Re: recent economic trends
Jim Devine wrote saith Rev. Tom: Sounds interesting. Could you expand a bit? sure, I'm a sucker for such things. No -- on second thought, I can't, since I've got too much work. Look at my article in Baiman, Boushey, and Saunders, eds., POLITICAL ECONOMY AND CONTEMPORARY CAPITALISM: RADICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ECONOMIC THEORY AND POLICY (M.E. Sharpe, 2000). The CHALLENGE article (to come) is a revised version of that article, with more up-to-date data. Thanks, Jim, that's all I need. Tom Walker Sandwichman and Deconsultant Bowen Island, BC
Re: profits and corporate speculation
And by the way, it was Gretchen Morgenson who did the piece in Forbes a few years back on employee stock options. Louis Proyect just posted a piece by her on consumer debt. I guess she's another one of those gloom and doom loving lefties.
Final exam question
Here's a question (and answer) from the final exam for Professor Lutz Hendricks' Economics 503 course at Arizona State University: Essay Questions (30 points each). Answer 4 questions. Question 1. Unemployment and the Work Week A recent French law intends to shorten the working week from 39 to 35 hours without loss of pay for workers. It is hoped that the plan could provide an extra 1.4 million jobs. What are the likely consequences of this law for employment, unemployment, real GDP, and government revenues? Would the law create new jobs, if pay was reduced in proportion to hours, so as to hold hourly wages constant? Explain your reasoning. Answer Sketches: Essay Questions Case 1: Hold hourly wages constant. Roughly nothing should happen to unemployment. If this is true, then real GDP should fall in proportion to hours (product per hour staying the same). Government revenues would accordingly fall. Employment might also fall because the relative attractiveness of unemployment rises. Why does unemployment stay the same? Essentially because aggregate demand is reduced by exactly the same amount as the reduction in earnings. The hope that new jobs might be created is the infamous lump of labor fallacy which ignores this reduction in demand. Case 2: No loss of pay. This case is similar, except that we now add a wage hike, which further reduces employment and GDP.
Re: Final exam question
Sorry, I thought I had beaten this dead horse so much that people would pick up on the intended irony. The key phrase is "the infamous lump of labor fallacy" the Arizona State U professor cites as the basis for the hope that reducing the work week will create jobs. Infamous indeed! There is no such thing. It is a hoax, a canard, a phony, a counterfeit, a figment of the imagination, a relic of textbook lore. Students in Professor Hendricks' class are eligible to get "30 points" for regurgitating baseless nonsense or possibly zero for a thoughtful answer. But since you asked . . . I'll plug my chapter on "The 'lump of labor' case against work-sharing: populist fallacy or marginalist throwback" in _Working Time: International trends, theory and policy perspectives_, published by Routledge. In that chapter I examined the scholarly credentials (or lack of them) of the alleged lump and show (to my own satisfaction and my editors', at least) how this phony doctrine actually contradicts orthodox marginalist theory on the hours of labour. Admittedly the lump of labor fallacy is itself a piece of trivia, but lurking behind it is an important issue. The eclipsed theory of the hours of labour (Sir Sydney Chapman's) is radically inconvenient to the standard economic assumptions of rationality and market tendency to equilibrium, yet it strictly adheres to the axiom of wages equal to marginal productivity. This inconvenient aspect of the theory meant that its implications had to be assumed away "for the sake of argument" in the 1930s by, e.g., J.R. Hicks and Lionel Robbins and eventually the acknowledgement that the argument rested on a counter-factual assumption had to be quietly set aside for the sake of ideological respectability. We might thus say that the standard analysis -- the "answer" in the final exam -- now rests on a lump of contradictory assumptions fallacy. Marxist economists should also take note of this odd episode because, as Chris Nyland argued about 12 years ago, Chapman's theory of the hours of labour substantially confirmed, from a radically different theoretical standpoint, Marx's position regarding the *historical* as well as immediate relationship between the intensity and duration of the expenditure of labour power. The lump of labor fallacy is, in effect, the bushy tail peeking out from behind Grandma's nightgown that should alert Red Riding Hood to the possibility that the canine-toothed creature in Grandma's bed is not Grandma. Carrol Cox wrote, I don't understand the point. Is this an attack on or defense of the exam questions? It needs more explanation for the non-economists on the list. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Final exam question: Op-ed
ut time we called the bluff of the textbook-thumping experts who seem to think that a toxic cocktail of overwork and underemployment is "good for the economy"? Isn't it about time we buried the bogus lump-of-labor fallacy alongside the remains of that other scientific hoax, the Piltdown Man? -- Tom Walker is a social policy analyst and advocate of shorter working time. His chapter on "The 'lump-of-labor' case against work-sharing" is in _Working Time: International trends, theory and policy perspectives_ edited by Lonnie Golden and Deborah Figart, published by Routledge. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Disappearing in Quebec City
from Naomi Klein: "They were dressed like activists," said Helen Nazon, a 23-year-old from Quebec City, with hooded sweatshirts, bandannas on their faces, flannel shirts, a little grubby. "They pushed Jaggi on the ground and kicked him. It was really violent." "Then they dragged him off," said Michele Luellen. All the witnesses told me that when Mr. Singh's friends closed in to try to rescue him, the men dressed as activists pulled out long batons, beat back the crowd and identified themselves: "Police!" they shouted. Then they threw him into a beige van and drove off. Several of the young activists have open cuts where they were hit. Three hours after Mr. Singh's arrest, there was still no word of where he was being held. http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/RTGAMArticleHTMLTemplate/B,B/20010421/wk lei?tf=RT/fullstory.htmlcf=RT/config-neutralvg=BigAdVariableGeneratorslug =wkleidate=20010421archive=RTGAMsite=Front Meanwhile, back at the ranch: In a speech hastily rewritten to address the clashes between police and small groups of protesters, Mr. Chrtien condemned the violence and said the 34 leaders gathered for the summit represent the will of the citizens who elected them. [Like Dubya, for example?] "Violence and provocation is unacceptable in a democracy," Mr. Chrtien said. "The type of behaviour that we have seen outside this afternoon by small groups of extremists is contrary to the democratic principles we all hold dear. "The creation of a free-trade area is not an end in itself," he said at the opening ceremony, which was attended by a host of dignitaries from across the hemisphere. "It is a means; a tool for growth that will allow us to promote closer, more dynamic economic relations among the nations of the Americas. In time, it will assure a higher standard of living and a better quality of life for all peoples of the hemisphere." Maude Barlow, chair of the Council of Canadians, said activists representing unions, church groups and other citizens' group flatly reject Mr. Chrtien's contention that free trade creates prosperity. "It has increased poverty in Canada and in the United States and in Mexico, and it will do the same throughout the rest of the Americas," Ms. Barlow said. The summit leaders are also expected to focus on ways to enshrine and promote democracy in the region. The heads of government are expected to include in their final communique a "democracy clause," which Canadian officials described as a major advance for a region that has a history of brutal military dictatorships. "They were dressed like activists," said Helen Nazon, a 23-year-old from Quebec City, with hooded sweatshirts, bandannas on their faces, flannel shirts, a little grubby. "They pushed Jaggi on the ground and kicked him. It was really violent." Mr. Chrtien said Friday night the promotion of democracy cannot take a back seat to the advancement of free trade. "Then they dragged him off," said Michele Luellen. All the witnesses told me that when Mr. Singh's friends closed in to try to rescue him, the men dressed as activists pulled out long batons, beat back the crowd and identified themselves: "Police!" they shouted. Then they threw him into a beige van and drove off. Several of the young activists have open cuts where they were hit. "Economic integration is only one pillar in our hemispheric edifice," he said. "After all, prosperity has no meaning if our citizens are not free, if they are not equal before the law or if they cannot make use of the opportunities open to them." Three hours after Mr. Singh's arrest, there was still no word of where he was being held. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Sweatshops and featherbeds
The sophistry in Krugman's argument is that he relies on a universal premise of rational utility maximization in order to demonstrate the irrationality of some particulars. All swans are white . . . therefore, those black swans over there are not swans. Obviously it takes a great deal of skill to perform such a feat but it also takes the indulgence of an audience that would rather watch and believe -- or watch and *disbelieve* -- such a performance than attend to the annoying question of what time it is. Sweatshops are a phenomenon of decay, pure and simple. They spring up like mushrooms in the crevices of a putrifying social formation. Sweatshop labour is a middleman operation heavily subsidized by state repression and uncompensated expropriation of population health. Wages are low not because of productivity but because of the legions of brokers, sub-contractors, petty officials and toad swallowers that have to be maintained to stoke the furnace with cheap labour. The middlemen are not cheap. Think of it this way: the difference between the price of an item produced by sweatshop labour and the cost of the labour that went into it is not all gravy for the capitalist. Some part of it went to feather the beds of so-called economists and columnists who churn out hoary tales about what a cracking good deal it all is. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Sweatshops and featherbeds
Does the L.A. times Normally capitalize words other than Proper nouns in the Middle of a sentence? A Sweatshop Is Better Than Nothing soph-o-mor-ic (sof uh môr'ik, -mor'-) adj. 1. of or pertaining to sophomores. 2. intellectually pretentious and conceited but immature and ill-informed. Daniel L. Jacobs, a Native of Los Angeles, Is a Sophomore at Williams College in Williamstown, Mass Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: what is economics?
