>By the way, I note that Mr Wray, Mr Henwood and you seem not
>interested in the question of whether the productivity measures or
>consumer price index is biased against the high technology
>revolution.
Biased against? The productivity numbers are, if anything, overstating the tech revolution (a topic dear to my heart, as the author of a book called A New Economy?). The price adjustments have high-tech output rising at a 50% annual rate, which strikes me as implausible. But industrial output outside high-tech is rising at a 2% annual rate. Since employment is roughly flat in both sectors, these translate into equally lopsided productivity figures. Productivity in heavy computer-using services is rising at extremely unimpressive rates. Of course the optimistic thing to do would be to redefine the measurements, and presto, reality would look much more pleasing.
>To the outside observer, it is a great paradox indeed that leftist
>business observers pooh-pooh the revolutionary impact of the radical
>new innovations of the third industrial revolution while exploring
>every new possibility they open up for self promotion.
Can't speak for anyone else, but I am all for technology, as most Marx-tinged leftists are. I doubt, though, that Moore's law is contributing much to the 40-something million Americans without health insurance. I am also all for self-promotion, so no dissent there either.
Doug