I think people generally identify less and less with the companies they work
for and tend to define themselves more and more outside of the context of
work. This is noted in Richard Florida's book The Rise of the Creative
Class, which I have mostly read and can't seem to finish. He makes a
Oh, I have followed this thread a bit, sorry, there is so much email.
Melvin makes a fabulous analysis because he points out the opening of a
positive space in which opposition to capital can occupy, both in theory and
in reality. He has identified fertile ground on which an alternative economy
On 10/10/2002 1:54 AM, Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thiago Oppermann:
Wouldn't the quality of unemployment also be relevant? A rate of 1% where
the
unemployed end up indentured to credit companies might be a lot worse than
5%
if they are free to enjoy productive unemployment.
Devine, James wrote:
Thiago writes:
there also is an issue here about what it means to be unemployed
these days. It doesn't necessarily mean one is not working: [clip]
I think it's useful to keep unemployment _per se_ (as with the
official definitions) separate from these
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.
This fine-grain sociological picture is, in my decidedly
Actually Carrol, I think in Melvin's theory the technically unemployed and
under employed play a significant role in revolution. It was really
fascinating, you should read it if you have not already.
LS
on 10/10/2002 7:34 PM, Carrol Cox at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Devine, James wrote:
lisa stolarski wrote:
Actually Carrol, I think in Melvin's theory the technically unemployed and
under employed play a significant role in revolution. It was really
fascinating, you should read it if you have not already.
Many sectors of the working class play (will play) a significant
[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
DD writes:
CJ: I know some people are probably sick of the
topic, but reading through all those posts, I
can't help but think at least two individuals
mucked it up more than added to it (not
Daniel's
recent post, which did add considerably).
DD: Thanks, but hang on a minute. If by two
I thought Daniel did an excellent job of responding to this note. I don't
think any one or two people mucked anything up but the discussion just got
ugly step by step.
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 04:07:47AM -0700, Charles Jannuzi wrote:
I know some people are probably sick of the
topic, but
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31147] Re: Re: employment
Michael Perelman wrote:
I thought Daniel did an excellent job of responding to this
note. I don't
think any one or two people mucked anything up but the
discussion just got
ugly step by step.
Hey, just yesterday a Zionist professor told me
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31150] Re: employment
I don't agree with that theory.
Charles J writes:
I have no doubt that the US's extremely large
jail populations and active duty military help
keep unemployment quite a bit lower than if the
US fit the OECD pattern in these areas. It
doesn't,
-Original Message-
From: Charles Jannuzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 09 October 2002 15:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:31148] Re: employment
best you could say it was an argument from
previously established authority
Absolutely, because I have no real specialist
Finally, think about how so many of these
concepts are culturally determined. If 'unemployment' in the US were
determined the
way it is in Japan, the figure would jump about 1%
with one calculation.
I'm not sure I follow the argument that, b/c Japanese statisticians define
employment
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31127] Re: Re: employment
Michael:
Several times in the past, I mentioned that the unemployment
rate should
include something to adjust for the quality of available
jobs. My idea
never resonated. I am sure that it could not be calculated with any
exactitude, but I
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31131] Re: Re: Re: employment
Thiago Oppermann:
Wouldn't the quality of unemployment also be relevant? A rate of 1% where the
unemployed end up indentured to credit companies might be a lot worse than 5%
if they are free to enjoy productive unemployment. ...
there's
Michael Hoover wrote:
i'll try to avoid making an analogy here for reasons that should
be obvious... i can't help but recall fanon's assertion that
violence is turned inward in colonial society; people kill each
other rather than their subjugators...
Yes, as Marx used to say, it's the
On 9 Oct 02, at 16:14, Davies, Daniel wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Charles Jannuzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 09 October 2002 15:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:31148] Re: employment
best you could say it was an argument from
previously established
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31157] RE: Re: employment (apologies: long)
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
Daniel Davies writes:
... My understanding of what the BLS unemployment rate is
meant to measure
As usual, Michael H. is correct. I tried to say something similar a
couple days ago when Doug suggested that the left had a tendency to root
out heretics. I cryptically suggested that it was not some political
tendency but rather it reflected powerlessness.
