PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[PEN-L:5182] Re: Trade Sanctions
- Subject: [PEN-L:5182] Re: Trade Sanctions
- From: glevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 19:37:55 -0700
I find Bill Mitchell's use of such terms as "us", "them" , and "we" to be
rather curious. "We" are not the US government or the ruling
class. "They" are not Japanese people.
What is needed is a class perspective, not a nationalist one. Individual
capitalist nations practice protectionism as one way of of their crisis,
"we" need to practice international working class solidarity.
On Mon, 22 May 1995, BILL MITCHELL wrote:
> Jerry replying to Doug said:
>
> >A short answer to Doug's question might be that there are divisions in
> >the ruling class as to what policies are in their class interests. What
> >may be beneficial from the standpoint of capitalists in one branch of
> >production may not be desirable from the standpoint of some blocs of US
> >capital or from the standpoint of US capital as a whole.
>
>
> Over on this side of the pacific, things a looking rosy if the sanctions
> proceed. The country to gain most will probably be us (OZ) and we are
> just waiting to go in there. The US administration tried last week to
> suck us into supporting them against Japan. In our case, we run a surplus
> with Japan instead of the US's huge deficit. But probably more relevant
> is the perceived hypocrasy over here in the US position.
>
> (a) Why did they not go to the WTO first after having made such a fuss about
> it in the past? seems a little odd to say stuff the world regulatory body.
> i guess (from my chats with barkley) that this is indicative of the
> isolationist republican swing going on over in the US.
>
> (b) The US has been totally unsympathetic to our trading rights in the past
> and recent past at that. The decision by clinton to subsidise your farmers
> and undercut our markets when (i) we do not subsidise wheat and beef and
> (ii) the US would not have had a hope in hell of competing openly - hurt
> relations b/tw the US and OZ.
>
> it seems a little arrogant to say the least, to then say, come on and support
> us on this one. reinforces the stereotyped view that OZ has of the US - jerks.
>
> so while some capital interests will suffer, our capitalists are counting the
> days and hoping that the US keeps its word.
>
> kind regards
> bill
> *******************************************************************************
> William F. Mitchell Telephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\
> Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \ about
> The University of Newcastle Fax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*<-- here
> Callaghan NSW 2308 v
> Australia Email : ecwfm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> World Wide Web Home Page: http://econ-www.newcastle.edu.au/~bill/billyhp.html
> *******************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:5187] Re: Trade Sanctions,
Doug Henwood Tue 23 May 1995, 14:43 GMT
- [PEN-L:5186] poverty & growth,
Doug Henwood Tue 23 May 1995, 14:41 GMT
- [PEN-L:5185] Re: Trade Sanctions,
Iwao Kitamura Tue 23 May 1995, 13:56 GMT
- [PEN-L:5184] End of Justice,
Curtis Moore Tue 23 May 1995, 03:37 GMT
- [PEN-L:5182] Re: Trade Sanctions,
glevy Tue 23 May 1995, 02:37 GMT
- [PEN-L:5181] Re: Trade Sanctions,
BILL MITCHELL Tue 23 May 1995, 01:03 GMT
- [PEN-L:5180] Re: Trade Sanctions,
glevy Tue 23 May 1995, 00:49 GMT
- [PEN-L:5179] Re: Profit-rate equalisation,
Alan Freeman Mon 22 May 1995, 18:52 GMT
- [PEN-L:5178] Re: Trade Sanctions,
Justin Schwartz Mon 22 May 1995, 18:23 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]