on 1/22/02 06:44 AM, Michael Perelman at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The Paris Commune caused a flurry of interest in Marx -- especially by
> mainstream economists.
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 10:13:37AM -0800, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> CB: The difference between Marx and others is the
>
>
>The argument that deficits cause high interest rates is also
>theoretically and empirically questionable. More often the causation
>goes the other way--high interest rates mean higher interest payments on
>the public debt which cet par mean larger deficits.
Mat, good point indeed.
>
>The
>Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>
>>(2) what happens if in running deficits, the US sucks up global
>>capital, raises interest rates, and visits catastrophe on poorer
>>nations? is this possible?
>
>You're assuming that deficits drive up interest rates. There's no
>simple relation between deficits and
G'day Running Dog
>And Carrol, it is Tienamen. I may be off on my spelling but,
> I'm closer, I betcha! Cf. "The Tienamen Papers, " edited by Andrew
> Nathan.
> Michael "Running Dog" Pugliese, Woof, Woof!
It was always rendered Tianenman here at the time.
I still remember those poor young
gt;
>--- Message Received ---
>From: Carrol Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 19:54:53 -0600
>Subject: [PEN-L:21620] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: reform and rev
>
>Carrol I like your thinking here but you probably will not like
my addition to i
G'day Christian,
> Michael wrote:
>
> > Also, interest rates are a very, very weak determinant of
> investment.
>
> Are you speaking generally? If so, do you know of any good empirical
> stuff that supports this?
>
Reckon pen-l has hit a very rich vein of late - gratitude to all.
Anyway, if
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >"If you don't hit it, it won't fall." Mao.
> >
> >I rather suspect that capitalism can be depended on periodically to tear
> >itself apart -- but it can also be depended on to put itself back
> >together
>
> Yup. As happened in Mao's own country
I have to run, but Robert Chirinko and Robert Eisner have done work on
this. bye.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 12:56:20PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Michael wrote:
>
> > Also, interest rates are a very, very weak determinant of investment.
>
> Are you speaking generally? If so, do you know o
Michael wrote:
> Also, interest rates are a very, very weak determinant of investment.
Are you speaking generally? If so, do you know of any good empirical stuff that
supports this?
Christian
Similar to Brenner in many ways, yes. We both worked on the transition to
capitalism about the same time. Several people pointed out the similarity
between his New Left Review piece and my own work. When I saw it, my first
thought was plagiarism. I asked about it and he explained the pathway t
Also, interest rates are a very, very weak determinant of investment.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 12:02:21PM -0500, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>
> >(2) what happens if in running deficits, the US sucks up global
> >capital, raises interest rates, and visits catastrophe on poorer
Michael Perelman writes:>In my new book, The Pathology of the U.S. Economy
Revisited, I tried to make the case that this success rested, in part, on
prior conditions: a new capital stock coming out of the Great Depression and
World War II, the destruction of competing economies, and a very favorab
> >(2) what happens if in running deficits, the US sucks up global
> >capital, raises interest rates, and visits catastrophe on poorer
> >nations? is this possible?
Doug answers:
> You're assuming that deficits drive up interest rates. There's no
> simple relation between deficits and interes
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>(2) what happens if in running deficits, the US sucks up global
>capital, raises interest rates, and visits catastrophe on poorer
>nations? is this possible?
You're assuming that deficits drive up interest rates. There's no
simple relation between deficits and interest
In my new book, The Pathology of the U.S. Economy Revisited, I tried to make
the case that this success rested, in part, on prior conditions: a new
capital stock coming out of the Great Depression and World War II, the
destruction of competing economies, and a very favorable debt structure.
"Will
Rakesh asks:
>Mat,
>(1) what happens if govt deficits in the pursuit of full employment
>have arresting effects on private investments; could this happen? why
>or why not?
If you are talking about some kind of "crowding out" then, first, I
think that many of the arguments for crowding out are
michael writes:
>
>
>I believe that the slaughtering of captial values gives capital a lot
>more room to maneuver than a Keynesian solution -- which I regard as a
>temporary fix -- although I am not convinced that the ultimate problem
>is deficit financing.
I don't think the ultimate problem i
Regarding what Carrol wrote, Russell Jacoby wrote about how the German
social democrats embraced crisis theory because it offered the comforting
idea that they did not have to do anything -- the economy would fall on
its own.
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:43:58PM -0600, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>
> Mi
Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
> I think govts have in fact already found that running deficits the
> size that would be needed to achieve full employment would only yield
> retrenchment in private investment;
Rakesh, I am not sure how you support the above. Right wingers often
say the same. Doe
As Jim D. mentioned, Marx's private predictions were not particularly
accurate -- they included a large dollop of hope. Marxists generally
study Marx for his method, not for his predictions.
Ian Murray wrote:
>
> Ok, but how are his claims any different from the
> predictions of other economis
Michael Perelman wrote:
>
> Ian, Marx posited that capitalism would work that way for a while, but
> that the contradictions would accumulate and then , but then, it has
> not yet happened, except in the USSR, China ...
>
"If you don't hit it, it won't fall." Mao.
I rather suspect that c
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 8:07 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:21571] Re: Re: Re: reform and rev
Ian, Marx posited that capitalism would work that way for a
while, but
that th
Ian, Marx posited that capitalism would work that way for a while, but
that the contradictions would accumulate and then , but then, it has
not yet happened, except in the USSR, China ...
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 07:15:22PM -0800, Ian Murray wrote:
>
> Hate to be a pain in the neck on this b
23 matches
Mail list logo
