I don't know that I'd bother following this list if Brad weren't on it.
Not becuase I enjoy the fights, but because he offers an informed and
vigorous response to the knee-jerk statisim that otherwise dominates the
list. I call it statism rather than Marxism because I know of no other
forum wh
Well, it's nice to see a top Bush official being so clear on the goal of
leaving the multinationals untaxed and gutting the Social Security and
Medicare systems. Worth passing on- NN
---
O'Neill lays out radical vision
Source: The Financial Times
Published: May 18 2001 19:18:25 Author:
In my own way I wish to second Fred Guy. Brad DeLong has no
doubt overplayed the no-argument argument, which most be quite
irritating to someone like Keaney who has put forth serious, well
researched responses. But look at the position of DeLong trying to
cope with relentless attacks coming
> I agree with Jim. That's basically the crux of the debate: what is
> the most important causal mechanism that gave rise to capitalism,
> i.e., M-C-M'? Not culture, not climate, not environment, not
> geography, not demography (understood in the Malthusian sense), not
> quantitative growth of
Fred Guy wrote:
>
> ... knee-jerk statisim that otherwise dominates the
> list. I call it statism rather than Marxism because I know of no other
> forum where the policies of Juan Peron, the South Korean government and
> state media monopolies (monopolies, not the Beeb) could all get such
> sym
>In my own way I wish to second Fred Guy. Brad DeLong has no
>doubt overplayed the no-argument argument, which most be quite
>irritating to someone like Keaney who has put forth serious, well
>researched responses...
Back in the late 1970s I would have agreed with Keaney that the IMF's
advice t
May 19, 2001
Hi Tim,
In my view, we do well to look at the race and genderas well as the
classdimensions of the attack on Pacifica radio. At KPFA in Berkeley, for
instance, nonwhite and women programmers were the first to be purged from
the air. Then, the assaults on programmers producing
Let me finally reanswer the question of the 'origins of capitalism' in terms
of my extended statements. With this apparatus the answer is trivial, though
still mysterious. The question of 'capitalism' requires being settled, to
some degree, by definition. Do we mean the Neolithic trade in obsid
A, if not the, crucial claim of the Great Divergence is that a Europe
facing similar ecological constraints as China was saved by New
World silver, timber, sugar, cotton and potatoes. The more I
research this question, however, the more it seems China, not
Europe, was recued from such a cris
At 10:40 AM 05/19/2001 -0300, you wrote:
> > I agree with Jim. That's basically the crux of the debate: what is
> > the most important causal mechanism that gave rise to capitalism,
> > i.e., M-C-M'? Not culture, not climate, not environment, not
> > geography, not demography (understood in the
At 19/05/01 07:42 -0700, you wrote:
>Back in the late 1970s I would have agreed with Keaney that the IMF's
>advice to Britain was counterproductive. But the fact that Mitterand and
>Carter both tried a "Keynesian" expansionary approach, and that their
>policies crashed and burned, has to make
> A crisis was
> looming, yes, as in Europe, "rural living standards did not improve
> much, if at all, between 1800 and 1850", and "the next twenty five
> years were catastrophic, featuring no less than four major civil wars,
> massive floods, droughts, and other calamities..." (144) - but only
Michael Keaney says he's "off to Stockholm in a couple of days to brush up
on [his] social skills." So I'm forwarding this message from him with
regard to our little debate with Brad. Because Brad filters out my
messages, he will not be receiving this. Could someone please forward this
to him?
Re: Foundations. Just saw a new book by Mark Dowie, published by M.I.T.Press
on the foundations like Ford, Pew, Rockefeller, etc. Blurbed by Ralph Nader.
http://mitpress.mit.edu/book-home.tcl?isbn=0262041898
_American Foundations: An Investigative History _
Michael Pugliese
- Original Message
At 12:37 PM 05/19/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>I don't know that I'd bother following this list if Brad weren't on it.