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at
01:38:55PM
Michael Perelman wrote:
As usual, Michael H. is correct. I tried to say something similar a
couple days ago when Doug suggested that the left had a tendency to root
out heretics. I cryptically suggested that it was not some political
tendency but rather it reflected powerlessness.
I guess
Nice post, Lou, except for the personal dig at the end. I remember when
the New Republic was my fave. Kopkind and Ridgeway were great.
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 06:26:18PM -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
Michael Perelman wrote:
I guess that a different kind of left is being described here than
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31033] Re: Re: employment
OK fellas,
I am going to imagine what Sabri could have meant. JD's are not the the
only perspectives on how we can treat statistics, government or
otherwise. Yes, even statistics are subject to perspective, numbers may
be objective
Sabri Oncu wrote:
Jim said:
Like Doug, I don't get this, Sabri.
I don't know how to describe it, although I am sure I would sound
racist if I say this but I think you don't get this because you
are Americans. You don't know the difference because you have
never experienced it.
As I said I
The US unemployment rate appeared steady earlier this year, despite the
slowing economy and mounting job cuts, but it eventually climbed well above
last October's 30-year low of 3.9 per cent. Many economists expect the rate
to rise to more than 6 per cent next year.
The Labor Department
Devine, James wrote:
Please don't tell me what
I think.
did you hear the one about the two behaviourists who were having sex? at
the end of the steamy session, one of them said to the other it was
good for you. was it good for me?.
most of the time i couldn't even tell what you write,
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31041] Re: employment
I wrote:
Also, I don't see why the sins of modernism
(a.k.a., capitalist
rationality) should encourage rejection of
logic, scientific thinking, the
use of evidence, etc. I doubt this is what you
advocate.
Jim
C. Jannuzi:
Well what sort of
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31048] Re: RE: Re: Re: employment
ravi:
did you hear the one about the two behaviourists who were having sex? at
the end of the steamy session, one of them said to the other it was
good for you. was it good for me?.
-- no, one would say: my behavior clearly reinforced
Devine, James wrote:
OK fellas,
I am going to imagine what Sabri could have meant. JD's are not the the
only perspectives on how we can treat statistics, government or
otherwise. Yes, even statistics are subject to perspective, numbers may
be objective but their presentation has its purposes.
I think I understand a little of what Sabri is getting at -- the
intellectual and accepting way we look at the statistics -- seeing
them as economic factorum and not as poor, suffering people.
What I think he is saying, certainly what I am saying, is ONE is
too many. When we remember that
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31054] Re: Re: employment
Paul, can you name a participant of pen-l who is fixated on a single number measuring the reserve army of the unemployed?
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message
Don't we see the same thing in every anti-war statement? X is a very bad
person. I don't support X, but .
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 11:23:05AM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
There's this extremely annoying habit in left discourse (cue to
Carrol Cox to say that the left doesn't exist) that
Tom Walker wrote:
My answer to Jim's question is: nothing is wrong if we fully acknowledge the
limitations of the government statistics -- or any statistics -- to
measure the phenomena they purport to measure. The problem is that we _do
not_ acknowledge those limits but become
and are available for full-time work but
have had to settle for a part-time schedule.)
Christian
-Original Message-
From: Louis Proyect
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 10/8/2002 7:52 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:31046] Re: Re: Re: employment
The US unemployment rate appeared steady
earlier
Michael Perelman wrote:
Don't we see the same thing in every anti-war statement? X is a very bad
person. I don't support X, but .
No, it's not the same. X (= Saddam, Slobo, etc.) generally is a very
bad person. I was at an antiwar demo - a very good, inspiring one -
in NYC just the
Christian Gregory wrote:
You don't really start getting numbers substantially higher than this until
you add workers on part-time basis for economic reasons, which suggests that
the marginally employed, as a fraction of the labor force, is pretty small.
Don't forget forced overtime and multiple
Doug Henwood wrote:
Look at the shit Marc Cooper takes from people busily policing left
ideological boundaries. There are American leftists - I won't name
names, for the sake of amity - who spend more time denouncing him and
The Nation magazine than they do actually engaging with
Look at the shit Marc Cooper takes from people busily policing left
ideological boundaries. There are American leftists - I won't name names,
for the sake of amity - who spend more time denouncing him and The Nation
magazine than they do actually engaging with American politics. It's
Devine, James wrote:
Paul, can you name a participant of pen-l who is fixated on a single
number measuring the reserve army of the unemployed?
