47999639   
   XPost: soc.culture.baltics, soc.culture.czecho-slovak, soc.culture.russian   
   XPost: soc.culture.nordic   
   From: ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com   
      
   In article ,   
    Anton  wrote:   
      
   > David Friedman kirjoitti:   
      
   ..   
      
   > > The issue isn't the barter,   
   >   
   > In James' view it is, or sort of is, since he repeats as a parrot that   
   > Finns were not getting real money in return.   
      
   James' point, which seems to have been mistaken, was that they were   
   getting money in exchange, but overvalued money. If the Soviets had paid   
   with rubles at the official exchange rate when the market value for the   
   ruble was (say) half the offical rate, the Finns would have been getting   
   only half as much purchasing power as the terms of the deal implied.   
      
   Wasn't that obvious?   
      
   > > it's the terms of the barter--biased, by   
   > > your accounts, in favor of Finland, apparently the weaker party.   
   >   
   > Is barter based trade attractive to a capitalist market economy? No. How   
   > do you make it attractive?   
      
   By offering stuff on terms that make it profitable.   
      
   Why would you expect barter to be a problem for a market economy? Money   
   exchange is more convenient, but if someone wants to offer you ten   
   million dollars worth of oil in exchange for nine million dollars worth   
   of machine tools, you can make the deal, sell the oil for money to   
   someone else, and end up a million dollars ahead.   
      
   Why in the world would you expect capitalist firms to be unwilling to   
   make such deals?   
      
   --   
    http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/   
    Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.   
    Published by Baen, in bookstores now   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)