My sense is that the critical lender of last resort function in East
Asia is being obstructed by a conflict between the US (through the IMF)
and Japan. The US wants any bailout to be linked to the dismantling of
the Japanese-inspired (and coordinated?) network of state capitalist
institutions in
]On Behalf Of Louis Proyect
> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 1999 7:25 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEN-L:10176] NY Times op-ed piece on global financial crisis
>
>
> A Crisis Without a Reform
>
> By JEFFREY E. GARTEN
>
> (Garten is dean of Yale Scho
"The fact is that although millions of people in emerging markets have
suffered horribly -- losing their jobs, going bankrupt, sinking into
poverty -- the crisis wasn't long enough or deep enough to result in the
kinds of corrective measures that would result in a less risky global
economy. Indeed
A Crisis Without a Reform
By JEFFREY E. GARTEN
(Garten is dean of Yale School of Management)
At this time last year it seemed as if the global economy was hanging by a
thread. Russia was defaulting on its debt, the first emerging market to do
so since the Asian crisis had begun. The world's la
-Original Message-
From: Discussions on the Socialist Register and its articles
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sid Shniad
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 2:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: THE G7 "SOLUTION" TO THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS: A MARSHALL
PLAN FOR CRE
> "One man deserves the credit,
> One man deserves the fame,
> And Nicolai Ivanovich
> Chossudovsky is his name!
> (Hey!)"
>
> (First one to trace this gets a free drink at my
> expense at the AEA meetings.)
Sawicky parody on Tom Lehrer, parody on Danny Kaye/Sylivia Fine
("Stanislavsky
We are indebted to Lou Proyect for forwarding this latest from Chossudovsky.
Chossudovsky's trenchant analysis is pointed up by his weak prescriptions, which
in stark contrast call only for such sticking-plasters as more regulation of
stock markets, and 'An expanding real economy,' which howe
Doug Henwood:
>
>What does it mean to say that capitalism is in "ok shape"? It means that a
>polarizing system of exploitation is reproducing itself pretty
>successfully. The creation of poverty alongside of wealth is an ancient
>feature of this charming economic form. I didn't think I had to make
Patrick Bond wrote:
>The socio-political fallout of some yuppie NY banker's
>flick of a finger on the keyboard can be terrifying. In SA, a 25%
>currency crash during a six-week period in 1996 compelled the ANC
>leadership to formally junk its soc-dem development programme and
>replace it with a (
Rosenberg, Bill wrote:
> Mind you, despite all this, Michel Chossudovsky has written some
> outstanding analyses - I can think of a couple on Africa and
> Yugoslavia. So I'm not conceding that Choss is a Lobachevsky
> by any means (unless it was the real Lobachevsky).
Hear hear. In a land of 30%
Max Sawicky wrote,
>Henceforth, the names of Walker and Chossudovsky
>will be forever intertwined, their ethnic
>contrast notwithstanding, though there may be
>some truth to the rumor that Chossudovsky's real
>name was Lodge and he changed it to make it as a
>radical economist. By the same
And another thing.
> Are you saying that _I_ sympathize with Chossudovsky's politics or excuse
> failures in logic and careless use of data? Or are you just setting up a
> bogus dichotomy as a platform to pontificate from? I simply was pointing out
> that Doug and Max were citing low unemployment
Quoth Valis:
> > Quoth Tom re Max:
> >
> > The disruption and the socialization of the losses are not random processes.
> > Life goes on more or less for some people and just less for others. While
> > Chossudovsky may have been hyperventilating, Max's and Doug's sanguine
> > comments about the
Doug Henwood wrote,
>Are you waxing deconstructive here, Tom? Being anti-apocalyptic requies an
>(unacknowledge) dependency on the notion of apocalypse? If so, what is the
>unnarativizable other?
The answer to the first question is, "yes". As for the second, I wouldn't
say that the dependency is
In response to the exchange between Tom, Doug and Max, there
is recent evidence from Canada that they are both right.