Jim Devine wrote, what is economics, anyway? orthodox economics seems to be a matter of preaching either free-market philosophy or technocratic superiority, along with a lot of purely academic stuff. Or as the Krugman/Jacobs consensus illustrates, purely sophomoric stuff. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Utility on display
In a foyer of University College London, in a glass fronted cabinet, sits the preserved body of Jeremy Bentham; philosopher, economist, expounder of Utilitarianism, Bentham is chiefly remembered for inventing the Panopticon; a glass walled prison designed for total surveillance. A video camera pointed at Jeremy Bentham's body, updating images onto the Internet every five minutes. http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/web/Nina/JBentham.html Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
RE: It's a Jungle In Here
This explains Microsoft documentation and 'help' files. I do hope though that Bill has the foresight to make provision in his will to follow in the footsteps of Jeremy Bentham. Alt-Ctrl-Del . . . Jim Devine wrote, BTW, Bill Gates is clearer: there was a story in TIME awhile back that described his social skills: he'd go to his office fridge to get a soda for himself, not even thinking of offering one to his guest. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
the enemy's stuh tis'tiks
The word statistics refers to three distinctively different things: the science that deals with the collection, analysis, and interpretation of numerical data, often using probability theory, the data themselves and a branch of political science dealing with the collection of data RELEVANT TO A STATE [emphasis added]. One can postulate the objectivity and neutrality of the latter kind of statistics only on the premise that the state itself is a neutral and objective enterprise. This would be rather like analyzing the economy on the premise that wage labour is a neutral and objective relationship, freely entered into by two parties with equal opportunities to engage in or withdraw from the relationship. A given state may be more or less inclusive in the data it deems relevant to itself and that inclusiveness may change over time. The use of any specific data series as a barometer of a state's performance makes it a target for manipulation, either directly in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data or indirectly in the targeting of state policies to get the numbers right, regardless of whether the better looking numbers reflect real improvements or merely an opportunistic inflation of the selected performance indicators. IT'S THE MAP, STUPID One anecdote is only an anecdote, a million anecdotes is a statistic. Considering the *relevance to a state* angle, the data must be viewed as fundamentally geopolitical. The GDP of Canada should not contain the value of goods and services produced in Nebraska. The data presupposes a map. I am conducting the 2001 Canaada census for a portion of the island where I live and I was supplied with a map of my area that could best be described as a travesty of a map. It makes the Palm Beach County butterfly ballot look like a paragon of logic and design. My map shows roads connecting that don't connect, calls roads names they've never had and leaves off quite a few. It numbers as a 'census block' a small triangle of dust left between two roads that intersect in a 'V' and their cut-off. It leaves a vast, occupied territory unsullied with any census block number. The collection, analysis and interpretation of data is also a labour process. The census takers (who are *required* to supply their own vehicle) are paid at a piece-rate, presumably calibrated to compensate them at slightly above minimum wage -- if they work at a steady pace and make no mistakes. Given a map that doesn't show the territory, that would be impossible. In other words, to be blunt, viewed from the bottom of the division of labour, the 2001 Canada census appears to be a pantomime. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Any thoughts
Again with reference to the Air Canada takeover of Canadian Airlines, the experts for CAW Local 1990 argue that Canadian Airlines was by far the more cost effective operator but was done in by its heavier debt servicing costs. Stuart wrote: We can see that finance capital drove a great deal of the restructuring but has it left the industry with a fundamentally different role, primarily that of leveraged buyer of aircraft and servicer of debt? Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Floyd Norris: An Exaggerated Productivity Boom May Soon Be a Bust
Or, productivity is cracked up to be something that it isn't. And therein lies the one great enduring fallacy of bourgeois economics, which is concerned above all to demonstrate the contribution to production of a non-tangible essence, i.e. a contribution of capital that cannot be attributed to previous accumulation of surplus value. [P]roductivity is not what it was cracked up to be. And therein lies one of the great fallacies of the recent boom and bubble. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
left the mita running?
Doug Henwood cracked, And such revolutions aren't likely to happen in the rich imperial nations if their left intellectuals are interested only in affairs thousands of miles from where they sit. Louis Proyect riposted, You forgot to mention that I live on the Upper East Side. Slipping in your old age? When I was a kid, people didn't worry much about getting to the movie on time. They would just find a seat whenever they got there and watch the last 2/3 or 3/4 of the movie, wait for it to start again and then watch the part they had missed. When scenes showed up that they had seen before someone would ask isn't this where we came in? and they would leave. If it was a tedious movie, someone would ask isn't this where we came in? after about 10 minutes. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
re: time (was left the mita running?)
A meter is an instrument for measuring and recording the quantity of something, as of gas, water, miles, or time. Take your pick. Doug Henwood asked, Does this have something to do with the length of the workday, or the lump of entertainment fallacy? Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: True Hegelian Truth
Well, according to Tim Horton's the hole is the Timbit. Jim Devine writes: As Baran Sweezy quote Hegel to say, the truth is the whole. = According to Paul Diesing, this should actually read the true is the whole. Michael K. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: time (was left the mita running?)
I think it is gas. Gene Coyloe It was those beans again. Speaking of beans and inevitably of bean counting, what seems important to me is the transition from a regime of calculation to first a regime of automated calculation and ultimately to a regime where the instruments of measurement construct the things being measured. This doesn't work for physical commodities like gas (the fuel) or water or sealing wax, but it does for derived categories like unemployment/employment, inflation, public opinion, entertainment, gross domestic product and . . . the wage. Wage labour is presumably something that can or could crop up ephemerally anywhere at any time historically for any number of locally significant reasons. But wage labour as we know it is something historically specific and, *whatever its origins*, it is something that is becoming increasingly incompatible with the continuation of social life. All puns aside, the meter has become the message. As Doug has correctly (if perhaps only kiddingly) perceived, this does have something to do with the length of the workday although it doesn't have to do exclusively with the length of the workday. More broadly, it has to do with the whole spectrum (or is it a lump?) of social statistics with which we intellectuals and ideologists entertain ourselves. However, the quantification of labour power in units of labour time is the point at which all this socially calculated rubber hits the road. It is consequently the point at which one may well expect the metered shit to hit the fan. Something about all that is solid melts into air; gas again -- greenhouse or beanhouse. The METER is running but the cab is parked at the curb with the engine idling. The meter is RUNNING but does it really count? Tom Walker wrote: A meter is an instrument for measuring and recording the quantity of something, as of gas, water, miles, or time. Take your pick. Doug Henwood asked, Does this have something to do with the length of the workday, or the lump of entertainment fallacy? Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Oz Competition update
Competition is like sex. Whether it is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing very much depends on who, what, when, where and how. Doug Henwood asked: I keep forgetting - is competition a Good Thing or a Bad Thing? Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Oz Competition update
What is distinctly odd is the way in which monopoly is fostered in the name of competition. Neo-liberalism thus heralds a magical transition from monopoly to monopoly with the main difference that the metamorphosed monopoly is relieved of its historically accumulated burden of countervailing constraints and reciprocal obligations. I would read Rob's implicit praise of competition as ironic, in much the same vein as Marx's implicit praise of property, family and religion in the Eighteenth Brumaire. As much as one might disparage the ideals that appear as slogans on the reactionary banner, those ideals are benign compared with the crapulent social forces that march under that banner. Doug Henwood wrote, Yeah, I'm with you on this. But it's a bit odd to see competition implicitly praised on a Progressive Economists list. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: Oz Competition update
Ah, Max, you are confusing good and bad with right and wrong. Max Sawicky wrote, I beg to differ. One of my favorite lines in a movie by Jessica Tandy was, When sex is right it can be wonderful; but when it's wrong it can be wonderful too. mbs Competition is like sex. Whether it is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing very much depends on who, what, when, where and how. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
The good, the bad and the ugly
Clarification That is to say, that utility and morality BOTH depend on who, what, where, when and how but not necessarily the same who, what, where, when or how. Ah, Max, you are confusing good and bad with right and wrong. Max Sawicky wrote, I beg to differ. One of my favorite lines in a movie by Jessica Tandy was, When sex is right it can be wonderful; but when it's wrong it can be wonderful too. mbs Competition is like sex. Whether it is a Good Thing or a Bad Thing very much depends on who, what, when, where and how. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
[PEN-L:1979] Of the Scurf Trade among the Rubbish Carters
. . . and plagiarism among the economics textbook authors I think I've located the locus classicus for the "Lump of Labour fallacy" and the so-called fallacy ain't what the textbook authors said it was. There's an 1891 article in the Economic Review by David F. Schloss, "Why Working Men dislike Piece-Work", in which he presented what he called the Lump of Labour theory and argued that it was a fallacy. The argument was recylcled in Schloss's book, _Methods of Industrial Remuneration_, on pages 44-47. Oddly enough, Schloss disavowed his argument having anything to do with the length of the working day! He was discussing the objections to piece-work. Here's what Schloss said in _Methods of Industrial Remuneration_ about the length of the working day: "With the question of the length of the working-day we have nothing to do. Still, I shall not conceal my opinion that the claim of the working-classes to possess an amount of leisure adequate for the purposes of rest, of education, and of recreation is one in an eminent degree deserving of recognition. But, while a reduction of the hours of labour -- say, to eight in the day -- may readily be admitted to be, on grounds both economic and social, highly desirable, yet it is no less desirable that during those eight hours every working-man in the country shall, using the best available tools and machinery, and performing as much labour as he can perform without exerting himself to an extent prejudicial to his health or inconsistent with his reasonable comfort, produce as large an output as possible. . ." Schloss's account has much more in common with Frederick Taylor's discussion of "systematic soldiering" than it does with any of the contemporary retorts to the argument that shortening the hours of work can alleviate unemployment. In fact, both Schloss and Taylor make offhand references to the idea that getting workers to work as efficiently as possible serves the cause of shorter work time. Perhaps there is indeed a Say's Law for apologist textbook authors: the supply of misinformation and plagiarism creates its own demand. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:1985] Re: Are We are all Keynsians Now?
A propos to this point is Keynes' "Notes on Mercantilism, etc" in _The General Theory of Employment_, in which he chronicles the incessant suppression by the "ranks of orthodoxy" of theories of under-consumption. Particularly revealing is his discussion of the controversy about consumption between Malthus and Ricardo, and of the attempts by J.A. Hobson and A.F. Mummery to revive the controversy in 1889. Frank Durgin wrote, Future economic historians (if the world survives Russia's looming social upheaval) will surely marvel at the fact that some 65 years after Keynes showed the world that budget deficits could serve as an instrument for curing depressions, and a quarter of a century after Nixon declared "We are all Keynsian's now", those who were setting economic policy for Russia were prescribing ever progressively tighter monetary and fiscal policies. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
RE: victory for Jim D.
