---------- ---------- From: yyba To: abel; abele; john_abowd; postmaster; chrisa; hja; adelman; ladkins; fadmati; renato.aguilar; ahsansm; aic; djaigner; akiba; albrecht; falcala; alesk; rob.alessie; alger.d; eco131; allenf; steve_allen; al-najjar; rma; amemiya; la13; t-andersen; tandersen; anderson; sagw; fredrik.andersson; lan; andreoni; andrews; panglin; angrist; luc; antille; antle; jja1; raoki; aloisio; arellano; arnott/ec; arrow; aruka; s.w.arulampalam; asano-seki; gasheim; tony.atkinson; atknsn; ecca; auerbach; aaustin; ybaba; bac; back; dbackus; bagwell; baic; khba-k; 20883rtb; inbv; fmbald; bbb; bblk; nbalke; rdballou; e304bb; rjb; rb7; gunnar.bardsen; baerlocher; barnett; fbaron; bobb; basci; mzjb; gbattese; battigal; baum/ec; bauwens; mrb12; beachc; c.bean; beaudry; beaumont; beck; becker; jbehrman; p.a.bekker; abelinfa; benabou; mba; benassi; hbenegas; benhabib; benjamin; paschimc; joyce-berg; olvar.bergland; tedb; berk; berliant; jtber; eberndt; helmut_bester; r.bewley; bhargava; gbhattacharya; sugato; mbiancon; gbiglaiser; arne.bigsten; mbilodea; uctpa97; erik.biorn; bisin; dblack; sblack.econ; blackbrn; blanchar; econcjeb; harry.bloch; h.g.bloemen; sblough; ablume; r.blundell; boadwayr; william-boal; boero; axel; vboehm; bohn; michele; dbol; bollerslev; billb; gfbonanno; jmbonni; t.borgers; l.borghans; bosch; pbs; wbossert; peterb; bourg; rbove; bowmand; braeutigam; frb; brander; kbrannas; braym; breslaw Subject: YYBA Conference Suggestion Re:The New Ec Date: Wednesday, February 26, 1997 10:11PM Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 01:11:46 +0200 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- From: International Planning Corporation - IPC, Jerusalem, Israel To: The Above 'List' For The - 1997 Australasian Meeting of The Econometric Society Subject: The New Economic Paradigm, The Integration of Labor(sm) Action: Economists and econometricians, and the operationally conscious, are called upon to cognitively affirm, or refute, the new economic paradigm, the Integration of Labor(sm), which defines 'information ,' as the new agant of transformation, as below, and elsewhere, in counterpart. When and provided IPC receives, prior to the now scheduled July 2-4,1997 Australasian Meeting of The Econometric Society - Conference, twenty five or more qualified and/or serious on-line responses, as above suggested in respect of the new economic paradigm from scheduled and/or planned attendees, IPC will link a direct gateway, for an on-line dialogue workshop, for all conference attendees, for the duration of the conference, with the author of the new paradigm, for all who wish to participate in the global new paradigm discussion. Most particularly,in relation to their own or their institution's specific development agendas. However, in regard to specific comments and suggestions being submitted to IPC, as a condition to our responding, IPC will reuqire log evidence, of a serious investigation by the party making the communication (in the minimum of one hour's review) of IPC's Website materials, in the minimum, in respect of these specific addresses, and, it is suggested the inquiry begin with the Slide Shows: http://www.ipc1.com/whatcreateswalth.html http://www.ipc1.com/SlideShows/slideshow2.html http://www.ipc1.com/MASS/gallery3.hrml http://www.ipc1.com/MASS.introIOL.html http://www.ipc1.com/SmithGMltr.html http://www.ipc1.com/MASSaboutIOL.html http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentaryTOC.html http://www.ipc1.com/tech_lic_services.html http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentary1.html http://www.ipc1.com/MASS/MASSstructure.html http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentary2.html http://www.ipc1.com/MASS/fourprograms.html http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentary3.html http://www.ipc1.com/impactiol.html http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentary4.html http://www.ipc1.com/MASS/aboutMASS.html http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentary5.html http://www.ipc1.com/MASS/taxonomy.html Secondary action(s): Only when and where a specific consnesus attains, in support of the new economic paradigm, IPC urgently requests, to receive from you, your documented support (for G-7 policy development reasons, now accelerating, in respect of the new economic paradigm). Your timely information content and inputs, are very important, and so please reply immediately. Additionally, please forward this communication, to your professional colleagues, with your personal request,that they as well respond to you, and/or IPC, or both, in a timely manner. More Specifically, to the Program Organizers: Department of Economics University of Melbourne - Parkville 3052 Victoria, Australia Dear Peter and Vance: Your 1997 Australasian Meetings of the Econometric Society, to be held at the University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, July 2nd to 4th, is why this writing. As this program's co-chairpersons, it is suggested you together