1979 debate between Michael Harrington and Jack Kemp on economic policy

[© Tweed the Younger]

stumbled across this.  pdf file is huge, 104MB, so be patient:

http://www.archive.org/details/TaxPolicyAndTheEconomyADebateBetweenMichaelHarringtonAnd


pretty cool, as this was of course the time when the tide was seriously turning for good away from the post-War social democratic / Keynesian consensus and towards neoliberalism.  Kemp argues from the early version of the neoliberal position... he's far less inane than the cartoonish hacks that spit out garbage today, though of course I severely disagree with him on many counts. Harrington identified as a 'democratic socialist', basically along the lines of the European Second International descendants.

the whole thing is a cool piece of history, gives you a nice freeze-frame that partially explains how we got here, I encourage everyone interested in this type of stuff to read it.

[opebo]

Well, its more than just interesting.. it is downright creepy, like watching a video of Hitler discussing his plans for the Jews - after all what Kemp was proposing has led to the destruction of the country and the loss of countless lives.

[© Tweed the Younger]

the most painfully ridiculous thing Kemp argued was that the KempRoth would lead to a decreasing concentration of capital -- the politicians are the true believers, I guess.

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have no way to download that.

[© Tweed the Younger]

I have no way to download that.

I can e-mail it to you if the servers allow such a large file to go through.  (what is Gmail's max?)

[Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I have no way to download that.

I can e-mail it to you if the servers allow such a large file to go through.  (what is Gmail's max?)

I would still have to download it as an attachment from an e-mail across a dial-up connection.

[Vosem]

Kemp is still right.

[opebo]

Kemp is still right.

You've learned nothing from 33 years of historical evidence.

[Sam Spade]

The great irony is that Kemp was necessary in order to keep what Harrington wanted in place.  Now that the collapse of Kemp is well nigh upon us, the collapse of what Harrington wanted will follow, and quite quickly.  Don't be surprised if politicians try to raid the excesses of Kemp to keep alive what Harrington wanted as much as they can, but in the end it is all for naught.

What will follow is something quite different, btw.  Though it may "sound" similar.

[© Tweed the Younger]

The great irony is that Kemp was necessary in order to keep what Harrington wanted in place.  Now that the collapse of Kemp is well nigh upon us, the collapse of what Harrington wanted will follow, and quite quickly.  Don't be surprised if politicians try to raid the excesses of Kemp to keep alive what Harrington wanted as much as they can, but in the end it is all for naught.

What will follow is something quite different, btw.  Though it may "sound" similar.

attempted translation to English:

a shift to the neoliberal state, through the Volcker induced-recession, was necessary to destroy inflation and thus preserve the Keynesian welfare state for a time.  this was done through a shift from inflation to the use of both public and private debt to 'bridge the gap'.  the neoliberal state is collapsing, but with interest rates still low, the US gov't will attempt to borrow in order to put of the day of reckoning re: social welfare spending, but this can only go on for some time before a wall is hit.



the last sentence is unfalsifiable nonsense and cannot be translated to English.

[© Tweed the Younger]

btw, Sam, you should read this article.

http://www.newleftreview.org/?page=article&view=2914

[Beet]

One of the under-appreciated facets of Volckerism is how the end of the '70s commodities boom destroyed the economies of South America and Africa for two decades.