WSN sorted : RE: Slavonica

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BDF6A9.2F5BE760
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I greatly appreciated your very thoughtful comments! You obviously know
Russian history better than I do. Still, allow me some comments. Somehow it
seems you have misunderstood me. (Are you confusing Wedel's views with my
own - I forwared Wedel's testimony and not my own - which article are you
commenting on?):

1) I AM aware of the liberalisation period under Bukharin, and argued in my
article on "Shock Therapy Rent-Seeking ...." (http://daastol.com/rus97.html)
that perhaps Stalin was a better choice - in THAT respect. See the chapter
Bukharin and Stalin.

2) I am not a great fan of the Witte PERIOD but an (not uncritical) admirer
of the Witte PERSON. Witte had some hard struggles with the autocratic parts
of the elite and stated his western liberal ideas clearly in line with his
other "List-ian" ideas.

3) Concerning infrastructure. You argue that there is too much of it in
Russia. That is a matter of definition, I think. Too much to be able to take
care of with the present socio-economic regime. Too little to develop Russia
into a descent economy. I still belive (as in MY article and as List & Witte
did) that infrastrructure development may be used as a productivity
enhancing locomotive for the whole economy. And goverment has particular
role to play here, in initiating such public goods (!) projects - which by
definition are not the obligation of private agents.

The comment you had on this concerning the NEP period's failure fits here:
"nobody was willing to make risky investments in the infrastructure". -
Quite descriptive of Bukharin's policy under the slogan "enrich yourself" -
related to his studies in Vienna with the Austrian School and Böhm-Bawerk.

May I add, not quite revolutionary I suppose, but, I believe the legal
structure to be the crucial point: security of civil rights including
property. Unfortumately what little was built during Witte etc. was torn
down afterwards.

------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BDF6A9.2F5BE760
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I=20 greatly appreciated your very thoughtful comments! You obviously know = Russian=20 history better than I do. Still, allow me some comments. = Somehow it seems=20 you have misunderstood me. (Are = you confusing=20 Wedel's views with my own - I forwared Wedel's testimony and not my own=20 - which article are you commenting on?):

1) I=20 AM aware of the liberalisation period under Bukharin, and argued in my = article=20 on "Shock Therapy Rent-Seeking ...." (http://daastol.com/rus97.html)= that=20 perhaps Stalin was a better choice - in THAT respect. See the chapter = Bukharin=20 and Stalin.

2) I=20 am not a great fan of the Witte PERIOD but an (not uncritical) admirer = of the=20 Witte PERSON. Witte had some hard struggles with the autocratic parts of = the=20 elite and stated his western liberal ideas clearly in line with his = other=20 "List-ian" ideas.

3)=20 Concerning infrastructure. You argue that there is too much of it in = Russia.=20 That is a matter of definition, I think. Too much to be able to take = care of=20 with the present socio-economic regime. Too little to develop Russia = into a=20 descent economy. I still belive (as in MY article and as List & = Witte did)=20 that infrastrructure development may be used as a productivity enhancing = locomotive for the whole economy. And goverment has particular role to = play=20 here, in initiating such public goods (!) projects - which by definition = are not=20 the obligation of private agents.

The=20 comment you had on this concerning the NEP period's failure fits here:=20 "nobody was willing to make risky investments in the = infrastructure".=20 - Quite descriptive of Bukharin's policy under the slogan = "enrich=20 yourself" - related to his studies in Vienna with the Austrian = School and=20 Böhm-Bawerk.

May I=20 add, not quite revolutionary I suppose, but, I believe the legal = structure to be=20 the crucial point: security of civil rights including property. = Unfortumately=20 what little was built during Witte etc. was torn down=20 afterwards.