Economic-union Books

So, apparently Amazon imported into their warehouse some sort of giant ISBN database that includes titles like "Use of electronics in railway signalling: Results of the measurement and analysis of transmission error structures for various transmission media and interference sources". Amazon will never stock or sell this book, paper, etc. But that doesn't stop a certain "Thomas Bartlett", a fool with his own blog called "Minor Tweaks", from wasting his and everyone elses time by writing facetious reviews for this and other items of database detritus, under some form of misguided conception that it is "funny". Mr. Bartlett is also known for interviewing a dog and posting his inane letters to the makers of consumer products on his blog. He also sometimes criticizes our President.

We are not amused with Mr. Bartlett's tomfoolery. Amazon is not your "playtoy", nor is your attempt at humor "funny".

In conclusion, I believe that Mr. Bartlett's internet IP should be revoked, and the proper authorities should commit him to ensure that he receives the proper medication or mental health treatment necessary to correct his disorder.

I'm not surprised that this text has "limited availability" and no, I would not like to sell mine here. It's my analysis of transmission error structures, and I'm keeping it, thank you very much. But if you ever are fortunate enough to come across this compendium of railway signalling wisdom, jump on it like a hand grenade, because it will blow your mind apart.

If I had to make one cavil about it, though, it would be the lack of theory to provide a framework for the data so diligently compiled. That and the photographs that accompany the "Signalling mishaps and disasters" chapter -- those seem in questionable taste.

Unfortunately, while perusing Amazon.com's extensive library of literature bound in the unknown, hoping to upgrade my current collection, I came across G. List's Use of Electronics in Railway Signalling: Results of the Measurement and Analysis of Transmission Error Structures for Various Transmission Media and Interference Sources, and wish I never had wasted the time. You see, as those of us in-the-know know, there are no electronics used in railway signalling.

Mr. List, with the help of the International Union of Railways is trying to pull one over on the unsuspecting American public (and other English speaking people). As I am sure that most of you are aware the IUR is the front organization for the Luxembourg Steamship Union, and it's more militant, radical wing, the Estonian Brotherhood of Canal Operators. They control all traffic signalling throughout the world, and quite frankly refuse to allow the electronics industry access to railway (and other) signalling devices.

Hence, we have now become reliant on these organizations and their diabolical system of squirrels and pulleys and cogs and such to control (especially railroad) signals.

So quite frankly, no matter how elegantly Mr. "G List" (an obvious pseudonym) makes his case - and I must say, some of it almost brought me to tears with its elegance - it is just so much tomfoolery.

Please, I beg of you, do not fall prey to Mr. List's arguments, especially those beautiful passages concerning transmission error structures.

I must admit that it's something of a goal of mine to eventually acquire an encyclopedic knowledge of all manner of signalling electronics.

This goal manifested itself one autumn in my university years. Myself and some chums quaffed back about a keg of beer and, upon returning to our dorm, found ourselves in the surprising posession of a traffic light.

That traffic light might have lain forgotton by the mists of time had we not made a decision a few weeks later to host a party. While searching for some sort of unique lighting, I was hit by the idea to connect the traffic light to our stereo system and have it flash in beat to the music. I channeled all of my McGyver-mojo and managed to create a device that not only enabled us to host an unforgettable party, but also resulted in over $1000 of local ordinance fines when my device was later reported to the authorities.

In the intervening years, I have consumed all manner of signalling literature, from "European Railway Signalling (Miscellaneous) -- by Colin Bailey" to "Telecommunications Signalling (IEE Telecommunications Series) by Richard Manterfield" to "Microbial Signalling and Communication by Reg England".

So it was that I decided to leaf through the dog-eared pages of this book. Just getting it open was a chore. I'll be damned if I couldn't quite figure out what kind of binding it was in. Nonetheless, I continued with my signalling quest.

Little did I know the surprises that were in store!

I had held the previous belief that the top-end platform for electronic signalling was to be found in those very traffic signals that had so pleased me in university. I was wrong! Railway signalling is where it's at!

I don't know where to begin in my review. From the comprehensive analysis of the measurments, to the detailed descriptions of the transmission sources, this book has it all!

