>(1b) The success of poor countries in making world market caliber
>goods shows that there is an important sense in in which Maylasia,
>etc. are part of the world market economy, and how markets can
>privide incentives to do better for priducers. The inequalities are
>terribly troubling, but the question is whether they are due to
>markets or to private property. I think the latter. Beat in mund
>that I do not defend capitalism.
Maylasia's contribution to the world economy comes mainly from foreign investment by electronics multinationals. Is this what you mean by markets and incentives? How can you separate "markets" from the property relations in this example? How about the S Korean model, which relied little on inward investment and a lot on (capitalist) state planning? They sold into a world market, but with knowhow built on some very nonmarket approaches.
Doug