<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nationalistic capitalism and the food crisis, Cleo Paskal</title>
	<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/</link>
	<description>Where the world comes together</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Guy Stanley</title>
		<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/#comment-2891</link>
		<author>Guy Stanley</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:58:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/#comment-2891</guid>
		<description>Cleo's instructive article is pointing us "back to the future" in what looks to me like a sort of populist mercantilism: governments try to ensure "secure --i.e. below world price--access to "vital" or "strategic" supplies, thereby worsening the trade distortions already in place from proetcionist trade policies. An American student of Nazi economic polices (Klein--I think) explained Hitler's strategies from the collapse of the Credit-Anstalt (leading to a German dominated clearing system for the then new states of central Europe) to his Blitzkrieg strategy (short-supply-scarce warfare) to his attack on the Soviet union (lock up vital supplies to maintain a thousand-year Reich) in these terms. Perhaps future scholars --if we can escape the full consequences of this &#38; survive--will put the blame where it rightfully belongs: the failure of the IMF as the custodian of the global monetary system...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cleo&#8217;s instructive article is pointing us &#8220;back to the future&#8221; in what looks to me like a sort of populist mercantilism: governments try to ensure &#8220;secure &#8211;i.e. below world price&#8211;access to &#8220;vital&#8221; or &#8220;strategic&#8221; supplies, thereby worsening the trade distortions already in place from proetcionist trade policies. An American student of Nazi economic polices (Klein&#8211;I think) explained Hitler&#8217;s strategies from the collapse of the Credit-Anstalt (leading to a German dominated clearing system for the then new states of central Europe) to his Blitzkrieg strategy (short-supply-scarce warfare) to his attack on the Soviet union (lock up vital supplies to maintain a thousand-year Reich) in these terms. Perhaps future scholars &#8211;if we can escape the full consequences of this &amp; survive&#8211;will put the blame where it rightfully belongs: the failure of the IMF as the custodian of the global monetary system&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cleo Paskal</title>
		<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/#comment-2886</link>
		<author>Cleo Paskal</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:35:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/#comment-2886</guid>
		<description>These companies are not monopolies. They are not controlling the market. They are competing in the marketplace against other companies that have headquarters in a range of countries, including the Canada, US and EU. The key difference is the goal of these companies. Free markets and monopolies have one goal: profit. These companies would like to make a profit, but they are willing to lose money permanently in order to advance their national strategic position. This is not dissimilar to the way the military is not expected to turn a profit. It is essentially an approach in which a range of 
products/commodities are shifted from a commercial context into a strategic one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These companies are not monopolies. They are not controlling the market. They are competing in the marketplace against other companies that have headquarters in a range of countries, including the Canada, US and EU. The key difference is the goal of these companies. Free markets and monopolies have one goal: profit. These companies would like to make a profit, but they are willing to lose money permanently in order to advance their national strategic position. This is not dissimilar to the way the military is not expected to turn a profit. It is essentially an approach in which a range of<br />
products/commodities are shifted from a commercial context into a strategic one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Antal Deutsch</title>
		<link>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/#comment-2885</link>
		<author>Antal Deutsch</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:32:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.dianaswednesday.com/2008/06/nationalistic-capitalism-and-the-food-crisis-cleo-paskal/#comment-2885</guid>
		<description>Hi Diana, this is an old story Adam Smith would have no problems with. Not that civil servants have become better decision-makers than business-men, but monopolies provide more market controls than competitive positions.The acquisition of monopoly positions is illegal  within most civilised market economies (Canada, US, EU etc.) but there is no international law to curb the activity.That is the story.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Diana, this is an old story Adam Smith would have no problems with. Not that civil servants have become better decision-makers than business-men, but monopolies provide more market controls than competitive positions.The acquisition of monopoly positions is illegal  within most civilised market economies (Canada, US, EU etc.) but there is no international law to curb the activity.That is the story.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
