding that labor creates all value Justin, Marx does not say that. He says that *abstract, general social* labor creates all value. No, he doesn't. You confuse the strict version of the LTV, SNALT (socially necessary abstract labor time) as a mesure of value, with the vulgar version, labor as the source of value. Marx could not be clearer that the distinction between abstract and concrete labor is one of the great accomplishments of his book, and the key to the critical conception. One simply cannot be making an interpretation of Marx in good faith without trying to understand what he meant by this distinction. Which of course is to say that there is a lot of shoddy interpretation of Marx. Marx accepts both. He accepts no other source of value but labor. But value lacks a measure or real significance outside market relations in which it comes to dominate society. Do you mean that value only exists (and potentially at that) as labor objectified in a commodity? Anyway, the vuklgar formulation is widely held by Marxists, whether or not Marx holds it, which hedoes. We are now in a position to read Marx above and beyond Marxism, Leninism, Social Democracy and Stalinism. or that price is proportional to value understood as socially necessary abstract labor time. Marx did not think price is proportional to value; contra Bohm Bawerk, he did not come around in vol 3 to implicitly recognizing the productivity of capital. Vol 3 was written before vol 1. Sure he did--not simply directly proportional, but there's a relation. Yes there is a relation. Drawing from Ricardo, Marx says that changes in value is the best explanation for changes in relative prices over time; however he does not say that price is proportional to value at any one time. Unless you think Engels and almost the entire tradition of Marxist economics was wrong about the existence of the transformation problem--yeah, I know Foley and those types do. But I disagree with them. That's not the point. Foley's taking the money wage instead of the real wage as given sure seems right to me. The idea of a uniform real wage in terms of an identical basket of commodities for all workers seems a very questionable assumption to make. And no neo Ricardian has ever responded carefully to Shaikh and the others in the Freeman and Mandel volume. I think Shaikh's response to the redundancy charge is marvelous as is Amartya Sen's. Again there has never been a formal response as far as I know. Now Howard and King say that Shaikh's iterative solution is the worst of all, but their response is almost purely vituperative. The point remains that in Shaikh's iteration (as well as Jacques Gouverneur's) the mass of surplus value value remains equal to capitalists' income as composed of profit and revenue, and the proof of this is that the capitalists gain or lose nothing in real terms as a result of a complete transformation which as Fred Mosely and Alejandro Ramos Martinez argue is not needed anyway as the inputs in Marx's own transformation tables are not in the form of values or direct prices
RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
[odd numbers of bracket Justin's writing; even numbers are for mine.] I wrote:Marx didn't say that price is proportional to value. in volume I of CAPITAL, he _assumed_ such proportionality in order to break through the fetishism of commodities, to reveal the macro- and micro-sociology of exploitation. (Trading at value is a standard of equal exchange, in some ways like an assumption of perfect competition for modern orthodox economists (MOEs).) Justin responded: Maybe we are not talking the same language. I do not mean by saying that Marx holds that prices are prop, to value that commodities trade at value, just that there is a function that takes you from value to prices, and that this function is statistically true, that is--that over the long run he thinks prices will tend to fluctuate around values, moreover, that values explain price levels. Surely he believed that! I riposted:no, Marx shows convincingly in volume III of CAPITAL that as long as (1) the rate of surplus-value is constant and uncorrelated with the OCC; (2) the OCC differs between industries; and (3) the rate of profit tends toward equality between sectors, prices gravitate toward prices of production (POPs) that differ from values. He now says: I don't see an inconsistency between the claim I am making and the you you correctly attribute to Marx. Let me clarify by saying that Marx did not believe that labor values were a ladder you could kick away once you had climed them, that all you needed, once yoy understood the whole story, was prices of production; rather, value exerts a pull on price; in fact; there is a systematic relation between value and price that can be at least statistically speaking represented, as we would say now, by a function establishing a proportionality: P=mV, where m is some complex function that takes into account the deviations of P from V due to various disturbances. The business of the complex function comes from Bortkewicz, who came from what is now called the neo-Ricardian tradition. Crucially, he assumed that the rate of surplus-value and the rate of profit were equalized between sectors, an equilibrium that's unlikely to be attained given the way capitalism continually generates endogenous shocks (Enron, etc.) This kind of functional relationship is so restricted in its real-world applicability that we should ignore it, except as a very special case. The pull is macrosocietal: ignoring inflation, individual participants in the capitalist system can't receive incomes (in price terms) unless someone produces products that are sold, so that total incomes (total prices, corrected to avoid double-counting) = total value. A person can get income without doing work (as every professor knows) but someone has to produce the basis for that income. Second, no individual in society can earn profits (interest, or rent) unless someone produces more than is necessary to cover his or her costs of survival. Thus total property income = total surplus-value. I wrote:Maybe you're thinking of Ricardo, who saw exactly this kind of result from his analysis but assumed that the value/POP correlation was good enough for early 19th century British political economy work (embracing what historians of economic thought call the 98% labor theory of value [i.e., of price]). For Marx, the connection between prices and values is macroeconomic in nature, with total value = total price and total surplus-value = total property income, with the macro structure of accumulation limiting and shaping the microprocesses that make up that totality. JKS:Right, but there's a proportionality. I'm not saying that Marx think that each price tends to converge on its value. I don't think he thought that would make sense, though he does seem to have thought you could talk about sectoral value, not just at the level of the whole economy. he thought you could talk about sectoral value -- at a high level of abstraction. It's a mistake to equate different levels of abstraction. Unfortunately, due to reasons that aren't entirely Marx's fault (i.e., he died before he finished), he's not as clear as he should be about the level of abstraction. (BTW, later on in volume III, Marx is very clear that individual participants in the capitalist system don't give a shite about values or surplus-value. They see prices, profits, interest, rent, etc., what he sees as superficial representations of value and surplus-value. As Sraffa, Steedman, and Samuelson would predict. Of course this is true! what they don't understand is that Marx saw prices (etc.) as not only the determinants of the behavior of capitalists but also that he saw them as an incomplete (partial) vision of the totality of capitalism. It's also true that individual atoms don't know the laws of statistical mechanics and individual electrons don't know the laws of quantum mechanics. Does that imply that Sraffa, Steedman, Samuelson, and you would throw out those laws? should we
Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Surely Marx did not say either what Justin or Rakesh claim. Rakesh' claim (re Marx) is correct about value in EXCHANGE but does not apply to use value. Air and sunlight etc. are valuable even if not involved in any exchange relationship and their use value is quite independent of labor. Cheers, Ken Hanly Marx's understanding of that distinction has to be modified? I think that Roemer's version loses a lot of the point of Marx's socological analysis, which, as I say, can be maintained without holding that labor creates all value Justin, Marx does not say that. He says that *abstract, general social* labor creates all value. Value as expressed in the exchange value of a commodity does not derive from the subjective or *personal* estimation of the toil and trouble involved in its production. Value does not derive from the useful qualities of the commodity that derive from the *concrete* labor that went into its making. The value of the commodity is not related to the time individual producers put into their making but rather the time socially necessary to reproduce that commodity. The value of a commodity is a represenation of some aliquot of the social labor time upon which divided in some form any and all societies depend. It is not personal, subjective and concrete labor time that is connected with the value of a commodity.
Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I subscribe Historical materialism I think that its weakness is inadequate insufficient analysis of fundamental category of Marx's analysis of value-form and labor theory. It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Would one of those important and true insights be that the value contributed by labor power to the product of labor power exceeds the value paid to labor by capital for its contribution? -Original Message- From: Justin Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 4:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:22131] Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism [EMAIL PROTECTED] I subscribe Historical materialism I think that its weakness is inadequate insufficient analysis of fundamental category of Marx's analysis of value-form and labor theory. It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Quick, everyone run for the hills :-) Ian - Original Message - From: Forstater, Mathew [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 2:23 PM Subject: [PEN-L:22132] RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism Would one of those important and true insights be that the value contributed by labor power to the product of labor power exceeds the value paid to labor by capital for its contribution? -Original Message- From: Justin Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 4:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:22131] Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism [EMAIL PROTECTED] I subscribe Historical materialism I think that its weakness is inadequate insufficient analysis of fundamental category of Marx's analysis of value-form and labor theory. It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
Would one of those important and true insights be that the value contributed by labor power to the product of labor power exceeds the value paid to labor by capital for its contribution? I had said: It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks I have defended that formulation in What's Wrong with Exploitation?, Nous 1995, availabkle on the net in the old marxism spoons archive. However, I argued that it did not require the labor theory of value in Marx's canonical formulation to state it. More generally, the point is that capitalism is exploitative, a point that _can_ be put without reference to any theory of value at all--Roemer has an argument to this effect. I think that Roemer's version loses a lot of the point of Marx's socological analysis, which, as I say, can be maintained without holding that labor creates all value or that price is proportional to value understood as socially necessary abstract labor time. I will add that Jim and Chris B have cast amniadversions on the reductionism of classical analytical Marxism, which has largely been abandoned by its founders (Erik Olin Wright excepted, also Alan Carling). But the points I am making do not require reductionism of any sort. What remains of AM--and it does survive in places like the journal Historical Materialism--is an emphasis on clarity, precision, explicitness, and rigorous standardss of argument, along with a totally unworshipful attitude towards traditional formulations or classic texts. These are worth preserving. Because AM as a movement has evaporated, it is not worth beating up on or defending. What is worth defending is what has always mattered--intellectual honesty and care, the pessimism of the mind that must accompany optimism of the will. Leave fundamentalism to the religious. If there is a scientific dimension to historical materialism, it will survive. But it requires a skeptical temperment. jks _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
It's analytical Marxist. Most AMs, like me, do not believe that Marx's value theory is more than a heuristic, and think that the important and true insights in Marx can be stated without the labor theory of value. jks Out of interest, what's wrong with the labour theory of value? Do the AMs have an alternative theory of value, or do you try to get along without one? Feel free to not answer if it would take more labour than is worth bothering with. cheers dd ___ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___
Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: query: Historical Materialism
I have defended that formulation in What's Wrong with Exploitation?, Nous 1995, availabkle on the net in the old marxism spoons archive. However, I argued that it did not require the labor theory of value in Marx's canonical formulation to state it. More generally, the point is that capitalism is exploitative, a point that _can_ be put without reference to any theory of value at all--Roemer has an argument to this effect. I have had an extensive argument with someone influenced by Roemer, though he criticizes Roemer for not appreciating the distinction between labor power and labor. But I'll ask you a question: how do you understand the logic by which Marx discovered the distinction between labor power and labor or--to put it another way--that what Mr Moneybags pays for in what is indeed a fair exchange is labor power, not labor time itself? Or do you think said distinction is as superfluous as the so called labor theory of value? Or do you think Marx's understanding of that distinction has to be modified? I think that Roemer's version loses a lot of the point of Marx's socological analysis, which, as I say, can be maintained without holding that labor creates all value Justin, Marx does not say that. He says that *abstract, general social* labor creates all value. Value as expressed in the exchange value of a commodity does not derive from the subjective or *personal* estimation of the toil and trouble involved in its production. Value does not derive from the useful qualities of the commodity that derive from the *concrete* labor that went into its making. The value of the commodity is not related to the time individual producers put into their making but rather the time socially necessary to reproduce that commodity. The value of a commodity is a represenation of some aliquot of the social labor time upon which divided in some form any and all societies depend. It is not personal, subjective and concrete labor time that is connected with the value of a commodity. These are very rough qualifications, but Marx spent a lot of time elucidating these qualifications--along with the monetary sides of value--that he thought escaped the classical economists who were thus at a loss to understand capitalism as historically specific form of social labor and the crises by which it was riven. or that price is proportional to value understood as socially necessary abstract labor time. Marx did not think price is proportional to value; contra Bohm Bawerk, he did not come around in vol 3 to implicitly recognizing the productivity of capital. Vol 3 was written before vol 1. I also find it puzzling--as did even Amartya Sen who is by no means a Marxist--that self proclaimed sympathetic critics would find value--abstract, general social labor time--of little descriptive interest in in itself merely because it is not a convenient way of calculating prices with given physical data. I can understand how Samuelson would embrace the redundancy charge and the eraser theorem but the alacrity with which academic sympathizers accepted such criticism is little short of astonishing, I must say. Or should we say socialists of the chair rather analytical Marxists? I will add that Jim and Chris B have cast amniadversions on the reductionism of classical analytical Marxism, which has largely been abandoned by its founders (Erik Olin Wright excepted, also Alan Carling). But the points I am making do not require reductionism of any sort. What remains of AM--and it does survive in places like the journal Historical Materialism--is an emphasis on clarity, precision, explicitness, and rigorous standardss of argument, along with a totally unworshipful attitude towards traditional formulations or classic texts. These are worth preserving. I thought Cohen's theory of history was a a more rigorous version of Plekhanov's classic texts? I must say that I found Brenner's criticism of Cohen rather persuasive. Because AM as a movement has evaporated, it is not worth beating up on or defending. What is worth defending is what has always mattered--intellectual honesty and care, I am not convinced that Marx was given a fair hearing. the pessimism of the mind that must accompany optimism of the will. Leave fundamentalism to the religious. If there is a scientific dimension to historical materialism, it will survive. Not necessarily because Marx's scientific theory threatens the ruling class. This is a science whose existence and (paradoxically) dissolution depends on the political victory of the working class. At any rate, I think this recent argument about crisis indicates how deeply Marx thought about micro foundations. In order for surplus value to be realized capitalists have to expand the scale of production but each capitalist does not do so in order to realize surplus value for the capitalist class as a whole but because hitherto such expansion in
Re: Re: Query on a book its author
Alan Cibils wrote: i might regret this giving out this prized bit of information, but have you tried http://www.bookfinder.com ? the best source for used and out of print books on the web that I know of. Thanks -- but I wrote the post sloppily. I own several copies of the book, and at one time knew Charles Loren personally. If no one is currently claiming ownership I want to start scanning it in and passing it on to others, and perhaps to whole lists. Carrol
RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
Crucible of Empire: The Spanish-American War appeared on PBS. I thought it was great, especially for PBS. to purchase, go to www.greatprojects.com\store mbs Do you know of any movies of significance, be they documentaries or fictions, on the following subjects: the Sepoy Rebellion; the Mahdi Revolt; the Spanish-American War/the Philippines-American War; the Boxer Rebellion; and any other non-Marxist but anti-colonial revolts rebellions? -- Yoshie
Re: RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
From: Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crucible of Empire: The Spanish-American War appeared on PBS. I thought it was great, especially for PBS. to purchase, go to www.greatprojects.com\store mbs The S-A War, just like the splendid little war now in progress, put the US public in quite a feisty mood. PBS rebroadcast another interesting documentary recently on Coney Island in its turn-of-the-century heyday. The documentary, by Ric Burns, noted how the S-A war influenced popular fantasies. One web site that draws on the same material Burns used notes: Americans have always loved violence and at the turn of the century they received it in a different form. Instead of seeing hundreds of people die in a film they went to Coney and watched as an entire city got swept away by a wall of water or saw Mount Vesuvius shower death upon the people of Pompeii. ... [Coney Island] shows like 'War of the Worlds' also gave Americans that feeling of pride, a feeling of what they thought their new country was going to become. In this show the naval forces of Germany, France, Britain and Spain sailed together into Manhattan. Then, [Battle of Manila Bay hero] Admiral [George] Dewey's fleet sailed out and sank every one of the sixty boats which had come to threaten American independence. See http://history.amusement-parks.com/users/adamsandy/coneyhist1.htm Carl _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
didn't get the dvd for lagaan yet (i think lagaan is expected to be
nominated for an oscar?), but this review in the latest on line
economic and political weekly
http://epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2001leaf=12filename=3798filetype=html
may suggest why it has such appeal.
__
My aim in this section has been to show that 'Lagaan', by eliminating
any reference to the 'parasitic' role of the raja/taluqdar and other
indigenous dominant groups, ends up posing -even when dealing with
only subaltern agency without any overt linkages to questions of the
'nation'- the question in terms of a homogenised 'us' ('Indians')
versus 'them' (English colonisers) and thus becomes easy fodder for
nationalist mythologies. As Aijaz Ahmad argues in another context,
if the motivating force of history...is neither class formation and
class struggle nor the multiplicities of intersecting conflicts based
upon class, gender, nation, race, region, and so on, but the unitary
'experience' of national oppression... then what else can we narrate
but that national oppression? [Ahmad 1992:102]. The result is not
only that the 'nation' becomes the legitimate community, but also
that the imagined 'nation' becomes
the mask worn by the ruling classes to cover their face of
exploitation. Thus the nationalist rhetoric here could be seen as a
strategy employed by the ruling coalition led by the bourgeoisie to
overcome the crisis of legitimacy which it is facing in the present
[Lele 1995 and Desai 1999]. It also contributes to the myth of a
benign and benevolent traditional order, which was only interrupted
by 'modernity' represented by the colonial state.22 That is
why it is imperative to recover the silences of the 'fiction' that
'Lagaan' portrays.
