LBO Talk

[lbo-talk] 36% of Americans have a positive image of socialism

Doug Henwood — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:25:03 GMT

On Feb 9, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Matthias Wasser wrote: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Doug Henwood > wrote: > >> >> On Feb 9, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Joanna wrote: >> >> First, the whole wet dream of capitalist success is to get so rich >> you >>> don't have to work; others will work for you and you will thrive >>> upon the >>> profits they generate. But nobody is very explicit about that. >>> >> >> That's not really true of today's capitalists - they work very long >> hours. >> > > Capitalists being executives? Shareholders? (Was there any point at > which > top executives didn't work long hours?) Execs, money managers - people at the pinnacle of the system. The role of the capitalist has been professionalized and subject to the division of labor, while the traditional rentier has largely disappeared.

[lbo-talk] 36% of Americans have a positive image of socialism

Matthias Wasser — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:13:49 GMT

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Doug Henwood wrote: > > On Feb 9, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Joanna wrote: > > First, the whole wet dream of capitalist success is to get so rich you >> don't have to work; others will work for you and you will thrive upon the >> profits they generate. But nobody is very explicit about that. >> > > That's not really true of today's capitalists - they work very long hours. > Capitalists being executives? Shareholders? (Was there any point at which top executives didn't work long hours?)

[lbo-talk] don't kill the queers, just lock 'em up

Sandy Harris — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:13:21 GMT

On 2/9/10, Doug Henwood wrote: > (In its 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision, the Supreme Court ruled that > Texas's anti-sodomy law was unconstitutional and that "the state cannot > demean [homosexuals'] existence or control their destiny by making their > private sexual conduct a crime.") "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation." Pierre Trudeau, 1967 http://quotationsbook.com/quote/44838/ At the time, he was Canadian Justice Minister; few years later, Prime Minister. One response, of course, was: "Great. I'll smoke my dope in the bedroom!" Anyone interested in the history of such things should read Andrew Hodge's biography of Alan Turing. LInk here: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Carrol Cox — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:12:44 GMT

brad bauerly wrote: > > While I haven't argued that we should 'reach out' There is no "we" to either reach out or not reach out to anyone. "The Left" is an empty category. If you want to talk about what the left should or shouldn't do you need to first explain how the thousands of individual leftists should go about froming a left that can do the reaching. Otherwise all this is another example of sandbox politics: first-gradres pushing play trucks around on roads they mareked out on the sandbox in their classroom. Carrol

[lbo-talk] 36% of Americans have a positive image of socialism

Doug Henwood — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:04:18 GMT

On Feb 9, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Joanna wrote: > First, the whole wet dream of capitalist success is to get so rich > you don't have to work; others will work for you and you will thrive > upon the profits they generate. But nobody is very explicit about > that. That's not really true of today's capitalists - they work very long hours.

[lbo-talk] February: Credit Card Learning Experience Month

Doug Henwood — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:03:15 GMT

On Feb 9, 2010, at 1:19 AM, Michael Pollak wrote: > Millions of debt-addled households across the US are in for a dose > of harsh reality when they open their February credit card > statements (writes Suzanne kapner in New York). > > For the first time card issuers are required by law to spell out how > long it will take ot pay off a balance by making only the minimum > payment. Wow, I missed this. Elizabeth Warren told me - back before she got too busy to talk to me - that when legislation like this came up years ago the industry went nuts lobbying against it. Guess the populist rebellion is really underway!

[lbo-talk] 36% of Americans have a positive image of socialism

Joanna — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:52:12 GMT

shag writes: "that is so true. relatedly: some folks i've encountered are absolutely certain that people who support socialism are lazy. i encounter this all the time and it never fails to floor me." It's interesting...all the little short circuits that have to happen to make this so. First, the whole wet dream of capitalist success is to get so rich you don't have to work; others will work for you and you will thrive upon the profits they generate. But nobody is very explicit about that. Second, from what I've noticed in the workplace, the lefties are the hardest working of the bunch. But, all this is effectively undermined by the representation of socialism as state directed redistribution from the "workers" to the "idlers". The fact that these idlers might be too old, too young, or too sick to work does not seem to come into the equation. The idea that socialism might mean the democractic control of the production process by workers is never, ever, ever mentioned in any media I've e

[lbo-talk] February: Credit Card Learning Experience Month

Joanna — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:44:37 GMT

There's some weird shit going on. I always pay my cc in full. Every once in a while, I check the interest rate -- on my Amazon Visa card, the annual rate is a little over 50%. Not kidding. I'm going to call them just for the hell of it and see what's going on. j.