Devine, James wrote: speaking of which, I know that size doesn't matter, but how is my font showing up? ravi replied, it could use some viagra. Or maybe some verdana? Tom Walker 604 254 0470
re: the great bet
As I recall, the stakes were a case of Lagavulin. This payoff comes too late. I had lunch with Max Monday on his way to Tokyo. If he had already received the case, maybe I could have mooched a bottle off him. Damn. Tom Walker 604 254 0470
re: liberalism
Rob Schaap wrote: Doug Henwood wrote: Michael Perelman wrote: Is this discussion or the elitism thread going anywhere? Not really, but does any thread ever go anywhere? It's the journey, dudes, not the destination. How about, Is this discussion becoming or going? Tom Walker 604 254 0470
The leisure life of a lump of labor lie
Editor, the Wall Street Journal, In a bold effort to vaccinate Americans against the insidious lump-of-labor virus, the Wall Street Journal today carries an article by one Christopher Rhoads headlined, Europe's Prized Leisure Life Becomes Economic Obstacle. The analytical nub appears in a paragraph located almost midway through the piece: Enter the shorter working week. Unions argued that reduced hours would spur job growth by spreading the same amount of work among more people. Most economists dismissed the theory, but some argued it could force Europeans to become more efficient, squeezing more work into less time. Neither turned out to be true. What Mr. Rhoads neglects to inform his readers is that the preceding is a formulaic set piece, the prototype of which first appeared in an 1871 Quarterly Review article by Mr. J. Wilson entitled Economic Fallacies and Labour Utopias. The formula was perfected in a 1901 screed featured in the London Times under the headline, The Crisis in British Industry. From 1903 to 1913 -- when a congressional investigation brought their activities to light -- the National Association of Manufacturers spared no expense of political bribery, financial extortion and physical intimidation to inscribe the same message as the common sense consensus of all sane, sober, self-respecting economists everywhere. In short, Mr. Rhoads' paragraph is a hoary slander. What is more, if there can be such a thing as plagiarizing slander, the paragraph -- fraudulently represented as Mr. Rhoads' own observation of some recent argument about spreading the same amount of work and the subsequent dismissal of the theory by most economists -- is a plagiary. Although Rhoads discretely omits the tell-tale term, the drill often passes under the sobriquet of the lump-of-labor fallacy. It was a mainstay in Paul Samuelson's Economics through the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s even though the Nobel Prize winning textbook author has subsequently been unable to account for its source or validity. Speaking of fraud, why doesn't Mr. Rhoads write an article advocating accounting fraud as a boost to global competitiveness? Perhaps he could even crib a few passages in support of his case (sans acknowledgement, naturally) from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Tom Walker 604 254 0470
Re: The leisure life of the lousy lump of labor lie
Thanks, Ben, for further information see my The Lump-of-Labor Case Against Work-Sharing: Populist Fallacy or Marginalist Throwback? in _Working Time: International trends, theory and policy perspectives_, edited by Lonnie Golden and Deb Figart, Routledge, 2001. Or I will send copies of the MS Word file on request. I also have a short piece online, Remembrance of Work Time Standards Lost at http://www.straightgoods.com/item439.asp Gar, I take the comment about being zen as a compliment. At 02:16 PM 8/8/2002 -0700, Gar Lipow wrote: Please be a little less Zen. What is the lump of labor fallacy? Ok no one actually believed it; but what is it that no one actually believed. From P.A. Samuelson W.D. Nordhaus, ECONOMICS, 16th edition, Irwin McGraw-Hill, 1998, p. 239. The Lump-of-Labor Fallacy We close our analysis of wage theory by examining an important fallacy that often motivates labor market policies. Whenever unemployment is high, people often think that the solution lies in spreading existing work more evenly among the labor force. For example, Europe in the 1990s suffered extremely high unemployment, and many labor leaders and politicians suggested that the solution was to reduce the workweek so that the same number of hours would be worked by all the workers. This view -- that the amount of work to be done is fixed -- is called the lump-of-labor fallacy. To begin with, we note the grain of truth in this viewpoint. For a particular group of workers, with special skills and stuck in one region, a reduction in the demand for labor may indeed pose a threat to their incomes. If wages adjust slowly, these workers may face prolonged spells of unemployment. The lump-of-labor fallacy may look quite real to these workers. But from the point of view of the economy as a whole, the lump-of-labor argument implies that there is only so much remunerative work to be done, and this is indeed a fallacy. A careful examination of economic history in different countries shows that an increase in labor suply can be accommodated by higher employment, although that increase may require lower real wages. Similarly, a decrease in the demand for a particular kind of labor because of technological shifts in an industry can be adapted to -- lower relative wages and migration of labor and capital will eventually provide new jobs for the displaced workers. Work is not a lump that must be shared among the potential workers. Labor market adjustments can adapt to shifts in the supply and demand for labor through changes in the real wage and through migrations of labor and capital. Moreover, in the short run, when wages and prices are sticky, the adjustment process can be lubricated by appropriate macroeconomic policies. Tom Walker 604 254 0470
Why be zen?
Gar Lipow requested: Please be a little less Zen. Although the characterization of my style as 'zen' is not 100% technically accurate, there is an affinity between how I write and zen. I CAN write in a linear style. Sometimes I have to because I make my living as a writer. But when I was out walking the dog this evening I wondered why much that I want to communicate seemingly can't be communicated linearly. It occured to me that the function of the clear, concise exposition is to make what is being read forgetable. People desire clear messages so they can read them, digest them and forget about them all in one gulp. Get the gist, put it in a drawer and shut the drawer. Then when I got home I glanced at the abstract to a paper on the marriage of time and identity: Kant, Benjamin and the nation-state and my eye fell on this line, The progressive notion of time is seen as dangerous by Benjamin, since it generates forgetfulness and inner impoverishment of the self. Justin said the other day People are motivated by the outrage of felt injustice. Well, what if they forget? What if they live in a temporal frame that has become a machine for forgetting? What if the news they get today has been designed to make them forget the news they got yesterday? Make it clear so I can forget it. I suppose I could do that. I've read lots of books on clear exposition. I've done and taught plain language editing. Watch September 11th carefully. There will be an orgy of remembrance calibrated to make people forget. Please be a little more Zen. Tom Walker 604 254 0470
Re: underemployment
Jim Devine wrote, ... It's bad for the left for there to be a bunch of disaffected educated people who can't get decent jobs who join the obscurantist right. Maybe we can draw them into our camp, but in order to do so, we have to pay attention to them. ... we need to increase the demand for educated people. What is an educated person? What is a decent job? Why would an educated person join the obscurantist right? Where is our camp? How does one pay attention? What does it mean to increase the demand for educated people? How does one do that? Who is the we that needs to do it?
Re: Bushies say NAIRU is 4.9
I'll admit as much as more coherent or more systematic but more scientific? That's like saying one astrologer is more scientific than another. Jim Devine wrote, The NAIRU is a more-scientific way to describe what Milton Friedman calls the natural rate of unemployment. His idea is that the economy gravitates toward the natural rate unless the government or central bank screws things up. Tom Walker 604 254 0470
Re: Bushies say NAIRU is 4.9
Jim Devine wrote, Saying that a phenomenon is natural is a much less scientific way of describing something than doing so in simple descriptive terms (which are more coherent or systematic). Except that this distinction ultimately goes around in circles. Instead of attributing the mystical status directly to the rate itself, the NAIRU description defers its mysticism to the unexamined definitions of inflation and unemployment. Whatever the common sense notions of those two categories may be, their measurement is profoundly subject to manipulation by policy. For example, policy can count as employed someone who has worked one hour in the last week or can change the eligibility requirements for unemployment benefits and sickness benefits, thus redefining people out of the labour force. Hypothetically, one could design various procrustean policy regimes that would generate roughly just about whatever NAIRU one wished to designate as _the_ NAIRU, which takes us back to Looking Glass world where words mean precisely what Humpty-Dumpty wants them to mean. The reductio ad absurdum limit cases might be thought of as, on the one hand, a subsistence economy where there is no unemployment because there is no employment and there is no inflation because there are no prices. NAIRU would be zero. At the other extreme, if we define as unemployment all hours spent not engaged at designated workplaces in direct production of a set of standardized staple goods and define as active in the labour force all individuals physically capable of performing some minimal routine operation there would be an extremely high NAIRU, let's say somewhere in the neighbourhood of 90. Back in the real world, the definitional play of NAIRU may be more of the order of its estimated size, which is to say 4.9, give or take 4.9. And I'm 6' 2 give or take a couple of yards. What is the scientific status of statements like that? At some ethereal level there may well be intuitive appeal to the idea of a NAIRU -- it's one of those seductive reactionary thought experiments. But NAIRU mixes together vague definitions with an _intimation_ of precise measurement for the purpose of arriving at a pre-conceived policy prescription. We already know what that prescription is -- restrain wages. Assigning a number doesn't make the prescription more scientific. In this regard, it is no different than judging figure skating at the Olympics. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Bushies say NAIRU is 4.9
Jim Devine wrote, Tom Walker changes the subject... ... and then proceeded to 'counter' my arguments with material that basically confirmed what I was saying. What I was saying, distilled to its essence, is that NAIRU is rhetorical and not scientific in the sense of some disinterested search for truth. What Jim responded with was examples of why the rhetoric of NAIRU is understandable, given a capitalist society and a profoundly reactionary political culture in the U.S. I have no particular objection to viewing NAIRU in that way. Now, I really will change the subject. What we are _really_ talking about here is green cheese and why capitalists have to tell workers that the green cheese factory is on the moon. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
re: An open letter to Dr. David Hartman
In Canada, aboriginal land claims are taken seriously. The BC Supreme court recently ordered 10 acres in the middle of Vancouver to be returned to the Squamish First Nation. The doctor's philosophizing is the sort one hears from those occupants of a tavern whose rear ends have become molded to the seats and whose voices have been polished to a smooth gravel by decades of tumbling in stale smoke and cheap alcohol. What if some Indian showed up on 57th street and asked for his land back, nobody would take him seriously. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: r.biel@ucl.ac.uk
This Husqvarnaquistholm sounds like a dangerous fellow. I understand he's also for clear-cutting old growth forests. Just one point of clarification, though. Did he actually say condors or condoms? If it was condoms, did he mean Ireland, not Great Britain? He argues that if Great Britain survived without condors, so can the rest of the world.
Re: tip (was Re: r.biel@ucl.ac.uk)
Eugene Coyle wrote, It is and has been perfectly legal and accepted, for a long time, to use condoms in Ireland. You just have to chainsaw the tip off before donning. Jaysus friggin' Christ, Gene, you wouldn't be needing a condom if you did that! Unless it was for a tourniquet. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
re: autism and autistic economics
Can anyone think of what to add to the list? The way money grows is not the way plants, animals and humans grow. - Gene Logsdon Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Where is Herbert Spencer when we need him?
In the 33-page document, Mr. Bush also seeks to answer the critics of growing American muscle-flexing by insisting that the United States will exploit its military and economic power to encourage 'free and open societies,' rather than seek 'unilateral advantage.' It calls this union of values and national interests 'a distinctly American internationalism.' Herbert Spencer, in the postscript to The Man Versus The State: While among ourselves the administration of colonial affairs is such that native tribes who retaliate on Englishmen by whom they have been injured, are punished, not on their own savage principle of life for life, but on the improved civilized principle of wholesale massacre in return for single murder, there is little chance that a political doctrine consistent only with unaggressive conduct will gain currency. Spencer's argument in Man Versus the State revolved around a contrast between two kinds of society the militant, based on command and hierarchy and the industrial, based on voluntary cooperation. A militaristic foreign policy would inevitably undermine the voluntary cooperation and laissez faire. In 1902, Spencer wrote an article titled Imperialism and Slavery. The title is self-explanatory. I expect we'll soon see all conscientious libertarians and consistent social Darwinists rise up in revulsion against this Bush doctrine. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Where is Herbert Spencer when we need him?
