<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Structural Power of Capital</title>
	<atom:link href="http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/</link>
	<description>Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 08:39:38 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nick L</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-169344</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick L</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 15:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/#comment-169344</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Don’t look to the Marxists for explanations of the relative powers of different producer interests... Agricultural production has concentrated benefits, free trade in agriculture has diffuse ones. There are information and lobbying costs, so concentration of costs and benefits matter&lt;/i&gt;

Isn&#039;t this precisely the argument offered by the late Susan Strange, Marxian international political economist?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><i>Don&#8217;t look to the Marxists for explanations of the relative powers of different producer interests&#8230; Agricultural production has concentrated benefits, free trade in agriculture has diffuse ones. There are information and lobbying costs, so concentration of costs and benefits matter</i></p>

	<p>Isn&#8217;t this precisely the argument offered by the late Susan Strange, Marxian international political economist?</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: abb1</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-169314</link>
		<dc:creator>abb1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 07:14:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/#comment-169314</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;...suggests business doesn’t have much power to shape the political agenda...&lt;/i&gt;

Generally I like contrarianism, but the &#039;earth is flat&#039; variety is not very interesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><i>&#8230;suggests business doesn&#8217;t have much power to shape the political agenda&#8230;</i></p>

	<p>Generally I like contrarianism, but the &#8216;earth is flat&#8217; variety is not very interesting.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C. L. Ball</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-169302</link>
		<dc:creator>C. L. Ball</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 02:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/#comment-169302</guid>
		<description>Henry and Dan can both be right. The TABD might not be influential even if capital is influential more generally. 

But if we ask whether agribusiness or internationalized manufacturing and services firms shape government policy, I&#039;m not sure how we sustain a Marxist argument given the economic structure of high income countries like the EU members and the US. Agriculture is a trivial percentage of value added GDP (less than 2% on average) and only around 10% of merchandise trade.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Henry and Dan can both be right. The <span class="caps">TABD</span> might not be influential even if capital is influential more generally.</p>

	<p>But if we ask whether agribusiness or internationalized manufacturing and services firms shape government policy, I&#8217;m not sure how we sustain a Marxist argument given the economic structure of high income countries like the EU members and the US. Agriculture is a trivial percentage of value added <span class="caps">GDP </span>(less than 2% on average) and only around 10% of merchandise trade.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-169297</link>
		<dc:creator>Henry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 00:12:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/#comment-169297</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s actually more in common between leftists and public choice theorists than you might think. Not least, I recommend you check out some of the &quot;no bullshit Marxists&quot; - Erik Olin Wright, Jon Elster etc, who combine Marxist theory with rational choice analysis in their 1980s work. Not necessarily ideological enemies at all, in the sense that you mean.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>There&#8217;s actually more in common between leftists and public choice theorists than you might think. Not least, I recommend you check out some of the &#8220;no bullshit Marxists&#8221; &#8211; Erik Olin Wright, Jon Elster etc, who combine Marxist theory with rational choice analysis in their 1980s work. Not necessarily ideological enemies at all, in the sense that you mean.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: derrida derider</title>
		<link>http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/comment-page-1/#comment-169290</link>
		<dc:creator>derrida derider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crookedtimber.org/2006/08/21/the-structural-power-of-capital/#comment-169290</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t look to the Marxists for explanations of the relative powers of different producer interests - look to their ideological enemies, the public choice theorists.

Agricultural production has concentrated benefits, free trade in agriculture has diffuse ones.  There are information and lobbying costs, so concentration of costs and benefits matter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Don&#8217;t look to the Marxists for explanations of the relative powers of different producer interests &#8211; look to their ideological enemies, the public choice theorists.</p>

	<p>Agricultural production has concentrated benefits, free trade in agriculture has diffuse ones.  There are information and lobbying costs, so concentration of costs and benefits matter.</p>
 ]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