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Joanna — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:42:04 GMT

Joseph writes: "Anyway, the question I'm awkwardly driving at here is this: Should we use such myopia, with all its implications of race and class, as an excuse to avoid meaningfully engaging with the people who are mired in it?" That's my point. It's not possible to meaningfully engage with racists. Particularly if they won't talk about their racism directly. j.

[lbo-talk] don't kill the queers, just lock 'em up

Doug Henwood — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:36:07 GMT

[I love the Obama quote. Reminds me of Reich's position back when he was Labor Sec - we may disagree on labor standards, but we can all agree on opposing slavery. Lafferty's image of Congress bending over to serve is pretty rich too.] POLITICAL ADVOCACY TRACKER FRC, AFA Say Gay Sex Should Be a Crime The debate over antisodomy laws moves from Uganda back to the U.S. Also: Groups debate immigration reform, abstinence education, and Scott Roeder. Tobin Grant | posted 2/05/2010 11:31AM Political Advocacy Tracker is a roundup of what Christian activist organizations have been talking about over the last week. Outlawing Gays in the USA? Yesterday's National Prayer Breakfast received scrutiny as critics attempted to link its sponsors to Uganda's anti-homosexuality legislation. While the sponsoring group and other American Christians have condemned the Uganda bill, some conservatives voiced support for the crimi

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

brad bauerly — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:59:35 GMT

While I haven't argued that we should 'reach out' to the tea-baggers I do feel that we should not speculate on their material make-up and/or cast them as monolithic. The very fact that there is no strong left movement in the US means that there is no basis for an analysis that could offer an alternative to the illogic of the tea-gang. I am not saying that they are all working class or even that any of them are, however their influence on the popular culture and political climate in the US is real and emerges from their prominence and the lack of a left alternative. Again, to be clear, I am not stating that the members of the tea-baggers (if they are member driven) are convertible if only we reach out to them. Instead we need to understand popular culture as the sight of struggle (I was reading Stuart Hall last night). And I am saying that there are some who, due to a lack of left analysis and politics, will accept some of the illogic of the tea-gang. So, rather than dismiss them

[lbo-talk] Decoupling

Julio Huato — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 14:00:55 GMT

This story at Roubini's website (RGE) is somewhat germane to our discussion on decoupling a few moons ago: http://www.roubini.com/emergingmarkets-monitor/258361/stiglitz___s_new_book_and_the_developing_countries

[lbo-talk] Neanderthals

Matthias Wasser — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:46:27 GMT

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 2:14 AM, Chris Doss wrote: > Uh-oh. Looks like you might have to give up out that symboling is unique to > humans thing. :) > Technically, I believe Neanderthals are in the Homo genus, making them human. > > (How could you figure this out by looking at the genome?) > "Probably" is a devilish word. I mean, you could look at their skulls, complete with brain cavity size and jaw structure, and say they "probably" spoke "much like" we did. I'm guessing the researchers poked around the genome and looked for genes 1) that were in modern humans but not other living apes and 2) whose absence or irregularity are associated with speech defects and found them there. There are, quite obviously, some methodological criticisms you could make of this, but it's a decent guesstimate, and at least one step up from e.g. evolutionary psychology, which more or less assumes characteristics on the supposition that they would have been beneficial. Plus there

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Marv Gandall — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 13:22:34 GMT

On 2010-02-09, at 1:09 AM, Joseph Catron wrote: > On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Joanna <123hop at comcast.net> wrote: > > The problem is that when the tea baggers talk about their America, they mean >> their WHITE America. >> > > Sure, but is this really such an alien phenomenon? I can't count the number > of white liberals of the Manhattanite sort who define New York in their own > image - and, in fact, often seem woefully ignorant that anyone else lives > here...Anyway, the question I'm awkwardly driving at here is this: Should we use > such myopia, with all its implications of race and class, as an excuse to > avoid meaningfully engaging with the people who are mired in it? ========================= Even the most "insensitive" white liberals, however, aren't pressing for Obama's birth certificate, and support a party in which blacks and other minorities are heavily represented. The white conservative base of the Republican party formed and grew in reaction to the demands of black