A minor quibble: There was virtually no mention of the effects on electronic signalling by cosmic rays or extraterrestrial radiation. I find this omission quite galling, since everybody in the signalling world knows that the major causes of signalling errors near railways is almost always E.T.-related. Especially in Nebraska.

Still I am willing to forgive this omission, since this book was writting in 1987, a time when any open and honest dialog about the effects of extraterrestrial radiation upon electrionic railway signalling was being stymied by the Reagan administration. Perhaps the International Union of Railways publisihed this book as a way to pave the road for future discussions about the E.T. problem. Perhaps not.

Either way, forget all other books about railway signalling electronics, because this book is all that you need. Unless you want to know more about extraterestrial radiations effects on RSEs, but this book has just about everything else.

Five Stars!

Nearly 20 years have come and gone since G List published "Use of Electronics in Railway Signalling." A lot has changed in those two decades. The Berlin Wall was torn down, for example. That monument to governmental control was destroyed not by sledgehammers, but by the power of the human heart (sledgehammers helped). Speaking of hammers, the 1990s saw the rise of MC Hammer, a big-panted performer who warned us repeatedly that we couldn't touch this. But what, exactly, couldn't we touch? Everyone has a theory. I think it was his pants: He hated it when you touched them.

Nothing of interest has happened so far in the 2000s.

History lessons aside, "Use of Electronics in Railway Signalling" remains what it always was, i.e., a book about the use of electronics in railway signalling that contains the results of the measurement and analysis of transmission error structures for a variety of transmission media and interference sources. In that sense, it is timeless. I am just as interested in it today as I was the day it was published. Five stars!

This book has a great history of unions and the American Labor Movement as
well. I didn't know how much unions have affected our current labor laws. I
think it would be a great supplement for any American History class.

The author makes it abundantly clear that without the backing of a labor union, most workers stand little chance of countering unilateral and capricious employer actions. A collective bargaining agreement is a quasi-constitution that provides for due process for workers in many workplace situations. Otherwise, employees simply work "at the will" of employers with no recourse to challenge decisions.

The author explores the steps that generally need to be taken to form a union under the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. Beyond those procedures, he repeatedly stresses the class and workplace solidarity needed to form an effective union. But the main American labor movement in its evolution has never developed a coherent stance on the class nature of capitalism. Bureaucratic, bread-and-butter, business unionism describes the American labor movement after WWII. It is an orientation that does not seek to transform the essential dominance of American capital over the American working class.

It is clear that the American labor movement has since the Civil War faced incredible opposition from both employers and the state, including the police, the armed forces, and the judiciary. In addition, the various media empires portray unions as un-American or criminal in nature. Nonetheless, the author is unhappy with the conservatism of the labor movement regardless of any practical reasons for that stance. He views the purge of left-wing elements from unions and the lack of union internal democracy as developments that greatly weaken the ability of unions to fully represent the working class.

The key structure of unions is the local union that is centered on one or more workplaces in a geographical area. Naturally their concerns are with local issues and generally not on broader working class concerns. The author wishes to see a far more aggressive labor presence in the political realm. Issues such as employment as a right, national health care, shorter work hours, greater equality in pay, and democratization of workplaces need to appear on the political agenda of organized labor. The author does not really address the issue of what would be the role for labor unions if the American working class actually became powerful enough to implement pro-worker legislation. For example, what would the role for unions be in worker-dominated firms?

Yes, unions do matter. No other organizations even remotely afford workers the voice and protection that unions do within workplaces. But there is wide variability in their effectiveness. Furthermore, it is rather obvious that the labor movement as presently conceived has been quite limited in its ability to counter the global forces of capitalism that have been playing havoc with the world's working classes. Basically, the author is not quite as pro-union as it might seem at first glance.

