Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Michael Pollak
On Mon, 13 May 2002, Michael Perelman wrote: Theoretically speaking, how does a deteriorating fiscal position lead to a strong dollar? deficits = high interest rates = strong dollar. That makes perfect sense. Except how come for all other countries, growing deficits lead to weaker

Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Romain Kroes
Subject: [PEN-L:26008] Re: Protectionism US style On Mon, 13 May 2002, Michael Perelman wrote: Theoretically speaking, how does a deteriorating fiscal position lead to a strong dollar? deficits = high interest rates = strong dollar. That makes perfect sense. Except how come

Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Ulhas Joglekar
Romain Kroes wrote: I have already answered this pertinent question. The asymmetry is due to the status of dollar as the wolrld account unit of debt. So that the USA are the only ones paying their debt with their debt. Why does the world continue to accept debt payment in dollars? I remember

RE: Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Devine, James
Ulhas writes:Why does the world continue to accept debt payment in dollars? I remember De Gaulle refusing dollars and demanding payment in gold in '60s. because the U.S. is the most powerful country in the world and in the era since 1971-73, money based on political-military power has replaced

Re: Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Romain Kroes
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: Why does the world continue to accept debt payment in dollars? I remember De Gaulle refusing dollars and demanding payment in gold in '60s. During the second half of 19th century, England, because of her systematically negative balance of trade, had invented the balance

Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Ulhas Joglekar
Devine, James: Ulhas writes:Why does the world continue to accept debt payment in dollars? I remember De Gaulle refusing dollars and demanding payment in gold in '60s. because the U.S. is the most powerful country in the world and in the era since 1971-73, money based on political-military

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Ulhas Joglekar
Romain Kroes wrote: Ulhas Joglekar wrote: How would Luxemburgism explain this phenomenon? In this matter, Luxemburgism postulates an organic relationship between imperialism and capital accumulation process. Current Globalization is verifying it. My question was about the nature of this

RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Devine, James
as the world currency than it was in the 1970s or 1980s. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Ulhas Joglekar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:36 PM To: pen-l Subject: [PEN-L:26017] Re: RE: Re: Re: Re

Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-15 Thread Romain Kroes
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: My question was about the nature of this organic relationship in the contemporary capitalism in concrete terms, as it impacts world's willingness to accept dollars ? Ulhas In the contemporary capitalism and in concrete terms, the Luxemburgist relationship links the

Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-13 Thread Michael Pollak
On Thu, 9 May 2002, Joseph Stiglitz was quoted as saying: Many of America's problems are made in USA. America's deteriorating fiscal position is leading to a strong dollar, just as the deteriorating fiscal position of the US after Reagan's irresponsible tax cut of two decades ago did.

Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-13 Thread Michael Perelman
deficits = high interest rates = strong dollar. On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 02:58:37AM -0400, Michael Pollak wrote: On Thu, 9 May 2002, Joseph Stiglitz was quoted as saying: Many of America's problems are made in USA. America's deteriorating fiscal position is leading to a strong dollar,

Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-13 Thread Bill Lear
On Monday, May 13, 2002 at 07:13:16 (-0700) Michael Perelman writes: deficits = high interest rates = strong dollar. = cheap imports = protectionism = militarism Bill

Re: Re: Re: Protectionism US style

2002-05-13 Thread Romain Kroes
Michael Perelman wrote: deficits = high interest rates = strong dollar. I propose another algorithmic system: 1. USA's trade deficit ) +) == strong dollar Dollar as account unit of debt) 2. Hardening elasticity between growth

Re: protectionism

2002-03-11 Thread Ian Murray
- Original Message - From: Rakesh Bhandari [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 11:47 AM Subject: [PEN-L:23830] protectionism Jim D wrote: It's interesting that a foreign-tradefinance expert like PK never mentions that a lot of the steel industry's

Re: protectionism

2001-07-18 Thread Christian Gregory
I refer here not only to retaliations and beggar-thy-neighbor policies (to which Mark was perhaps averring) but the possibility that by limiting the supply of dollars abroad through tariffs and the other import restrictions meant to protect declining industries--and this seems to be what

Re: Re: protectionism

2001-07-18 Thread Rakesh Narpat Bhandari
I refer here not only to retaliations and beggar-thy-neighbor policies (to which Mark was perhaps averring) but the possibility that by limiting the supply of dollars abroad through tariffs and the other import restrictions meant to protect declining industries--and this seems to be

Re: protectionism

2001-07-18 Thread Tom Walker
Michael Perelman wrote, If the US tried to use protectionism as a form for maintaining aggregate demand, wouldn't that throw fuel on the Argentinian/Turkish crisis? Doesn't the rest of the world economy depend on the US as the consumer of last resort? Would it be a bull in China shop? Tom

Re: protectionism

2001-07-17 Thread Michael Perelman
I am glad to see Rakesh returning to pen-l, but please, Rakesh, try to avoid attacking others on the list, even obliquely. Rakesh Narpat Bhandari wrote: 1. Alex's concerns about dynamic increasing returns speak mostly to North-North trade--as Richard Nelson and Sylvia Ostry have noted--not

RE: Protectionism, free trade and socialism

2000-03-07 Thread Dorman, Peter
Before getting into a discussion over the Marxist utopia, I'd like to comment a moment on Tom Friedman's utterly demagogic piece in the NYT. Progressives are opposing the misnamed "African Growth and Opportunity Act" because it imposes structural adjustment-like conditions on African countries

Re: Protectionism, free trade and socialism

2000-03-07 Thread Mathew Forstater
Has anyone heard that Angola and South Africa were nominating Stanley Fischer to head the IMF??? (I hadn't known that he was born in "Northern Rhodesia.") Ouch. -Original Message- From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL

Re: Re: Protectionism, free trade and socialism

2000-03-07 Thread Patrick Bond
From: "Mathew Forstater" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Has anyone heard that Angola and South Africa were nominating Stanley Fischer to head the IMF??? (I hadn't known that he was born in "Northern Rhodesia.") Ouch. Hey, it's deeply embarrassing. All we can say from Jo'burg today is that it

Re: Protectionism, free trade and socialism

2000-03-07 Thread Jim Devine
At 10:10 AM 3/7/00 -0500, you wrote: [This op-ed piece is a demagogic appeal on behalf of Africans from the neoliberal cheerleader Thomas Friedman. In targeting the protectionist campaign of unions like UNITE, Friedman offers the free flow of capital as an alternative. This points to the rather