[lbo-talk] 36% of Americans have a positive image of socialism

shag carpet bomb — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:56:59 GMT

At 02:14 AM 2/6/2010, Joanna wrote: >I think the negative populist interpretation of socialist is "giving to >someone who wants something for nothing." That someone could be either the >rich, the poor, or the government. > >Obama is a socialist because he bailed out the banks. >J. that is so true. relatedly: some folks i've encountered are absolutely certain that people who support socialism are lazy. i encounter this all the time and it never fails to floor me. shag

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

shag carpet bomb — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:51:39 GMT

At 10:03 PM 2/8/2010, Doug Henwood wrote: >On Feb 8, 2010, at 9:54 PM, shag carpet bomb wrote: > >>At 04:03 PM 2/8/2010, Marv Gandall wrote: >>>As you say, you're a busy person who probably hasn't thought much >>>about how our country discriminates against blacks, immigrants, >>>gays, Muslims, and women at home and is the greatest threat to >>>peace and freedom abroad..." >> >> >>that'll get them on your side right quick. > >I don't think that was Marv's intention. i didn't think so either. shag >___________________________________ >http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk -- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)

[lbo-talk] Software GUI guidelines, no longer relevant? Are pics better than words?

shag carpet bomb — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 11:49:41 GMT

At 10:13 AM 1/17/2010, John Adams wrote: >-----Original Message----- > >From: shag carpet bomb > > >it's really quite astonishing how Google has accomplished this feat. > >Not really. Libertarians are gullible. Film at eleven. > >Thanks, > > John A > http://www.arkansawyer.com/wordpress/ heh. I'm replying late to this primarily b/c i was reminded of the conversation while read Ken Auletta's latest: _Googled_. Boy, was I on to something when I wrote that bit about Google's way of claiming it's all about the user when, in the end, it's really all about how it's all about the engineer and what the engineer thinks is best - and also, of course, what's good for google. What's good for Google and what's good for the user tend to overlap, Auletta shows, but there are plenty of stark examples of when they are at odds. Google's ambition seems to be to want to take over the world of data, and not just doing 'data mining' but what is called 'reality mining'.

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Lew — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 09:20:11 GMT

Matthias Wasser wrote: >> In terms of economics, this is more or less how the Keynesian Left >> (including some who would call themselves Marxist) also define socialism: If >> the economy is in difficulty, the government should spend its way out of >> trouble. >> > > So the Keneysian Left believes that what all Keynesians advocate constitutes > socialism? In economics, yes. They only differ on the extent of government intervention. On the one side of the spectrum are those who favour "quantitative easing", not because they are conscious Keynesians (they've probably never read him), but because they have absorbed his assumptions that this is the right and necessary thing to do; on the other end of the spectrum, mostly populated by "Marxists", they favour a more thoroughgoing state intervention. But in fiscal and monetary terms, they are almost identical. They will, of course, have important differences in other respects. -- Lew

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Chris Doss — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 07:34:56 GMT

Note that he says "the ability to think," not "the ability to�cut and paste walls of text by Marx, Keynes, and Whitehead." � ----- Original Message ---- From: Ted Winslow "the vocation, designation, task of every person is to achieve all-round development of all his abilities, including, for example, the ability to think" http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch03g.htm#c.1.2.3 Ted ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

[lbo-talk] Neanderthals

Chris Doss — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 07:14:16 GMT

Uh-oh. Looks like you might have to give up out that symboling is unique to humans thing. :) � (How�could you�figure this out by looking at the genome?) ----- Original Message ---- From: c b Human Origins / Neanderthals #35: Neanderthals Get Personal Researchers sequence most of their genome and say they probably spoke much like we did. 01.25.2010

[lbo-talk] February: Credit Card Learning Experience Month

Michael Pollak — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 06:19:23 GMT

[From an FT sidebar] Millions of debt-addled households across the US are in for a dose of harsh reality when they open their February credit card statements (writes Suzanne kapner in New York). For the first time card issuers are required by law to spell out how long it will take ot pay off a balance by making only the minimum payment. The average American household has $10,000 in credit card debt. Assuming no new borrowings and an 18 per cent annual percentage rate, it would take 48 years to become debt-free just by paying the monthly minimum. Michael

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Joseph Catron — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 06:13:49 GMT

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Joseph Catron wrote: One can only guess how many time's she's ventured into any of the other four > boroughs. Or into Harlem, Washington Heights, Midwood > By which I, of course, meant Inwood. -- "Hige sceal �e heardra, heorte �e cenre, mod sceal �e mare, �e ure m�gen lytla�."