consider to introduce, formally, the new economic paradigm, the Integration of Labor(sm). And this suggestion is made withthe full knowledge that most all likely to attend have their own agendas, of more specialized interests. This suggestion responds to an email, we received forwarded, from a one Professor Sergui Hart in Jerusalem's Hebrew University, for "invited and contributed papers," in mathematical economics, economic theory, and theoretical and applied econometrics (as your email, to the above list). Specifically, what IPC offers your Conference, in the first category, of mathematical economics, not in the applied sense, as in the first principle sense, is P = lc2 , the seminal and new general theory of economics. Its strong reductionist, first principle, grammar is, 'P,' defines GNP/GDP, as equal to a composite macro statistical set(s), of existing and new methods of 'P,' content output(s) of a nation. Where the composite output(s) 'P,' is equal to 'l,' defined as a sub-composite set(s), of existing and new methods of 'l,' as labor content output(s); times, 'c,' defined as a sub-composite set(s), of existing and new methods of 'c,' as capital content inputs and output(s); times, '2,' defined as a new composite set(s) of 'information,' defined as the new agent of transformation; defined as a new composite of four sub-composite sets (as set forth below). Some basic definitions: Existing methods of labor, are primarily measured and reported as wage based aggregates, where labor's new methods will, in future, be based on a composite of value added indices (derived form a matrix of production and distribution components, fundamentally diferent from today's normal time series), in turn derived, principally, from natural intelligence-NI work, as knowledge engineering and expert systems development and applied use, through to scale, teleworking, all supported by three additionally related sub-indices (as, SI, NS and HD, as below) within massive technologic infrastructure, certain to make today's Internet operations look like child's play. Existing methods of capital, as both a commodity and a valuation mechanism, are universally defined as assets, that are either productive, in the fixed asset sense, in relation to business operation, or monetized as fungible-liquid in, or as, capital instruments, globally. However, the new definition of capital, is 'information, ' as knowledge, embodied and dispersed, as intellectual property, now certain to become, in time, globally fungible, eventually, eclipsing capital's existing definition and operational pre-occupation, within its existing methods of global capital markets structure and operation, with an entirely new and vastly superior organizational structure, based on new instruments and international market methods of operation. Information, as the new agent of transformation, will attain (as above) massive investment, in new technologic infrastructure(s), globally, replacing existing plant and equipment industrial object reference, meanings and values. Information's four macro operational elements-domains are; i) systems integration-SI (a post IBM operational definition, as well as emerging international market reality), ii) network services-NS (the post national telephone companies definition(s), iii) natural intelligence-NI (as new methods of knowledge engineering and expert systems development, applicable to both natural and social science) and iiii) human development-HD, as new cognitive and behavioral science, developed and applied as the new methods of work, through teleworking. see: http://www.ipc1.com/MASSaboutIOL.html In respect of "economic theory," what the above "mathematical economics," as P = lc2 is based on, is what now answers, the primary question that economics exist to answer; which is, "what creates wealth?" Its strong reductionist answer is, obviously, least cost methods of production and distribution. However, here is where old and new methods, are now becoming more recognizable, as being, fundamentally, different, in terms of how this is achieved. see: http://www.ipc1.com/Gallery3/ and, as to where the rubber meets the new economic paradigm road, http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentaryTOC.html This means, the "division of labor," for the present, remains the least cost method of the production and distribution of physical goods. Though this old method, is not the least cost method of organizing, producing and distributing - information, existing and/or new knowledge products, and most especially intellectual property new knowledge services. Here, it is the new economic paradigm, the Integration of Labor(sm), that is the new least cost method(s). However, its macro as new technologic infrastructure, to micro new methos of of work as teleworking, defines the new Economic Process Change-EPC, in relation to its policy implications, in respect of education and training and operational new methods being achieved, to scale, by the work force, of a nation. For this to be achieved, it