Re: [OPE] Odyssey and the Peruvian treasure

From: Alejandro Agafonow <>
Date: Sun Feb 15 2009 - 06:10:02 EST

Jerry: **No doubt, there was pollution in those societies. But, on what basis - and with what sources - can you determine that it was 'larger' there?**   The processing of natural resources in Marxist Economics rests on the assumption that they are a gift of nature, because labor has not participated in their production lending them value.   This assumption was implemented after the Bolshevik victory with the decree O Zemle, which declared land state ownership and considered inappropriate to pay for it. Also, the Article 6 of the legislation enacted on the subject in the USSR, stated that: "[...] the earth’s interior is assigned for use free of charge except in instances established by the USSR Council of Ministers."   Due to overexploitation of land and water, centrally planned economies were forced to partially introduce market mechanisms to restrict consumption, conditioning their use to payment of a rent, which implied a contradiction with the Marxist economic theory. A partial solution in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) was, according to Joan DeBardeleben, the payment to a special fund which was intended to finance measures to increase the productivity of land.   The important thing is that these ad hoc measures to restrict the exhaustion of natural resources never was so ambitious as those adopted in some mixed economies backed by democratic regimes. Particularly enlightening were the problems of air pollution, acid rain, and habitat degradation in the former East Germany, due to the use of Coal for electricity generation.   Regards,A. Agafonow

ope mailing list
Received on Sun Feb 15 06:15:43 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 24 2009 - 20:30:37 EDT