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Joseph Catron — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 06:09:39 GMT

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Joanna <123hop at comcast.net> wrote: The problem is that when the tea baggers talk about their America, they mean > their WHITE America. > Sure, but is this really such an alien phenomenon? I can't count the number of white liberals of the Manhattanite sort who define New York in their own image - and, in fact, often seem woefully ignorant that anyone else lives here. The other day, a friend I generally respect, who works for one of our more left-leaning state legislators, told me, in all seriousness, that she didn't think that many religious people lived in the city! One can only guess how many time's she's ventured into any of the other four boroughs. Or into Harlem, Washington Heights, Midwood, the Lower East Side ... Anyway, the question I'm awkwardly driving at here is this: Should we use such myopia, with all its implications of race and class, as an excuse to avoid meaningfully engaging with the people who are mired in it? And if we do so, in a

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Joanna — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 05:42:25 GMT

"WOW, this list has gotten pretty elitist and paranoid of right-populism really fast over the last few days." The problem is that when the tea baggers talk about their America, they mean their WHITE America. And, since, this is not part of the public discourse, it's impossible to engage... j.

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Chuck Grimes — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 05:02:03 GMT

Getting back to the top of the thread, Marv Gandall posted a quote: "In one of his magisterial explorations of German politics between the wars, the historian Ian Kershaw mused that 'there are times -- they mark the danger point for a political system -- when politicians can no longer communicate, when they stop understanding the language of the people they are supposed to be representing.' ------------ I went off on a cog-sci linguistics trip the other day with Lakoff, then rediscovered some dust-up between Lakoff and Steven Pinker. I watch some equal time with Pinker and recalled some of the studies covered in The First Word, Kenneally. Google Lakoff v. Pinker. Whatever the intellectual merits one way or the other, both are doing political speech analysis. This bares on what I think is at the root of public discontent. Everybody who tries to follow US political life has to engage in some form of disambiguation in order to make political speech meaningful---and usually that effort fai

[lbo-talk] [Fwd: Re: [Debate] Crisis of overaccumulation]

Patrick Bond — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 04:37:10 GMT

Reposting - multiple lists don't seem to work for LBO... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Debate] [lbo-talk] Crisis of overaccumulation Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 07:01:28 +0200 From: Patrick Bond Reply-To: pbond at mail.ngo.za, Debate is a listserve that attempts to promote information and analyses of interest to the independent left in South and Southern Africa To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org CC: Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition , DEBATE References: <4239FCC86F1049AC9C07F51E40EC944F at JamesPC> Thanks comrade James, and I'll cc two other lists your article was posted... James Heartfield wrote: > Patrick, you are very kind about Grossman (I only did some proofing on the manuscript). I am grateful that you take the time to reand the article, but sometimes it seems to me that there is such a din of ideas in your head that it is hard to know where to start. Y

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Carrol Cox — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:49:06 GMT

Doug Henwood wrote: > > On Feb 8, 2010, at 9:54 PM, shag carpet bomb wrote: > > > At 04:03 PM 2/8/2010, Marv Gandall wrote: > >> As you say, you're a busy person who probably hasn't thought much > >> about how our country discriminates against blacks, immigrants, > >> gays, Muslims, and women at home and is the greatest threat to > >> peace and freedom abroad..." > > > > > > that'll get them on your side right quick. > > I don't think that was Marv's intention. It wasn't mine,either, of course. I'm partly just trying to work somethng out myself. It is pretty obvious the IQ tests do not measure intelligence. In fact "intelligence" as a single entity probably doesn' exist. Gould among others wrote extensively on that. And as I tentatively argued ina post taking off from my own situation, "reading skill"is probably not relatred even to linguistic 'intelligence.' Hence they hypothetical teabagger's statement. I was mistaken to raise the final question, because no actual teabagger (or left

[lbo-talk] Niall defies a fatwa

martin — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:40:45 GMT

On Feb 8, 2010, at 7:32 PM, Michael Smith wrote: > Does anybody know where I can contribute to the Niall > Ferguson Fatwa Fund? PO Box 4 Saint Helens OR 97051

