Chris:
> It is not just "another industrialist at the US Treasury".
> It is a change of policy.
Maybe. But maybe it is just a tactical change. If your objective
is to drive to a certain destination and you realize that the
road is congested, you may even take a U turn and travel in the
opposite d
At 08/12/02 23:13 -0800, you wrote:
Chris asked:
> why would manufacturers favour a strong dollar policy?
They don't and this was Doug's point.
I don't want to appear pedantic, and there does not have to be a one to
one correlation between material economic interests and social and
psycholo
Chris asked:
> why would manufacturers favour a strong dollar policy?
They don't and this was Doug's point.
> So does Bush's firing of O'Neill and his preference for
> even more radical tax cuts, reflect a shift in the loyalties
> between different sectors of capital?
I would say, yes. As I see
Doug, don't forget a massive deregulation drive to stimulate the economy.
I presume that such an effort will accompany the tax cuts.
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 11:25:29AM -0500, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Chris Burford wrote:
>
> >Doug, these may be fiddly questions and things can get too detailed,
> >b
Chris Burford wrote:
Doug, these may be fiddly questions and things can get too detailed,
but the present abrupt dismissal of O'Neill suggests a lightening
flash in a looming storm, at least as far as Bush is concerned.
W is worried that he'll suffer the same fate as his father - popular
war
At 07/12/02 15:21 -0500, Doug wrote:
Chris Burford wrote:
But what sector of capitalism did he represent if it was not finance
capital?
Are you using this term in Hilferding's sense, as the unity of industry
and finance on the mystical model of the Holy Trinity?
I do not know see Google pic