I wrote, I expect we'll soon see all conscientious libertarians and consistent social Darwinists rise up in revulsion against this Bush doctrine. Mark Jones asked, Why so? I was being sarcastic, Mark. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Personalities and the List
Michael Perelman wrote, We could have an inflatable president, which could be pumped up and presented at important occasions, and the system would be virtually unchanged. Correction: the adjective virtually is unnecessary here. Certainly in some dimension I am sure there is a flesh and blood ex-drunk named George Dubya Bush who is listed on the federal payroll as POTUS, civil service grade whatever. Machts nicht. The REAL President Bush IS an inflatable vinyl doll. The media is the bellows that keeps this ghastly doll pumped and ready for action. I'm a Dubya doll, in the Dubya pol, Life in plastic, it's fantastic, You can write my speech, make those liberals screech Imagination, Mandate is your creation Wolfie: Come on Dubya, Let's go bomb 'em Dubya: Ha ha ha yeah Wolfie: Come on Dubya, Let's go bomb 'em Dubya: ooh ooh
Re: ex-drunk
Michael Perelman wrote, Ok Walker. You want to challenge my language. How about your ex-drunk? Smoking gun had a video of a drunk W. and by the looks of it the event was not too long ago. You win. I was just trying to show deference to the office of the President. I mean, who ever heard of anyone sober choking on a pretzel? For that matter, who ever heard of anyone eating a pretzel without drinking beer?
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
Michael Perelman asked, Neil Bush is also involved in the testing business. Is that an omen of impending collapse? Silverado Neil has a company that produces web-based multi-media instructional support material. That no doubt fits under the supplemental services component of No Child Left Behind. One could view the law in the context of a long term strategy to open up broader opportunities for privatization of public education. To the extent that its philosophy fails, it will of course be the public schools that will bear the brunt of the blame. The obvious solution will be to turn more and more to the innovative and flexible private sector. http://www.ignitelearning.com/home.htm Tom Walker 604 255 4812
FED HEAD SAYS BUMF TRUMPS BUBBLE
My brother -- who is a real estate agent and was a high school buddy and water polo team mate of N.J. Republican senate candidate Doug Forrester -- says the most bubblicious part of the market is duplex to fourplex, which in Sacto are selling for as much as 300 times monthly net income. The benchmark is 100 times income. Jim says buying a fourplex would be like buying Enron at $90 a share. The below piece of bumf would, in my view, tend to confirm what he says. Any time Greenspan testimony refutes, once and for all the existence of anything, you have to be concerned. As if refuting the bubble once and for all was not enough, the bumf goes on to put this issue to rest, declare no such thing as a house price bubble and note that a pop of the bubble simply isn't in the cards. If the mixed metaphors don't get you, the repetition repetition repetition will. In other words, as my bro says DO NOT BUY an existing duplex, triplex or fourplex if they are selling at more than 100 times the monthly rent... Your entire investment could be wiped out. Rumor of Housing Bubble Pops WASHINGTON (July 19, 2002) Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan's testimony before Congress last week refutes, once and for all, the existence of an alleged housing market bubble, said chief economists of the National Association of Realtors® and the National Association of Home Builders, two trade groups that collectively represent more than 1 million professionals from all walks of the housing industry. The time has come to put this issue to rest, said NAHB Chief Economist David Seiders. The nation's home builders have said it, the Realtors have said it, and now Alan Greenspan has said it once again, in no uncertain terms: there is no such thing as a current or impending house price bubble. Asked about the issue during his testimony, Greenspan said, We've looked at the bubble question and we've concluded that it is most unlikely. He attributed recent sizeable gains in home prices to the effects on demand of low mortgage rates, immigration and shortages of buildable land. Given the local nature of real estate, NAR Chief Economist David Lereah said, it's possible for prices to deflate on a local basis, but a pop simply isn't in the cards. He noted that, even during recessions and periods of declining home sales, the national home price has risen every year. Over time, the typical home value appreciates at the general rate of inflation, plus one- to two-percentage points, he said. Acknowledging the stabilizing force for the overall economy that residential construction and related consumer outlays provided during last year's downturn, Greenspan noted in his testimony that the U.S. housing market continues to perform admirably in the evolving recovery period. Echoing the Greenspan's apparent confidence in the industry when he predicted reasonably strong housing demand, Seiders and Lereah affirmed, The housing market is fundamentally sound: we have a lean inventory of homes, historically low interest rates, good consumer confidence and strong demand from a growing population. The supply/demand situation means we can expect healthy price appreciation to continue. The housing groups applauded Greenspan's leadership of national monetary policy and his wisdom in lowering interest rates, which has unquestionably helped housing support the economy during the recession and the early stages of recovery. EDITOR'S NOTE: Housing is vital to local and state economies, creating jobs and generating taxes and wages that positively influence the quality of life. Find out more about this crucial component of the economy at http://www.nahb.com/news/housingjobs.htm . Also, NAHB's publication, Housing: The Key to Economic Recovery, explains just how housing has led the economy to recovery. This publication is available free of charge on NAHB's website, at http://www.NAHB.com/housing issues. The National Association of Home Builders is a Washington-based trade association representing more than 205,000 members involved in home building, remodeling, multifamily construction, property management, subcontracting, design, housing finance, building product manufacturing and other aspects of residential and light commercial construction. Known as the voice of the housing industry, NAHB is affiliated with more than 800 state and local home builders associations around the country. NAHB's builder members will construct about 80 percent of the almost 1.6 million new housing units projected for 2002, making housing one of the largest and most powerful engines of economic growth in the country. The National Association of Realtors, The Voice for Real Estate, is America's largest trade association, representing more than 800,000 members involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real estate industries. Posted July 26, 2002 Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: bullying
Stark alternatives -- those who don't have naive faith must believe the thing is a total sham. One could base a fundamentalism on such a dichotomy. It may sound like a pedantic distinction, but capitalist democracy is not a synonym for bourgeois democracy. Capitalist democracy or democratic capitalism is an Irving Kristol neo-logism, in spirit if not in strict etymological fact. The trajectory of its well-spun connotation is an inflection away from social democracy or democratic socialism and its moral claim is that ONLY capitalism and NOT socialism can be democratic. This moral has practical implications too. If only capitalism can be democratic, then it is perfectly democratic to not let socialists play at democracy. Whether or not one idealizes bourgeois democracy, democratic capitalism has no more to do with it than does, say, democratic centralism. Capitalist democracy is Americanism plus Free Enterprise plus the Right to Work. Perhaps the U.S. in 2002 is roommier than Germany in 1938 only to the extent that capitalist democracy hasn't entirely triumphed over bourgeois democracy. Carrol Cox wrote: But again, my central point is that incontinent use of the label fascist shows a naive faith in the goodness of simple capitalist democracy. Doug Henwood wrote, If capitalist democracy were such a total sham, how come you're not in jail? Is it just because you're so marginal? Or is the thing actually a little roommier than Germany in 1938? Tom Walker 604 255 4812
re: Question re. work time
Rob asked, Was it here I read the other day that when Britain was moved to a 3-day week by the energy crisis of '74, they found that productivity did not decrease? If so, I'd love a cite and/or anything else that comes to mind. Potent datum, if it's true, no? Rob, One can't extrapolate from a short-term response to a crisis. For example, people working to a tight deadline on a project may put in many hours of overtime yet at the same time increase their hourly productivity. Besides, the question of work time is not an economic issue, it is a moral one. Hard work builds character ergo more hard work builds better character (see Hastert, 2002). Or so we're told. And told. And told. Although one could demonstrate in a three-hour seminar the feasibility of a 15-hour work week from the standpoint of productivity, one could never do it from the standpoint of morality. I use the term morality loosely (as do we all these days). I should clarify that by morality I mean fealty to the seven deadly sins* -- an expressly Satanic morality, perhaps, but the best we can do under the circumstances. Better than nothing, eh? One could compose a respectable corporate vision statement simply by expounding on the theme of each of the seven. In economic geometry terms, the deadlies could be summarized by the expression demand curve. The problem -- the moral problem -- with a shorter work week is this (there is no other way to say it): what would happen to the economy if people were to grow WEARY of sin? *Pride, Avarice, Envy, Wrath, Lust, Gluttony, Sloth Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: PK's the man with the plan
One Krugman ready or not? Gosh, I seem to recall someone by the name of Paul Krugman, I believe it was, mocking William Greider a few years ago for his naive fallacy of composition belief in the possibilty of overproduction. Now I realize that investment and production are not synonyms, but it seems to me that the arguments against the _possibility_ of overproduction would pertain equally to the possibility of overinvestment. Or, to put it a different way: Productivity growth in one sector can very easily reduce employment in that sector. But to suppose that productivity growth reduces employment in the economy as a whole is a very different matter. http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/hotdog.html Paul Krugman wrote, The key point is that this isn't your father's recession -- it's your grandfather's recession. That is, it isn't your standard postwar recession, engineered by the Federal Reserve to fight inflation, and easily reversed when the Fed loosens the reins. It's a classic overinvestment slump, of a kind that was normal before World War II. And such slumps have always been hard to fight simply by cutting interest rates. Contrasts with: Here again, however, there is a deeper answer. It is possible for economies to suffer from an overall inadequacy of demand--recessions do happen. However, such slumps are essentially monetary--they come about because people try in the aggregate to hold more cash than there actually is in circulation. (That insight is the essence of Keynesian economics.) And they can usually be cured by issuing more money--full stop, end of story. An overall excess of production capacity (compared to what?) has nothing at all to do with it. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
fre: rom the new economy to the ooch economy
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last Oochs toward Bethlehem to be born Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Oil and sperm
Silent Sperm describes the 50% loss in sperm count that has occurred in men worldwide during the past 40 years. Yeah, but who's counting? Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re Otto Reich
I'll say it was effective. My first encounter with NPR when I spent a half-year at Cornell in 1987-88 was hearing a vomitous romanticization of the contras as guitar-strumming guerrileros. Obviously something written to please Reich. He warned the journalists that his office would be monitoring NPR's broadcasts. Buzenberg later suggested that Reich's attempt to intimidate people at NPR had been effective. He recounted in a speech how an editor had asked him, with regard to one of his stories, 'What would Otto Reich think?' Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
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 collect the data are honest and well-intentioned. Doug Henwood wrote, Well, damn, I only spend my life with this stuff, so I guess I'm at a disadvantage not having just done a five minute Lexis search. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
of the U rate, we may be implying 5 to 40 pages of inaccessible technical discussion, ambiguous interpretation and scholarly disputation. All that jazz has nothing on the deliciously clear and unambiguous nobility of a single number. Who really cares how many unemployed angels can dance on the head of pin? Presumably the discourse about unemployment and an unemployment rate started out as a criticism of conditions and a rationale that somebody ought to do something. There is thus a performance evaluation component to it and a reformist agenda underlying it. The problem with using an index number or test score for performance evaluation is that people can start teaching to the test or cream-skimming. Getting the numbers right becomes the reform agenda -- the bottom line, as it were. The manipulation involved at the policy level aimed at getting the numbers right can very appropriately be thought of as Enronesque. No laws need be broken. No incorrect numbers need be entered in the books. Only a corruption of purpose and meaning need take place. In short, it is possible to produce a lower unemployment rate while making employment more precarious and less rewarding and unemployment more personally and financially painful. This is after all what the right-wing think tanks and the OECD jobs strategies have in mind when they talk about 'flexibility'. Inflexible are things like layoff protections, generous insurance schemes and union membership. Flexible are things like just-in-time production and contingent employment. Did I say indicator several paragraphs above? Indicator of what? Is the unemployment rate an indicator of what some other, more comprehensive set of statistics might tell us if we had the time and energy to collect and analyize them? Or are we using the unemployment rate as an indicator of the precariousness of employment and the misery of unemployment? But wait. If the judicious implementation of precariousness and misery can lower the rate of unemployment, is it rational to believe that a fall in the unemployment rate is an indicator of a decline in precariousness and misery. Daniel Davies said about as much in many fewer words. Daniel Davies wrote, If we're interested in the extent to which job insecurity is affecting peoples' lives, giving them erectile dysfunctions and shortening their lifespans, or it (to be a bit less resolutely grim) we care about the extent to which unemployment is restraining workers' militancy in demanding higher wages or for that matter provoking revolutionary sentiment, then it's not obvious to me that moving between the ILO, official US and adjusted US definitions is going to help us. Or to put it another way, I'm worried about my job and so is everybody else, so the very fact that the statistics are telling us that employment is holding up and remaining robust, suggests that there's something funny about that statistic, whether or not it is in fact describing the reality it purports to describe. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
