Jim writes,
> Yes. I should have been clearer: if "efficiency" means the
> minimum-cost attainment of some given goal, I was talking about
> efficiency in the pursuit of a goal of which I approve.
A hypothetical case. Suppose it takes one worker eight hours to do a
job. It would take two w
BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1996
RELEASED TODAY: The U.S. Import Price Index fell 1.2 percent in June. The
decrease, which followed a 0.6 percent decline in May, was again paced by
falling petroleum prices. The U.S. Export Price Index also fell in June,
declining 0.1 percent after ri
At 8:58 PM 7/23/96, R. Anders Schneiderman wrote:
>I think Nader's position is appalling, and I find it hard to understand how
>anyone can argue that voting for him is any better than voting for Clinton.
>When Clinton does things that make my stomach turn, it's usually because
>he's protecting hi
> Date sent: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 11:54:01 -0500
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GC-Etchison, Michael),
>[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], mscoleman@a
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Doug Henwood)
> Subject:Re: fare
Jim Craven writes: >>Pareto was a member of the Italian Fascist
Party and a committed supporter of Mussolini. The concept of a
Corporatist State and the myth of a supranational and patriarchal
organ (the State) standing above society and class interests and
balancing and harmonizing contending and
>I believe that there is a direct relationship between Pareto's
>concept of "efficiency" and his demonstrated fascist proclivities.
>The Corporate State celebrated by fascists past and present
>celebrates the notion of "universal harmonies" and the State as an
>agent reconciling mutually contr
Anders writes:
>One of the many joys of being a Business Week subscriber--aside from
>reading some very sharp reporters--is that I get to watch the race between
>Gary Becker and Craig Roberts to see who can come up with the most
>amazingly idiotic statements (Craig is currently ahead by 5). I ju
On Tue, 23 Jul 1996, Michael Perelman wrote:
> I have trouble accepting Anders's criticisim of Nader. Nader has always
> limited himself to consumer and environemntal type issues. He has never
> shown much interest in foreign affairs or questions, such as gays in the
> military. Neither ha
Peter writes:
> Isn't there something profoundly unhelpful about a concept
> of efficiency which would define some allocation of
> resources as "unimprovably efficient", while there is a
> feasible re-allocation of resources which would make, say,
> 95 percent of people 10 percent better
Was the decision to expel Etchison reached democratically and with the
full approval and participation of list members?
Shawgi Tell
University at Buffalo
Graduate School of Education
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim D. writes:
>It also shows the limits of the Pareto concept. The Pareto concept
>starts with everyone having "given endowments" and using them in a
>static system. Accumulation and real-world technical changes
>really doesn't fit in to the Paretian framework; just as with
>Walrasian GE, it
Jim D writes:
>This is not efficient in the usual neoclassial sense: okay,
>one might argue that stealing from (and killing) the
>Indians, Armenians, Jews, etc. could in some way cause the
>total product rise after the fact. But that rise in
>"efficiency" isn't Pareto superior, since some fol
Anders writes:>>David Brower's piece, posted by Jim Devine on
Monday, is a good example ofthe problem I have with some people who
vote Third Party. As I understand it, the best argument for voting
for third party candidates is that rather than choosing between two
candidates you don't like--the l
>No, Michael, we do not have a formal rule. Instead we count on the courtesy
>and good sense of the participants. To deny someone access to pen-l
>would no more be an infraction of freedom than to ask people not to join
>in on a personal telephone call.
>This is a progressive economists list.
Gene writes:
[...]
>In that group of "most economists" I see cited all the time I think most
>would assert that you could compensate the losers out of the gains of the
>winners and thus make all better off. I'm serious here. I hear that
>explanation quite often for schemes that are just short o
In response to the following,
>>And so would anybody. No reasonable interpretation of the neoclassical
>>notion of pareto efficiency would allow that the creation of an Auschwitz or
>>the distribution of infected blankets to Indians constitutes a pareto
>>improvement.
Gene writes:
>I think a
> Date sent: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 09:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
> Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Gil Skillman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject:[PEN-L:5303] Re: Pareto Efficiency
> >I believe that there is a direct
Among several statements that I agree with, Jim D writes
>As economists usually apply the concept of PO, it's the mythical
>Walrasian auctioneer that is "standing above society and class
>interests and balancing and harmonizing contending and
>irreconcilably contradictory and hostile class intere
How about this for a modification of Pareto Optimality: A state in
which no person can be made better off without having to necessarily
make others worse off as those who need to be made worse off as
efficiently as possible and to the greatest extent possible--nazis,
racists, sexists, homophob
On Wed, 24 Jul 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote to me directly:
> As you may know, I have been evicted from pen-l. I suppose this
> relieves me of the social obligation to continue any conversations in
> which you all and I have been engaged at one time or another. I shall
> miss them.
>
Pareto developed his concept well before
he was a member of the Italian Fascist Party.
Nevertheless, I can see at least a distant link
between aspects of the concept and his eventual
membership. It connects with his sociological
theory of the circulation of the elites. An implication
of t
Gil Skillman writes in reply to me:
Well, yes and no. Yes, pareto efficiency is essentially blind to
distributional issues, and perforce to redistributional moves. No, that
doesn't make it absolutely unhelpful.
I didn't say it was *absolutely* unhelpful, just profoundly so.
Having ac
The monopoly capitalist system tends to socialize all aspects
of life - the process of production, the huge cities, education,
health and even such things as recreation and living together in
seniors' homes. The aspect of modern life it does not want to
socialize is ownership of the means of
First, I must apologize in advance to Michael
P. for saying something about something he wants
nothing said about. But I already said something about
it before I saw his "please don't" message and I need
to tie it up with a clarifying addendum. It seems that
I am frequently violating his wi
Concerning Michael Etchison's farewell:
>> As you may know, I have been evicted from pen-l. I suppose this
>> relieves me of the social obligation to continue any conversations in
>> which you all and I have been engaged at one time or another. I shall
>> miss them.
The problem with Et
Doug wrote,
>I can't speak for Nader; his refusal to talk about "gonadal politics," as
>he calls it, is also unfortunate. But I do think it's a bit of a leap to
>conclude that Nader is "another White Boy on the Left who doesn't take
>racism seriously." You could also argue that affirmative action
Jim writes:
>It's just not true that the position of all third-party advocates is
>that one picks someone whom you actually support. There are other
>reasons.
>* A vote for a third party can be seen as part of a strategy to
>pressure the two-party duopoly to lean in our direction. If the
>politi
At 1:26 PM 7/24/96, R. Anders Schneiderman wrote:
>The issue of racism is one of the central problems facing our country
>today. It's also one of the central issues the Right is using to divide our
>side. If Nader is going to duck it, then I don't see how anyone who
>believes in social justice c
Jim C. writes:
>How about this for a modification of Pareto Optimality: A state in
>which no person can be made better off without having to necessarily
>make others worse off as those who need to be made worse off as
>efficiently as possible and to the greatest extent possible--nazis,
>racis
shee-it, I can't get any work done, so here goes...
I wrote that:>It's just not true that the position of all
third-party advocates is that one picks someone whom you actually
support. There are other reasons.<
>A vote for a third party can be seen as part of a strategy to
pressure the two-par
Let me give you again my interpretation about the function of pen-l. First
and formost, it is to give space to people to use their energies to further
progressive causes. Yes, I know that we have no unanimity. The
Clinton/Nader debate is a case in point.
I do not recall how old pen-l is, but
31 matches
Mail list logo