Yates does present a good basic review of the trials and tribulations and the benefits of unions over the last century or so. But there is much disingenuity in this book. He points out that much of the basis of early unions was an urban-based solidarity of workers who lived, worshipped, and worked in close proximity in the early decades of the 20th century. He calls for a renewed, if not similar, solidarity among mainstream workers today; but the demographics of US workers and the structure of industries are far different. The closest example today of old time solidarity may be the relationship of black churches and neighborhoods and municipal workers. Other than workers from union families and left-liberal college professors, most US workers in many segments of the economy don't have a clue about unions and what they know is negative. His calls for worker activism in the political process and within workplaces have to be reconciled with the reality of political apathy and workplace authority. That is the ground that must be tilled for solidarity. For the one in ten workers that are in unions, the NLRA and NLRB and well as union officialdom probably contain and constrain as much as empower workers. For example, changing national union affiliation is not viewed with equanimity. Yates is too accepting of US-style unionism; for example German-style works councils could have been contrasted with US unions in terms of giving workers agency. Also, it seems that Yates derives far too much satisfaction from the fact that the AFL-CIO will now talk to left-liberal academics. He needs to appreciate better that the activists of bygone eras were generated from within the working class which reflected an inherent understanding of their class condition. How many Americans today even have a notion of class? As stated, Yates' book does a good job of showing the state of AFL-CIO unionism. But the book would not be satisfying for those who have critically examined that terrain.

Over the past decade, economist Michael Yates has written a number of books for working people -- "Power on the Job," "The Labor Law Handbook," "Longer Hours, Fewer Jobs: Employment and Unemployment in the United States" and now "Why Unions Matter." Yates manages to write in a clear readable style and, at the same time, talk about complex matters. He is also one of the very few nonlawyers who has an understanding and grasp of the role of law. "Why Unions Matter" manages to provide a lot of information about union history, labor economics, and even how to organize a union and bargain a contract in a very concise book. While I might differ with Yates on some details, I think this book makes a valuable contribution. It and his other books should be on every unionist's bookshelf, and unionists should lobby their public libraries to carry Yates' books.

As a final note, it is a very rare thing for academics, such as Yates, to write for a popular audience. All the pressures in academia are to write for other academics. It takes imagination, caring and courage to do what Yates does, and he deserves our gratitude for it.

This is an excellent introduction to unions. The author covers the basic legal, economic and political aspects with a critical eye. This should be mandatory reading for union members and everyone else that wants to stand up to Corporate America.

Michael Yates' anecdotal stories of rank-and-file resistance to corporate greed and business unionism deserve to widely read in and of themselves.

Great book. Well written and easy to read even for someone who is not familiar with financial language.

I'm not an economist so I might be rating this book higher or lower than someone who knows this stuff, but for the lay person it was a pretty good read. One thing to note up front is that this is more of an academic book than the normal pop-econ books that most of us are used to seeing. The paragraphs are heavily cited and the reader is assumed to know at least a little about modern international finance (I had to spend some time on wikipedia more than a few times).

Cohen spends most of the book laying out the arguments to why most economists think that the number of currencies in the world is going to contract (down to only the dollar, euro, and yen), with hints of his upcoming argument. Then in the last chapter he lays out his argument which claims that the number of currencies is going to rise in the near future. I learned quite a bit about international monetary policies from most of the book and became pretty convinced of his arguments that we won't ever have a world with just three currencies, but I found his argument for many more currencies pretty weak. It seemed like he just plopped that last chapter on quickly feeling the need to talk about the internet. And he used the word 'flooz' way too much to be respected.

To summerize, I found the book worth the time spent to read it (which is a lot better than most pop-econ books) and although I think his ending arguments were weak I don't necessarily think that he's wrong.

This book is a thoughtful, amply documented reflection on the future of currency. The dollar, euro and yen dominate the global monetary order, with the dollar now unrivaled at the top and unlikely to be threatened in the future. The countries that issue lesser currencies face a trade-off between monetary sovereignty and international acceptability (with all its economic advantages). Some economists say these lesser currencies should simply dollarize, that is, sacrifice their monetary sovereignty on the altar of international economic efficiency by adopting a stronger currency as their own. Author Benjamin J. Cohen argues that these countries are likely to reject dollarization because the emotional and political advantages of issuing one's own currency are simply too strong. He suggests various alternate mechanisms that allow countries to maintain some monetary independence and authority while gaining the advantages of a fully liquid, widely used currency. Non-specialists may find his extensive discussions a bit dry or sometimes tedious, but we applaud the author's ability to explore monetary economics in admirably lucid detail.

