Search LBO-Talk Archives

11026 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 7, 2007, at 2:13 PM, Carl Remick wrote: > [That's easy: Heartfield is is a right-winger masquerading as a > lefty. > He's a fraud tip to toe. Consider his affiliation with the > execrable online > "Spiked":] That's way too harsh. I don't always agree with James, but he's an intelligent and agreeable fellow. He's way wrong on the latest, but I always pay attention to what he has to say. Doug

Document Size:	4892
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 11:33:33 PST 2007

11027 [lbo-talk] loved, unloved countries -- rank: 1000

On Mar 7, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote: > Canada does not have much dirt in > its history - no wars of aggression, no colonies, no genocide If you bracket the very nasty treatment of Indians...

Document Size:	4735
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 11:12:55 PST 2007

11028 [lbo-talk] loved, unloved countries -- rank: 1000

[bounced because it was prepended to the entire post, driving it over the length limit - trim, please, trim!] From: "tfast" <tfast at yorku.ca> Date: March 7, 2007 12:48:15 PM EST To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] loved, unloved countries Yah this hit the news in Canada yesterday afternoon. If only because Canada scored best loved in the world. But here is the great thing when the pollster was asked why is Canada ranked number 1 it turned out to be ...

Document Size:	5346
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 09:51:27 PST 2007

11029 [lbo-talk] loved, unloved countries -- rank: 1000

<http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/325.php? nid=&id=&pnt=325&lb=hmpg1> Israel and Iran Share Most Negative Ratings in Global Poll A majority of people polled for the BBC World Service across 27 countries believe Israel and Iran have a mainly negative influence in the world with almost as many saying the same about North Korea and the United States. Respondents were asked to rate 12 countries Britain, Canada, China, France, India, Iran, Israel, Japa ...

Document Size:	32119
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 09:06:30 PST 2007

11030 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 7, 2007, at 11:20 AM, James Heartfield wrote: > Doug, 2007: > > "More women working ...also means that the number of paid work > hours in the > society has risen dramatically, with little assistance for child or > elder > care (two things that are on my male mind right now, too). > Household incomes > are flat, average hourly earnings are down, yet productivity is > massively > up. There's something seriously wrong with that." > > Doug, 19 ...

Document Size:	5691
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 08:44:27 PST 2007

11031 [lbo-talk] Productivity, Efficiency, Enron, Doom (Was Re: barbaric) -- rank: 1000

On Mar 7, 2007, at 2:38 AM, andie nachgeborenen wrote: > I am not aware of a productivity measure that > measures unit output as a ratio of some measure of > profit, although such a function could be constructed. Tthe BLS does report a measure of unit profits, as part of the productivity series. From the end of the recession in the fourth quarter of 2001 through the third quarter of 2006 (the latest data available), unit profits rose 144%; real unit profits, 122% (deflated by the pr ...

Document Size:	5457
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 06:25:20 PST 2007

11032 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 7, 2007, at 4:34 AM, James Heartfield wrote: > How much worse off you are in the US: Yyou picked 1975, the trough of a recession, to compare with 2007, the fifth year of an expansion, so the unemployment comparison is bogus. In any case, no one claimed that U.S. living standards are going to hell. The claim, at least the way I'd make it, is that few of the benefits of rising productivity have gone to the working class - instead, we're working harder for little or no gains in real ...

Document Size:	4977
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Wed Mar 7 06:07:27 PST 2007

11033 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 6:51 PM, James Heartfield wrote: > Doug, it is not that I have a hard time believing this, it is just > that I am > not used to the idea that immigration and more women in work is a > bad thing. > > Aggregate hours worked in industry don't tell us much about hours > individual > people work. You seem to accept here weekly hours are falling. > > You did relate the growth in aggregate hours worked to population > growth, > but it is the size o ...

Document Size:	6608
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 16:05:10 PST 2007

11034 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 5:44 PM, James Heartfield wrote: > This is what the ILO says > > http://laborsta.ilo.org/cgi-bin/brokerv8.exe#291 > Non agricultural weekly hours US > > 1976 36.1 > 2006 33.9 A major reason for this is the decline in manufacturing jobs, which have a longer workweek than services. But if more people are working, aggregate hours will rise, as they have. > http://laborsta.ilo.org/cgi-bin/brokerv8.exe#291 > Non agricultural earnings per hour dollars &g ...

Document Size:	6273
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 15:07:55 PST 2007

11035 [lbo-talk] Baudrillard, he dead -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 4:22 PM, Carrol Cox wrote: > He was born one year and 2 days before me. Well, don't follow his example just yet. Doug

Document Size:	4619
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 13:35:24 PST 2007

11036 [lbo-talk] Baudrillard, he dead -- rank: 1000

It'd be too obvious to make a joke about this: <http://www.lefigaro.fr/france/ 20070306.WWW000000430_jean_baudrillard_est_mort.html>

Document Size:	4747
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 13:07:02 PST 2007

11037 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 3:10 PM, James Heartfield wrote: > I am surprised at lbo-talk's sudden conversion to the view that US > workers > are hard up. James, could you for once respond to actual points people have made instead of those of your own invention? Doug

Document Size:	4840
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 12:28:21 PST 2007

11038 [lbo-talk] US immiseration -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 1:48 PM, James Heartfield wrote: > Doug, you amaze me. I had no idea that consumption rates in the US > were > declining. Who said anything about consumption? I wrote about incomes. It's a fact that the real hourly wage is down since 1973, and average household incomes are barely up. To accomplish that, more people have to work longer hours. In 1973, 57% of the adult population worked for pay; now, it's 63%. Total hours worked in the U.S. private sector have rise ...

Document Size:	5478
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 11:49:05 PST 2007

11039 [lbo-talk] barbaric -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 6:52 AM, Daniel Davies wrote: > just to give some sort of scale to the improvements made in the lot > of the > poorest quintile of households, the improvement between 1978 and > 2001 would > have been roughly enough to buy a caffe latte every weekday: > > http://crookedtimber.org/2004/08/12/heres-your-fucking-latte-sir 1978 was a peak for bottom quintile incomes; it wasn't surpassed for 10 years. Their level in 2005 was $610 higher (in 2005 dollars), whi ...

Document Size:	5391
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 09:57:03 PST 2007

11040 [lbo-talk] US consumption -- rank: 1000

On Mar 6, 2007, at 11:38 AM, James Heartfield wrote: > Doug, fsometimes you surprise me. > > It is hardly a revelation that productivity increases in services > are less > easy to come by than in goods. But how can you honestly say that > cheaper > goods do not increase the basket of consumer goods people can buy. > You say > Cox and Alm's research is shoddy (which would appear to be a > euphemism for > Texan if I read you right). But you do not say it is wrong. ...

Document Size:	9090
Author:	Doug Henwood
Date:	Tue Mar 6 09:45:39 PST 2007