----- Original Message ----- From: "Bradford DeLong" <jbdelong at uclink.berkeley.edu> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:57 AM Subject: Re: anti-globalization label
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Brad DeLong" <jbdelong at uclink.berkeley.edu>
> >
> >> We neoliberals at least have broad agreement that
developing-country
> >> governments are corrupt, by and large (East Asia excepted) lack the
> >> competence to run successful developmental states, and hence the
best
> >> chance is to try to shrink them to keep them out of the way of
> >> economic development for a generation or so. We have broad
agreement
> >> that maximizing economic contact--trade, investment, et cetera--is
> >> our best chance for accelerating technology transfer to poor
> >> economies and hence putting ourselves on the road to what may for
the
> >> first time in history become a truly human world.
> >
> >======================
> >
> >And of course the following has nothing to do with the neoliberal
> >worldview either:
> >
> >[NYTimes]
> >April 10, 2002
> >Critics Charge Pension Bill Favors Highly Paid Workers
> >By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
> >WASHINGTON, April 9 - When many employees lost their retirement
savings
> >after Enron (news/quote) filed for bankruptcy protection, lawmakers in
> >Washington promised legislation that would mend the holes in the
pension
> >safety net exposed by the company's collapse...
>
> Gee. Haven't you noticed that we Clintonistas are no longer in power?
> If you read down, you'll see what we think of this. Mark Iwry is good
> people:
> >
> >
> >Another critic is J. Mark Iwry, who oversaw employee-benefits policy
and
> >regulation at the Treasury Department from 1995 to 2001.
> >
> >"This controversial proposal would weaken existing legal protections
for
> >workers in both the statute and regulations," Mr. Iwry said. "It would
> >allow corporations in some cases to exclude more employees from
pension
> >coverage and reduce the level of benefits for average- and lower-paid
> >workers who remain covered."
>
=================
Well he's obviously anti-globalization! :-)
Ian