_
rb
Re: RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
Actually the John (aka 'General') Milius' versions of Teddy Roosevelt's view of colonial conflict in The 'Wind and the Lion' and 'Rough Riders' are amusing as mass mystifications. (and of course the Soviet use of Cuban mercenaries to invade Colorado in 'Red Dawn' helps signal that end of irony stuff, given events at Columbine). Their significance is a bit more about the Republicanism of Hollywood production deals and unfortunately require quite a bit of ideological reframing, but do say something about graduates of the USC film school. Ann - Original Message - From: Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 10:36 AM Subject: [PEN-L:20886] RE: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts Crucible of Empire: The Spanish-American War appeared on PBS. I thought it was great, especially for PBS. to purchase, go to www.greatprojects.com\store mbs Do you know of any movies of significance, be they documentaries or fictions, on the following subjects: the Sepoy Rebellion; the Mahdi Revolt; the Spanish-American War/the Philippines-American War; the Boxer Rebellion; and any other non-Marxist but anti-colonial revolts rebellions? -- Yoshie
Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
0. battle of algiers 1. Sembene Ousmane camp thioyre (sp?) 2. Shyam Benegal movie Junoon on The Revolt of 1857 3. SYNOPSIS - 1942: A LOVE STORY (my mother's favorite) 1.Naren Singh (Anil Kapoor) is about to be hanged. He apologizes to his mother for failing her. She says he is giving his life for the motherland - what mother could ask for more? Naren's father tells him if he reveals the names of the traitors, his own life will be spared. Naren tells him that he is the only traitor Naren knows. The crowd rallies to the slogan Victory to India as Naren mounts the scaffold. Flashback to: 2.The Quit India movement is spreading across India, burgeoning in a direct correlation to the rising number of British atrocities, which are being committed largely under the direction of General Douglas. He kills freedom fighters who, till the end, chant proudly, We'll do or we'll die! 3.Indian patriots are appalled to discover that Gen. Douglas is being called home to England for a promotion. Before his departure, a farewell parade is scheduled in his honor at a hill-town called Kasauni. Raghuvir Pathak and his band of patriots make plans for one of their own (a man called Shubhankar) to assassinate Douglas there. Pathak will travel there under the pretense of taking a medical rest in order to prepare for the assassination. 4.In Kasauni. A riot ensues when soldiers pull down the flag symbolizing the Independence movement. Naren Singh (whose father Dewan Hari Singh, a British toadie, gave the orders to pull down the flag) interferes despite his apparent ambivalence to the Independence movement when it becomes clear that a child's life is at stake. During his struggle, he catches the eye of a beautiful woman (Manisha Koirala). 5.Dewan Hari (from now on, DHS) is very upset with his son. DHS shows no sympathy for his starving tenants because their son is part of the Independence movement. Naren rides back into town to find the girl, but she's nowhere to be seen, though he does find her earring. Later he tries to tell his driver and best friend, Munna, how beautiful the girl was, but cannot think of a description to do her justice. That night, he tosses and turns as he seeks the words to describe her (SONG: EK LADKI TO DEKHA). 6.The next day, Naren goes to Munna's house so they can begin the search for his mystery girl. He spies her, but loses sight of her soon afterward. Her name is Rajeshwari, and she is the daughter of the patriot Pathak. He has revealed the plans for assassination to the man he is staying with (whose name is Govind), but she still believes that he has come to Kasauni to seek medical treatment. 7.Munna finds out that Rajeshwari has gone to the library, and arranges for Naren to intercept her there. Rajeshwari is both flattered and alarmed by Naren's admiration (SONG: RUUT NA JAANA). 8.Pathak meets with a town man named Baig, who gives him a map of the hall where Douglas will be officially welcomed to Kasauni, and materials to make a bomb. Baig, who is putting on a play in the hall for Douglas as a pretext under which they can lure the General to a pre-arranged site, tells Pathak that in order to allay suspicion they will exchange messages through Rajeshwari. Later, Rajeshwari tells her dad that she likes Kasauni very much. Pathak tells her that she must go help Baig tomorrow with the play, and asks her to tell Baig that he's forgotten to give Pathak the white powder. 9.The soldiers fortify the hall. Baig reassures the Major that nothing will happen. The Major tells him that he underestimates the revolutionaries - one has already infiltrated the theater! Baig, horrified, asks carefully, Who? The Major points out his own daughter, who has the role of Juliet in the play, and they share a good laugh. 10.Naren tries to ditch rehearsal to go find Rajeshwari, but his intentions quickly change when Rajeshwari appears at the theater. Rajeshwari gives Baig the message about the white powder, and he asks her to be on book for the actors. He then tells his co-conspirator Shankar to take some phosphorous to Pathak. Meanwhile. Naren is reciting the most romantic lines in Romeo Juliet directly to Rajeshwari. 11.Back in her room, Rajeshwari confides to her journal that she knows Naren wasn't acting - he truly loves her. Naren throws a note inside her room which says much the same thing. She tries to get him to leave, but he makes her promise to come to the performance hall tomorrow before everyone else. (SONG: DIL
Re: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
http://www.twn.org/
Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
How about Burn with Marlon Brando? Michael Collins? Too much of a romance? There are a couple of more set in Ireland -- can't recall the titles, sorry. Gene Coyle Ian Murray wrote: - Original Message - From: Yoshie Furuhashi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 11:13 AM Subject: [PEN-L:20871] Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts Do you know of any movies of significance, be they documentaries or fictions, on the following subjects: the Sepoy Rebellion; the Mahdi Revolt; the Spanish-American War/the Philippines-American War; the Boxer Rebellion; and any other non-Marxist but anti-colonial revolts rebellions? -- Yoshie * Calendar of Anti-War Events in Columbus: http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html * Anti-War Activist Resources: http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html * Student International Forum: http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/ Try the library of Congress catalog's and go from there. http://www.loc.gov/ Good luck, Ian
Re: Re: Re: Re: Query on Anti-Colonial Revolts
my mom tells me that she now likes lagaan better which she may be giving me on dvd tonight. rb Synopsis Set in the latter half of the nineteenth century Lagaan is a film about the adversities and injustice perpetrated by the British upon the innocent peasants who face these extraordinary circumstances with fortitude and dignity. It is Aamir Khan's maiden home production and is written and directed by Ashutosh Gowarikar whose earlier directorial attempt Baazi proved to be a dud at the box office. The film casts Aamir Khan, Gracie Singh (of Amaanat fame) and a host of Indian and British actors including Jessica Radcliffe and Rachel Shelley. AR Rahman's music in the film is folkish and have a beautiful amalgamation of Indian and western instruments. And the costumes are by Bhanu Athaiya who had done the costumes for Richard Attenborough's Gandhi. In a small village of Champaner in North India in 1890s is a community of poor and innocent farmers who are happy ploughing, sowing, praying for the rains and reaping their harvest. Part of this community are Bhuvan (Aamir) a young farmer and Gauri (Gracie Singh), his love. A spate of adversities strike them with the entry of a brute-like British army captain who challenges the locals to a cricket match. A dastardly character, he is planning, in the sly, to burden the villagers with a land tax (Lagaan). One of the conditions of the game is that the loser will pay the state the land tax. The captain knows that the villagers are ignorant of the game and its rules and therefore be beating retreat against his trained players. Although poor, the villagers are people of self-respect. Led by Bhuvan they are ready to take on the Britons despite their ignorance of the game. Now comes to their rescue the army captain's younger sister Elizabeth (Rachel Shelley). Firstly Elizabeth helps the rustic lads purely out of sympathy for them but later she grows affection for Bhuvan. But Bhuvan is fixated on one thing. With grit and determination he and villagers stand together against the ruthlessness of their perpetrators. Faith and courage comes face to face with arrogance and ruthlessness and what follows is spectacular climax of showdown between Indians and Britons. Review Lagaan, as Aamir puts it, has not been an easy film to make. When its director Ashutosh Gowarikar first narrated the idea to him, he brushed it off without showing any enthusiasm. But Ashutosh didn't give up and worked on the script and it's subtleties for a good five months. And when he showed Aamir a meticulously written script the second time, the dashing Khan relented. Not only did Aamir give consent to play the film's protagonist Bhuvan but also decided to produce it himself. With that began a challenging task that, after two year's arduous labor, culminated in a Rs 25-crore film. Lagaan is a film with a realistic theme but at the same time retains the gloss of popular cinema. With Nitin Desai as the art designer, Ashutosh has created the authentic milieu of an Indian village Champaner in 1893. Those who inhabit it go by the names of Deva, Goli, Kachra, Lakha, Bhura, Ismail. They are peasants, blacksmiths, potters, wood cutters, temple dwellers and astrologers. The dialect they speak is a mix of three bolis - Awadhi, Bhojpuri and Brijbhashsa. Clad in a darned Dhoti and with hair drenched in oil, Aamir Khan gives a realistic portrayal of a simple village yokel. Bhuvan, the character he plays, is a man of self-respect no
Re: Re: query: Engels anthropology
It is a bit tangential to earliest anthropology but the following post I have just dashed off to Marxism and Sciences illustrates a crucial period in the rise of the modern state. It also illustrated how the early islamic Empire provided conditions for the emergence of a type of civil society interested in cross fertilising the innovative commercial practices found in interchange with the cultures on its borders. Reference to Engels at end. Chris Burford I must share a few highlights from an excellent Open University programme I caught on BBC 2 this morning covering 1500 years of interchange of arithmetical skills between India where the numberical system was first used 100 present era (Brahmi) to the Arab traders after the rise of Islam. A key figure was Leonardo of Pisa, now famous for his calculation of the Fibonacci numbers. Here is a Google clip on him as Leonardo Fibonacci. Fibonacci was born in Italy but was educated in North Africa where his father, Guilielmo, held a diplomatic post. His father's job was to represent the merchants of the Republic of Pisa who were trading in Bugia, later called Bougie and now called Bejaia. Bejaia is a Mediterranean port in northeastern Algeria. The town lies at the mouth of the Wadi Soummam near Mount Gouraya and Cape Carbon. Fibonacci was taught mathematics in Bugia and travelled widely with his father, recognising and the enormous advantages of the mathematical systems used in the countries they visited. Fibonacci writes in his famous book Liber abaci (1202):- When my father, who had been appointed by his country as public notary in the customs at Bugia acting for the Pisan merchants going there, was in charge, he summoned me to him while I was still a child, and having an eye to usefulness and future convenience, desired me to stay there and receive instruction in the school of accounting. There, when I had been introduced to the art of the Indians' nine symbols through remarkable teaching, knowledge of the art very soon pleased me above all else and I came to understand it, for whatever was studied by the art in Egypt, Syria, Greece, Sicily and Provence, in all its various forms. All told, the programme by Graham Flegg, was an excellent integration of knowledge of economic developments and arithmetic over 3 continents and 1 1/2 millenia. It was fully in accord with a historical materialist perspective. It is consistent with observations by Engels about the revolutionary role of merchant capital.
