Calculation Problem Again

tgs at tgs at
Tue Nov 1 05:32:09 MST 1994

As you know, I still don't have the capacity for a line-item veto reply
So here's what I remember:

1) Since when is anybody saying that the market's failure to adjudge
externalities means that LTV is wrong?  One of McNally's biggest themes
is precisely this point--can't judge externalities.  But this is a moral
critique of a completely a-moral concept--price.  This seems really

2) On the practicality of state regulation, as my ol' professor Marshall
Berman would say to a Stalinist in his class, you say A I say B, you say
A.    As i come up with clinching argument after clinching argument, all you
do is say, well the state can solve that.  The state's whole capacity to
solve ANYTHING vis the market is what I'm questioning.

3) Is it market or is it class?  Markets create capitalist classes: that's
the whole point.

4) First you say,look at Western Europe, where it worked.  then you come
along to the part in my message where I say, look at Western Europe,
where it's falling apart.  So you make up excuses for your panacea.

5) Look at Marx and Keynes, by Mattick: he shows how, while initially, during
the secular boom period, state intervention can appear to resolve the
crises of the market, all it does is stimulate what investment it can.
As the secular decline period sets in, this becomes impossible: the state
acts rather now, not as a stimulus, but as a drag upon production.  It
is precisely this positive moment in the fall of the rate of profit that
obscures the negative moment of state intervention for market socialists:
leading them to believe that the welfare state is ushering in the Golden

6) Of course, your resistance to McNally is based ultimately upon your
rejection of LTV.  So those of you who have offered those wonderful supports
(the juan guy last night was absolutely standout theoretical wizardry!  Wow,
I'm not kidding, juan really has a gift for this kind of thought, makes
me very envious) have gotta' keep pluggin' away.

7)Let's keep this dialogue as Socratic as possible.  Refer me to as little as
possible: I'm pig ignorant on previous discussion.  Explain as much as you
have the patience for.  I appreciate it.


More information about the Marxism mailing list