Jim Devine wrote:
>
[catching up on posts--SP]
> When I was in Mexico a few years ago (about 3 years ago), people were
> talking about the PRI agriculture minister's plan to liquidate the ejido
> sector, because of its alleged inefficiency (from the point of view of the
> PRI elite, I would g
You might mention in addition to water, especially when many of the large
landholders have been able to get subsidized irrigation.
"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
> Jim,
> I am aware of at least three things that have gone
> against the ejidos. One is the point that you made
> regarding
Jim,
I am aware of at least three things that have gone
against the ejidos. One is the point that you made
regarding lack of credits, which should also be expanded
to a lack of technical assistance. This was a key to the
higher productivity of the green revolution rancheros in
northern Mex
>I don't see the distinction between being pushed out of ejidos by poverty
>and being pulled into maquiladoras by higher wages. It's never push *or*
>pull, it's always both...
of course, just like you can't have demand without supply -- or
vice-versa.[*] But if the Mexican state is actually e
>I think it was Barkley who wrote:
>>>Mine,
>>> I do not disagree that the wages suck. But, are
>>>they better than what those workers got on the ejidos?
>
>now Brad writes:
>>The voting-with-the-feet pattern suggests an answer...
>
>As Michael suggests, we should look for push factors rather
