My Thoughts on: Marxism, Living Under American Capitalism, Marxian Philosophy, Baseball, Economics, Alcohol, and any other topic I feel like writing about.
22 February 2012
Can't Everyone See What is Happening Here?
Per the NY Times this morning...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/business/global/gm-in-partnership-talks-with-french-automaker.html?_r=1&hp
Peugeot Citron is possibly going to be bought by GM.
The Times (in the above article), as well as in a couple of smaller sources that I have seen this morning mention that the French and German governments won't be eager to see plants shut down to trim costs.
Last I checked the EU was all about belt tightening and "austerity"? An those layoffs are coming from a GM owned company anyway, Opal is losing a ton of money! And GM is coming off of record profits. My crystal ball thinks this deal will be done by the end of the day.
Either way the winners will be the shareholders of both companies. The losers will be a small number of the rulers of P.C. and well the workers of course. But the European workers need to get used to losing, often and hard. Austerity seems to be the chosen path that will save capitalism from itself this time.
17 February 2012
A Brief Call for Change in The Economics Profession
As the stock market continues to boom, driven by strong macro economic indicators of the possible end of the Great Recession, it is only a matter of time before the policies of my neoclassical colleagues result in another downturn in the business cycle. If the Debt situation in the EU doesn't cause the collapse fist of course. I would love if my profession would accept even these small changes:
The global economic systems needs new economic thinking because of unnecessary slowing of technological growth during recessions, and the social harm suffered when recession occurs.
My decision to study economics is from a personal (technological) humanism. The ability of people to develop their material lives has brought vast changes in living standards and productivity in my life time. The greatest constraint on advancement is slowing of economies by market failures and productivity losses periodically experienced.
The processes that limit human advancement also can cause unnecessary suffering. There is strong correlation between unemployment levels and health outcomes, family stability, and substance abuse. New economic thinking could lead to much less suffering in the developed, and developing world.
The new economic thinking necessary needs to come in two forms: Movement away from the neoclassical model of the individual (and firm). Largely because a less ahistorical approach to the economy could lead to a much broader policy implication space. Secondly, an increase in pluralism of methodology to open up economic outcomes beyond the limits of statistical analysis. An expansion of accepted method could result in an expansion of solutions to some of the cyclical problems economies currently face.
I am not usually a champion of reform over revolution, but even small steps are better than none.
The global economic systems needs new economic thinking because of unnecessary slowing of technological growth during recessions, and the social harm suffered when recession occurs.
My decision to study economics is from a personal (technological) humanism. The ability of people to develop their material lives has brought vast changes in living standards and productivity in my life time. The greatest constraint on advancement is slowing of economies by market failures and productivity losses periodically experienced.
The processes that limit human advancement also can cause unnecessary suffering. There is strong correlation between unemployment levels and health outcomes, family stability, and substance abuse. New economic thinking could lead to much less suffering in the developed, and developing world.
The new economic thinking necessary needs to come in two forms: Movement away from the neoclassical model of the individual (and firm). Largely because a less ahistorical approach to the economy could lead to a much broader policy implication space. Secondly, an increase in pluralism of methodology to open up economic outcomes beyond the limits of statistical analysis. An expansion of accepted method could result in an expansion of solutions to some of the cyclical problems economies currently face.
I am not usually a champion of reform over revolution, but even small steps are better than none.
Labels:
business cycle,
economics,
revolution or reform
16 February 2012
The Growth of Holyoke Continued:
Probably the last post in this short series. Unless I decide to share some stuff on the decline:
YEARS OF BIRTH AND GROWTH
The first paper mill in Holyoke “Parson’s Paper” was opened in 1853, four years after the completion of the dam. Many other mills followed, and within 25 years Holyoke had become the largest production center of writing paper in the world. By 1880 Holyoke had more paper mills than any other American local, including production of cheaper quality papers, with 17.
This period is characterized by massive increases in the organic composition of capital and worker productivity in paper making. The output of Parson’s Paper increased more than 25 fold from 1854 to 1884 without an increase in the physical size of the mill. By assumption the downward pressure put on the rate of profit by the increasing organic composition was more than offset by productivity gains and relative surplus value.