This book is a thoughtful, amply documented reflection on the future of currency. The dollar, euro and yen dominate the global monetary order, with the dollar now unrivaled at the top and unlikely to be threatened in the future. The countries that issue lesser currencies face a trade-off between monetary sovereignty and international acceptability (with all its economic advantages). Some economists say these lesser currencies should simply dollarize, that is, sacrifice their monetary sovereignty on the altar of international economic efficiency by adopting a stronger currency as their own. Author Benjamin J. Cohen argues that these countries are likely to reject dollarization because the emotional and political advantages of issuing one's own currency are simply too strong. He suggests various alternate mechanisms that allow countries to maintain some monetary independence and authority while gaining the advantages of a fully liquid, widely used currency. Non-specialists may find his extensive discussions a bit dry or sometimes tedious, but we applaud the author's ability to explore monetary economics in admirably lucid detail.

There is little question that Marx was the most important economic/political theorist of the modern era. The question then, is how to present an overview of his thought in a single volume.

This collection includes sections from Marx's earlier more philosophical period as a gradute student. It includes his dissertation on democritus and Epicurus as well as the famous essay 'On the Jewish Question.'

Additionally, there is the great 'German Ideology,' 'Gundrisse,' and the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (one of the most important works on political revolution in the entire literature. Of course you will also find the Manifesto, and selections from Capital (though far from comprehensive) as well as the Economic-Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844.

I was also pleased with the editor's inclusion of several letters of Marx between him and friends and family, mostly Engels. Also, there are report cards from the young Marx while he was in school, a fun extra.

The Portable Marx is a good way to begin to immerse yourself in Marx, though only a thorough reading of Capital will really allow you to appreciate the depth and range of his genius.

"The Portable Karl Marx" is a splendid anthology of Marx' writings, political, philosophical and economic. The book also features a selection of Marx' personal letters, his university records and various private documents, including his birth certificate, all which help to illuminate the character of one of the prophets of the modern age. The compendium of extracts traces Marx' intellectual trajectory, from his early discipleship to the critical idealism of Hegel, onto his maturity, by which time he had established himself as a luminary of political thought. The chief doctrines of his mature philosophy are expounded here, such as historical materialism, surplus value and the class struggle, which would be generated by the contradictions and tensions of capitalism itself, leading to the growth of an educated proletariat which would free themselves from their yoke and revolt to usher in the era of communism. Karl Marx is, along with Freud and Nietzsche, one of the focal points of the culture of the twentieth century. Contemporary debates on political philosophy cannot do without having recourse to, or at least coming to terms with, his shattering insights and path-making formulations.

This book is an outstanding overview of the life and thoughts of Karl Marx. The editor masterfully weaves together Marx's published works and private letters into a rich tapestry of history and ideas.

In addition to what you might expect to find in a collection like this (the text of The Communist Manifesto, selections from Das Kapital...), there are also tidbits from Marx's hand that help you truly understand the man and the history of his ideology, from his predictions on the fates of France and Russia, even down to his favorite color (red, of course) and his old report cards.

No serious student of economic and political philosophy should be without an understanding of Karl Marx. This book provides it like no other.

In addition to Marx's writings, this book consists of introductions to various sections of Marx's writings by Prof Kamenka, a chronology of events in Marx's life, letters and other documents by and about him and a glossary of Marxian terms. The writings can be tedious, windy full of run-on sentences, sometimes unreadable. I skipped some of them, including his speech "Value, price and profit," which Kamenka claims was a good laymen's introduction to the ideas of "Capital," but I gave it up after a few pages. The first section of writings is from before 1844. In the tradition of the enlightenment, he discusses the concept of "alienation," how human nature is based on the need to maximize one's creative potential. Yet under capitalism, the worker is turned into a machine; the product he makes, or help makes under the division of labor, does not give him any value, but the wealth from it goes to his boss. The workers intellectual capabilities and self-esteem are stunted. Thus, a truly just society would give the worker the freedom to pursue his dreams, not having to worry about renting himself out to capitalists to survive. Workers, those who actually produce wealth, would directly manage businesses (not state bureaucrats).

