--- Carrol Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I suppose that what interests me in this > discussion is not the question of the > > political significance of the third digit > right of the point, but rather that > > of the social role of different kinds of > unemployment and near-unemployment. > > Correct! But that is determined through > political struggle, not by > academic spats over (as you say) the "third > digit to the right of the > point." I'm concerned that too many maillist > denizens come to think that > winning an argument on a maillist has anything > to do with winning > political struggles. > > Carrol
The problem as I see it is this academic tendency to reify the concept over the social reality that it is supposed to model or represent in political discourse. If I have to take a calculation on unemployment out to the third digit to satisfy the statistician down the hall, so be it. If I have to multiply a simple total (of unemployed) by two to three because my collection methods are so inadequate, I might as well be wanking myself with all ten digits. I think the whole concept of employment is equally absurd. I'm absolutely sure that the work I do of most social--and economic--value is my volunteer editing duties--totally unremunerated. Quite a bit more satisfying, though, if you think about it, than taking one hour of part-time work a week at an employment security office for 8 dollars just so some government stats person can say I'm no longer unemployed. C. Jannuzi __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com