Re: Re: query: Engels anthropology
thanks for your reply. It was quite useful. Could you please give a quick summary of Dobbins' theory of the missing dialectic? At 10:21 AM 10/23/01 +0800, you wrote: If you are interested to track down a pamphlet by (I think) Peggy Anne Dobbins From Kin to Class you will find that she has discovered the missing dialectic in the equal exchange of necessary labour ... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti. (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
Re: Re: Re: query: Engels anthropology
its effects sublimated into an apparent anti-exchange value economy (trade dies off) which by way of its passage makes way for a re-emergence of exchange-value freed from the need to be expressed as external trade as its dominant expression. I hope this makes sense without sounding too cosmological. The re- emergence of trade played a vital part in ending feudalism however social evolution via feudalism now provided exchange value with a more powerful means of social expression in that of the freed labourer (the village being now a source for such labour, which no-communal based kinship society could long sustain). Of course this is not the usual way the transformation is portrayed but is, I think, just the other side of the coin to Marx's primitive accumulation - I am simply emphasizing why slavery and feudalism had to be presupposed by capitalism. What I particularly like about Dobbins concept is that it shows how labour is the engine for social change - that plunder is not a sufficient basis for early accumulation and that the idea that the most productive prospered is laid to rest as a bourgeois myth - it is the least productive who prospered (their labour might have been necessary but not open to much improvement - ie priests and warriors) and hence leisure became the profit of ancient economies (something the Greek philosophers were all too clear about). Likewise the nature of change becomes more satisfactorily understood as a rebellion against systems that get out-of-kilter and the setting up of a new more equal (based on what passed beforehand) systems which of course gave birth to new contradictions - the transformation of kin relations being the subject of Engels thesis. To turn things on their head a little, social progress is a result of instabilities in production (lack of success in maintaining productive levels giving rise to great unevenness) - primitive societies are therefore those which skillfully changed themselves in order to preserve communal life (unalienated), they are in this way also great success stories of the human spirit. I will not add any more but am ever willing to elaborate ; ) Greg Schofield Perth Australia --- Message Received --- From: Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:21:32 -0700 Subject: [PEN-L:19012] Re: Re: query: Engels anthropology thanks for your reply. It was quite useful. Could you please give a quick summary of Dobbins' theory of the missing dialectic? At 10:21 AM 10/23/01 +0800, you wrote: If you are interested to track down a pamphlet by (I think) Peggy Anne Dobbins From Kin to Class you will find that she has discovered the missing dialectic in the equal exchange of necessary labour ... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti. (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
Re: Re: Re: Re: query
I left Australia off the end of the address: www.theage.com.au Ian Murray wrote: Also, try the Melbourne daily: WWW.theage.com Andrew Hagen wrote: Utterly shameless plug: I keep a bunch of news links, including international ones, on http://clam.rutgers.edu/~ahagen/news.html Andrew Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 13:04:13 -0700, Jim Devine wrote: Can someone name some good English-language newspapers produced outside the US? (General newspapers, not business ones: for example, the Guardian Unlimited is pretty good, in terms of having a non-US perspective.) I download news story from www.Avantgo.com and I am looking for new sources. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine I try to start the day with: http://www.warnerbros.com/pages/madmagazine/index.jsp or http://www.nationallampoon.com/ Ian
Re: Re: query
Dear Jeremiah, Can you link a summary of Maude Barlow's last two via an Amazon or Barnes Noble posting, at least for this week. Also, in the Topics section, Could you link to the site below with the heading: Media Sources. http://clam.rutgers.edu/~ahagen/news.html Thanks. bob _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: Re: query
Also, try the Melbourne daily: WWW.theage.com Andrew Hagen wrote: Utterly shameless plug: I keep a bunch of news links, including international ones, on http://clam.rutgers.edu/~ahagen/news.html Andrew Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 13:04:13 -0700, Jim Devine wrote: Can someone name some good English-language newspapers produced outside the US? (General newspapers, not business ones: for example, the Guardian Unlimited is pretty good, in terms of having a non-US perspective.) I download news story from www.Avantgo.com and I am looking for new sources. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: Re: query
Also, try the Melbourne daily: WWW.theage.com Andrew Hagen wrote: Utterly shameless plug: I keep a bunch of news links, including international ones, on http://clam.rutgers.edu/~ahagen/news.html Andrew Hagen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 13:04:13 -0700, Jim Devine wrote: Can someone name some good English-language newspapers produced outside the US? (General newspapers, not business ones: for example, the Guardian Unlimited is pretty good, in terms of having a non-US perspective.) I download news story from www.Avantgo.com and I am looking for new sources. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine I try to start the day with: http://www.warnerbros.com/pages/madmagazine/index.jsp or http://www.nationallampoon.com/ Ian
RE: Re: Query- GDP by states
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Pollak Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 6:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:15495] Re: Query- GDP by states So if GSP is basically state income, and the division of profits replicates the same proportionaltiy between states as holds for their incomes, then doesn't it follow that a state will appear more energy efficient in Btus per dollar of GSP the higher its average income and the less manufacturing it does -- i.e., the more money it makes and the less things it makes? mbs: Earnings, not income, is the allocation factor. Income includes rent, interest, and dividends. There is no data on interest and dividends paid by state. As I said in my post, the answer to your question depends on whether services, construction, and government use more or less energy per dollar of output than manufacturing. I would guess that they do use less, in which case you Gene would be right. So if state income relative to the national average stays constant, the state will become more energy efficient the more service-oriented it becomes, cet par. And in Gene's example, if we assume that home office jobs pay more and use less energy than manufacturing jobs on the average, moving manufacturing to New Mexico would make the state more energy efficient in GSP terms.Michael
Re: RE: Query- GDP by states
Max, You need to make it simpler for me. If Intel were, in 1980, producing all its chips in California, would its product be considered 100% California GSP, though its sales were world-wide? If that were the case, then its California consumption of electricity, in kWh/GSP would be XX. Then, by the year 2,000, production is mostly out of California -- e. g. New Mexico, Ireland, Asia, sales still world-wide. Now it would not be manufacturing much in California, so its electricity consumption would be down but $$ of GSP would be up. It would look, in that case, as if California had become much more energy efficient. So, help me get my head around that. I keep reading that Califonia is much better than other states in terms of electricity/GSP. I'm trying to understand what that is based on. Gene. Max Sawicky wrote: Gross State Product, produced by Regional Economic Info Service of BEA, Dept of Commerce. GSP is state counterpart of GDP. Since profits (and a few other things) are not reported by state, BEA takes profits for an industry and allocates it by state according to earnings for that industry. Same goes for capital consumption. The upshot is that 'Net State Product' is more real than GSP since it has fewer imputations. GSP = earnings (incl fringes), payroll taxes paid by employer, profits (imputed), depreciation (imputed), rent (don't recall how they do this piece), business transfers (tiny), and interest paid. Basically it's in terms of income produced. First thing I did out of grad school was papers on state fiscal capacity, in which GSP figured prominently. mbs I see occasional references to GDP of the State of California. I. e. California by itself is the XX largest economy in the world. How is the GDP for a state defined? For computer chips, for example: Intel is headquarted in California but produces chips in New Mexico, Ireland -- and elsewhere. H-P the same. How are state GDP numbers put together? One reason for asking is a number that is now used here -- the energy use (in BTUs, say) per dollar of state GDP. Gene Coyle
RE: Re: RE: Query- GDP by states
Max, You need to make it simpler for me. If Intel were, in 1980, producing all its chips in California, would its product be considered 100% California GSP, though its sales were world-wide? If that were the case, mbs: Firm-level data is not involved. If U.S. IT profits were $100 billion, and earnings of IT workers (under SIC codes) in California were 10% of national IT earnings, then California GSP would be credited with $10 billion (10%) in IT profits. I don't know if there is data on electricity consumption by SIC category by state. If not, then you would be reduced (or, more precisely, aggregated) to an average consumption per dollar of GSP for all industries in the state. then its California consumption of electricity, in kWh/GSP would be XX. Then, by the year 2,000, production is mostly out of California -- e. g. New Mexico, Ireland, Asia, sales still world-wide. Now it would not be manufacturing much in California, so its electricity consumption would be down but $$ of GSP would be up. mbs: if there are no IT workers in CA, then there are no IT profits to allocate, under BEA methodology (assuming it hasn't changed in the past ten years). It would look, in that case, as if California had become much more energy efficient. mbs: with out-sourcing, consumption/GDP would increase, but if new GSP (and jobs) replace old, then out-sourcing makes no difference to energy 'efficiency.' If composition changes from production to services, and if services use less/more electricity, then for a given GSP level you would register an increase/decrease in 'efficiency.' So, help me get my head around that. I keep reading that Califonia is much better than other states in terms of electricity/GSP. I'm trying to understand what that is based on. Gene.