See - we didn't invoke the standard litany, therefore we're either
ignorant, insensitive, or on the verge of heresy.
I'd laugh, but I care about this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I understand a little of what Sabri is getting at -- the
intellectual and accepting way we look at the statistics -- seeing
them as economic factorum and not as poor, suffering people.
And who the hell isn't saying that?
Is this is the best progressive
Devine, James wrote:
I _do_ acknowledge these limits, as does Doug (in my experience).
Who is this we you refer to? I really hate being a straw man.
Using statistics intelligently (or scientifically) always involves
two different things: (1) actually using them and (2) being aware of
the
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31067] Re: employment
I wrote What is the problem with using some (but not all) government statistics
as a half-bad/half good way of understanding what's going on, in conjunction with other information and reasoning?
Sabri Oncu wrote, Life is not as rational as you think
Dynamically, the concept relies on contradiction. Only statically does it
appear to be non-contradictory. The statistic necessarily treats unemployment
at rest, so to speak. A statistic gives a static picture. It is no coincidence
that both words begin with the
same four letters.
So what if
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[PEN-L:31057] RE: Re: Re: employment
Date sent: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:06:30 -0700
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul, can you name
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31084] Re: RE: Re: Re: employment
I wrote:
Paul, can you name a participant of pen-l who is fixated on
a single number
measuring the reserve army of the unemployed?
Paul responded:
Well, I sure read a lot this past day on the list about THE
unemployment rate
: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[PEN-L:31077] Re: RE: Re: Re: employment
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Devine, James wrote:
Paul, can you name a participant of pen-l who is fixated on a single
number measuring the reserve army
:[PEN-L:31088] RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: employment
Date sent: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 12:05:55 -0700
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I wrote:
Paul, can you name a participant of pen-l who is fixated on
a single number
measuring the reserve army of the unemployed?
Paul
Doug, don't be mad, just say yes, yes, perhaps I took that point for
granted when I made this other point. Sometime people just want to point
the qualitative stuff out. We are all on the same side here, there is so
much work to do. I hope the list won't crumble over this.
Lisa S
on
BLS? VCR? FYAH.
Tom Walker
604 255 4812
FYAH? Fuck you ass hole?
Inquisitively,
Christian
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31098] Re: employment
Tom W writes:
Jim,
It looks to me like you reacted to my message paragraph by
paragraph without
treating the message as an unfolding whole. This in itself should be a
warning against the cinematographic method you uphold. What I
have to say
BLS? VCR? FYAH.
Tom Walker
604 255 4812
Seriously, the critique of representation only gets you so far. Then, if you
can't come up with something else, you're left muttering that it's all
representations and so can't be trusted, etc.
So, sure there should be some index of job holders
I have been teaching all day and I am bit groggy. How the hell does a
simple discussion about data evoke such nastiness? I see that Doug has
already left.
Why can't we just communicate? If you want to get angry, direct it towad
the war mongers.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 04:27:44PM -0400,
We are going to war and you guys are getting nasty over BLS data. Give me
a break!
Cut the crap. This is not directed at any single individual, but the
entire thread.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 12:45:30PM -0700, Tom Walker wrote:
Christian Gregory wrote,
So what if you don't get
Doug is only gone temoporarily.I don't think attacking him or Liza is
appropriate here. I wish that Doug had not brought up Cooper. I agree
with Lou that the policing does no good.
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:58:02PM -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
Look at the shit Marc Cooper takes from
Michael Perelman wrote:
Doug is only gone temoporarily.I don't think attacking him or Liza is
appropriate here. I wish that Doug had not brought up Cooper. I agree
with Lou that the policing does no good.
i hope doug does not find me in the list of those he finds unreasonable.
ravi wrote:
i hope doug does not find me in the list of those he finds unreasonable.
whether it be my general responses to his posts, or to the particular
issue of marc cooper (and i agree that we should avoid discussing
personalities), i have tried to be honest and friendly. if that
Come on, let's cool it with the personalities.
