Probably I should not waste my time with this, and I do not
know what VOW is and I am not sure that I want to know, but
I guess I find this kind of apocalyptic forecast that we are on
the verge of something worse than 1929 to be a major waste
of time to bother with. Periodically we have had such forecasts.
We also regularly have forecasts of the Second Coming of
Christ, the End of the World, and the World Proletarian Revolution.
Perhaps any or all of these events really are imminent. But I
am not holding my breath, and I do not particularly see why
now, rather than say three or four years ago, or even 12 years
ago, or 21 years ago, was not more imminent than this very
instant, when, although things are certainly far from perfect,
I personally do not see any obvious signs of impending enormous
collapse of anything.
Barkley Rosser
----- Original Message -----
From: schulte-baeuminghaus <mailto:schulte.baeuminghaus@xxxxxxxxx>
To: gang8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gang8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ;
pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ; VOW
<mailto:vow@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jozef Imrich <mailto:chezimrich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: [gang8] Re: Disillusionment of the critical student
Arno,
The only thing that eventually will change academic economics is a
repetition of 1873 or 1929, a severe crisis that lasts long enough for :
1. The effects to be obvious to everybody and pressure academics to
do something more than produce heaps of worthless paper.
2. Lasts long enough for the orthodox professors to die - literally
speaking, as Keynes pointed out.
"The real difficulty in changing any enterprise lies not in
developing new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones." — John
Maynard Keynes
Arno, how right you are.
The horror of the present circumstances is that a bigger and
"worser" 1929 is almost certainly upon us and we have done and are
doing nothing to deal with it.
We did a lot of thinking after 1929 but, even after the outbreak of
war in 1939, we had still not developed and implemented effective
policies to deal with what was an immensely serious crisis -
economic, social, political, strategic.
Today, we have not even begun to think about what crisis measures
are necessary. The poverty of the thinking of the academics and the
policymakers more than matches even the desperate physical poverty
of so many millions - indeed, billions of people - around the world.
That is why I have been advocating VOW for some year and a half now.
The long agony - the long economic and social misery - is now
unavoidable for many millions; but the sooner we get together and
hammer out agreed policies of cooperative, pragmatic, democratic
action the more quickly we will be able to get the better of the
huge menace with which we are confronted.
I wish devoutly that we could draw more people into active,
vigorous support for VOW - and for a program of well-managed public
and private investment to enable us to achieve a more rapid recovery
than now seems likely.
James
http://members.chello.at/schulte-baeuminghaus
http://www.authorsden.com/jameswcumes
http://VictoryOverWant.org
http://www.crystaldreamspub.com/bios/authors/A-E/cumes_j.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: Arno Mong Daastoel <mailto:am@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: gang8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gang8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 10:36 AM
Subject: [gang8] Re: Disillusionment of the critical student
Chris,
I have often been told that one can question the foundations of
economics after one becomes a professor, if before you won't get
that far.
However, if you love economics and is a critical student,
First, you will loose the love for the (curriculum part of the)
subject and perform badly and wont ever get the necessary superb
marks for a successful career.
Secondly, after eventually getting that far, most have been
brainwashed to believe the crap.
Thirdly, after eventually getting that far and still being
critical, you will be censored in subtle ways, for instance
financially.
Fourthly, the remaining critical few they won't make much of a
difference anyhow, since the indoctrinated professors don't give
a damn anyhow....
Fifth, the above deals only with academia. In addition you will
be fighting the vested interests of in particular "the financial
class", as Michael so often has pointed out.
;-)
So, becoming a professor doesn't make much of a difference, even
becoming a Nobel laureate won't make much of a difference.
My best example is the Nobel speech of the very able
econometrician Trygve Haavalmo, who then said that we have
started in the wrong end (meaning we got everything upside down)
by starting with the individual instead of the system, the
whole. Have you ever heard about this later? I am pretty sure
you have not.
So, my conclusion is that if you want to become a professor,
keep quiet about your doubts, accept the world as it is and
peddle along within this glass bowl. If you eventually manage to
stay critical after making an academic career, don't expect to
change anything.
The only thing that eventually will change academic economics is
a repetition of 1873 or 1929, a severe crisis that lasts long
enough for :
1. The effects to be obvious to everybody and pressure academics
to do something more than produce heaps of worthless paper.
2. Lasts long enough for the orthodox professors to die -
literally speaking, as Keynes pointed out.
"The real difficulty in changing any enterprise lies not in
developing new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones." —
John Maynard Keynes
Arno
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705909556:HM/A=1564416/R=0/SIG=11ti81skc/*http://www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=60164797&partid=3170658>
The gang8 list is devoted to Creditary Economics.
To unsubscribe, email: gang8-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.