RE: RE: query: kinked utility curves
Other directions that do not engage the utility lit are transactions costs and 'specific human capital in the firm,' the latter a fancy way of saying you develop specialized knowledge in a particular job that is not transferable. So if you lose that job you command a lower wage (all other things equal) elsewhere. If you are forced to relocate, you could incur further losses due to sunk costs implied by residence and property ownership in a particular place. The transactions costs speaks to the point that alternatives that appear to be of equal value are not, when the costs of switching are taken into account. mbs Hi Pen-Lrs, This seems like a useful point to make in talking about the true costs of unemployment, plant closure and job/income loss (especially if these losses are supposed to be justified by gains in welfare that supposedly accrue to others). Any references would be much appreciated. thanks, Thad
Re: Re: Query on Passage from Ch. 6, Results...
Tom Walker wrote: Jim Devine wrote, Tom translates Marx: I merely transcribed that which Ben Fowkes translated. Herein lies a dissertation for some bibliographer of the 23rd century. Ben Fowkes is listed as the translator of the CW 34 text, which is what I queried. And the translations are too different to be merely the result of printer's errors. Anyhow, thanks for the text, and the sentence I queried is indeed ungrammatical. I kept squinting at it in different ways trying to find some hidden syntax, but it just wasn't to be found. [snip] What capitalist domination in social relations requires is that people come to regard ownership as a relationship between a person and a thing. That seems a near perfect expression of it. I would add as a gloss Marx's comment that relations, unlike the 'things' related, must be thought rather than observed. (I forget where the comment is -- either in _Capital_ or _Grundrisse_.) If one regards ownership as a relationship between a person and a thing, one can _also_ then come to regard that relationship as, itself, a _thing_, even an 'observable thing.' And that (stretching it further) can lead/does lead to the illusion that one need only know the facts, that relations are _merely_ mental, not material reality. Carrol
Re: Re: Re: Query on Passage from Ch. 6, Results...
Tom interprets Marx as saying: What capitalist domination in social relations requires is that people come to regard ownership as a relationship between a person and a thing. While capitalist domination in social relations requires the fetishism of commodities that obscures class relations -- so that, among other things, ownership is seen as a mere relationship between a person and a thing (a machine or whatever) -- part of Marx's analysis is that there is an objective basis for this fetishism. The objective domination of life by commodity production encourages fetishized conceptions to be embraced by the participants in the system and orthodox economists. which is to explain the origins my wrong explanation of what Marx said: I was emphasizing the objective rather than the subjective side. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: query
These figures should be adjusted to take into account that people are leaving the countryside -- maybe not so much in Chile -- and going to the cities, where wages -- except for the informal sector -- should be a greater part of labor's income. Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED]: In the July-August 1999 MR, a special issue on the state of the world, there are articles by James Petras on Latin America and Stanislav Menshikov on Russia that include interesting statistics on the wage share of national income and GDP respectively (might be the same thing?). In Latin America, the percentages are striking: WAGES AS A PERCENTAGE SHARE OF NATIONAL INCOME 19701980198519891992 Argentina40.931.531.924.9-- Chile47.743.437.819.0-- Ecuador 34.434.823.616.015.8 Mexico 37.539.031.628.427.3 Peru 40.032.830.525.516.8 [...] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: query on US dollar
G'day Jim et al, that works, assuming that the U.S. can continue to accumulate external debt with no negative consequences (like a move away fromthe US$ as the main reserve currency). But was it the U.S. intent? From the administration's point of view, it may be that negative consequences are immaterial if they can reliably be delayed until after their eight years. It might have suited some foreign policy priorities, too, but more guesswork on that below. (2) it makes stuff denominated in greenbacks (like oil) cheaper; for whom? not for those of us with US$. Well, what if, say, the oil was to be denominated in a relatively strong Euro? A foreseeable circumstance, or not? (3) it makes foreign productive assets cheaper in a period ofintense consolidation; it allows US-based capitalists to take over foreign assets on the cheap? that fits. (4) it helps the consumer keep the economy bubbling along; yeah. A high dollar is based on loaning to the U.S., which in turn involves lending to consumers. But was that its intent? For many, the consumption boom was a surprise. and (5) it keeps the Euro from looking like an alternative. but a high US$ involves massive loans to the U.S. while a low Euro helps Euroland's exports and restrains its imports. Might party-political short-termism be relevant here, too? Or the firm belief that America's advantage in high-tech offered the economy sustained productivity/profit advantages sufficient to cover a daily billion or two in foreign debt? Beyond PEN-L, it was pretty hard to find committed skeptics between '96 and '00, after all. Or, to get a bit Leninist about it ... Europe is a serious rival in the making. If Washington wants to cut it down to size a bit, perhaps the early days are when to poison it. The high dollar indirectly puts a lot of pressure on the rival Eurosuits. The Euro's fortunes are important PR during these early days - Duizenberg has to apologise for every droop.The lower the Euro, the cheaper its productive assets to American global-merger-magnates in particular and American political-economic sway in general. The lower the Euro, the better the potentially useful Euro-skeptics look. The lower the Euro, the less Europeans buy from the US's other rival, poor ol' underutilised Japan.Europe has to buy nearly all its oil, in greenbacks. Europe has to buy most of its IT hardware and software, in greenbacks. And, the lower the Euro, the less room there is for capital-investment-rejuvenating rate cuts rate cuts. Maybe, then, it was to do with a cost-benefit analysis - the idea that the hurt Washington could inflict in the decisive moment outweighed the benefits to Europe of a few reasonable export numbers. I could be wy too dark in these idle speculations (for that's certainly all they are), and have no idea as to the maths of this CBA, but if there's no obvious explanation for an obviously dangerous high-dollar policy, we might as well prompt it with a bit of provocative guesswork. Cheers, Rob.