As we progress along the years with Marx, he begins to develop his redoubtable historical materialist conception of history. This is a "scientific" thesis that all societies pass through slavery, feudalism, and capitalism and then capitalism starts to break down because of its own "contradictions." In unrestrained capitalism, capitalists try to maximize profit anyway they can. They build up excess capacity of factories and other facilities to try to compete but unfortunately in unregulated competition, all but a select few are destroyed. The petit bourgeoisie i.e. peasants and small business owners are also wiped out by big business. The capitalists in order to keep up their rate of profit, increase the hours of their slaves and try to reduce their wages and getting out of doing anything for them to make their conditions better. The capitalist system will eventually collapse from all of this and the urban wage slaves, the proletariat will take over the means of production, eventually instituting democratic workers control over these means. As Prof. Kamenka notes later, it is rather vague if Marx conceived of various measures to forestall capitalism's, destabilization. ...

His writings from the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte are certainly interesting, though his efforts to apply his theories to the situation in France somewhat take away from his analysis of the events. He conceives the France under Louis Philippe (1830-48) to be under the control one of section of the bourgeoisie, basically stock market swindlers. The rest of the proprietered classes revolted against this one faction in 1848. The ruling classes promised the proletariat radical democratic reforms to get their support for the overthrow but once they had consolidated their power, they massacred them into submission. The peasants were the majority of France at that time, and they, of course, valued stability above all else to maintain their meager property. The Bourgeois republic that was consolidated in 1848 could not provide the requisite stablity for capitalist operations, so up rose Louis Bonaparte, nephew of Napoleon to establish a dictatorship.

In his article,"The Indian revolt" from 1857 he breaks free from the vague theorizing and comes out with first rate journalism pure and simple. He reminds his readers that with all the hocus pocus of holy horror in England of the atrocities of the Indian sepoys , British troops were raping and burning down villages in China not that long ago. He quotes the proud numerous proud accounts from British soldiers of routine racist massacre and torture. Such as "not a day passes but we string up ten to fifteen of them(noncombatants)" and "every nigger we meet we either string up or shoot."

Another first rate piece of journalism, is his inagural address to the international working of 1864. Again, no tedious theorizing but a straightforward report on the condition of the British working classes. This was in a period, he notes, which the Chancellor of the Excheqeur slobbered over as a period of unprecedented expansion of wealth for all Britons. He contrasts this with a quote from William Gladstone that this increase in wealth was actually exclusvely confined to the property-owning minority. He quotes extensively from house of lords reports that worry about the severe malnourishment among agricultural laborers and which also noteed that the worst conditions of these laborers was better than the average amongst urban laborers.

The best writing by far is his stuff on the Paris commune of 1871, after France's defeat by Bismark's Prussia. Prussia and the French elite combined to crush these communes. These communes were set up as local, regional and national bodies. However, the local communes had the predominant power. Each body selected delegates to the higher bodies. Each body had reprehensive from the working class paid at workingperson's wages. Any government official could be removed from power at anytime by a recall type action. This is clearly what Marx had in mind as a system to govern the "transition to communism," instead of the dictatorship over the proletariat that was set up in the so-called "communist states" under his name.

The Critique of the Gotha program for 1875 consists of Marx attacking the German workers party somewhat pedantically but it consists of interesting comments. He denounces the party for its advocacy of state power to achieve its ends. He even denounces them for calling for government control of the schools.

This book is a good source on Russian economic reform in the early to mid 1990's. Great for anyone with an interest in Russia's transition from socialism to capitalism. My only quarrel with the book is that it seems to be a bit repetitive. Other then that, great book.