Doug Henwood wrote, Don't forget forced overtime and multiple jobholders. There's at least as much overwork in the U.S. economy as there is underwork. But since that wasn't the case in the 1930s, most American leftists can't think about it. ...and another thing I was going to mention was overtime and multiple jobholders. Oh but wait, Doug just mentioned it. I'm glad you mentioned it, Doug. And yes, I find it rather peculiar that most American leftists can't think about that. I'm not sure if the generalization is accurate, but it feels as though it is. I view multiple jobholding and forced overtime as pathological symptoms, not as signs of vibrant labour demand. With regard to the unemployment rate, there is no category for full-time composite from two or more part-time jobs. Nor is it regarded as overemployment when somebody who works overtime would prefer not to. Besides what would the statisticians do if there was such a thing as overemployment? Would the overemployment cancel out the underemployment or would the two add together as undesired hours employment? My preference would be for the latter, but nobody's asking me. With regard to the whole schmozzola of under-, over-, un-, and just plain unpleasantly employed, later today I'll post to Pen-l a piece on the work ethic and its discontents I started writing for the shorter work time list. Those of you who may have encountered difficulties following my last re: employment message will be happy to know that in the forthcoming message I clear up any possible confusion. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
Christian Gregory wrote, So what if you don't get existential intimacy or subjective versimiltitude from a BLS statistic? Do you keep shoving bread into your VCR and complain when it doesn't come out toasted? BLS? VCR? FYAH. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
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 is even more objectionable if you take it sentence by sentence. Word by word, it's incomprehensible. Letter by letter, it is a totally meaningless sequence. Jim Devine wrote: Using statistics intelligently (or scientifically) always involves two different things: (1) actually using them and (2) being aware of the limitations of the statistics. This is a key point that critics of Doug and myself on this issue miss. but elsewhere Jim writes: The monthly unemployment rate does represent a snap-shot. But put enough of them together, you get a movie, or at least a slide-show. I was trying to point out the methodological limitations that arise precisely from the cinematographic illusion. You seem to think the illusion, far from being a limitation, is a redeeming feature. This would suggest to me that you are not aware of the limitations. Later on, Jim wrote, this tells us we should ignore rising measures of unemployment produced by the BLS? For someone who doesn't appreciate being told what you think, you sure are free and easy with the non sequitur reductio ad absurdums, if you'll pardon my French. brevity is the soul of wit. Shit. Shinola. Remember that, Jim, and you'll be alright. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
That's more like it. You're right, the critique only gets you so far. The rest of the journey is grounded in experience, which can be narrated but not reduced to a set of statistics -- even a fairly comprehensive set. I use official statistics all the time. I charge clients real money to dig up and describe the most meaningful statistics to support their case. I even compile statistics from raw data. Good numbers support a well-constructed argument, but even the best numbers can't construct the argument for you. From my perspective the biggest political defect of statistics is that they necessarily refer to something that has happened in the past. Doug H. referred to the rather dire state of the world. Michael P. wrote, we are going to war. Would it be too coy of me to ask where is the statistical evidence for either of those statements? But that is precisely the kind of question that gets thrown at us when we raise questions about, say, precarious employment or the polarization of working hours. The first question is about the numbers (which, unlike the unemployment data are often between two and five years old). The second question is what makes you think it is anything other than peoples' preferences being revealed? The classic way to not take action is to refer a matter for further study. In that respect, representation can't get you any further than can critique. Whatever you come up with can always be referred for even more study. Do I sound like someone who's been there and done that? Christian Gregory wrote, 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 who have two temp (or full-time) jobs as a composite of one. But pointing out that this statistical measurement is missing from a statistical data set is different (and more germane) than saying that statistics don't capture suffering and therefore can't be trusted or are incomplete. The latter amounts to beating your head against the wall. For your arcane hermeneutics... Tom Walker 604 255 4812
The work ethic and its discontents
The work ethic and its discontents by Tom Walker Anis Shivani extols Charles Bukowski's _Factotum_ as offering the only answer that makes sense to the sham that is modern work (The Life of a Bum: Against the Work Ethic, http://www.counterpunch.org/shivani0925.html). Henri Chinaski, Bukowski's alter ego in that novel, shows utter disrespect for the work ethic. The problem with liberal critics of capitalism, Shivani argues, is that they don't want to mess with the foundations of the system. His answer to this faintheartedness? Refusal of work means that you have given up the deceptive fight to ameliorate its conditions. Of course, not all anti-work dissidents have the perserverence to drink, fuck, goof-off and get fired like Henri Chinaski, let alone write like Charles Bukowski. A handful of Bukowski acolytes may write a novel or two. A few more pick up a degree in literature. Most probably end in something more dependable like advertising or journalism. Robert Frost wrote that he never dared to be radical when young for fear it would make me conservative when old. That's a fear worth attending to. This is not to disparage Bukowski, only the notion of Bukowski as a beacon of revolt against the work ethic. The catch is that a little youthful rebellion never brought down a regime. Nearly forty years ago, Timothy Leary invited youth to turn on, tune in and drop out. Somehow the work ethic has weathered both Henri Chinowski's picaresque contempt and Leary's pixelated pied-pipering. Shivani is right that today's work ethic is an abomination. Modern work is a sham -- not all work, mind you, but all too much of it. It is highly improbable that a bit of tinkering can set things right. So where does that leave us? Can't live with it, can't live without it and can't reform it? Can't get over it, can't get under it and can't get around it? Not quite. The work ethic and the refusal to work are the two poles of an axis. Amelioration of working conditions also lies on that axis, located somewhere between the two poles. But there is another dimension at stake that forms its own axis, an axis that intersects the work ethic one. That other dimension is time. Unless the word time brings to mind such names as Marcel Proust, Henri Bergson or Walter Benjamin, it may not be what you think it is. In his preface to _Time and Free Will_, Bergson asked, whether the insurmountable difficulties presented by certain philosophical problems do not arise from our placing side by side in space phenomena [namely the experience of time] which do not occupy space... It may be worth asking if the insurmountable difficulties presented by work and the work ethic do not arise from our acquiescence to an illegitimate quantification of time and to the incoherent practical and moral consequences that flow from it. It is, after all, discontent with such practical and moral incoherence that motivates such an inquiry. It does seem reasonable to wonder, as Freud did, whether people would perform necessary work without coercion. It's another matter when a political and economic elite insists on coercion for fundamentally aesthetic reasons -- because it pleases them to see an increase in measured output without regard to whether that output contributes to public welfare or detracts from it. How does one distinguish between reasonable doubts about the relationship between work and coercion and unreasonable certainties? Shivani's glorification of the _Factotum_ lifestyle trivializes the Freudian doubts, as did beat sensibility and 1960s counter-culture. Liberal proposals for workplace reform enshrine those reasonable doubts to an extent that paves the way for a return of the unreasonable certainties. It remains to be shown that we are throwing virgins into the volcano, not because we believe it will appease the volcano god and not only because we have been doing it so long that it has become a habit but, most disturbingly, simply because we can't think of anything else to do. Not thinking of something else to do is a moral lapse that makes Henri Chinaski's ennui positively heroic by comparison. But only by comparison. The anti-hero's heroism is parasitic in that it depends on the complacency of the squares. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. But when everybody tries to be a bum, goofing-off loses its cachet. Ultimately, the work ethic returns stronger than ever as an indignant reaction to the beat ethic -- no longer a true positive but a double negative. They're the worst kind. Work ethic? We don't got no work ethic. This ungrammatical, double negative work ethic doesn't even have to stand on its own two feet. It can lean against its own shadow. Its adherents believe it is sufficient to proclaim there is no alternative to overrule any objection. For crying out loud, there is an alternative. Those who deny it are liars, cheats and embezzlers. The alternative is an affirmation of work that is unequivocally subordinated
Re: The work ethic and its discontents
Lou, No, are you referring to Italian autonomists in the 1970s? I'm familiar with anarchist and dadaist/situationist tracts against work, which I expect influenced or are influenced by the autonomists. I can see the point of the provocation but one can't live on a diet of spleen. Eventually, one has to start up a punk-rock band or open a boutique or hit up the folks (familial or state). Sorel's myth of the general strike has to be in there somewhere. If it's not it should be. Yes, it's mostly pretty incoherent until you start to notice that it is an echo of the principal incoherence -- a mirror image of the square/bourgeois/capitalist incoherence. If we imagine that infantile leftism has oral, anal and oedipal stages, the refusal of work may well be *precisely* a crock of shit. One of these days someone will figure out why a retired civil servant wrote _Reflections on Violence_. Louis Proyect asked, Tom, have you ever read what the autonomists have written about the refusal to work. I've always thought that it is a crock of shit myself. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
re: employment
* violence. In his _Rhetoric of Motives_, Kenneth Burke questioned what the literary function of suicide and murder was in a number of texts, among them Milton's Samson Agonistes. To make a long story short, Burke saw these themes as figuring change. I don't know if my short story does justice to Burke's long one, but the point is that kill talk projects a metaphor for profound change that people can identify with (can, not necessarily will). Sorel was saying something similar (although not identical) with his theory of social myths. Rhetorical violence, taken literally, may well be the mother of all weapons of mass destruction. Let's ignore it and hope it goes away. On second thought, haven't we tried that? Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: employment
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 mentioned Nietzsche's all instincts that do not discharge themselves outwardly turn inward from Genealogy of Morals. I'm re-posting the comment, below, because I originally sent it at the bottom of a longer message so it may have gotten overlooked. By the way, notwithstanding Michael's not seeing any reason for the nastiness, there may indeed be a reason. And that reason may also help explain the we're having big fun over here on the right phenomena (http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/41/on-powers.php). I did a quick scan of the fun guys on the right and spent a little more time looking at one particular fun guy on the right and noticed one distinctive feature that contrasted with left discourse. There was a lot of jocular kill talk. Not all of it was graphic. Some was euphemistic, like take out Saddam. But the kill talk seemed to me to be playing a crucial role in bonding between the righties. There are obstacles to a comparable kill talk on the left. For one thing, many of us hold the opinion that killing is not sport and that talking about killing doesn't advance progressive politics. There are also possible legal complications if people on the left routinely made jokes about killing people _we_ don't like. We're not on a level playing field with the right in regard to kill talk. They can rhetorically murder with impunity. Before anybody concludes that I'm calling righties a bunch of blood-thirsty cretins, I want to clarify that I don't take the kill talk literally. There is, of course, always the danger it may get played-out literally in some psychopathic spectacle of preemtive self-defence but I don't see that as an integral part or inevitable consequence of the rhetoric. What I do see as an integral part is the bonding that takes place around the kill talk. Nietzsche wrote that all instincts that do not discharge themselves outwardly turn inward. And it may be worth asking whether the internal rancor of the left may have something to do with the self-imposed and societal constraints that the left feels about rhetorical violence. Remember I am talking about *rhetorical* violence. In his _Rhetoric of Motives_, Kenneth Burke questioned what the literary function of suicide and murder was in a number of texts, among them Milton's Samson Agonistes. To make a long story short, Burke saw these themes as figuring change. I don't know if my short story does justice to Burke's long one, but the point is that kill talk projects a metaphor for profound change that people can identify with (can, not necessarily will). Sorel was saying something similar (although not identical) with his theory of social myths. Rhetorical violence, taken literally, may well be the mother of all weapons of mass destruction. Let's ignore it and hope it goes away. On second thought, haven't we tried that? On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 01:38:55PM -0400, Michael Hoover wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/08/02 05:33PM How the hell does a simple discussion about data evoke such nastiness? Michael Perelman 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... so while most pen-lers are probably comfortable (relatively speaking), i've a hunch that many have been rendered politically impotent... michael hoover
Sign of the times?