Re: Re: Re: Re: query on US dollar
this discussion is interesting, but it's between two admitted ignorami (Rob myself). Is there anyone on pen-l who knows -- or has some sort of journalism-based knowledge -- of why the U.S. has pursued a high dollar policy? At 04:57 PM 06/12/2001 +, you wrote: G'day Jim et al, that works, assuming that the U.S. can continue to accumulate external debt with no negative consequences (like a move away from the US$ as the main reserve currency). But was it the U.S. intent? From the administration's point of view, it may be that negative consequences are immaterial if they can reliably be delayed until after their eight years. It might have suited some foreign policy priorities, too, but more guesswork on that below. (2) it makes stuff denominated in greenbacks (like oil) cheaper; for whom? not for those of us with US$. Well, what if, say, the oil was to be denominated in a relatively strong Euro? A foreseeable circumstance, or not? (3) it makes foreign productive assets cheaper in a period of intense consolidation; it allows US-based capitalists to take over foreign assets on the cheap? that fits. (4) it helps the consumer keep the economy bubbling along; yeah. A high dollar is based on loaning to the U.S., which in turn involves lending to consumers. But was that its intent? For many, the consumption boom was a surprise. and (5) it keeps the Euro from looking like an alternative. but a high US$ involves massive loans to the U.S. while a low Euro helps Euroland's exports and restrains its imports. Might party-political short-termism be relevant here, too? Or the firm belief that America's advantage in high-tech offered the economy sustained productivity/profit advantages sufficient to cover a daily billion or two in foreign debt? Beyond PEN-L, it was pretty hard to find committed skeptics between '96 and '00, after all. Or, to get a bit Leninist about it ... Europe is a serious rival in the making. If Washington wants to cut it down to size a bit, perhaps the early days are when to poison it. The high dollar indirectly puts a lot of pressure on the rival Eurosuits. The Euro's fortunes are important PR during these early days - Duizenberg has to apologise for every droop.The lower the Euro, the cheaper its productive assets to American global-merger-magnates in particular and American political-economic sway in general. The lower the Euro, the better the potentially useful Euro-skeptics look. The lower the Euro, the less Europeans buy from the US's other rival, poor ol' underutilised Japan.Europe has to buy nearly all its oil, in greenbacks. Europe has to buy most of its IT hardware and software, in greenbacks. And, the lower the Euro, the less room there is for capital-investment-rejuvenating rate cuts rate cuts. Maybe, then, it was to do with a cost-benefit analysis - the idea that the hurt Washington could inflict in the decisive moment outweighed the benefits to Europe of a few reasonable export numbers. I could be wy too dark in these idle speculations (for that's certainly all they are), and have no idea as to the maths of this CBA, but if there's no obvious explanation for an obviously dangerous high-dollar policy, we might as well prompt it with a bit of provocative guesswork. Cheers, Rob. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: query on US dollar
I suspect that the goal is not a high dollar per se, but the fear of the reaction to anticipation that the dollar will fall. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: query on US dollar
It's possible that the simplest explanation is the correct one: the high dollar represents a flexing of US political and financial power. From the standpoint of US-based finance, the high dollar asserts the primacy of the US as the financial center. In international terms, US financial institutions have the greatest assets and its markets have the highest capitalization. Entities earning dollar profits are in a position to have their way with entities whose earnings are denominated in other currencies. From a government standpoint, the strong dollar bolsters the prestige of US political elites and amplifies the leverage of the US in international organizations. In a sense, it is the same constellation of interests that impelled England to strive for overvalued sterling after WWI. In the US case, there is little risk of a forex crisis for the time being, because the key currency status of the dollar appears secure, and gold is out of the question as potential constraint. As long as the US can borrow at will, with negative savings rates making up for current account leakage (or hemmorhage), why not keep going with it? PeterIt's possible that the simplest explanation is correct: the high dollar represents a flexing of US political and financial power. From the standpoint of US-based finance, the high dollar asserts the primacy of the US as the financial center. In international terms, US financial institutions have the greatest assets and its markets have the highest capitalization. Entities earning dollar profits are in a position to have their way with entities whose earnings are denominated in other currencies. From a government standpoint, the strong dollar bolsters the prestige of US political elites and amplifies the leverage of the US in international organizations. In a sense, it is the same constellation of interests that impelled England to strive for overvalued sterling after WWI. In the US case, there is little risk of a forex crisis for the time being, because the key currency status of the dollar appears secure, and gold is out of the question as potential constraint. As long as the US can borrow at will, with negative savings rates making up for current account leakage (or hemmorhage), why not keep going with it? PeterIt's possible that the simplest explanation is correct: the high dollar represents a flexing of US political and financial power. From the standpoint of US-based finance, the high dollar asserts the primacy of the US as the financial center. In international terms, US financial institutions have the greatest assets and its markets have the highest capitalization. Entities earning dollar profits are in a position to have their way with entities whose earnings are denominated in other currencies. From a government standpoint, the strong dollar bolsters the prestige of US political elites and amplifies the leverage of the US in international organizations. In a sense, it is the same constellation of interests that impelled England to strive for overvalued sterling after WWI. In the US case, there is little risk of a forex crisis for the time being, because the key currency status of the dollar appears secure, and gold is out of the question as potential constraint. As long as the US can borrow at will, with negative savings rates making up for current account leakage (or hemmorhage), why not keep going with it? Peter
RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: query on US dollar
Jim Devine writes: - this discussion is interesting, but it's between two admitted ignorami (Rob myself). Is there anyone on pen-l who knows -- or has some sort of journalism-based knowledge -- of why the U.S. has pursued a high dollar policy? - I am not sure about the assumption contained within your question. Are you talking about the dollar's value relative to other currencies, or relative to a basket of commodities? It seems to be that the Fed has followed an anti-inflationary policy (to the point of deflating the currency) as opposed to a specific policy to strenghten the dollar relative to other currencies. David Shemano
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: query on US dollar
Jim Devine wrote: this discussion is interesting, but it's between two admitted ignorami (Rob myself). Is there anyone on pen-l who knows -- or has some sort of journalism-based knowledge -- of why the U.S. has pursued a high dollar policy? 1) Wall Street likes it, because, among other things, it makes everyone else's assets cheaper, and 2) when you need to borrow $1b/day abroad, you better hope your currency stays strong. Doug
Re: Re: query on US dollar
I asked: does anyone know _why_ the U.S. -- which must refer not only to the administration but to the Fed -- was pursuing a high dollar policy? Rob writes: ... (1) it helped keep [non-US$] economies on the brink from folding, by offering a market (we're talking international crisis for most of this period, eh?); that works, assuming that the U.S. can continue to accumulate external debt with no negative consequences (like a move away from the US$ as the main reserve currency). But was it the U.S. intent? (2) it makes stuff denominated in greenbacks (like oil) cheaper; for whom? not for those of us with US$. (3) it makes foreign productive assets cheaper in a period of intense consolidation; it allows US-based capitalists to take over foreign assets on the cheap? that fits. (4) it helps the consumer keep the economy bubbling along; yeah. A high dollar is based on loaning to the U.S., which in turn involves lending to consumers. But was that its intent? For many, the consumption boom was a surprise. and (5) it keeps the Euro from looking like an alternative. but a high US$ involves massive loans to the U.S. while a low Euro helps Euroland's exports and restrains its imports. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: RE: query
- Original Message - From: Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 6:40 AM Subject: [PEN-L:12506] RE: query There's a brand new Congressional Budget Office report w/tons of stuff on the income part. It can be downloaded at www.cbo.gov: Historical Effective Tax Rates: 1979-1997. If that's not current enough for you, go to Census or the EPI web site. max == Somewhere on this thread somebody posted the stats on the income gains between '79-'97 for the rich and for everyone else. The putz fractal in my brain hit delete and I can't seem to find it in the archives, does anyone have it handy? Ian
Re: Re: query
On Thursday, May 31, 2001 at 14:40:37 (+0100) Max Sawicky writes: There's a brand new Congressional Budget Office report w/tons of stuff on the income part. It can be downloaded at www.cbo.gov: Historical Effective Tax Rates: 1979-1997. If that's not current enough for you, go to Census or the EPI web site. I was not able to find anything more fine-grained than the top 5%. If you find something that shows better definition, let us know. Bill
RE: Re: Re: query
Try Appendix G of the CBO report. max There's a brand new Congressional Budget Office report w/tons of stuff on the income part. It can be downloaded at www.cbo.gov: Historical Effective Tax Rates: 1979-1997. I was not able to find anything more fine-grained than the top 5%. If you find something that shows better definition, let us know. Bill
Re: Re: query
On Thursday, May 31, 2001 at 15:13:22 (+0100) Max Sawicky writes: Try Appendix G of the CBO report. Better, thanks. But where do we see the juicy bits about how the top 1% is broken down? Bill
RE: Re: Re: query
broken down how? max -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of William S. Lear Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 7:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:12514] Re: Re: query On Thursday, May 31, 2001 at 15:13:22 (+0100) Max Sawicky writes: Try Appendix G of the CBO report. Better, thanks. But where do we see the juicy bits about how the top 1% is broken down? Bill
Re: Re: query
On Thursday, May 31, 2001 at 15:13:22 (+0100) Max Sawicky writes: Try Appendix G of the CBO report. One final ignorant question. When they say effective income tax rates, is it correct to assume that income does not include capital gains? The definition under the heading The Nature of the Analysis (p. xvi) is a bit ambiguous, as it includes all cash income, and I'm not sure if cap. gains are income. Also (ok two questions), if I'm very rich and have a very good tax lawyer, I assume that I can shield portions of my income from being seen as income by the taxman. How common is this occurrence? Note to Jim Devine: see the Cautionary Note at the top of p. xvii where it says As a result, it may be difficult for readers to determine their own placement within the reported distributions. Bill
Re: Re: query
On Thursday, May 31, 2001 at 15:37:21 (+0100) Max Sawicky writes: broken down how? Er, well, where does a person making $10 million per year fit in? What is her tax rate? How does my favorite sports star rate? Etc. I'd like the analysis to not stop at edge of the petit bourgeois. Bill
RE: Re: Re: query
Perhaps of relevance are IRS reports: Page of reports relevant to tax returns of individuals: http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/tax_stats/ind.html Page of reports on tax data by size of income: http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/tax_stats/soi/ind_ agi.html Most recent IRS report on tax returns for high income earners. The most recent report, however, is for 1998: http://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/irs-soi/98hiinco.pdf I've not looked at this particular report but most IRS reports of this type have lots of nifty information. Eric .
