52/01 - Revision history

Santiago Pinault: /* Table of Contents */

2019-05-29T14:01:21Z

Table of Contents

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:01, 29 May 2019
Line 31:		Line 31:
	\| 1961.05.28		\| 1961.05.28
	\| 60-64		\| 60-64
			\|-
			\|
			\|
			\|
			\|-
			\| [[From George Dalton (2 June 1961)]]
			\| 1961.06.02
			\| 70
	\|-		\|-
	\| [[From Nathan Keyfitz (2 June 1961)]] (Disembedding the Economy)		\| [[From Nathan Keyfitz (2 June 1961)]] (Disembedding the Economy)

Santiago Pinault: /* Table of Contents */

2018-10-12T18:30:15Z

Table of Contents

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:30, 12 October 2018
Line 32:		Line 32:
	\| 60-64		\| 60-64
	\|-		\|-
	\| [[~~Disembedding the Economy~~ (2 June 1961)]]		\| [[From Nathan Keyfitz (2 June 1961)]] (Disembedding the Economy)
	\| 1961.06.02		\| 1961.06.02
	\| 74-78		\| 73-78
	\|-		\|-
	\| [[To George Dalton (18 June 1961)]]		\| [[To George Dalton (18 June 1961)]]

Santiago Pinault: /* KPI Description */

2018-04-05T17:21:52Z

KPI Description

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:21, 5 April 2018
Line 15:		Line 15:
	\|-		\|-
	\| Date		\| Date
	\| 1961		\| [[1961]]
	\|}		\|}

Santiago Pinault: /* Table of Contents */

2018-04-05T16:35:02Z

Table of Contents

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 | 1961.06.02
 | 74-78
 |}

Santiago Pinault: /* Table of Contents */

2018-04-05T16:19:44Z

Table of Contents

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 | 60-64
 |-
-| [[From (29 February 1960)]]
+| [[Disembedding the Economy (2 June 1961)]]
 | 1961.06.02
 | 74-78
 |}

Santiago Pinault: /* Contents */

2018-04-05T16:04:25Z

Contents

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:04, 5 April 2018
Line 19:		Line 19:

	== Table of Contents ==		== Table of Contents ==
	~~== Contents ==~~

	{\|class="wikitable"		{\|class="wikitable"
	! Letter		! Letter

Santiago Pinault at 16:04, 5 April 2018

2018-04-05T16:04:10Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 == KPI Description ==
 == Table of Contents ==
 === To George Dalton (28 May 1961) ===
 {{Page |n°=60}} Your defense of redistribution as a sort of exchange is <u>not</u> only catallactic, but the Benthamite variant of it: utilitarian. Such an undisciplined use of the terms would demolish the advances of <u>most of modern anthropology</u>. Middle 19th century fantaisies of atomistic individualism as the foundation of political science would be restored with a vengeance.

Santiago Pinault: /* Table of Contents */

2017-08-18T15:03:10Z

Table of Contents

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:03, 18 August 2017
Line 2:		Line 2:

	== Table of Contents ==		== Table of Contents ==
			=== To George Dalton (28 May 1961) ===
			{{Page \|n°=60}} Your defense of redistribution as a sort of exchange is <u>not</u> only catallactic, but the Benthamite variant of it: utilitarian. Such an undisciplined use of the terms would demolish the advances of <u>most of modern anthropology</u>. Middle 19th century fantaisies of atomistic individualism as the foundation of political science would be restored with a vengeance.

	=== Disembedding the Economy [02 June] ===		=== Disembedding the Economy [02 June] ===
Line 18:		Line 20:

	And this applies as much to planned as to free economies; in fact the distinction between these two does not appear to be fundamental. Both operate through organizations which are bureaucratic; they involve people working in definite slots, according to impersonal rules, and a rational awareness in the making of decisions both at the highest level, where they concern the product that the institutions as a whole will turn out, and at the level of implementation where the foreman is directing his men on the job. The elements of the accounting seem to be given by the market in the one case; in the other they are apparently arbitrary. But the Soviet decision marker who has calculated with 'wrong' prices will find his mistake when the goods do not move, and in practice there is no question that he will quickly make the necessary adjustment. The process in both goes to the point where one can weight the economic against other elements. One could build a factory in the countryside, perhaps more easily in a socialist system than in a capitalist one, but in both cases one would want to know the cost of the attainment of the non-economic ideal of the open air.		And this applies as much to planned as to free economies; in fact the distinction between these two does not appear to be fundamental. Both operate through organizations which are bureaucratic; they involve people working in definite slots, according to impersonal rules, and a rational awareness in the making of decisions both at the highest level, where they concern the product that the institutions as a whole will turn out, and at the level of implementation where the foreman is directing his men on the job. The elements of the accounting seem to be given by the market in the one case; in the other they are apparently arbitrary. But the Soviet decision marker who has calculated with 'wrong' prices will find his mistake when the goods do not move, and in practice there is no question that he will quickly make the necessary adjustment. The process in both goes to the point where one can weight the economic against other elements. One could build a factory in the countryside, perhaps more easily in a socialist system than in a capitalist one, but in both cases one would want to know the cost of the attainment of the non-economic ideal of the open air.
	~~=== Quoted by Dale ===~~
	~~??? Your defense of redistribution…is not only ''catallactic'', but the ''Benthamite'' variant of it: ''utilitarian''.~~