The wage of paper workers was fairly stagnant through the second half of the 1800’s. There were some small increases, especially in the more skilled jobs, but nothing close to the increases in productivity that went along side them. There was some unionization of paper workers during this time, however workers remained mostly divided along skill divides as well as divides of ethnic origin. The Holyoke paper worker was usually of Irish Catholic heritage (often first or second generation immigrants). There was however a large French Canadian immigration wave into Holyoke during this period as well. It seems a common complaint of the Irish that the French Canadians were willing to work for a wage that was far below V for the Irish workers. The large population growth in Holyoke during this period seems to have put enough downward pressure on wages that they did not rise even as many more mills opened in the city.
By 1880 the total population of Holyoke was 22,000 roughly 1900 of these people worked in paper mills. About 9% of the total population and 25% of the total workforce! The combined employment of the textile and paper industries totaled more than 50% of the total workforce. This period, although characterized by increasing capital investment, was still a relatively labor intense one in paper production. There was also a vast difference in the types of labor and wages employed in the mills. Machine tenders and beaters of the pulp were high skilled jobs and not easily replaceable. Women in the “rag sorting” room and workers in the finishing departments (often French Canadian immigrants who were willing to work for far less) were easily replaceable. Class antagonism seems to have been absent for the most part. Most documentation of workplace disputes points to problems of the Irish owners and skilled workers with the French Canadian (and to some degree Polish) unskilled workers. Class harmony between labor and capital and a blind eye to exploitation of workers was present from the beginning of Holyoke paper though much of the hundred years the mills were in operation. Even workers in more skilled jobs felt the pressure of a high local immigration rate, as well as ethnic bonds with mill owners.[1]
Profits were not just high because of being able to pay low wages. During the first 4 decades of paper production in Holyoke the mill owners (in an informal, and sometimes formal, cartel setting) took actions to gain monopoly power. The mills had a rising organic composition of capital that was lowering average costs for the mills as their production vastly increased. In a competitive system this would result in a cheapening of the final commodity being produced, in this case cheaper fine writing paper. The Holyoke mill owners prevented the fall in their profit rate that would come with such a result by colluding to keep prices for writing paper high. For most of the 1870’s and 80’s most of the mill owners in town meet two or three times a month in a formal organization. The stated purpose of the organization was to discuss marketing strategies and export markets, however it is well documented that price fixing took place.
Labels:
Holyoke,
industrial organization,
urban growth
Now That's What I Call (An Increased Rate Of) Exploitation (Are You Fucking Kidding Me?)
Over that past week or so, all the news about General Motors (GM) has been about how they recorded a RECORD 8 billion dollars in net income for 2011, and hope to be over 10 billion for 2012.
That is BILLION WITH A B ladies and gentlemen.
As good for GM and their shareholders (not their shareholders who lost everything three years ago of course) as this news is, (Honestly, this is fantastic for some!) GM is a symbol of the American heartland, an institution of American capitalism, receiver of one of the largest "Keynesian" (sorry J.M. Keynes, you will always be blamed for the digging holes and refilling them with government money thing) bailouts in history, employer of many of my family members past and present, the next major story in the news makes it clear that the revenue increase is nothing but the blood of GM workers.
What to make of this?
This must mean that the recession is over right? GM is making a shitload of money for investors as well as the American taxpayer (at least according to every major news outlet).
Until we get to today's news...
Historically General Motors was a great company to be exploited by (comparatively in terms of standard of living.) With nothing more than a high school deploma you could earn a decent living and suppport a family. Part of supporting yourself and your family was being able to retire at a reasonable time (without having to take a job as a greater at Wall Mart to make ends meet). Right after news breaks of record earnings, today we get this:
A destruction of the pension plan at GM.
Of course the conservative New York Times frames it as a "change" not a destruction....
Will we see an increase in profits at GM? Yes........Will it allow the US government to sell the rest of their GM shares at a higher price than otherwise would have been possible? Yes... Is it just another example of the massive increase in the rate of exploitation in this country? Of course.
Labels:
automotive industry,
capitalism,
exploitation,
general motors
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