Ad for a credit union in an local weekly: INVEST SMART *** this whole global-economy- COLLAPSING-THING might take a while coastcapital savings Tom Walker 604 255 4812
October 16, 2001: an anniversary they'd rather forget?
of the LJM partnerships has been disclosed to date. Private partnership documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal indicate that Enron agreed to a partnership arrangement with potentially huge financial rewards for Mr. Fastow. The LJM Cayman partnership raised a relatively modest $16 million, according to the documents. The more ambitious LJM2 aimed to raise at least $200 million, the documents show. Among investors were Credit Suisse Group's Credit Suisse First Boston, Wachovia Corp. and General Electric Co.'s General Electric Capital Corp. The Arkansas Teachers Fund committed $30 million, of which $7.4 million had been tapped by late last month. Bill Shirron, a fund manager there, said the LJM arrangement had already returned $6 million to us. It's been a home run so far, Mr. Shirron added. According to the LJM2 offering document, the general partner, made up of Mr. Fastow and at least one other Enron employee, received a management fee of as much as 2% annually of the total amounts invested. Additionally, the general partner was eligible for profit participation that could produce millions of dollars more if the partnership met its performance goals over its projected 10-year life. In exchange, the general partner was obliged to invest at least 1% of the aggregate capital commitments. In an interview earlier this year, Mr. Lay said the LJM arrangement didn't produce any conflicts of interest. Such related-party transactions, involving top managers or directors, aren't unusual, he said. Almost all big companies have related-party transactions. Typically, related-party transactions involve dealings with partly owned affiliates or a contract with a firm tied to one of the company's outside directors. It is rare for a top executive to be in a position where he could have conflicting fiduciary responsibilities. The LJM2 offering document states that the responsibilities of Mr. Fastow and other partnership officials to Enron could from time to time conflict with fiduciary responsibilities owed to the Partnership and its partners. Some institutions approached as potential LJM investors demurred partly because of such potential conflicts. Enron has publicly stated that the partnership deals were aimed to help it hedge against fluctuating values for its growing portfolio of assets. In the past decade, Enron has seen its asset base rocket to more than $100 billion. As a result of this rapid growth, Enron has at times been strapped for capital and has sought ways to bring in outside investors to help bolster its balance sheet. Charles LeMaistre, an outside Enron director and president emeritus of the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas, said he viewed the partnership arrangement partly as a way of keeping Mr. Fastow at Enron . We try to make sure that all executives at Enron are sufficiently well-paid to meet what the market would offer, he said. Enron 's interest in retaining Mr. Fastow may have been heightened by an exodus of top managers who were cashing out large stock-option grants after the company's success in 1999 and 2000. Mr. Fastow's yield from options for the 12 months through Aug. 31 was $4.6 million, according to disclosure reports compiled by Thomson Financial. Mr. Lay netted about $70 million from exercising options during this period, while Mr. Skilling, the former president, realized nearly $100 million. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: what is science?
When we talk about science, we frequently talk about two different kinds of order without adequately distinguishing between them. One kind of order has to do with laws of causality, the other has to do with conscious intent. If one lives at the edge of a cliff, it is consistent with the laws of physics to throw one's garbage over the side -- the garbage will fall. But that grave result doesn't take into account other possible or even likely consequences, such as the effect of toxic waste on an eco-system below or on people dwelling at the bottom of the cliff. Some or many of the consequences of an action may be, practically speaking, unknowable. It would take so long and so much energy to find out all the consequences that one would never be able to act. Because inaction itself may have consequences, the dilemma is unresolvable. Therefore one forms intentions on the basis of experience and judgment, not on the basis of a complete assessment of how the laws of causality apply to a given situation. When I say experience and judgment I imply memory because it is what we remember from our experience (whether consciously or subconsciously) that forms the basis of our judgment. If I forget that there may be people living at the bottom of the cliff, it doesn't really matter any more to my judgment that I once knew it. Now, memory doesn't obey the laws of physics but it does obey the laws of nature (I am speaking metaphorically when I use the terms law, physics and nature, although I am not certain *how* metaphorical). It is possibly that I may capriciously bring to mind only these or those physical laws when forming an intention. If I claim that my action was scientific because it scrupulously took into account the physical laws that I capriciously remembered, there is something missing in my account. We might refer to the missing element as humility. Science without humility -- that is without a proper regard for the vagaries of memory and intention -- is unscientific. The fact that the facts emphasized are indeed facts trivializes the relationship between memory, intention, action and causality. Of course, it is entirely possible for people to form intentions that completely disregard causal (or probabilistic) relationships. Otherwise who would buy lottery tickets? Is it somehow more scientific to throw one's garbage over the side of a cliff than to buy a lottery ticket because in the former act one has taken into account at least *some* of the laws of causality? How many laws and how much judgment and memory must come into play to distinguish between the scientific and the unscientific? Where does one draw the line between science and caprice? Consciousness is qualitative. Analysis forms an important part of consciousness, but consciousness cannot be reduced to analysis. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Six years from my policy workbench to the editorial pages of the NYT...
Robert Reich, who elsewhere has written about the problem of overwork, frames his proposal in the NYT in terms of putting more money into consumers' pockets. It would indeed do that. But his proposal's strategic structural effects are even bettter: it would reduce perverse tax incentives that encourage employers to use overtime instead of hiring new workers. I'm sure Reich realizes this. Robert Reich, October 2002: The simplest way to put more money into consumers' pockets is to cut their payroll taxes, which will instantly fatten their paychecks. Congress could exempt the first $15,000 of everyone's income from payroll taxes for two years, beginning immediately. Everyone gets the same tax cut but it's more helpful to lower-paid workers since the payroll tax is so regressive. And since employers no longer have to pay their share of these taxes, they would have a new incentive to keep more people on the payroll. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/15/opinion/15REIC.html Me, November 1996: When questioned about the prospects for reducing work time and sharing the work, the standard response of business leaders is 'We can't afford it.' or 'More government regulation? No thanks!' But what if we could put together a modest, easy-to-implement plan to enable employers to voluntarily reduce their use of overtime and create new jobs at no cost to the employer or the taxpayer? What if all the plan required us to do was to make the federal payroll tax system more fair by closing a tax loophole for overtime? http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/loop.htm Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: MBA's
I hope Bloom wasn't suggesting MDs should be reserved as a mark of scholarly acheivement. Last Thursday, an orthopaedic surgeon set the bones in my sons broken arm and did a mighty fine job. I couldn't care less if the good Dr. never published in a peer reviewed journal. Also, I once took an undergraduated commerce course that opened my eyes to the unspoken class bias in the canons of sociology, anthropology and political science. It all became much clearer. As for the MBA boom itself, it was the academic/intellectual equivalent of Enron or WorldCom -- the bottom line looked impressive because the thing was specifically designed to create that appearance. There is, of course, no academic equivalent of the S.E.C. to pursue intellectual fraud. Here's a writer I don't often quote with approval: .a great disaster has occurred. It is the establishment during the last decade or so of the MBA as the moral equivalent of the MD or the law degree, meaning a way of insuring a lucrative living by the mere fact of a diploma that is not the mark of scholarly achievement.the prebusiness economics major, who not only does not take an interest in sociology, anthropology or political science but is also persuaded that what he is learning can handle all that belongs to those studies. Moreover, he is not motivated by the love of the science of economics but by love of what it is concerned with-money. This is from Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind, which shot up the bestseller list in the 1980s. Bloom goes on to say that prospective MBA students have blinders put on them. Now, why is it that all of Bloom's paranoid passages about the effects of 60s radicals and shallow multiculturalism on the university are quoted by William Bennett yet not the passage above? Bloom was right about the MBA student. Anyone who attended an American university in the 80s or 90s can remember those smug fellows who dreamed of the riches derived from a Wharton or Harvard MBA. (The role model was Donald Trump with his degree from the Wharton School of Finance.) Who can forget their superior attitude toward their fellow students who were wasting their time in the humanities department? By the way, George W. Bush is the first president with an MBA. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: what is science
Jim Devine wrote, of course, contrary to scientistic/positivistic propaganda, intuition is part of science. What was Einstein, if not intuitive? (I'm told that his math wasn't very good.) Scientists use their intuition all the time. But then the products of intution that can't be validated logically or empirically fall by the wayside. The first product of intuition is intuition of itself. This product cannot be validated by exogenous logical or empirical criteria. I think therefore thinking exists. The indivuated sumness of it is far less certain.
