I'm not even sure that Doug Henwood terms himself a Marxist economist. He certainly seems to discuss economics from the standpoint of Keynes sometimes.
Then Hayek is discussed all the time.
Maybe your Eurocentrism that you are unusally hostile to a non-European who deviates from Marxism, but not so to Europeans who deviate from Marxism.
Charles Brown
>>> Stephen E Philion <philion at hawaii.edu> 09/03/99 08:51PM >>>
Here is comments from Ju-chang on the effect of the Asian financial crisis
on CHina and ways South East Asian countries can solve their problems. In
a nutshell, more free market ideology is Ju-Chang's solution.
Steve
>From Ju-chang's homepage:
3. China was not affected by this crisis, because it adopted strict
control over its currency. Mr. Soros had got no way to borrow
Renminbi yuan from the international banks. Without Renminbi yuan
in hand, he is not able to speculate in Renminbi yuan.
4. In order to prevent the occurrence of similar financial crisis in
Southeast Asia, countries the world over should give up fixed
exchange rate as soon as possible and continue carrying out free
market economic policy.
Charles, help me out with this, I'm just too damned Eurocentric to figure out what he means I guess and how this meshes with a Marxist critique of political economy....despite my fluency in Chinese and friendship with serious Marxists in China....Unfortunately, Ju-chang aint one of em...
Compare this crap with the rich analysis of a Raymond Lau in *Capital and Class* and other journals...Lau is the kind of stuff we should be discussing on this list, not this more of the same crap.
Steve
On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, chang wrote:
> Max Sawicky,
> Do you agree that GDP as a measurement of the whole economy condition is
> unscientific and unfair for poor people? Is GDP for the rich to hoodwink poor
> people's eyes?
>
> Sincerely,
> Ju-chang He
>
> SHENZHEN, P.R. CHINA
> Welcome to My Homepage
> <http://sites.netscape.net/juchang/>
>
> Date: Saturday, September 04, 1999 12:28 AM Max Sawicky wrote:
>
> >chang:
> >>> Why do economists have no other standard of measure indicating the
> >living
> >standards of poor people?
> >
> >We do. Plenty of them. If you want references,
> >one place to start is with an intermediate text
> >on public finance.
> >
> >There is data on incomes by income class and many
> >other characteristics reported by the Census. There
> >is research on non-monetary types of income received
> >by the poor. There are measures before taxes, after
> >taxes, and after taxes-minus-transfers. There are
> >various measures of income inequality.
> >
> >I'd be surprised to find an introductory text which
> >does not make clear the distinction between GDP and
> >well-being, or between GDP and the condition of the
> >poor. The use of GDP in political debate as a welfare
> >indicator is another matter, but this thread is getting
> >ridiculous.
> >
> >mbs
> >
> >
>
>