Yesterday the Canadian Council on Welfare issued its
report on child poverty in Canada in which my home province,
Manitoba, was third on the list after New Brunswick and
Newfound
Tom Walker wrote:
>I will say, however, that pooh-poohing the apocalypse can be as much of a
>pose as apocalypticism itself. It might even be interesting to ask whether
>apocalyptic pooh-poohing isn't itself just a variation on the theme of
>apocalypse. In other words, Sawicky's rhetorical labell
Tom Walker wrote:
>There's nothing fishy about the *numbers* -- they measure what they're
>intended to measure. There is something fishy about the *relevance* of those
>numbers in terms of the lives of working people. A family in which one adult
>is working full time and earning enough to support
On Fri, 28 Nov 1997, Doug Henwood wrote:
> >It's magic: lower incomes + higher labour force participation = a lower rate
> >of unemployment. This precisely confirms the right-wing nostrum that there
> >is no such thing as involuntary unemployment. At a low enough wage, there is
> >a job for every
Colin Danby wrote,
>No, increased labor force participation by itself will raise the
>unemployment rate not lower it. Look up the definition of
>unemployment.
Colin, I'm not impressed with this facile hair splitting. Why don't _you_ go
look up the definition of solipsism. You might have under
Tom W on Doug:
> A family in which
> two adults have to be working full time to earn a similar level of income
> contributes twice as many participants to the labour force and thus
> "improves" the employment picture.
> It's magic: lower incomes + higher labour force participation = a lower rate
valis wrote:
>> Quoth Tom re Max:
>>
>> >If the bubble breaks,
>> >there is some disruption and often some socialization of the losses,
>> >but life more or less goes on. Where's the apocalypse?
>> >
>>
>> The disruption and the socialization of the losses are not random processes.
>> Life goes
Doug Henwood wrote,
>I know it's sometimes thrilling to mount a moral high horse and declaim,
>but I was responding specifically to the assertions in the original
>histrionic document that there was something fishy about U.S. employment
>numbers.
There's nothing fishy about the *numbers* -- they
> Quoth Tom re Max:
>
> >If the bubble breaks,
> >there is some disruption and often some socialization of the losses,
> >but life more or less goes on. Where's the apocalypse?
> >
>
> The disruption and the socialization of the losses are not random processes.
> Life goes on more or less for
Doug Henwood wrote,
>It might be a better use
>of a Marxist's time to figure out how to organize to end this destructive &
>polarizing system than to devise elaborate theories of how it will do
>itself in.
That's what I keep telling myself. But I find no more empirical support for
this theory th
Doug Henwood wrote:
> It might be a better use
> of a Marxist's time to figure out how to organize to end this destructive &
> polarizing system than to devise elaborate theories of how it will do
> itself in.
Name names.
Which contemporary Marxists have been devising "elaborate" theories for
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>Moreover, Carchedi examines how falling profitability can be staved off by
>advanced capitals through the mechanisms of unequal exchange. In recent
>analysis he also also explored the hidden appropriation of value in the
>seignorage priviliges from the dollar as the world
Doug asks:
> So if this Marxian cycle
>theory doesn't apply to the most important capitalist country over the last
>50 years, where does it apply?
>From Mattick to Cogoy to Shaikh, there has been an attempt to examine how
crisis can be *deferred* through public and private credit. Of course
Matt
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>Marxian theory, of which
>Chossudovsky's analysis is not an example, does not predict the apocalypse
>but ever more protracted depressions
Protracted compared to when? Since WW II the U.S. economy has spent about
1/5 of the time in recession; in the late 19C, it spent nea
Max Sawicky wrote,
>If the bubble breaks,
>there is some disruption and often some socialization of the losses,
>but life more or less goes on. Where's the apocalypse?
>
The disruption and the socialization of the losses are not random processes.
Life goes on more or less for some people and
Max wrote:
"For this to go on indefinitely, it would seem that assets must
be permanently and increasingly overvalued. At some point the asset
price gets obviously out of whack with the cash flow from ownership
of the asset. For a permanent bubble, there has to be an endless
supply of idiots w
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
>I finally got around to reading the Chossudovsky
>piece uploaded by LP and would like to invite
>reaction to a few comments (interspersed with
>the text).
>Nowhere is it mentioned that the Dow, its decline notwithstanding,
>remained significantly higher than the start of t
there are some big lapses in places.
Instructive citations from 'Wall Street' are welcome.
I've got the book.
> THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS
>
> by Michel Chossudovsky
>
> Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, author of "The
> Globalizatio
THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS
by Michel Chossudovsky
Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, author of "The
Globalization of Poverty, Impacts of IMF and World Bank Reforms", Third
World Network, Penang and Zed Books, London, 1997.
Black Monday October 19, 1987 will be rem
33 matches
Mail list logo