Re: Columbus as prototype - after Guindon
Better: do not send attachments to a list. If you receive attachments do not open them. Only open attachments if you know who they are coming from and what they are. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Chutzpah (Re: back, self-promotingly)
Why apologize? Isn't self promotion all there is anyway? Doug Henwood wrote, Hi gang. Back for a bit before taking a little trip. Sorry that my return message is a blast of self-promotion, but it won't happen again, I swear.
Sleeper at the SEC
With 5 days to go before the U.S. midterm elections, I don't suppose the media will pay a great deal of attention to the bungled appointment of William Webster at the SEC. Nobody but accounting wonks would be interested in this story anyway. S.E.C. Orders Investigation Into Webster Appointment By STEPHEN LABATON http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/31/business/01CND-ACCO.html Excerpts: WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 - The Securities and Exchange Commission today ordered an investigation into the appointment of William H. Webster to head a new board overseeing the accounting profession after Mr. Webster's disclosure that he told the S.E.C. chairman, Harvey L. Pitt, that he had headed the auditing committee of a company facing fraud accusations. Mr. Pitt chose not to tell the other four commissioners who voted on Mr. Webster's nomination last Friday, according to S.E.C. officials. White House officials said they, too, were not informed about the details of Mr. Webster's work for the company. Mr. Webster stepped down from the board of U.S. Technologies in July after he said he was told that it could no longer provide liability insurance for directors and officers against claims from investors. The company invests in young Internet companies and runs a contract labor company using prison inmates. It has had a variety of legal and regulatory difficulties. While Mr. Webster headed the audit committee, it was delisted from trading on Nasdaq for failing to make timely filings with the S.E.C. Lawyers involved in the criminal investigation said there was no evidence that Mr. Webster violated any laws and he was not the target of the inquiry. But critics of his selection to the oversight board said the audit committee's decision not to investigate thoroughly and make public its findings demonstrated that he lacked the qualifications to lead the board. ``Even if we find out that Webster was totally passive in this process, it is an indictment on his ability to run the accounting oversight board,'' said James D. Cox, a professor of securities and corporate law and author of a textbook on accounting who teaches at Duke. ``To let something like this go shows really bad judgment, and I think is automatically disqualifying. At a minimum, the audit committee had an obligation to investigate. This is exactly the kind of situation that the accounting oversight board is supposed to change, and that the new law creating the oversight board is supposed to fix.'' Mr. Webster said he did not think his experience at U.S. Technologies ``would impair my ability to serve.'' Earlier story: Divided S.E.C. Picks Watchdog for Accounting By STEPHEN LABATON http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/26/business/26ACCO.html WASHINGTON, Oct. 25 - The new board overseeing the accounting profession got off to a troubled start today when the members of the Securities and Exchange Commission split bitterly over the qualifications and competency of the board's new leadership. They voted 3 to 2 to approve formally the selection of William H. Webster, the former director of the C.I.A. and the F.B.I., to head the new board. The three Republicans on the commission and Republicans in Congress hailed Mr. Webster for his integrity and extensive background in law enforcement, but the commission's two Democrats said he lacked the credentials to lead an accounting board. They emphasized that he had no recent experience in accounting issues and lamented the perception that the Republicans had given in to the accounting profession, whose lobbyists had complained that an earlier choice of some of the commissioners, John H. Biggs, had been too aggressive a reformer. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
RE: Frontiers of rational expectations
What I want to know is: is there any money in a correct prediction and if there is, how does one collect if one is dead? Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Curious
VNS Unable to Deliver Exit Polls ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News Channel -- anticipating possible problems with exit polls -- each did last-minute telephone surveys to gauge voter attitudes. Fox conducted its survey in 10 states on Monday night and Tuesday and used some of those findings on the air. VNS hired Battelle Memorial Institute, an Ohio-based technology company that also works as a defense contractor to help build the new VNS system. A Battelle spokeswoman declined comment on Tuesday's performance. Ted Savaglio, VNS executive director, said he was disappointed with Battelle's work. He wouldn't comment on VNS' future. http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-eln-voter-news-service1106n ov06,0,2579073.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines FBI Investigates Possible Financial Motive in Anthrax Attacks DNA tests have confirmed that the spores used in the terrorist attacks are genetically identical to a strain obtained by researchers at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Md., in about 1980. The Army has acknowledged distributing the strain to five other agencies, and some of the strain was in turn shared with other researchers. The five labs that received the Ames strain from USAMRIID are the Army's Dugway Proving Ground in central Utah; Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, Ohio; the University of New Mexico's Health Sciences Center in Albuquerque; the Canadian DRES; and Porton Down. Battelle, a private contractor that has worked with the Pentagon in developing defenses against biological attacks, is one of several labs visited by FBI agents investigating the anthrax attacks. Katy Delaney, a Battelle spokeswoman, said the company has cooperated fully with the government's investigation. FBI agents have interviewed people on our staff, Delaney said, but she declined to provide information about the nature of the interviews or how many Battelle employees had been questioned. I can say that we have continued to provide all of the information and material that has been requested by the government, Delaney said. Battelle is a contractor at Dugway, which last week acknowledged making a powdered form of anthrax to use in testing sensors and other equipment used to defend against biological attacks. http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/FBIfinancialmotive.html
Re: Negri explains the multitude
...the multiplicity that refuses to represent itself in the dialectical Aufhebung Surely Negri means bong? Rhyzomatic is clearly an allusion to Guattari and Deleuze. I would translate the passage as a whole to mean, roughly, shit happens.Negri has presumably eschewed that more compact formulation for the sake of avoiding its imminent reflexive implications. I hope this helps. As for Doug's worrying about wasting time on Negri and the Nation while the U.S. is under the control of a frightening gang of lunatics hellbent on war with a good bit of the world: shit happens, Doug. And time marches on. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Negri explains the multitude
I wrote, ...shit happens, Doug. And time marches on. Doug Henwood replied, Oh, of course. Why didn't I think of that? Presumably because you have other fish to fry and a hard row to hoe. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Economy in novels
The Scarlet Empire, David M. Parry, 1906. This one is definitely not post WWII, but it is notable for its explicit treatment of the point of view of American right-wing industrialists. Parry was president of the National Association of Manufacturers at the time he wrote the novel and the N.A.M. was engaged in its infamous open shop campaign of union busting. The novel, set in the undersea socialist dystopia of Atlantis projects the dire consequences of legislation establishing an eight-hour day. For a stark contrast, pair that chestnut with Gabe Sinclair's _The Four Hour Day_, 2000 http://www.fourhourday.org/, Taken together, the two novels neatly bookend the 20th century and its distracted economic thinking. In my view, they also clearly show why the central economic question is the determination of the hours of work, not the determination of the prices of commodities. To the extent that political economy focuses on the latter and neglects the former, it is an exercise in mystification. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
RE: Aesopian Language on Maillists
the death of Satan was a tragedy for the imagination -- Wallace Stevens Satan is NOT dead, 'e's just pinin' for the fjords. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: outsourcing the State
This is inherent to getting the taxpayers the best deal for their dollars and the best service from the government, said Trent Duffy, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget. It's called building a permanent Republican party gravy train. The only thing inherent in the plan is the stench of corruption. The Government Accounting Office has determined that public-private competition will save taxpayers 30 percent on each contract. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! And they charged poor Andy Fastow for pilfering the petty cash box! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: Re: RE: Aesopian Language on Maillists
Joanna Bujes wrote: well, wouldn't you be? Joanna At 05:50 PM 11/14/2002 -0800, you wrote: the death of Satan was a tragedy for the imagination -- Wallace Stevens Satan is NOT dead, 'e's just pinin' for the fjords. Not really. I'm one hour away from 'em by bus, 40 min. by car.
