Doug through Larry Summers raises two issues: Is there any
qualitative change due to a) the telecommunications revolution and b)
globalization in the current period.
At a very basic level there cannot have been qualitative change as
long as class relations are fundamentally unchanged. The
I think Barkley raises a valuable point. I've always been uncomfortable
with the epithet fascism being thrown around --- Fascism has to be more than
"repression as usual" by the capitalist state. One element in it, IMHO,
ought to be _mass mobilization_ and _mass psychology_. In this area, it
Just a brief comment on one small aspect of Terry's post. On globalization,
Tim Koechlin (sp?) did some research a few years back and discovered that
despite all the rhetoric about a free-flow of capital, particularly in
financial form but also in the form of creation of new structures, anywhere
If Summers is right on this (which I believe he is), i.e. that there is
a lot of hype and emperor's new clothes around "globalization" and
similar topics, the question is why? I see at least two reasons:
1) The need for politicians, business executives, media people and
(sigh) some academics to
With ref. to Sid's comment on this: my Mastercard provider (Midland
Bank, now part of the Hongkong Shanghai group, also charges
interest of the entire credit advanced unless I pay it off entirely. My
response is therefore to pay off either all, or the stipulated minimum
of 5%...
Hugo
To Trond and others interested in globalization: I'm trying to send
a short piece on globalization as an 'attachment'...if it doesn't
work. my apologies. If it does, naturally all comments welcome.
Hugo Radice
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Trond,
You are not alone in regarding much of the talk of globalization as
'hype'. However, I believe that there IS something beneath the hype.
I will try to send to pen-l a text file of a short piece which I wrote
several months ago, which appeared in the Bulletin of the Centre for
Trying again to send file.
Hugo Radice
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* This message contains the file 'gmr.doc', which has been
* uuencoded. If you are using Pegasus Mail, then you can use
* the browser's eXtract function to lift the original contents
* out to a file, otherwise you will have to extract the message
* and uudecode it manually.
begin 660
Gerry Epstein just sent me a paper that seems to indicate that globalization
might be taking off now, although
earlier people like Tim were correct to say that many were exaggerating its
importance.
Gwartney et al say that "economic freedom" and, say, average GDP per
capita, are positively correlated. The general issue remains. A brief
analogy:
Children's vocabulary and foot size are highly correlated (and this is
where Peter Dorman's suggestions as to good statistical practice have a
Andrew, here. I've been away from the net for a month + and am now beginning
to wade through things. I wanted to respond to Mike Meeropol's discussion of
the transitivity of value, etc. If A, B, and C are commodities, and IW is
the relation "is worth", as economists use the notion of worth
Gwartney et al say that "economic freedom" and, say, average GDP per
capita, are positively correlated. The general issue remains. A brief
analogy:
In my opinion, the assertion that "economic freedom" is positively
correlated with average GDP is just another version of that tired, old and
long
Where countries are poor, the kleptocrats have to resort to brutal repression
to extract wealth. Also to extract a given quantity of wealth, the poor
have to be kept poorer. So a Burmese general offers less rights than
a U.S. Gingrichian. Alas, the the causality is reversed.
--
Michael
Carl Dassbach wrote,
In my opinion, the assertion that "economic freedom" is positively
correlated with average GDP . . . neither merits nor warrants attention.
It does merit attention if it is part of an attempt to discriminate
among three different propositions:
1. democracy
Hugo,
This is how we got from you. Try it again.
Fikret.
M;VX@:7,@8V]M5L;EN9R!'97)M86X@:6YD=7-TFEA;"!A;F0@8F%N:VEN
M9R!C87!I=%L('1O(%D;W!T('1H92!N;W)MR!A;F0@')A8W1I8V5S(]F
M('1H92!!;F=L;RU387AO;G,@=VAO(1O;6EN871E(=L;V)A;"!C87!I=%L
M(UAFME=',[("!T:4@8V]S2!2:EN96QA;F0@8V%R=5LR!AF4@8G)E
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 15:30:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: "The Left" on Crossfire ( Cohen II)
To: Recipients of fair-l [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: "The Left" on Crossfire (
+--+
+ AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL URGENT ACTION BULLETIN +
+ Electronic distribution authorised +
+ This bulletin expires: 10 March 1996. +
+--+
Forwarded message:
Date: 28 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: TAX THE RICH
Organization: ?
