Re: wynne godley

2001-07-20 Thread Charles Brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/19/01 08:18PM neither. It says that Lenin felt and said that Bukharin's book was more complete and accurate than his own little pamphlet on the subject. Bukharin's analysis doesn't fit today's imperialism very well at all, since his emphasis was on the aggressive

Re: Re: wynne godley (Attn., Charles Yoshie)

2001-07-20 Thread Michael Pugliese
Some secondary sources on Bukharin below, for Charles and y'all.Mark Selden, below, btw, edited a great collection of docs for MR Press on the CCP and PRC back in the 80's or late 70's. His articles in the Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars along with counterpoints by Edward Friedman and

Re: wynne godley

2001-07-19 Thread Jim Devine
ellipsis I wrote: (On net these days, the US is _importing_ tremendous amounts of capital.) Charles writes: CB: What is the comparison between US export of capital and export of goods ? US net exports of goods and services + net US income earned on foreign operations = a negative number these

Re: wynne godley

2001-07-19 Thread Jim Devine
I wrote: I don't think the current day fits Lenin's sketch very well at all. Lenin himself once wrote that Bukharin's book on imperialism was superior. Charles writes: CB: Are you saying 1) that Bukharin's analysis of imperialism of that period contradicted Lenin's main points , or elaborated

RE: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Max Sawicky
There is tax competition between states and countries, but the effect in distorting tax structures is much more important, IMO, than the impact on the size of government. There is pressure on the size of Gov, but it stems from ideological and (anti-)redistributive concerns, not very much from

Re: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Jim Devine
Charles wrote: CB: What is competitive austerity ? Is it competition between governments to see who can cut social spending and public enterprise the most ? Is the difference between this and the 1930 situation that there weren't welfare state institutions as much in place then as in the

Re: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Michael Pugliese
Like the U.S. Business Industrial Council. Marc Cooper on Radio Nation had on one of their ideologues. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/98profiles/24303.htm 1998 DATA* (1997 DATA ALSO AVAILABLE) US Business Industrial Council Total Lobbying Expenditures: $60,000 Lobbying Firms Hired

Re: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Jim Devine
CB: Cutting taxes on multinationals, but not on workers ? Cutting wages or working class incomes , in part, by cutting social spending , this neo-liberalist austerity ? yup. CB: Is it the pushing exports and the cutting taxes and wages that could lead to deepening world depresssion , or

RE: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Max Sawicky
I don't think it's quite right as an analogy. There's a city/suburb problem that you can appreciate wherein better-off people reside in suburbs and use the cities for job locations, services, and certain amenities not available in suburbs (museums, sports teams, etc.). This way they avoid, with

Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Michael Perelman
Max, I don't understand your point. Toledo gave away tax breaks to lure companies, such as Chrysler, which gutted its tax base. On Wed, Jul 18, 2001 at 04:49:04PM -0400, Max Sawicky wrote: I don't think it's quite right as an analogy. There's a city/suburb problem that you can appreciate

RE: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-18 Thread Max Sawicky
To that extent tax competition is on point. In the main, urban fiscal problems are due to the city-suburb (city-state legislature) relationship, IMO. mbs Max, I don't understand your point. Toledo gave away tax breaks to lure companies, such as Chrysler, which gutted its tax base.

Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Michael Perelman
This also creates a bind regarding the dollar. If the dollar threatens to depreciate, the damn foreigners will refuse to continue financing our binge, dump their securities, drop the market and spoil our fun. Rob Schaap wrote: Ah, we're talking economics again, are we? Well, Prudent Bear

Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Jim Devine
At 04:08 PM 7/17/01 +, you wrote: Ah, we're talking economics again, are we? is that allowed? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine Is it peace or is it Prozac? -- Cheryl Wheeler.

Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Michael Perelman
Although Godley is not signing on for a while, his co-author and ex-penner, Alex Izurieta, is coming on board. You can direct some of these questions for him, although you might wait a couple of hours. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel.

Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Jim Devine
At 09:37 AM 7/17/01 -0700, you wrote: Although Godley is not signing on for a while, his co-author and ex-penner, Alex Izurieta, is coming on board. You can direct some of these questions for him, although you might wait a couple of hours. folks, be polite! Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Max Sawicky
. . . The effects of any form of undisguised wall-to-wall US protectionism on world trade today would be presumably, completely catastrophic, the debacle even worse than 1929-31. Is the Godley view that this debacle is inevitable anyway, so it's a case of sauve qui peut? Mark Jones I presume

Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Jim Devine
Mark Jones wrote: Incidentally, the Godley paper lays policy emphasis on import controls. This looks like impish humour, since it is hard to imagine how such a policy could be implemented without doing even more damage. As Jim Devine says, the cure is worse than the disease: To summarize, U.S.

Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Rakesh Narpat Bhandari
In any event, the world political economy has changed, undermining the political basis for protectionism Jim, I check the archives often, and have learned a great deal from your posts. Not sure I agree here. Wouldn't the US state like to run a trade deficit to its own mnc's and thus

RE: wynne godley

2001-07-17 Thread Tom Walker
Max Sawicky wrote, If the discussion is not fruitful, I'm sure it will be nutful. Beans are a fruit, aren't they? Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213

RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Max Sawicky
If the discussion is not fruitful, I'm sure it will be nutful. mbs Jim Devine has brought up Wynne Godley's work several times. He has a new paper writter with a former penner, who had promised to return. I think that Godley may sign up to pen-l after he returns from England. I hope that we

Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Michael Perelman
I was hoping for more fruit and less nuts. On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 03:48:15PM -0400, Max Sawicky wrote: If the discussion is not fruitful, I'm sure it will be nutful. mbs Jim Devine has brought up Wynne Godley's work several times. He has a new paper writter with a former penner, who

RE: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Forstater, Mathew
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 2:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:15206] Re: RE: wynne godley I was hoping for more fruit and less nuts. On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 03:48:15PM -0400, Max Sawicky wrote: If the discussion is not fruitful, I'm sure it will be nutful

Re: RE: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Michael Perelman
Worse than that, it makes sense -- a violation of basic academic principles. On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 04:29:07PM -0500, Forstater, Mathew wrote: his work is very important i think. he sets up scenarios with simple models, like Y = C + I + G + X -M or -- Michael Perelman Economics

Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Christian Gregory
- From: Mark Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 6:00 PM Subject: [PEN-L:15210] RE: wynne godley Michael Perelman: I think that Godley may sign up to pen-l after he returns from England. I hope that we can discuss his paper fruitfully. I'd

Re: Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Rob Schaap
Ah, we're talking economics again, are we? Well, Prudent Bear Marshall Auerback http://www.prudentbear.com/Comm%20Archive/markcomm/i082900.htm talked about Wynn Godley's thoughts on private sector debt last August (when, to my mind, things looked bad, but not as bad as now - Kenichi Ohmae's

Re: RE: wynne godley

2001-07-16 Thread Chris Burford
At 17/07/01 02:00 +0100, you wrote: Michael Perelman: I think that Godley may sign up to pen-l after he returns from England. I hope that we can discuss his paper fruitfully. I'd be specially interested to discuss his views about import controls. Mark Wynne Godley is a thoughtful and

Re: Wynne Godley

2000-06-15 Thread Joel Blau
I read it a while ago, and thought it was pretty persuasive, but I'd be interested in any critiques. Joel Blau Michael Perelman wrote: Jim Devine has referred to Wynne Godley's 7 unsustainable processes before. Does anybody else have any opinions about the article? -- Michael Perelman