Talk:Shock therapy (economics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There's no discussion of Russia in the results section - something of an omission. Has this been cut? If so, why? Regards, Winterstein 16:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Removed the following from the article since it has little to do with economics or shock therapy.
- Some judge that the military attack on the Russian parliament in November 1993 reduced the possibility of Russian economists with alternative economic models to participate in economic decision-making.
- See also
- * Aleksandr Lukashenko
- * Poland
--kudz75 03:53, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Err
No mention of Pinochet's Chile? Joffeloff 13:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re Recent Edits
I'm leaving most of them in for now because they're factually correct and somewhat relevant. However, Shock therapy as defined in the article and usually, is " the sudden release of price and currency controls, withdrawal of state subsidies, and immediate trade liberalization within a country." Privatization of state industries is a bit more of its own beast. The architects of Shock therapy in Poland (Sachs, Balcerowicz) recognized that effective and beneficial privatization had to be carefully designed and did not push for it immiediately. It is useful to contrast this process with the one in Russia but it is only partially relevant. Most, well, good many, economists would advocate Shock therapy as defined in the article, but caution about chaotic and ill conceived privatization schemes (myself among them). Furthermore Poland usually is the poster boy for shock therapy so calling it "gradualist" is somewhat misleading though I guess it's a matter of magnitude sometimes. I am going to remove/redit the edits soon unless someone wants to argue the opposite case.radek 03:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Katrina
Why is there a link to Hurricane Katrina's economic effects here? Has there been "shock therapy" economic reform in Louisiana? James Haughton (talk) 04:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] See Also: The Shock Doctrine?
Along the lines of the Katrina comment, I'm going to question the appropriateness of the placement of "The Shock Doctrine" under 'See Also' because it conflates the economic strategy of shock therapy with the thesis of Ms. Klein's book, which as I understand it has to do with collusion in profiting from natural and humanitarian disasters. The two seem only marginally related, for example in discussion of Pinochet (as humanitarian disaster) who instituted the Chicago Boys' recommended reforms (shock therapy). It seems to me that including Klein's book in the entry gives a false impression of a relationship where there is none; I'm assuming the title of the book is to blame here. Unless Klein figures shock therapy into the collusion--maybe someone who has read the book could clarify? Thanks.
Mackenzie 140.160.11.146 (talk) 11:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