Re: Re: Re: query
Bill writes: Note to Jim Devine: see the Cautionary Note at the top of p. xvii where it says As a result, it may be difficult for readers to determine their own placement within the reported distributions. I like Steve Rose's great chart in which one can find one's household in the context of the graphical whole. Does he still produce it? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: Re: Re: query
Different studies define income differently. There is a section in the report that discusses income definitions (p. 32). The income measure used includes the obvious types of cash income, as well as some fringe benefits, the employer share of the payroll tax, and realized capital gains. The fringes and payroll tax are considered to be income that would otherwise go to the worker, hence they are used to top up income. A great deal of income is shielded from individual income tax, much of it in ways that do not require a tax accountant. You could look at it this way. In 1997, U.S. GDP was $8.3 trillion, national income was $6.6T, personal income was $7 trillion, and total taxable income (i.e., after subtracting exemptions, deductions and other adjustments) under the Federal individual income tax was $3.1 trillion. Fun fact: personal consumption in 1997 was $5.5 trillion. The consumption tax base is much larger than the statutory income tax base. mbs One final ignorant question. When they say effective income tax rates, is it correct to assume that income does not include capital gains? The definition under the heading The Nature of the Analysis (p. xvi) is a bit ambiguous, as it includes all cash income, and I'm not sure if cap. gains are income. Also (ok two questions), if I'm very rich and have a very good tax lawyer, I assume that I can shield portions of my income from being seen as income by the taxman. How common is this occurrence? Note to Jim Devine: see the Cautionary Note at the top of p. xvii where it says As a result, it may be difficult for readers to determine their own placement within the reported distributions. Bill
RE: Re: Re: query
Depends on how good they are at tax avoidance, or how bold they are in tax evasion. The Gov 'muddies' its publicly-available data to prevent the identification of individuals. The averages for the top 1% are the best you are going to get, unless you have access to a microdata set that lets you calculate the top 1/2 percent, or whatever. mbs Er, well, where does a person making $10 million per year fit in? What is her tax rate? How does my favorite sports star rate? Etc. I'd like the analysis to not stop at edge of the petit bourgeois. Bill
RE: Re: Re: Re: query
Yup. There's a new one out. Available in your hippest bookstores everywhere. If you don't have any hip bookstores, you can probably order it by phone or e-mail. http://www.kramers.com/ max Bill writes: Note to Jim Devine: see the Cautionary Note at the top of p. xvii where it says As a result, it may be difficult for readers to determine their own placement within the reported distributions. I like Steve Rose's great chart in which one can find one's household in the context of the graphical whole. Does he still produce it? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: Re: Re: query
Jim Devine wrote: I like Steve Rose's great chart in which one can find one's household in the context of the graphical whole. Does he still produce it? http://www.thenewpress.com/books/socstrat.htm. Doug
Re: Re: Query on Terminology, was ... textbook
On Thu, 3 May 2001, Jim Devine wrote: The problem with the standard model of MC is that (1) it assumes that all firms have the same cost structure (even though they produce different products); and (2) it focuses on equilibrium, ignoring the process. Are there a good books that develop a non-standard models -- that go into process, or into the macro implications of this being the general case? MC seems to correspond very much to the MBA picture of the world, where firms compete over market share, brand-building and customer loyalty, rather than competing on price. Michael __ Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Re: Query on Terminology, was ... textbook
Michael, I have to disagree with you. The MBA approach is far more realistic than the MC approach. Michael Pollak wrote: On Thu, 3 May 2001, Jim Devine wrote: The problem with the standard model of MC is that (1) it assumes that all firms have the same cost structure (even though they produce different products); and (2) it focuses on equilibrium, ignoring the process. Are there a good books that develop a non-standard models -- that go into process, or into the macro implications of this being the general case? MC seems to correspond very much to the MBA picture of the world, where firms compete over market share, brand-building and customer loyalty, rather than competing on price. Michael __ Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: Re: Re: Re: Query on Terminology, was ... textbook
On Sun, 6 May 2001, Michael Perelman wrote: Michael, I have to disagree with you. The MBA approach is far more realistic than the MC approach. I don't disagree. I was referring to Jim Devine's implied non-standard model of MC that made up for the normal MC shortcomings and made it dynamic. So, are there are any good economics books that try to treat any of the macro implications of the MBA model? Where everyone in the market is assumed to be competing on market share and brand and customer loyalty rather than on price? Michael __ Michael PollakNew York [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Query
London GreenPeace has an article entitled "WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE BODY SHOP?-- a criticism of 'green' consumerism" on their web site at http://www.perc.flora.org/buy-nothing/articles/bodyshop1.html Tim Bousquet --- Stephen E Philion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I recall that Alex Cockburn wrote a number of very critical articles about the co. in the late 80's or early 90's, in his *Beat the Devil* column. Steve Stephen Philion Lecturer/PhD Candidate Department of Sociology 2424 Maile Way Social Sciences Bldg. # 247 Honolulu, HI 96822 On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Carrol Cox wrote: I vaguely remember some discussion (I think negative) of The Body Shop on this or some other list. The company has or aspires to have a progressive reputation. Does anyone have any information. Carrol = Subscribe to the Chico Examiner for only $30 annually or $20 for six months. Mail cash or check payabe to "Tim Bousquet" to POBox 4627, Chico CA 95927 __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
RE: Re: query: Frank Ramsey
He also influenced Wittgenstein, but Sraffa's influence on W. was famously more great. Jim, could you pass on the ad? -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 11:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:8481] Re: query: Frank Ramsey Frank Ramsey was mostly a mathematician. Sraffa consulted with him when writing his book. He also influenced Keynes on probability. He is probably best known for Ramsey pricing, which is a scheme for pricing public utilities. On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 09:11:27AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: Yesterday, I received an e-mail advertising a macroeconomics textbook that was based on the ideas of Frank Ramsey. It wasn't Keynesian or monetarist, but Ramseyite (to paraphrase the blurb). Does anyone know anything about Ramsey and his ideas? It sounds like he totally ignored the factor of uncertainty in making decisions about the future, but I don't know anything about him. 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]
Re: Re: query: Frank Ramsey
In public utility pricing, "Ramsey pricing" is pricing such that the total revenue needs of the utility are met by charging different prices to different customers. Ramsey pricing argues that prices should be set based on inverse elasticity, so that high prices are charged to those who will least respond to prices -- so that sales don't drop, while low prices are charged to those who will respond and use more. It is remarkable how close this is to the pricing behavior any unconstrained monopolist would think up. But Ramsey showed that it would be good for society. An ex-PEN-Ler, Ron Baiman, has written some articles about the assumptions behind all that. Gene Coyle Michael Perelman wrote: Frank Ramsey was mostly a mathematician. Sraffa consulted with him when writing his book. He also influenced Keynes on probability. He is probably best known for Ramsey pricing, which is a scheme for pricing public utilities. On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 09:11:27AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: Yesterday, I received an e-mail advertising a macroeconomics textbook that was based on the ideas of Frank Ramsey. It wasn't Keynesian or monetarist, but Ramseyite (to paraphrase the blurb). Does anyone know anything about Ramsey and his ideas? It sounds like he totally ignored the factor of uncertainty in making decisions about the future, but I don't know anything about him. 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]
Re: Re: query: Frank Ramsey
He was also a logician and philosopher. He developed a method of eliminating reference to theoretical entities in science and also treated generalisations as rules for anticipating experience rather than propositions. He is infamous for his redundancy theory of truth, also adopted by A.J. Ayer. As its name implies the theory holds that "is true" and "is false" are redundant. In "It is true that Frank Ramsey is dead" the "It is true" is redundant. You can say the same thing more simply : "Frank Ramsey is dead" and with no redundancy. Positivists such as Ayer thought this theory great since it meant there was no necessity for a theory of truth at all. Forget all those useless discussions of the coherence theory, the correspondence theory or the pragmatiic theory or even the semantic theory. Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 11:38 AM Subject: [PEN-L:8481] Re: query: Frank Ramsey Frank Ramsey was mostly a mathematician. Sraffa consulted with him when writing his book. He also influenced Keynes on probability. He is probably best known for Ramsey pricing, which is a scheme for pricing public utilities. On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 09:11:27AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: Yesterday, I received an e-mail advertising a macroeconomics textbook that was based on the ideas of Frank Ramsey. It wasn't Keynesian or monetarist, but Ramseyite (to paraphrase the blurb). Does anyone know anything about Ramsey and his ideas? It sounds like he totally ignored the factor of uncertainty in making decisions about the future, but I don't know anything about him. 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]
Re: Re: Re: query: Frank Ramsey
For the record, I also wrote a short piece, "Ramsey Pricing and Contestability Pricing". Peter Eugene Coyle wrote: In public utility pricing, "Ramsey pricing" is pricing such that the total revenue needs of the utility are met by charging different prices to different customers. Ramsey pricing argues that prices should be set based on inverse elasticity, so that high prices are charged to those who will least respond to prices -- so that sales don't drop, while low prices are charged to those who will respond and use more. It is remarkable how close this is to the pricing behavior any unconstrained monopolist would think up. But Ramsey showed that it would be good for society. An ex-PEN-Ler, Ron Baiman, has written some articles about the assumptions behind all that. Gene Coyle
RE: Re: query: Frank Ramsey
yes, one and the same. -Original Message- From: Justin Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 3:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:8489] Re: query: Frank Ramsey Frank Ramsey, the Cambridge philosopher, friend of Wittgenstein--one of the handful of people W admired, early decision theorist and probablity theorist--that Frank Ramsey? One of the most brilliant tragicallly short careers of the century. --jks Yesterday, I received an e-mail advertising a macroeconomics textbook that was based on the ideas of Frank Ramsey. It wasn't Keynesian or monetarist, but Ramseyite (to paraphrase the blurb). Does anyone know anything about Ramsey and his ideas? It sounds like he totally ignored the factor of uncertainty in making decisions about the future, but I don't know anything about him. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: Re: query: Putterman
http://econ.pstc.brown.edu/faculty/putterman/ -Original Message- From: Peter Dorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, February 16, 2001 1:52 PM Subject: [PEN-L:8211] Re: query: Putterman Lou Putterman is an excellent guy and a very good economist. His specialty is communal and cooperative organization, and he is also involved in a "values and economics" initiative (with Avner Ben-Ner and others). He wrote a comparative systems text many years ago that doesn't have the breadth of Rosser Rosser but is still insightful in its own right. He is perhaps best known on the left for a piece he wrote ages ago on why capital hires labor. Peter Jim Devine wrote: I received an ad today for a book titled DOLLARS CHANGE: ECONOMICS IN CONTEXT, by Louis Putterman (Yale U.P.) It looks okay, because it puts economics into an historical context, but YUP wants $5 for an examination copy and (in addition to not wanting to pay), I don't have my checkbook here. Does anyone know anything about this book or the author? (if you're on PKT please respond directly to me, since currently I don't receive PKT messages.) Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: query: economic clichés
How about Bush's campaign speeches? It's their money. Unleash the creativity of the market. Or you could go back further in time; magic of the marketplace. Jim Devine wrote: could anyone give me some commonly-used economic clichés? "The economy overheated, sucking in imports..." Doug -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: query: economic clichés (+ MarkTwain contra Benjamin Franklin)
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: "Money is the root of all evil." This should probably not be included, since its provenance long predates political economy or economics: "Radix malorum cupiditas est" (I'm not sure I've got the word order straight) should be translated, "The lust or desire for money," not "Money" as such, is the root of all evils. This proverb then belongs to a social order (or social orders) grounded in use values rather than in the appropriation of surplus value, and should be seen primarily as expressing Aristotle's point that of the two uses of sandals, the second (to sell) was perverted. Money as a goal in and of itself is evil, but its proper use (to acquire the needs or luxuries of life) is not evil. There is a more or less "natural" limit to the number of pairs or sandals or number of quarts of wine one might desire, but there was no such limit to the acquisition of money, which was in principle infinite. So "(Desire for) Money is the root of all evil" is a proverb rather than a cliche. Carrol
Re: Re: query
Isn't that a typo in the first line, or did you mean "Intrerview"? Sorry 'bout that, chief. The rest is perfectly clear. I tend to agree. Wordy but poignant. Well, that's my lot, ere the morning's tnmnx. 'Night all, Rob.