[lbo-talk] Niall defies a fatwa

Michael Smith — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:32:27 GMT

Does anybody know where I can contribute to the Niall Ferguson Fatwa Fund? -- Michael Smith mjs at smithbowen.net http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Marv Gandall — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:25:39 GMT

My obviously failed attempt to be playfully and ironically postmodern. :) On 2010-02-08, at 10:03 PM, Doug Henwood wrote: > > On Feb 8, 2010, at 9:54 PM, shag carpet bomb wrote: > >> At 04:03 PM 2/8/2010, Marv Gandall wrote: >>> As you say, you're a busy person who probably hasn't thought much about how our country discriminates against blacks, immigrants, gays, Muslims, and women at home and is the greatest threat to peace and freedom abroad..." >> >> >> that'll get them on your side right quick. > > I don't think that was Marv's intention. > ___________________________________ > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

[lbo-talk] platform

Carrol Cox — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:11:39 GMT

Doug Henwood wrote: > > [The use of "productive" is classically populist, but the rest of this > is pretty standard-issue right-wing boilerplate. How is someone who > believes these sorts of things amenable to sweet-talking from the left?] They aren't _while_ they believe these things. But (as the large number of ex-leftists in thenation also illustrates) people change their minds all the time. But they don't change their minds, in the first instance, because someone 'courts' them. They change their minds, or at least loosen up, because of things that happen to them or around them. I personally doubt that most right-wingrs will change, and certainly not through a non-existen left 'organizing them' or directing agitation at them. But it doesn't hurt leftists to train themselves not to sneer at any particular group or individuals. And it might be good training for the day when suddenly there is a larger public response to left goals. Carrol

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Doug Henwood — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:03:20 GMT

On Feb 8, 2010, at 9:54 PM, shag carpet bomb wrote: > At 04:03 PM 2/8/2010, Marv Gandall wrote: >> As you say, you're a busy person who probably hasn't thought much >> about how our country discriminates against blacks, immigrants, >> gays, Muslims, and women at home and is the greatest threat to >> peace and freedom abroad..." > > > that'll get them on your side right quick. I don't think that was Marv's intention.

[lbo-talk] platform

Chris Maisano — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:02:50 GMT

The fact that NY State tea partiers are trying to draft a real estate developer as their gubernatorial candidate lends some credence to Doug's speculation that the class composition of the movement as a whole is based mainly on small biz types and the struggling self-employed. To put it mildly, that's not fertile ground for left-wing agitation and organization. I'm not sure how you could entice a someone like a real estate developer to defect to the left either.

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

shag carpet bomb — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 02:54:03 GMT

At 04:03 PM 2/8/2010, Marv Gandall wrote: >As you say, you're a busy person who probably hasn't thought much about >how our country discriminates against blacks, immigrants, gays, Muslims, >and women at home and is the greatest threat to peace and freedom abroad..." that'll get them on your side right quick. -- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Ted Winslow — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:43:21 GMT

Doug Henwood wrote: > She also had a barbed comment on JMK himself, the exact wording of > which I wish I could remember. But it went something like: Keynes > wanted to increase investment. Pity he said so little about > investment in what. On what social productive forces would ultimately be for in an "ideal social republic," Keynes was much closer to Marx than Joan Robinson. In that republic, a republic on "the far left of celestial space," he claimed we would finally be free to return to some of the most sure and certain principles of religion and traditional virtue - that avarice is a vice, that the exaction of usury is a misdemeanour, and the love of money is detestable, that those walk most truly in the paths of virtue and sane wisdom who take least thought for the morrow. We shall once more value ends above means and prefer the good to the useful. We shall honour those who can teach us how to pluck the hour and day virtuously and well, the delightful people who are

[lbo-talk] platform

Mr. X — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:15:43 GMT

Didn't the Right support a version of Cap & Trade in the 70's? � peace, Jim Davis Ozark Bioregion, USA, Planet Gaia� http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=141735 ----- Original Message ---- > From: Doug Henwood > To: lbo-talk > Sent: Mon, February 8, 2010 5:21:09 PM > Subject: [lbo-talk] platform > > [The use of "productive" is classically populist, but the rest of this is pretty > standard-issue right-wing boilerplate. How is someone who believes these sorts > of things amenable to sweet-talking from the left?] > > IOWA TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: Whereas, the Federal Government...continues with > failed so-called 'bailouts that force productive members of the economy and > citizens to finance unproductive businesses, is advancing dangerous 'Cap & > Trade legislation that will destroy millions of jobs, skyrocket prices, and > further damage the American Economy; is advancing hugely expensive and > inefficient government run health care;