Without A Map, by Harvard economist Andrei Schleifer and UCLA political scientist Daniel Treisman, describes the successes and failures encountered by Russia's economic reformers in the years 1992-98. The three primary reform efforts, privatization, controlling inflation, and reforming the tax system, are presented individually. For each of these topics, the authors approach is to, first, describe the situation, the government's actions, and the results, second, present summaries of various explanations of these situations, actions, and results, and, finally, provide their own interpretation of the political tactics and economic results. Each of these areas of reform required approaches that were both economically appropriate (contributed to solving the problem) and politically acceptable (would be enacted by the legislature, carried out by the government, and not provoke major popular unrest). None of the reforms had a powerful constituency and most did have powerful opponents in the form of the various stakeholders in the status quo. In the cases where the reformers were successful they were able to split the opposition stakeholders by co-opting some (by offering them an alternative to their existing stake) and expropriating others (by transferring or abolishing their stake).

In the case of privatization in 1992, the stakeholders were (1) the industrial ministries (which had controlled their respective industries under the Former Soviet Union), (2) the managers, (3) the workers, and (4) the regional and local governments. Several formulas for issuing vouchers that could be converted to shares were proposed. The winning solution was to co-opt the managers and workers by allocating them 51% share to be owned individually rather than collectively. This approach resulted in a higher concentration of initial ownership than might have been desirable, but this compromise was probably essential achieving any meaningful degree of privatization.

In the case of controlling inflation in 1995-6, the key stakeholders were (1) the central bank and commercial banks and (2) the state subsidized industries (e.g., agriculture and defense). In a bizarre twist on western banking practices, Russian banks in these years paid their depositors interest rates lower than the inflation rate and invested the funds in commodities and currencies which appreciated relative to the ruble, effectively selling the currency short. The reformers co-opted the banks by creating a market for government securities with the banks as the primary dealers. The banks were transformed from short sellers of the ruble to stakeholders in the ruble by virtue of their holding of government securities. In addition, the 1996 "loans-for-shares" deals between the government and the banks further co-opted the banks. Under this program, the government obtained loans from the banks that rather obviously exceed the government's ability to repay. The loans were secured by shares in major oil and mining companies which became the property of the banks when the government failed to repay the loans. Although this tactic appears rather unsavory, it was successful in breaking the pattern of inflation and in further transferring productive assets out of the state ownership. However, it also created the class of oligarchs who became a major stakeholder in the third reform effort.

The last area of reform was the attempt to reform government finance and the tax system. Here, the stakeholders were (1) the large enterprises (who paid the taxes), (2) the regional governments, (3) the local governments, and (4) the State Tax Service (STS) which collected taxes on behalf of the federal and regional governments. This is the area where the reformers failed, due primarily to the complex set of obstacles presented by the existing tax structure. Briefly, that tax structure was characterized by (1) overlapping tax bases - federal and regional taxes collected in competition on the same base, (2) tax revenue sharing - selective federal remittances of tax revenues to regions which prompted the regions to hide their revenues and exaggerate their poverty, (3) a tax service charged with serving two masters - the STS collected taxes for both the federal and regional governments, resulting in a fundamental conflict of interest, and (4) combined tax rates so high that they drove small enterprises into the underground economy. The reformers were unable to co-opt or expropriate the stakes of any of these stakeholders.

What is amazing about the Russian reformers (especially, Yegor Gaidar, Anatoly Chubias, and Boris Fyodorov) is not that they were not entirely successful but that they were as successful as they were in light of the overwhelming obstacles.

Without a Map is a good place to start learning about Russian economic reform in the 1990's. It is concise and thorough, and covers a lot of ground. As a result, it tends to be somewhat general, when one might be interested in specific details of reforms, but it's a very solid overview. It is not a book for just anyone, but will fascinate anybody who has an interest in the Russian economy or in economics in general. It is a perfect complement to Privatizing Russia, also co-authored by Schleifer.

In a very readable book the authors provide an excellent account of fiscal federalism in Russia. They talk about the stagnation the Russian economy faces and provide a very valid hypothesis for its cause in Russia's taxation system - what many others have previously given scant attention to. This book will appeal to economists, political scientists, and anyone else interested in Russia today.

I had Getman for labor law and that's why I bought this book. I'm passing it on to my sister who practice labor and employment law because I know she'll really enjoy it. It's a good book for someone who wants to get a picture of how unions work, internal politics and all, and the emotions involved in a labor strike. An objectiver look from an interesting guy who really knows this area of law.