must first be understood and articulated as new public policy, in turn as new industrial policy, as new labor policy ans as well as new information, education and science policy; beginning within the G-7, immediately. see: http://www.ipc1.com/Chirac.ltr.html And thereafter translated into operational programs, of new technologic infrastructure design and development, on a number of levels, as massive teleworking, on the platform level, in developmental and operational cooperation, with all existing capacity, while developing new technologic infrastructure(s) as macro, to micro, new Economic Process Change-EPC that is culture specific programs, based on IPC's four defined universal programs, occurring developmentally, on a number of levels, simultaneously, in order that this change, is recognized and acted on, institutionally and individually, as fundamental, so that it is no longer thought of, or attempted, as Business Process Change-BPC or BPR, which it is not. Your program, I am given to understand, will contain a number of symposia and workshops in "economic theory." It is possible they may be collabroatively improved, if focused on the new economic paradigm. While it would seem, what you and your colleagues mean, by "economic theory," is on a level of intentionality, more in line with new techniques for simulation models and methods, focused on econometrics; within in an unchanged economic structural context. If this is so, then the value of this writing in relation to a new paradigm dialogue, may well not be well received, or even for that matter regared as of interest? The new economic paradigm has not been without its most formidable detractors; as I remember Samuelson's reaction when we met, many years ago, was to libel me, personally, to Dr. Collado who insisted we meet, at my expense (foolish me), and so this taught a much needed lesson, in the context of scientific objectivity, not to mention the basic conflict of interest, of his vested interests in publishing royalties from, rather dated textbook sales. http://www.ipc1.com/ EC_BPR_commentaryTOC.html While in another direction, this recalls the time when Chase and DRI, both had interest to hire me, many years ago, though upon explaining to both, I was not sufficiently expert, nor for that matter really interested in applied mathematics and statistics (at the time they were into least cost squares), but rather more preoccupied and fundamentally concerned, at the time with, first principles, in relation to learning the finality of conscious consequences, of the events likely to cause fundamental change, in methods of organizing and achieving new methods of work, as this was and remains for me far more meaningful, than having interest in, the intentionality of, aggregate, transactional behavior(s). If it will help, I and IPC are willing, to offer Integration of Labor(sm) to your program committee, through IPC's Website, as well as its, for the moment limited collateral public documents, for your meeting's attendees, to critically discuss, and we will, in time, respond to all questions and commentaries, through IPC Website, on the Internet. The advantage for us, is of course, while still absent full public disclosure, is the strategic prerogative to choose additional new methodological materials, for inclusion; as much of IPC's new economic paradigm technologic material, is and will for some time continue to constitute intellectual property trade secrets; and is therefore, in operational large measure, not as yet released to the public domain, particularly, in respect of your specialized field, of econometrics. In parallel, we are now considering to license, the new paradigm's logic development rights, embodied within IPC's Base Technology, to a suitable, to scale, international institutional strategic partner, in relation to their own strategic plans for offering econometric services, as new and superior operational products, services and programs. Despite this minor drawback (as above), we are still willing to help, your conference, although we no longer present papers, nor travel any distances, as these are old methods of knowledge development and dissemination. IPC's Website, though it has never been advertised, nonetheless, receives thousands of requests per day, for information, and now with its costs rising, we will inevitably have to begin to charge, to sustain thesenew methods technology transfer development efforts. Permission, through July 31st, 1997, is granted by IPC to your Conference for your people and Conference attendees, to link your proceedings, prior to, during and after your conference (as and when, uploaded in your website), for discussion purposes for your workshops and symposia... from: http://www.ecom.unimelb.edu.au/ecowww/home.html to: http://www.ipc1.com And although your conference is open, "to all economists and econometricians," as well as researchers in related disciplines, including statistics and finance etc., I am first a cognitive and behavioral scientist, and