New York Times, October 30, 1997, p. A31.
"China's Missing Girls" by Bob Herbert. "There has never been the kind of
international outcry that there should be over the girls who are missing from
the population of China. The world has largely closed its eyes to this
immense tragedy.
A c
Has there been a decrease in Black teenage unemployment? ellen
>In a message dated 97-11-01 20:09:26 EST, (Doug, er, whoever) writes:
>
>>Obviously an unemployment rate below 5% should help black workers a lot,
>>but why are the bottom quintile of white households losing income (-4.3%
>>between 1
In a message dated 97-11-01 21:26:21 EST, you write:
>my vote is that Doug should go to
>>SUNY--Stonybrook. For game theory.
Hey, hey, hey! My mother graduated from stony brook in the early 1970s. Her
graduating class all wore gas masks in protest against the war. We (her kids
-- only five o
In a message dated 97-11-01 20:09:26 EST, (Doug, er, whoever) writes:
>Obviously an unemployment rate below 5% should help black workers a lot,
>but why are the bottom quintile of white households losing income (-4.3%
>between 1989 and 1996) while the bottom quintile of blacks (who are much
>poor
In a message dated 97-10-31 18:46:15 EST, Lawrence Shute writes:
>I may be living in some alternate universe, but I've long thought that the
>actual US unemployment rate was much higher (say, twice as high) as the
>published figures. Because of under counting of undocumented residents,
>discoura
In a message dated 97-10-31 09:37:26 EST, you write:
>OK, I have to confess. I've been posting to PEN-L and other lists under the
>name Jerry Levy to provoke controversy, and with it attention. Because as
>we say in the self-promotional trade, there's no such thing as bad
>publicity.
>
>Doug
Dam
Stephen E Philion wrote:
> Think of it like this. Maurce Dobb and Paul Sweezy had a very lively
> debate in the 1950's. Their views were largely irreconcilable, yet
> neither party ever sunk to telling the other one "to go back to school to
> learn (fill in th eblank)..." Brenner and Wallerst
James Devine wrote:
> I can't believe that anyone could get so _excited_ about the issue of
> unproductive vs. productive labor; it's a pretty academic issue that should
> have no emotional content. Bitter criticism seems out of line.
I was simply pointing out that your claim re Henwood's posit
Stephen E Philion wrote:
> This is the problem Jerry. You say you are critical of Malecki, yet you
> have never spent any energy criticizing this guy,
Where do you get your information from? Just recently, I criticized him
publicly (and repeatedly).
> Lou's sin was simple and he apologized fo
I had written:>> I can't believe that anyone could get so _excited_ about
the issue of
unproductive vs. productive labor; it's a pretty academic issue that should
have no emotional content. Bitter criticism seems out of line. <<
Jerry Levy replies: >I was simply pointing out that your claim re He
Ellen (anzalone/starbird) wrote:
> Is it true that inmates incarcerated in prison are NOT counted as
> households in your data?
To be counted as being employed or unemployed in the US data, one must
first be counted as being part of the labor force. But, the labor force is
defined in such a way
James Devine wrote:
> Being Marx-informed and
> Marx-friendly, his "superficial" or "empiricist" analyses in WALL STREET
> takes for granted Marx's vol. I macro-analysis.
He has not "taken for granted" the distinction between productive and
unproductive labour and has indeed often explicitly re
According to Jerry Levy, Doug > has not "taken for granted" the distinction
between productive and unproductive labour and has indeed often explicitly
rejected the use of
Marxian categories such as c, v, and s for empirical work. ... On the other
hand, he
wants to use Marxian words like exploitati
jerry,
On M-I and Pen-L you have singled out Doug for your bitter attacks.
I subscribe to these two lists and have not seen you attack anyone else
with such bitterness. As Michael Yates and James Devine have pointed out,
your criticisms are especially vitriolic, which this list is not
supportiv
James Devine wrote:
>So to my mind, Doug may be like Moliere's bourgeois gentleman (without being
>bourgeois himself, of course): he's been speaking Marxian value-theoretic
>prose all his non-lit-crit life without knowing it. Being Marx-informed and
>Marx-friendly, his "superficial" or "empiricis
On Sun, 2 Nov 1997, Gerald Levy wrote:
>
> LNP didn't (and doesn't) like Bob Malecki. Well, OK ... he's not exactly
> my favorite person either. But, Proyect decided that since he didn't like
> Malecki (a personal grudge), he would [try to] chase him off of cyberspace
> by maliciously claiming th
Hi Doug!
I'm not sure who makes it into the count of Black households, and so I ask
this as much out of ignorance as I hope, to be of some help on directing
the inquiry on income and race in a positive direction (as I can be no help
in providing a packaged answer, besides idunno.)
Is it true tha
Friends,
I do not know why comrade Levy is so bitter. Who needs this stuff? I doubt
Doug needs to go back to school though it would be nice to think of pen-l as a
school in which we all can learn rahter than make smart aleck remarks.
michael yates
This discussion of value theory vs. empiricism needs some clarification,
ignoring the personal invective.
We should start with Marx's value-based analysis of capitalism as a social
system, in vol. I of CAPITAL. (Marx, unlike bourgeois economists with their
"methodological individualism", starts
(LP: This article fails to point out that subsistence farmers are settling
in the rain-forests because most of the prime land in Brazil is devoted to
export production of coffee, beef, tobacco, etc. Otherwise the information
seems not only correct and alarming, but highly analogous to what is
happ
Could a five minute [PEN-L]ty for high sticking and a game [PEN-L]ty for
brawling increase the signal to noise ratio on this list?
Regards,
Tom Walker
^^^
knoW Ware Communications
Vancouver, B.C., CANADA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(604) 688-8296
^
Louis Proyect wrote:
> >becoming a pro-management snitch).
> Levy, I was going to ignore this as I used to ignore your ravings on the
> Marxism-International mailing-list. I think most people on PEN-L are
> starting to form the same sort of impression of you that people already
> have on the Spoo
Levy:
>becoming a pro-management snitch).
Levy, I was going to ignore this as I used to ignore your ravings on the
Marxism-International mailing-list. I think most people on PEN-L are
starting to form the same sort of impression of you that people already
have on the Spoons-List. You are a perso
We are getting into the personal invective again. Please, let this drop.
We have more important things to discuss.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
916-898-5321
916-898-5901 fax
Stephen E Philion wrote:
> Yes, but Jerry you have to explain why you recommend that Doug
> a) choose a liberal school that charges outrageous tution rates that most
> working class students cannot afford instead of the Marxist School, which
> is much cheaper and run by a group of admisitrators
25 matches
Mail list logo
