Re: Conclusions

1/7/2001, Paul Riesz wrote:
 > REFORMED CAPITALISM; similar to the existing Scandinavian models

C'mon Paul, you're going to have to do better than
repeating yourself if you want to convince anybody of
anything.

What do you know about the Scandanavian economies?  Do you
know how much of their well-being depends on oil royalties,
or on weapons-related contracts?  Have you done the numbers
to determine if their economy is sustaintable?

When you look at the current imperialist global economy, you
cannot look at the cream and ignore the non-fat milk below
it.  The economy of the West and the economy of the third
world are one economy.  If you want to sing the praises of
Scandanavia, then you've got to justify the death squads in
Guatemala at the same time, not to mention the famine
victims in the African countries which export their coffee
to Scandanavia.

And what in the world do you mean by 'reformed capitalism'?
When you get done with the reform, what part of capitalism
is left?  Have you worked out what's going to happen to the
global economy when you reform away the growth that allows
capitalism to function?  Have you read David Korten?  Do
you know the difference between a market economy and
capitalism?

Why don't you set your little formula aside for a while, and
discuss how to get what you want.  You want a solution which
can be achieved, and which doesn't require a disruptive
transition period, right?  Let's talk about the problem,
instead of debating simplistic solutions.

rkm