## Nachricht am 27.01.96 archiviert
## Ursprung : /misc/activism/progressive
---
TAX THE RICH Nationwide
Let me condense my earlier recommendations into just two for starters. First,
raw correlations across countries with no attempt to control for other
variables are highly suspect. Take the data on "economic freedom" and growth
and add a third or fourth variable. Try, for instance, literacy or
How ever do they define "economic freedom," anyway? Freedom from hunger, or
freedom to fire 5,000 workers?
Doug
--
Doug Henwood
Left Business Observer
250 W 85 St
New York NY 10024-3217
USA
+1-212-874-4020 voice
+1-212-874-3137 fax
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web:
Carl Dassbach wrote,
In my opinion, the assertion that "economic freedom" is positively
correlated with average GDP . . . neither merits nor warrants attention.
It does merit attention if it is part of an attempt to discriminate
among three different propositions:
1. democracy
What's wrong with conceding the point but reinterpreting the terms and
explaining their significance? It's probably true that "economic
freedom"--that is, capitalist production relations--causes higher economic
groiwth and tends to increase, perhaps maximize wealth--for a few. And
that "causes"
Doug wrote:
How ever do they define "economic freedom," anyway? Freedom from hunger, or
freedom to fire 5,000 workers?
Don't know; guess I'll have to read the book (sigh).
FYI, "The Economist" in its quasi-review feels that "[economic freedom]
cannot be measured by looking at the size of
How ever do they define "economic freedom," anyway? Freedom from hunger, or
freedom to fire 5,000 workers?
Doug
Economic freedom in the US is, of course, the freedom to fire 5000, with no
questions ask, the freedom for health care providers to make huge profits
and pay inflated executive
Dear FEMECON-L'ers PEN-L'ers:
Natasha Desai is a senior at Vassar College who wishes to pursue research
on the topic she describes below. I would be very appreciative if more
knowledgeable folks than I would pass along any suggestions to her on how
she might proceed.
Ms. Desai writes:
"I
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 18:00:16 -0800
From: Homeless Action Coalition [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Journal of Homelessness [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: re:missions,welfare,religion
Missions vary in the way they treat people. Many are caring and
compassionate, others are cruel and abusive and
Carl Dassbach wrote,
1. . . . capitalism historically promotes democracy . . ..It
promotes formal equality to overcome the feudal inequalities .
I agree this is a TENDENCY, although I'm not sure this is true in
all cases. My concern in my last posting was not about the transition
At 12:52 PM 1/29/96, C.N.Gomersall wrote:
Stripped to its essentials, economic freedom is concerned with property
rights and choice. Individuals are economically free if property they have
legally acquired is protected from invasions or intrusions by others, and
if they are free to use, exchange
To Doug Henwood,
One reply, developed by various sorts of historians, is to focus on the
tradition of ideas about the rights or "dignity" of labor, going back at
least as far as the 1820s, if not further, with echoes heard as far back as
Franklin in the 1750s. Also known as "producerism,"
5
The Nation January 29,
1996
Business finds the cheapest labor of all:
MAKING PRISON PAY
Christian Parenti
No sooner had California's tough new "three
strikes, you're out" law been passed in 1994 then the
RAND
On Mon, 29 Jan 1996, Doug Henwood wrote:
"rights"? That leads you to the elitist dead-end of litigation and Supreme
Court worship. Any liberals out there who can help me out?
Hey, Doug, go easy on us (future) radical lawyers. Litigation isn't so
bad. You got a problem with Brown v. Board of
There's also the response Peter Burns and I were batting around the other
day with Michael Meeropol: that there's no freedom, or it has no value,
without resources to use it. If workers are "free" in the sense that they
must work for the bosses or die, what's the great benefit to that? Well,
A few of you may be interested in looking at pope John
Paul II's 1982 encyclical "Laborem exercens", which
stresses the primacy and priority of labor over capital,
and while criticizing Soviet style state ownership,
indicates approval for what JP calls an "authentic
socialization" of the means
34 matches
Mail list logo