only secondly, an economist. And were the truth known, merely by default, having been claimed by your profession, by one of your fellow economist's who as well as myself, was at the time and remained a non-practitioner. Here I am referring to Dr. Pete Collado, of MIT and Harvard where he received his training in economics, and who later became the Executive VP of Exxon and their CFO as well as a Director, for many years. It was Pete and, also Eugen Loebl (my mentor and author of "Humanomics" and several other friends, Franco, Profressor Alvin Rabushka and Ms. Etti Boschan (an Econometrician, now retired from Citibank, in New York, US), all who recognized, from the intentionality, the content's conscious finality, as a function of how much research and development effort, was invested over many years, in asking and answering first principle questions, in economics, when the profession per se was, with these very few giant exceptions, completely, disinterested, see: http://www.ipc1.com/Collado.html (please excuse Pete's exaggregated comparisons and opinions). For these and other reasons, perhaps your keynote addresses, would serve you, your colleagues and institution well, certainly historically, were it to focus on the Integration of Labor(sm), by in some way including it, in all three of your - the E. J. Hannan Lecture, the A. W. Phillips Lecture and the Colin Clark Lecture. How? Gentlemen, this is entirely up to you, with blessings from Jerusalem. Perhaps Professor Sergui Hart, who forwarded your email to our attention, or other of his colleagues, here in Israel or elsewhere, some of whom (Dr. Gil Epstein, Professor Etian Sheshinsky, Professor David Levhari and Professor Beenstock, Professor Yoel Haitowsky and numerous others) I am given to understand, have now had a change of heart. Since over the past ten years, that I am here (I've not been professionally received), and in truth its been worse, behaviorally, than Samuelson's hatchet, and a hundred times more transparent, as to the personal and profesional motivation. However, some now, much to my surprise, again, want me to go public - after all these many barren years, of new paradigm gestation, in silence; therefore, perhaps it is time?... and you will offer some suggestions, suitable to your, and everyone's needs? If this suggestion is beyond your envisioned Conference scope, we completely understand. And nonetheless thank you, in advance, for your understanding and certain willingness to cooperate. We have a chapter, in Western Australia, in Perth, with several members in the Ben-Avraham family and Dr. Barry Marshall, who is now an honorary participant, as he now lives in Virginia,in the US. Sincerely, YYBA - IPC International Planning Corporation - IPC Yehoshua Yaacov Ben-Avraham President & Chief Scientist PO Box 4332, Jerusalem, Israel 91043 972-2-567-2048 - Primary Phone 972-2-563-7820 - Fax Number 972-2-563-2132 - Alternate Phone Number http://www.ipc1.com >From "LYNN TURGEON, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ECONOMICS, HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY, >[EMAIL PROTECTED]"@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu Thu Feb 27 16:22:44 1997 Thu, 27 Feb 1997 15:21:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 15:21:40 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Originator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "LYNN TURGEON, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ECONOMICS, HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY, [EMAIL PROTECTED]"@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu Subject: [PEN-L:8788] Progressive taxation and Wartime X-Comment: Progressive Economics It seems quite clear that the U.S. income distribution became more equal as a result of World War II. It was this greater equality that influenced Kuznets's conclusion in his "Income Revolution" (1949) that there was a tendency towards greater equality over time. This was a very influential book and underlay the conventional wisdom (begun by Alfred Marshall) that this was a "law" of capitalism. The highly unequal income distribution in UDCs seemed to buttress this argument. The first person to challenge this belief came from outside the profession, from the historian, Gabriel Kolko, in the early 60s. It is also true that there was an "excess profits tax" during World War II and during the Korean War, but not during the Vietnam War. The mere fact that th ere was genuine full employment also allowed for people at the bottom to have more than a single job. On the other hand, the withholding of taxes was introduced in 1941 whichuncovered 7 million taxpayers who had been avoiding taxes, particularly in the bottom rungs of the income ladder. The Vietnam War, on the other hand,produced rising Gini and/or Thiel indexes of inequality, which have acceleratedin the Reagan-Bush years. The poor capacity utilization rates depressed profits and there was no one callingfor an excess profits tax other than George McGovern. Lynn Turgeon e