Mr. Getman does a good of telling the local union's side of the strike at Internatioal Paper's Jay, Maine mill, however his lack of balance causes him to miss the point. I worked as a consultant at the Jay mill for a year prior to the strike and know all the main characters Mr. Getman describes. He has omitted some key relationships. For example the deep personal dislike between the mill manager and the local president was an important element in the strike. But more important Mr. Getman missed the point he was trying to make. While he concludes that International Paper, the international union, and the law betrayed Local 14, the fact is the real betrayers of Local 14 were the idealists who turned a local labor disput into a crusade. He is correct in that the strike bitterly divided the town of Jay and it is divided to this day. I hope every union official reads this book before they ask their members for a strike vote.

This is an insightful and readable account of an important strike. The local leadership did not go looking for this strike, International Paper did. What they did not count on was the innovative tactics of the workers, and their leadership and advisors, who inflicted a lot of pain on the company. When I lived in Maine, the paper companies got everything just they way they wanted it. When they said jump, everyone from the Governor to the media said how high? And if the paper companies wanted fewer restrictions from environmental laws, even the unions went along with it. But in 1987-8, workers in Jay stood up. And a lot of Mainers stood by them. The strike shook things up in the state. This book is a useful reminder that workers can stand up for what they believe in. They can fight and make a difference. By the way. In other countries, like France, it is illegal to bring in permanent replacement scabs. It should be here.

Many people think that Stalin's Russia was a productive industrializing country in the 1930s. Andreev-Khomiakov points out that it wasn't. This was a country which gave minimal wages to most of its workers. It was also a country that did not provide materially for its citizens. In a sense, this country was a totalitarian dictatorship where a few got rich, and most were poor. Industry was poorly run, since nobody was competing against another company. People also stole and cheated on the system because they had to. The author gives a convincing story on the system that Communism placed in Russia.

This is certainly a great book to read about how Stalin's system did not work. This shows the inner workings of Communism and why this system died in the 1990s. An interesting read for those interested in Stalin's Russia.

This book was very well written and shows what effect being a political prisoner has on one man even after he returns to the "real world." This is an intelligent man who works in manufacturing and views Soviet life under Stalin in an unfavorable light. He knows how to work the system and keep himself under the radar until World War II breaks out. I found this book compelling and enjoyed reading it very much.

If you're one of those people fascinated by the Soviet Union in the 1930s your mind will be blown by this quite fabulous book. Like virtually no other work I've read on the subject it brings home quite how anarchic life was for many people and how the ludicrously inhuman way in which the Soviet Union was run helped crush the population's soul. Anyone interested enough in this topic to probe further should also read "An American Engineer in Stalin's Russia", which is almost as good as this work. Andreev-Khomiakov's greatest talent is his ability to wriggle right into the psyches of the opposers and the opposed to produce a graphic explanation of what was so wrong with the Soviet Union in the 1930s. He also produces enough anecdotes to show how some people can retain their most human qualities at a time when everyone around them is descending into brutality. I say again -- this is a quite extraordinary work. Buy it now!

This is the best, comprehensive book ever written for financial management for individuals and families.

If you've never been interested, never had enough, or pay for everything but attention-when it comes to finances, well here's a good place to start learning the basics about money management and its nomenclature.

I've always relied on Consumer Reports for information and I'm glad I used this book as my financial/monetary reference. I've learned so much about a number of topics from IRAs to wills, credit unions to buying my first house mortgage. Consumer Reports provides great statistical data to back up their suggestions or findings (for example, different compounding results for loans vs. leases). They don't just provide definitions for each topic, they give helpful, advanced suggestions and advice (for example, a regular IRA will compound much more than a Roth IRA because a Roth IRA gets taxes pulled out of it right at the contribution). I guess the younger you are, the more I can recommend this book. Anyone who is just breaking in to the real world will find this book extremely valuable. Everyone else will at least find further insight to topics they might already know about and also get their money's worth from the book.

