Thomas Lunde wrote:
Hi FWer's:
Some of my recent reading has asked me to consider some serious
questions, questions which need to be discussed and critiqued. I
will pose some of these questions and see what kind of responses the
questions evoke. For example:
Given that the concept
Tom Walker answered:
I'd have a look at John Maurice Clark's writing
on labour as an overheadcost (in his _Studies in the Economics of Overhead
Costs_). Thejustification is that a wage system is no longer appropriate to
the way thata modern economy works. The wage system is a form of
At 03:34 PM 2/20/98 -0500, Thomas Lunde wrote:
Tom Walker answered:
If I can try and paraphrase your answer, it would be that we should change
because "a wage system is no longer appropriate to the way that a modern
economy works." And because of this, the cost of providing a worker is
borne by
One practical reason for a basic income. Maintain effective demand in the
economy. Maintain purchasing power. Going to be hard to buy all that
output without access to purchasing power.
arthur cordell
On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Colin Stark wrote:
At 03:34 PM 2/20/98 -0500, Thomas Lunde wrote:
The last series of interchanges have been the main reason I joined (and
have remained lurking) on Futurework.
I just don't see that there are now enough needed jobs at sufficiently
high wages to give everyone (at least in the post-industrial world) a
living income. Many, perhaps most, people are
Jim Dator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Separating "work" entirely from access to goods and services, and
permitting/enabling people to live meaningful, satisfied lives without
"working" seems one of the biggest challenges of the present, and
foreseable future. Trying to create more jobs is futile