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Doug Henwood — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:33:37 GMT

On Feb 8, 2010, at 6:18 PM, Mike Beggs wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:45 PM, Lew wrote: > >> >> In terms of economics, this is more or less how the Keynesian Left >> (including some who would call themselves Marxist) also define >> socialism: If >> the economy is in difficulty, the government should spend its way >> out of >> trouble. > > Who are you talking about here? The original left Keynesian Joan > Robinson meant rather more than that - for her the central aspect of > socialism was expropriation of the wealthy and redirection of their > consumption expenditure into development. She also had a barbed comment on JMK himself, the exact wording of which I wish I could remember. But it went something like: Keynes wanted to increase investment. Pity he said so little about investment in what. Doug

[lbo-talk] platform

Eubulides — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:31:11 GMT

On 10-02-08 03:21 PM, Doug Henwood wrote: >Carl is an outspoken, no-nonsense guy with a crass eloquence ============ Ya gotta luv it!!!! http://www.thegreatusainterminableshoutfestofknowitalls.com

[lbo-talk] uh-oh! too much regulation!!

Mike Beggs — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:30:15 GMT

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Eubulides wrote: > > http://econospeak.blogspot.com/ > > [Today's post by Brenda Rosser] I second that recommendation. The other problem with a lot of the 'global imbalances' discourse - besides Rosser's point that the aggregates are increasingly arbitrary (i.e. undescriptive of the processes that generate them) - is the collapsing of a complex set of interrelated factors into a simple story about the interactions of mis-specified aggregates, e.g., 'Chinese saving' and 'US consumption'. Mike

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Eubulides — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:22:25 GMT

On 10-02-08 03:04 PM, ken hanly wrote: > In other words many on the left define socialism in ways that have nothing essentially to do with socialism since using the government in such a manner leaves the capitalist system essentially intact. At the most it is a type of leftist reformism that uses a strong capitalist government to redistribute wealth to alleviate some of the worst effects of a more free market capitalism. ============= Zombie taxonomies

[lbo-talk] platform

Doug Henwood — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:21:09 GMT

[The use of "productive" is classically populist, but the rest of this is pretty standard-issue right-wing boilerplate. How is someone who believes these sorts of things amenable to sweet-talking from the left?] IOWA TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: Whereas, the Federal Government...continues with failed so-called 'bailouts that force productive members of the economy and citizens to finance unproductive businesses, is advancing dangerous 'Cap & Trade legislation that will destroy millions of jobs, skyrocket prices, and further damage the American Economy; is advancing hugely expensive and inefficient government run health care; is using one-time so-called stimulus money to fund ongoing expenses; continues to place much greater tax burdens on their citizens... Be it resolved, as a tax-paying constituent, consider this a Petition of Grievance as a formal protest against these policies and the politicians who advance such destructive agendas.

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Mike Beggs — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:18:52 GMT

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:45 PM, Lew wrote: > > In terms of economics, this is more or less how the Keynesian Left > (including some who would call themselves Marxist) also define socialism: If > the economy is in difficulty, the government should spend its way out of > trouble. Who are you talking about here? The original left Keynesian Joan Robinson meant rather more than that - for her the central aspect of socialism was expropriation of the wealthy and redirection of their consumption expenditure into development. Mike

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

ken hanly — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:04:07 GMT

In other words many on the left define socialism in ways that have nothing essentially to do with socialism since using the government in such a manner leaves the capitalist system essentially intact. At the most it is a type of leftist reformism that uses a strong capitalist government to redistribute wealth to alleviate some of the worst effects of a more free market capitalism. Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html --- On Mon, 2/8/10, Lew wrote: > From: Lew > Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] socialism defined > To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org > Date: Monday, February 8, 2010, 7:45 AM > Joanna wrote: > > > In case you were wondering. > > > > "American socialism has long functioned under the > principle that a > > strong central government, lavishly funded by the > middle and upper > > classes, should influence the economy in the name of > "social justice," > > and provide benefits to the low

[lbo-talk] uh-oh! too much regulation!!