Scargill and Heathfield are heroes --God knows we need them now more than ever! What this book does is expose the pressure and the violence capital will use when confronted with real opposition--it makes watergate look like nothing. Remember the annhilitation of the PKI in 1965 or think about the growing carnage in IraqI just wish that Gen Giap had with the miners in 1984. It was noi orginary strije--it altered a world --and it is a testament to the book that Arthur is still around to organize opposition to "turbocapitalism"

I'd like to begin with a disclaimer: I broadly share the politics of the author and I'm sure this influenced my rating. ...I would have preferred much MORE detail, ...In particular, I think it is regrettable that there is no appendix which gives verbatim extended extracts of the original Mirror and Cook reports to which the book is a rebuttal. (To be fair, this might not be the fault of the author -- it's possible that copyright considerations prevented the inclusion of such material. However, even if this is so, he should have mentioned it in the preface or acknowledgements.) I was somewhat put off by the author's unstinting admiration for Arthur Scargill. Yes, he has suffered a lot, and I'm sympathetic, too. But surely many of his unpopular stances (such as his adamant refusal to condemn any picket-line violence) could have been subjected to greater scrutiny. Despite these critical comments, I believe that this book is essential reading since it is a case study which constitutes a critical contribution to a much under-explored topic -- mainstream media coverage of the Industrial Left. I was also very impressed by the long list of works which Milne referred to. This gave me the impression that Milne had a great deal of background information to work with, and further motivated me to consult these other works.

Before I go on to say what a fabulous piece of work this is, I must stress one criticism. I felt Milne went into perhaps too much detail about what happened to 'this million' or 'that million' with reference to where Scargill and Heathfield hid the NUM's donations. Although interesting, I would like to also have seen Arthur himself give a closer look at his own perspective of events surrounding the strike. I feel this would ultimately have been more revealing about the nature of the whole smear campaign than so much time and print being spent on the detail.

What double dealing and hypocrisy from everyone from the Soviets to Kinnock though! I'm sure I feel more angry at the likes of Ron Todd (not mentioned much actually) Neil Kinnock and the whole TUC and Labour Party than I ever will about Thatcher and her despicable (but at least openly hostile)cronies.

Anyway, I was moved by the miners' story. I am ashamed on behalf of all the British people who voted for, and kept voting for, Thatcher.

I am only sad that a movie has not been made based on this book. It's nail-biting stuff reminiscent of Forsyth so why is there so little literature and film on what happened? Where's Ken Loach? Come on Ken, get a film made of it all!

Great piece of work Seamas!

This review is more of a greater explanation of the contents, rather than analysis of the material selected, because it's been a while since I read this and the book contents are unable to be searched on here.

The first section of the book gives the title of the book a misnomer, which is comprised of direct speeches given by the early (1930s - 1950s) thinkers and leaders (Spenelli and Rossi, De Gaulle, and others) and contemporary ones (Blair, DeLors, Fischer) in what is now known as the European Union. Additionally, the preambles of the Nice and Maastrich Treaties were included. The preambles and speeches provide a valuabl, first-hand source on the leaders' views of integration and how the EU wanted to integration to take place.

The second section provides an analysis of early integration theories (economic integration) and the effects of integration in the EU (the fate of the nation-state). There are 7 articles in this section.

The last section has more analytical approach to contemporary theories (functionalism, neofunctionalism) of integration and levels of governance within the EU.

For each reading, the editors provide a brief explanation of the and a small historical background of author and the reading, which is valuable for readers, especially those with a minimal background on the European Union.

Since this collection is focused on integration, I was a bit surprised there was not anything (to the best of my knowledge) regarding the Euro (the common currency) or migration policy. Overall, I rate this a 3.5 stars, rounded to four on Amazon.

Wow! This man knows how to write a book on EU law! No one captures the flair and significance of Europe like he does. The chapter on "The Tragedy of Europe" brought tears to my eyes. Why did they not listen?! Why did this have to happen! Nelsen knows and he tells you. I recommend this book to all, not just Norse love gods, but to all humanity!

I found this book a useful reference work for the original texts concerning the political study of EU integration history & theory.