Santiago Pinault: /* Disembedding the Economy [02 June] */

2017-08-18T14:55:44Z

Disembedding the Economy [02 June]

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:55, 18 August 2017
Line 18:		Line 18:

	And this applies as much to planned as to free economies; in fact the distinction between these two does not appear to be fundamental. Both operate through organizations which are bureaucratic; they involve people working in definite slots, according to impersonal rules, and a rational awareness in the making of decisions both at the highest level, where they concern the product that the institutions as a whole will turn out, and at the level of implementation where the foreman is directing his men on the job. The elements of the accounting seem to be given by the market in the one case; in the other they are apparently arbitrary. But the Soviet decision marker who has calculated with 'wrong' prices will find his mistake when the goods do not move, and in practice there is no question that he will quickly make the necessary adjustment. The process in both goes to the point where one can weight the economic against other elements. One could build a factory in the countryside, perhaps more easily in a socialist system than in a capitalist one, but in both cases one would want to know the cost of the attainment of the non-economic ideal of the open air.		And this applies as much to planned as to free economies; in fact the distinction between these two does not appear to be fundamental. Both operate through organizations which are bureaucratic; they involve people working in definite slots, according to impersonal rules, and a rational awareness in the making of decisions both at the highest level, where they concern the product that the institutions as a whole will turn out, and at the level of implementation where the foreman is directing his men on the job. The elements of the accounting seem to be given by the market in the one case; in the other they are apparently arbitrary. But the Soviet decision marker who has calculated with 'wrong' prices will find his mistake when the goods do not move, and in practice there is no question that he will quickly make the necessary adjustment. The process in both goes to the point where one can weight the economic against other elements. One could build a factory in the countryside, perhaps more easily in a socialist system than in a capitalist one, but in both cases one would want to know the cost of the attainment of the non-economic ideal of the open air.
	Your defense of redistribution…is not only ''catallactic'', but the ''Benthamite'' variant of it: ''utilitarian''.		=== Quoted by Dale ===
			??? Your defense of redistribution…is not only ''catallactic'', but the ''Benthamite'' variant of it: ''utilitarian''.

Santiago Pinault: Created page with "== KPI Description == == Table of Contents == === Disembedding the Economy [02 June] === {{Page |n°=74}} People who are 'uncivilized', whether their culture is rich or poor..."

2017-08-18T14:53:01Z

Created page with "== KPI Description == == Table of Contents == === Disembedding the Economy [02 June] === {{Page |n°=74}} People who are 'uncivilized', whether their culture is rich or poor..."

New page

== KPI Description ==

== Table of Contents ==

=== Disembedding the Economy [02 June] ===
{{Page |n°=74}} People who are 'uncivilized', whether their culture is rich or poor, do not typically separate their lives into work, religion, play, education and the other segments that we recognize.

[…]

Once institutions which have this single purpose have come into existence, then the individuals participating can apply rationality in their behavior in relation to the institutions. If it is known that there is a difference in price between two markets, then the individual can weight in his mind the trouble of taking his contents to the further one against the higher price that he will receive. This is a primitive kind of rationality of course, but it can lead to more elaborate kinds {{Page |n°=75}} of calculation in actual numbers, obtainable when in prices have been set ont the various components, including the time of the person, and including by extension into cost accounting, on those intermediate products that do not pass immediately through the market.
[…]

{{Page |n°=76}}

{{Page |n°=78}} …(such as those people for whom Weber said 'The churches are open') the lost innocence is irretrievable.

[…]

And this applies as much to planned as to free economies; in fact the distinction between these two does not appear to be fundamental. Both operate through organizations which are bureaucratic; they involve people working in definite slots, according to impersonal rules, and a rational awareness in the making of decisions both at the highest level, where they concern the product that the institutions as a whole will turn out, and at the level of implementation where the foreman is directing his men on the job. The elements of the accounting seem to be given by the market in the one case; in the other they are apparently arbitrary. But the Soviet decision marker who has calculated with 'wrong' prices will find his mistake when the goods do not move, and in practice there is no question that he will quickly make the necessary adjustment. The process in both goes to the point where one can weight the economic against other elements. One could build a factory in the countryside, perhaps more easily in a socialist system than in a capitalist one, but in both cases one would want to know the cost of the attainment of the non-economic ideal of the open air.
Your defense of redistribution…is not only ''catallactic'', but the ''Benthamite'' variant of it: ''utilitarian''.