No-one has called for kicking him off, that I know of. I, for one, was
asking him to be polite.
>Not becuase I enjoy the fights, but because he offers an informed and
>vigorous res
Re: Peronism (Carrol see if Nestor Gorojovsky
knows of this book), "
Record # 1
Title : Peronism and Argentina / edited by James P. Brennan.
M.P.
http://emperors-clothes.com/petition/petition.htm
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/header.htm
Jared Israel, Nico Varkevisser and Nestor Gorojovsky, who
I don't want to suggest that the potato was planted only in the
regions (Shandong and Zhili/Hebein), regions which P so happened
to mention (accidentally) as areas of substantial demographic
growth after 1750. As we will see below, it came to occupy a
critical role in Shandong but am not sure
I agree with much in this message, except for the personal material. Jim need
not mention Brad's filtering and Michael need not make the subject Brad (as he
does at times), but his ideas. I am hoping that we can continue without the
acrimony -- no tit for tat from either side.
Jim Devine wrote:
The subject title of this thread should not have been "did the potato
save China" for China was not saved. Rather, the potato benefited
China more than Europe and eased her constraints, allowing her
population to grow after 1800, more than it would have, but China
still reached its *absolute*
Jim D. says:
>Further, in some circumstances (but not all), "books, research,
>debate, history" are _not needed_. Yoshie was making a simple
>theoretical point, about what's important. If one follows Marx's
>definition and theory of capitalism -- which is somewhat cryptically
>summarized as M
Jim Devine wrote:
>
> There's a big difference between _attacking an individual_ (ad hominem) and
> _attacking an argument_. The rules of Congress may encourage politeness,
> but that's a democracy of the few, of the elite and powerful. We need to
> put said "democracy" into context, which is wh
>
> Back in the late 1970s I would have agreed with Keaney that the IMF's
> advice to Britain was counterproductive. But the fact that Mitterand
> and Carter both tried a "Keynesian" expansionary approach, and that
> their policies crashed and burned, has to make you think again. In
> retrospect,
Duchesne says:
>Devine complains DeLong does not answer; well, isn't there a point at
>which one should ceased talking to a stalker?
this is flame-bait. I have in no way "stalked" Brad. Stalking involves
physical presence of some sort. It's also illegal, isn't it? Being willing
to argue with
[Surely of some pertinence and lest the biggest threat to academic
freedom becomes one's fellow academics and, of course, real world
irrelevance...I cut some of "the fat" from the essay, but provided the
link for those interested]
http://csf.colorado.edu/bcas/sympos/sylie.htm
Moral Ambiguity, D
What is the Bray book? There is a 1983 book on rice, but no 1986 book
that I could find.
I already mentioned the potato a while ago, suggesting that you look at
The Social and Economic History of the Potato.
Ricardo Duchesne wrote:
> I don't want to suggest that the potato was planted only in
>Jim Devine wrote:
>
>>
>> There's a big difference between _attacking an individual_ (ad hominem) and
>> _attacking an argument_. The rules of Congress may encourage politeness,
>> but that's a democracy of the few, of the elite and powerful. We need to
>> put said "democracy" into context, w
>
>More importantly, I thought the whole point of the criticisms of the IMF was
>precisely this: that it has treated the financial crises of Mexico and Asia
>like they were crises of excess demand and exogenous shock for the developed
>world in the 70's. Why would the remedy for one be similar to
Brad, come on. I asked Michael K. to cool it, because I thought you had.
Nobody benefits from repeatedly going over the same tit for tat stuff.
You made your case fairly clearly in your last post, calling for a
kinder-gentler IMF.
Let me ask a question about that post: Is the role of the IMF to
So do we trust these bankers?
... Or the economists who claim to have all the answers on whether to
join, asks Faisal Islam
Observer Election Special
Guardian Unlimited Politics
Sunday May 20, 2001
The Observer
Politicians have long been able to fish out the appropriate economist
to back any p
29 matches
Mail list logo