Eubulides — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:02:39 GMT

On 10-02-08 10:52 AM, c b wrote: > From: Eubulides ^^^^^^^^^ >>> US Empire is dying because something else is taking its place... > > ^^^^^^^ > CB: Yes indeedy ===================== http://econospeak.blogspot.com/ [Today's post by Brenda Rosser]

[lbo-talk] characterization

John Gulick — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:57:28 GMT

DH posted >Ferguson, who also has high-level links to the Tory Party, with a seat on the board >of the Right-wing think-tank the Centre for Policy Studies, has been seen with Ms Hirsi Ali >at a number of high-profile events over recent months. The separation is likely to affect >both of their political careers, as each enjoys close links with the Conservative party, >which has been focusing heavily on the promotion of marriage. Thin gruel though it may be, it's nice to see one of these punks get their (very partial) comeuppance now and again... JG _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/

[lbo-talk] characterization

Doug Henwood — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:16:21 GMT

Professor Ferguson, whose books, television programmes and work with financial hedge funds earn an estimated �5million a year, is understood to have been in a relationship with Ms Hirsi Ali since last summer. Today, The Mail on Sunday can reveal how Ferguson s philandering behaviour described by one confidante as more akin to a Premiership footballer s louche ways than an esteemed professor s wrecked his marriage to Ms Douglas, one of Tory leader David Cameron s closest friends, a leading member of the Tory A-list of potential parliamentary candidates and a former Fleet Street editor. ... Ferguson 'cheated eight times in five years' ... Ferguson, who also has high-level links to the Tory Party, with a seat on the board of the Right-wing think-tank the Centre for Policy Studies, has been seen

[lbo-talk] socialism defined

Matthias Wasser — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:15:30 GMT

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Lew wrote: > > In terms of economics, this is more or less how the Keynesian Left > (including some who would call themselves Marxist) also define socialism: If > the economy is in difficulty, the government should spend its way out of > trouble. > So the Keneysian Left believes that what all Keynesians advocate constitutes socialism?

[lbo-talk] Niall defies a fatwa

Doug Henwood — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:10:22 GMT

Fabulously Snobby Divorce Scandal of the Week: Niall Ferguson's Fatwa Mistress Two-Step By Maureen O'Connor Feb 8, 2010 02:04 AM Harvard professor, hedge-fund millionaire, and "court historian for the imperial American hard right" Niall Ferguson is leaving his wife for a feminist filmmaker he met at the Time 100 party. Sex! Scandal! Murderous Muslim clerics! This story has it all. Ferguson (whose career highs include defending colonialism and parlaying books about the Rothschild dynasty into a lucrative Rothschild-endorsed hedge fund career) is divorcing his wife of sixteen years, former editor and Cond� Nasty Susan Douglas, reports The Daily Mail. Niall's new lovah: Somali-born filmmaker Ayaan Hirsi Ali. After meeting at a party for Time's 100 Most Influential People in the World, Niall and Ayaan launched into the most glamorously snobby, geopolitically thrilli

[lbo-talk] weimar shadows

Marv Gandall — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:03:01 GMT

On 2010-02-07, at 8:12 PM, Carrol Cox wrote: > > Lots of people are prououndly ignorant for lots of things. And the forms > and subjects of "ignorance" are so varied, that noting an ignorance of a > perticular kind of a particular subject matter hardly explains anything. > To pick a random example, I am prfoundly ignorant (and plan to remain > so) of C-basic (and substitute any other programming language & the > anser is the same). Why shouldn't I be? Suppose a Palin supporter should > say to you, Yes, I'm ignorant of political affairs, but why shouldI be > when I have someone I trust -- Palin, that is -- to guide me. I'm a busy > perosn; I don't have much leisure time, and I need to relax. Besides, > complicated prose gives me a headache. > > How are you going to reply to that Palin supporter? ============================ I would say: "Well, it's no big deal that you're ignorant of political affairs. I myself am profoundly ignorant of computer programming and plan to remain so. Ditto

[lbo-talk] Speaking of Weimar...

dredmond at efn.org — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:46:25 GMT

...those shadows got a little more shadowy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aK4_F9KSeqo "Congress censors Arab news media" Text of HR 2278, passed last December by our lovely Congress-critters: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111:2:./temp/~c111Fhgojy:: -- DRR