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 12:37:06AM +0100, Mark Jones wrote:
ravi wrote:
i hope doug does not find me in the list of those he finds unreasonable.
whether it be my general responses to his posts, or to the particular
issue of marc cooper
Several times in the past, I mentioned that the unemployment rate should
include something to adjust for the quality of available jobs. My idea
never resonated. I am sure that it could not be calculated with any
exactitude, but I agree that an unemployment rate of 1% with everyone
flipping
On 9/10/2002 12:49 PM, Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Several times in the past, I mentioned that the unemployment rate should
include something to adjust for the quality of available jobs. My idea
never resonated. I am sure that it could not be calculated with any
exactitude,
makes sense to me.
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 01:41:25PM +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/10/2002 12:49 PM, Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Several times in the past, I mentioned that the unemployment rate should
include something to adjust for the quality of available jobs.
Title: RE: [PEN-L:30994] Re: employment
Even though pension numbers are iffy, the employment numbers are calculated using a relatively simple sample survey. One of the things that they indicate is that even though (in recent months) the over-all unemployment rate has fallen, so has
Devine, James wrote:
Even though pension numbers are iffy, the employment numbers are
calculated using a relatively simple sample survey.
And, fevered claims to the contrary, they're not cooked by
Enron-style accountancy. The people who collect and process the U.S.
jobs data are honest,
And, fevered claims to the contrary, they're not cooked by Enron-style
accountancy. The people who collect and process the U.S. jobs data are
honest, competent professionals. If anything, the political sympathies of
BLS employees are slightly to the left of center.
Doug
I don't have time to
I don't think that there is a contradiction between Doug and Lou. There
are criticism's about the method of calculating unemployment -- the
discouraged workers being excluded. But such matters are transparent, not
the result of skulduggery.
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 05:21:30PM -0400, Louis
Michael Perelman wrote:
I don't think that there is a contradiction between Doug and Lou. There
are criticism's about the method of calculating unemployment -- the
discouraged workers being excluded. But such matters are transparent, not
the result of skulduggery.
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31008] Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: employment
Michael Perelman:
I don't think that there is a contradiction between Doug and
Lou. There are criticism's about the method of calculating unemployment -- the
discouraged workers being excluded.
The BLS currently calculates
,
Economics,
University of Manitoba
Date sent: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 14:39:46 -0700
From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:31008] Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: employment
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I don't
Tom Walker wrote:
Well, gosh, I spend my life with this stuff, too as do the follks on the
unemployment statistics list. Michael Perelman is right. There isn't really
a contradiction between saying the methodology is flawed and the numbers are
misleading yet recognizing that the people who
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31015] Re: Re: employment
Tom Walker writes:
There isn't really a contradiction between saying the methodology is flawed and the numbers are misleading yet recognizing that the people who collect the data are honest and well-intentioned.
Tom, could you explain
Sabri Oncu wrote:
I said:
Maybe I am just a dreamer, but I am not the only one!
After reading Jim's and Doug's comments, I came to the conclusion
that I am the only one.
This is sad, very sad.
About what? We're talking about life under capitalism. The conditions
of the labor market matter
I am not reading anyone saying anything terribly different from what Tom
and I said.
I believe that the BLS people do a good job with the parameters that they
are given. Doug is correct that they collect much of the information
necessary to give a better picture of unemployent -- except for the
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31027] Re: employment
I hope you're not saying that it's a Turkish thing; you wouldn't understand it.
JD
-Original Message-
From: Sabri Oncu
To: PEN-L
Sent: 10/7/2002 7:13 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:31027] Re: employment
Jim said:
Like Doug, I don't get this, Sabri.
Title: RE: [PEN-L:31029] Re: employment
There's Western rationality and there's Western rationality. The main -- hegemonic -- form is the capitalist rationality that wants to reduce everything -- and all people -- to things that can be manipulated to attain the predetermined goal (primarily,
RE: [PEN-L:31029] Re: employment
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James
There's Western rationality and there's Western rationality. The main --
hegemonic -- form is the capitalist rationality that wants to reduce
everything -- and all people -- to things that can be manipulated to
Title: Re: [PEN-L:31024] Re: employment
OK fellas,
I am going to imagine what Sabri could have meant. JD's are not the the only perspectives on how we can treat statistics, government or otherwise. Yes, even statistics are subject to perspective, numbers may be objective but their
75 matches
Mail list logo
