Re: [A-List] Global Economic Prospects: Bright for 2004

["Gary Santos" <garysantos@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Henry and Michael,

I must say I hestitate to try to fence with someone whose insights I highly,
as you know, respect. However, . . .

I am quite aware of the past miscues of IIE economists. I mentioned
Williamson whose paper "Why the Wash. Cons. Failed" made me aware that it
was IIE that promoted the consensus. At the same time, there was this IIE
woman, Mann, whose paper on the US deficits (circa 1997 or 8) was the first
paper I encountered which warned of the deficits. And, I wonder whether
anyone in this group had warned of the dangers as early as she did. Her
policy recommendation, that of attempting to spur exports, was adopted as
late as 2002/3.

To listen to IIE is not the same as agreement, perhaps, you misundertand my
posting. Or, perhaps, the difference between our attitude is one of purpose.

Should I join the chorus in cheering any miscue of mainstream economics? It
is not me. I have no vested interest nor do I have any inclination to
continue finding fault. I would rather support efforts like that of James
Cumes in finding a solution to what is possibly the economic dilemma of the
century. My listening to IIE recognizes that all interests are one or at
least it should be. It is in the interest of everyone, especially that of
the "proletariat", that a solution be found.

We can analyze and criticize the causes of poverty and misery all we want.
But, in the end, however, we shall find that the only thing we have learned
is how to create more poverty and misery. This is perhaps another case of
marching into folly.

Gary Santos

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "The A-List" <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [A-List] Global Economic Prospects: Bright for 2004


> IIE paper are not dismissed because they represent mainstrean views, but
> because they have lost all credibility over decades of faulty analysis
> and forecasting.  The Mussa paper in question said nothing fresh or new
> and instead mislabeled once more a liquidity bubble for a recovery.
> Mussa blaming Argentina for debt addiction is like the liquor industry
> blaming alcoholics for lack of self-control.  People who listened to IEE
> forcasts have lost their life saving in the past and will again in the
> fututre which is the true defintion of folly.  To be taken to the
> cleaner once is human, to be taken repeatedly merely because the crooks
> are part of the establishment is voluntary slave mentality.  Greenspan
> and company are not distinguished for their wisdom or clear insight, but
> for the power to manipulate the market and only fools still take them
> seriously.  There is no bigger crime than a crooked casino operator.
> False recoveries are the device to suck up whatever little money is left
> in the system from pensioners, widows and orphans.  Look at the list of
> the directors of IIE from its web site and you will see a group who have
> lost a lot of other people's money which seem to be the key criteria for
> membership.   They are not even competent capitalists.  The left does
> not need to overthrow the system, these idiots are working hard on from
> the inside.  Argetnina was the poster boy of neo-liberalism before its
> debt problems surpfaced. So was Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea and
> even Japan.  All of them listened to the IIE and ended up in the poor
> house just to keep the lenders whole.
>
>
> Henry C.K. Liu
>
>
> Gary Santos wrote:
>
> >There is no doubt in my mind that these fellows (IIE) are mainstream,
> >influential/paid by establishment economists. I understand they even set
up
> >the agenda and working papers for one or another G7 meeting. Williamson
of
> >the Washington Consensus fame is also in IIE. That being the case, policy
> >papers coming from IIE, whether they turn out to be or not, are important
in
> >this respect. To dismiss them and to solely listen to/read bearish
> >analysts/economists is folly.
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>
> >To: "The A-List" <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 3:29 AM
> >Subject: Re: [A-List] Global Economic Prospects: Bright for 2004
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Henry writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>The IIE projected accelerated growwth for Asia up till July 2 1997.
> >>
> >>...and this clown...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Michael Mussa
> >>>Institute for International Economics
> >>>
> >>>
> >>was one of those responsible for economic disaster after economic
disaster
> >>administered by the hirelings of the Washington consensus, viz:
> >>
> >>Privately, fund officials are angry that they are being blamed in some
> >>quarters for the slow motion implosion of Argentina's economy last year.
> >>"For better or for worse, all of the key policies were fully owned by
> >>the Argentine authorities," says Michael Mussa, who was the fund's chief
> >>economist until last summer.
> >>
> >><snip>
> >>
> >>Mr Mussa says Buenos Aires became addicted to borrowing as a solution to
> >>its problems. "The Argentine government is like a chronic alcoholic -
> >>once it starts to imbibe the political pleasures of deficit, it keeps on
> >>going until it reaches the economic equivalent of falling down drunk."
> >>
> >>See http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/a-list/2002/msg01185.htm
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>