Re: Re: Re: Re: query: tree planting
Michael, I agree. That is correct. Therefore at the beginning of the new forest it will not take up as much CO2 as a mature forest, but will exceed it later. I don't know how long that takes, and I suspect it varies from type of forest to type of forest, also having to take into account local climate and soil differences as well. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, November 24, 2000 7:41 PM Subject: [PEN-L:4938] Re: Re: Re: query: tree planting Not quite. A newly planted forest takes up very little CO2. The trees are still tiny. The rate of increase increases up to a point, then decreases after the aggregate growth climaxes. On Fri, Nov 24, 2000 at 01:05:17PM -0500, J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote: The other is that indeed a new forest once planted generally will absorb more CO2 as it grows rapidly in contrast to a relatively stagnant old growth forest. I do not know what the details are on this particular issue in the Kyoto Protocols, however. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, November 23, 2000 2:46 PM Subject: [PEN-L:4882] Re: query: tree planting -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: query: tree planting
Michael, Two complications. One is that in general the method of lumbering emits large amounts of CO2 because usually there is a lot of burning of small branches and other "unusable" stuff. The other is that indeed a new forest once planted generally will absorb more CO2 as it grows rapidly in contrast to a relatively stagnant old growth forest. I do not know what the details are on this particular issue in the Kyoto Protocols, however. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, November 23, 2000 2:46 PM Subject: [PEN-L:4882] Re: query: tree planting As I understand the original proposal, the US would get credit if they cut down an old growth forest and planted a new one. On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 09:57:23AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: in the global warming talks, the US, Canada, and some other countries argue that they should be given some slack on their production of pollutants if they invest in tree planting. what's wrong with this idea? or am I restating the US proposal inaccurately? 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]
Re: Re: Re: query: tree planting
I happen to think that the particular proposal whereby the US buys credits from Russia and Ukraine for their reduced industrial production is a farce. But, in general, I do not see what is so bad about trading emissions permits in the context of trying to reduce global warming. It has worked pretty well in the US for SO2 emissions reductions. Those who advocate policies that will exact maximum economic pain from the US in trying to reduce global warming, will simply find the US not agreeing at all. The US Senate has already signaled its lack of interest, and with Dubya probably coming in, the whole thing is going to be thrown in the trash can unfortunately, even the plans with the stupid loopholes for the US to follow. BTW, I have some papers on global warming and related policy issues on my website. Barkley Rosser http://cob.jmu.edu/rosserjb -Original Message- From: Eugene Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, November 23, 2000 5:07 PM Subject: [PEN-L:4887] Re: Re: query: tree planting Planting trees is said to be a way to create a "carbon sink." That is, young trees absorb carbon as they grow. Part of planting new trees is cutting down mature forests to clear space for them. Mature forests have already absorbed most of the carbon that they will. Another drawback to creating a carbon sink, beside the impact on existing forests, is that the carbon remains in the sink. If the wood is later burned, the process is reversed and the carbon is released. This means that tree planting is simply creating storage for carbon, not a reduction in its production. At issue in the tree planting argument is that it depends for success on the trading of emissions. Trading emissions is a market based solution for the global warming problem and has problems which seem insurmountable. Gene Coyle Louis Proyect wrote: in the global warming talks, the US, Canada, and some other countries argue that they should be given some slack on their production of pollutants if they invest in tree planting. what's wrong with this idea? or am I restating the US proposal inaccurately? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine It is not just about planting trees. It is about protecting old-growth forests, something that Clinton and Gore have refused to do. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
Re: Re: Re: query: tree planting
Not quite. A newly planted forest takes up very little CO2. The trees are still tiny. The rate of increase increases up to a point, then decreases after the aggregate growth climaxes. On Fri, Nov 24, 2000 at 01:05:17PM -0500, J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. wrote: The other is that indeed a new forest once planted generally will absorb more CO2 as it grows rapidly in contrast to a relatively stagnant old growth forest. I do not know what the details are on this particular issue in the Kyoto Protocols, however. Barkley Rosser -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thursday, November 23, 2000 2:46 PM Subject: [PEN-L:4882] Re: query: tree planting -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: query: tree planting
As I understand the original proposal, the US would get credit if they cut down an old growth forest and planted a new one. Credit, despite good evidence that old growth sequesters more CO2 than younger forests. Either way, the US should plant more trees and not merely for functional reasons. Ian On Thu, Nov 23, 2000 at 09:57:23AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: in the global warming talks, the US, Canada, and some other countries argue that they should be given some slack on their production of pollutants if they invest in tree planting. what's wrong with this idea? or am I restating the US proposal inaccurately? 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]
Re: Re: query: tree planting
Planting trees is said to be a way to create a "carbon sink." That is, young trees absorb carbon as they grow. Part of planting new trees is cutting down mature forests to clear space for them. Mature forests have already absorbed most of the carbon that they will. Another drawback to creating a carbon sink, beside the impact on existing forests, is that the carbon remains in the sink. If the wood is later burned, the process is reversed and the carbon is released. This means that tree planting is simply creating storage for carbon, not a reduction in its production. At issue in the tree planting argument is that it depends for success on the trading of emissions. Trading emissions is a market based solution for the global warming problem and has problems which seem insurmountable. Gene Coyle Louis Proyect wrote: in the global warming talks, the US, Canada, and some other countries argue that they should be given some slack on their production of pollutants if they invest in tree planting. what's wrong with this idea? or am I restating the US proposal inaccurately? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine It is not just about planting trees. It is about protecting old-growth forests, something that Clinton and Gore have refused to do. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
Re: Re: Re: Query re taxation in the USSR
Thanks for the info. I don't suppose the Lane's book is part of the Gutenberg project that puts great books on line :) Cheers, Ken Hanly p.s. It would be interesting to compare the effect on lower income groups of the former tax system versus the present one. For sure the present system is much more regressive. The Canadian Alliance leader is suggesting a flat tax rate but in two stages to make it somehow seem less regressive. - Original Message - From: Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 10:00 PM Subject: [PEN-L:4354] Re: Re: Query re taxation in the USSR At 02:20 AM 11/13/2000 +, you wrote: There was income tax, mainly. It was low. I think there was a VAT. Look uit up in David Lane's Economy and Society in the USSR. some title like that. Lane published a series of books over 20 some years with words like tha in the title that are worthy, useful, dull, and reliable. --jks I'm not an expert, but it wasn't a VAT, but a "turnover tax," which would be proportional not to (total revenues minus raw materials and intermediate goods costs) like a VAT but instead proportional to total revenues. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