Re: economy in novels
Oh, I almost forgot to mention Walter Brierley's The Sandwichman, 1937. I recommended this one before in reply to a Pen-l thread a couple of years ago on Workplace Literature. So I'll just recycle my 2 1/2 year old message: Louis Proyect wrote or quoted: Marx warned that, in a capitalist system, the worker becomes a commodity, and indeed, the most despised of commodities. Saunders' correction is that the worker becomes an advertisement, and, indeed, the most wretchedly inarticulate of advertisements. . . I would like to here and now start a cult for a 1937 book by Walter Brierley titled, The Sandwichman. Actually, I'd like to start a cult for about 25 pages in the book, from 201 to 226, wherein the unemployed protagonist, Arthur Gardner, temporarily works at two 'jobs'. The first assignment is as the sandwichman of the book's title, advertising a sale at a furniture store. The second is as an adult education night school lecturer, presenting a series of six lectures on drama, one on pre-Shakespearean, one -- or two, perhaps -- on Shakespeare, then Restoration and the Romantic comedy in one, then two on the moderns. As a sandwichman for the furniture store, Arthur wears a sign that proclaims: SALE! SALE! SALE! LATHAM'S! LATHAM'S! LATHAMS!. His lectures, in Fritchburn, a little village about half-way between Pirley and Leawood, are advertised by an paper stuck to a bus-stop hoarding announcing Arthur's name in large capitals and the subject of that evening's lecture. Arthur manages to delude himself into believing that hawking culture as if it were furniture is somehow more 'respectible' than hawking furniture, but other than the delusion, the former comes off as a more profound humiliation than the former. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Left sweeps to victory in Vancouver
From the CBC: Real-life Da Vinci leads sweep in Vancouver elections Last Updated Sun, 17 Nov 2002 9:54:49 VANCOUVER - A former Mountie and coroner who inspired a CBC Television series won a landslide election on Saturday to become the next mayor of Vancouver. Larry Campbell, the real-life inspiration for the title character in the crime drama Da Vinci's Inquest led his party to a sweeping victory in municipal elections. Despite rain and heavy winds, voters headed to the polls in huge numbers. Turnout was markedly higher than in the last elections three years ago, and among the highest in decades. Campbell's left-wing Coalition of Progressive Electors (COPE) had its most impressive showing since the party entered Vancouver politics in the 1960s. In that time, it had never elected a mayor or held a majority on council. This time, every COPE candidate running won. They won seats on the parks board, the school board, and city council. http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/11/17/vcr_elxn021117 Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: War and property tax
So what ever happened to the old custom of the king personally leading the troops into battle? Tom Walker
[PEN-L:2026] Re: profits
Doug Henwood wrote, Corporations also want to report the highest possible profits to their shareholders, esp in these days of heightened rentier scrutiny. So I think this off the books stuff may be exaggerated. "Off-the-books" can also refer to (non)expenses treated in such a way as to fluff the earnings reports. Corporate accounts have multiple audiences: share holders, creditors, tax officials, labour unions, the public . . . If the tax regime shifts you can bet the profit story will change, etc. etc. Fudge flows both ways. Remember, too, that the whole government statistical apparatus exists mainly for the benefit of the bourgeoisie, which consumes them avidly. Another reason not to doubt them too much. It may seem *logical* that information produced for the benefit of the bourgeoisie would be reliable, but it's just not true. All the statistical apparatus can do is ask questions and compile results. People's answers to questions frequently change depending on what they think the apparatus wants to know and what they want the apparatus to believe. It's not so much that people are "lying" (although they may be doing that) as that their interpretations can be extremely flexible. "I never had *sex* with that woman." Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2004] Re: BLS Daily Report
strength and not a speculative bubble that could burst...In the minds of many economists, the stock market serves mainly as a gauge of the real economy and a stimulus for spending. I guess that means that "in the minds of many economists" the real economy grew 2.5% yesterday but then shrunk a bit today. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:1994] Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug Henwood wrote, sounds like the Fed is worried about the stock market, now that the crisis period in Asia is fading. The president of the Atlanta Fed gave a speech the other day that evoked bubblish fears, though in that careful way Fedsters do. I was wondering when someone was going to notice. What's the market up so far this year? 5%? Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2018] Re: profits
I'll let everyone else go out on a limb on this one. There are so many factors off-the-books that comparing profits from decade to decade can't be a question of comparing REPORTED profits. One item that would reduce reported corporate earnings if it was on the books is the issuing of stock options to other than senior management. I think you could argue that options issued to senior management is still profit. But options issued to employees in lieu of other compensation could be viewed as incentive pay -- virtual piece-rates. -Original Message- From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Most of the improvement in US corporate profitability is the result of -lower interest costs. Add together profits and interest (to get some -measure of the corporate surplus) and there's little change since the early -1980s as a share of GDP. But isn't looking at profits as a share of US GDP besides the point? The real measure should be percentage of the global capitalist economy's GDP. That US corporate profits are holding even during a global depression seems to be a rather strong indicator of expanding profit margins. How to measure what the proper GDP that profits should be measured against is a tough issue, since merely listing global GDP would include certain non-monetarized sectors or state protected sectors that multinationals are really not involved directly in exploiting. But as with trade numbers, I am suspicious of numerical measures of value that ignore the wide disparity in wage levels around the world. It may be true that profits are largely stagnant on investments in the US and Europe, yet if multinationals are making super-profits in the third world, they may be at levels of wage exploitation whose obsenity is camoflagued by ignoring wage disparities between different countries where the multinationals operate. --Nathan Newman Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2035] The paper bag test
Excerpt from a lecture, The Black Church As Institutional Actor in Contemporary Urban Environment, given on Thursday, April 16, 1998 in the Urban Sociology Class, taught by Dr. Shana M.B. Miller "The turn of the century also saw a great increase in the membership of the black churches. New churches were being formed at an amazing rate. In northern cities like New York, Chicago and Detroit, churches began popping up on the average of one every 2 months. And as quickly as a church would begin, it would become filled to capacity, thus creating the need for even more churches. "With the expansion of the black church, largely in urban areas, the role of the church continued to expand and redefine itself. Moving from the singular object of worship, it began to create more social programs. Reading and tutoring programs were created. Food pantries, job assistance, educational opportunities, the church started to become less of a singular place of worship and more like the community centers that we see in today's society. The benefit of this was that the church was often the only autonomous organization in the black community. It existed for blacks, was supported by blacks, and in turn, served the black community. "However, this was not a perfect situation. As the years rolled by and the ills of slavery slowly began to fade out of the constant thought of the congregations, as new problems surfaced, with lynchings becoming more current, with the advent of the KKK and other white supremacists groups, the black church started exhibiting some strange behavior. "Churches started getting more cliquish. The black church, like other elements of black society, began to buy into the misguided notion that the lighter the better, or to quote the old cliche, "White is right, if you're brown, get down, if you're black step back." The "House Nigger" and "Field Nigger" mentalities began to invade the church at an alarming rate. "We should all be familiar with the infamous "paper bag test" which was employed by many black organizations, most notably the black greek organizations and other college clubs, was finding it's way in to the black church. Many churches had an unwritten policy that darker skinned blacks were not accepted and therefore, not really welcome in the regular worship situations. A light skinned preacher was almost always more accepted than a dark skinned one. And in fact, the lighter the preacher was, the more he was accepted. "Some churches took this notion to an extreme. So prevalent was the practice of blacks being "color struck" that some churches, particularly in the northern areas of the midwest and the south painted the walls of their respective sanctuary a certain color, and if you were darker than the walls, you were denied entrance into the church, or given a seat in the rear of the church. The best example of this could be found at a church which would later become synonymous with Civil Rights, Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, the home church of Dr. King. I am not sure if the walls are still the same color as they were years ago, but that church had a notorious reputation for shunning the darker brothers and sisters." Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2048] Re: unemployment
Frances A. Walker wrote in 1890, ". . . gross exaggeration is resorted to in stating the number habitually unemployed, which is sometimes placed as high as one fifth or one quarter of the laboring population. One writer speaks of the unemployed as 'the reserve army of industry.'" It should go without saying that gross exaggeration could as easily be resorted to in understating the number of unemployed. I would be at least as suspicious of the 4% historical statistic cited by NBER as by 20%. It could be George Gunton (Wealth and Work?) who was the source for the 20% figure that Walker criticizes. I remember reading somewhere that the average unemployment rate in the US in the latter half of the 1800s was probably around 20%. Anyone else seen this figure? Any comparables for England? Thanks, Ellen Frank Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2044] Re: re: Global Depression
Henry C.K. Liu wrote, Tom Walker wrote: Although the anomaly is much less bizarre if you consider the role the U.S. dollar as reserve currency has played in permitting an even more anomalous balance of payments deficit. In its function as "borrower of last resort", the U.S. can appear as a kind of cornucopia in reverse. That is why the introduction of the euro as a second reserves currency is very significant. I agree. But I would expect it would take quite some time -- several years -- for the effect to play itself out. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2041] re: Global Depression
Nathan Newman wrote, The United States has become this bizarre anamoly, partly explained by the labor "flexibility" (meaning creation of unregulated bad jobs) but needing broader explanations as well. Part is obviously the US's role as the center of the current computer revolution related to networking and part may be driven by the hyperprofits of global capitalism inducing "wealth effects" spending here. Although the anomaly is much less bizarre if you consider the role the U.S. dollar as reserve currency has played in permitting an even more anomalous balance of payments deficit. In its function as "borrower of last resort", the U.S. can appear as a kind of cornucopia in reverse. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2009] Re: BLS Daily Report
Barkley Rosser wrote, Of course he could be wrong and this is January, when the "January Effect" of unusually rapidly rising stock prices frequently happens. But then October is often a time of unusual declines and this last one saw a record runup. Oh well, we shall just have to wait and see. As I understand Say's law, for every seller, there's a buyer, eh?. Obviously, then there's as much money to be made during a stock market decline as during a rise. Or as Malthus said, "What an accumulation of commodities! Quels debouches! What a prodigious market would this event occasion!" (quoted by Keynes on page 364 of the General Theory of Employment) Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:6225] Re: Why Nato needs to destroy Serbia
Wojtek wrote: - it is patently false. The current institutional design is based on two developments, the institutional designed developed under central planning and the interplay of occupational and professional interests under the central planning regime (for the primer see Konrad and Szelenyi, _The Intellectuals on the Road to Class Power_, New York: Haracourt Brace Jovanovich, 1979; and Kennedy, _Professionals, Power and Solidarity in Poland, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Wojtek, Do Konrad and Szelenyi say anything about Oskar Lange's contribution to establishing the economic principles of the central planning regime? regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/covenant.htm
[PEN-L:6242] five-cent cigar
"'We're not inflicting pain on these fuckers,' Clinton said, softly at first. 'When people kill us, they should be killed in greater numbers.' Then, with his face reddening, his voice rising, and his fist pounding his thigh, he leaned into Tony [Lake, then his national security adviser], as if it was his fault. 'I believe in killing people who try to hurt you.. And I can't believe we're being pushed around by these two-bit pricks.'" -- Bill Clinton ordering the bombing of civilian targets in Somalia, as quoted in All Too Human, by George Stephanopoulos "We do know that we must do more to reach out to our children and teach them to express their anger and to resolve their conflicts with words, not weapons," -- Bill Clinton on the carnage at Columbine High regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/covenant.htm
[PEN-L:7724] Re: Sado-imperialism -- Five Minutes Over America
Headlines found, in this order, with no deletions: 13:12 BROWN DONATION TO BUY 1,000 GUN LOCKS TO GIVEAWAY TO GUN OWNERS - AP. 13:11 SINGER JAMES BROWN DONATES $4,000 TO HOMETOWN AUGUSTA, GEORGIA-AP. 13:09 SURGERY ON JUNE 7 AT WWW.CELEBRITYDOCTOR.COM. 13:08 [DIS] BANC AMERICA: RUMORS ABOUT RESTRUCTURING AT DISNEY; COMPANY DECLINE COMMENT. 13:08 CORRECTION: CHRIS TEMPELTON TO BE 1ST FEMALE CELEBRITY TO RECEIVE PLASTIC SURGERY ON NET. 13:07 SOAP OPERA ACTOR TO BECOME 1ST PERSON TO RECEIVE PLASTIC SURGERY 'LIVE' OVER INTERNET.
[PEN-L:7709] petit-bourgeois scribbler/parlor dilettante
Michael Perelman wrote I don't think that there are any "petit-bourgeois scribbler/parlor dilettante(s)" on pne-l . . . What am I? Chopped liver? The problem with the subscribers on this list is they don't know a compliment when they see one.
[PEN-L:7708] Re: Sado-imperialism
I wrote, . . .Weiner schnitzel! Hah-ha! Take that, dude! I meant to say "wiener" schnitzel. I hope my typo didn't offend any weiners.
[PEN-L:8118] Re: Dry goods 2000
Max Sawicky wrote, And the Emmy for most inscrutable e-mail post of the year goes to . . . Gore-Tex (gôr'teks , gohr'-) Trademark . . . Hey, Max, it's still early in the year. If you think that was inscrutable, wait 'til you see Chapter 13 of Descending Mount Pelerin! regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:8110] Dry goods 2000
Gore-Tex (gôr'teks , gohr'-) Trademark 1. a breathable, water-repellent fabric laminate used on clothing, shoes, etc. Vel-cro (vel'kroh) Trademark 1. a fastening tape consisting of opposing pieces of nylon fabric, one with tiny hooks and the other with a dense pile, that interlock when pressed together, used as a closure on garments, luggage, etc. Tef-lon (tef'lon) 1. Trademark. a fluorocarbon polymer with slippery, nonsticking properties: used in the manufacture of electrical insulation, cookware coatings, etc. adj. 2. characterized by imperviousness to blame or criticism: a Teflon politician. regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:9864] Tom Walker signing off
Sometime around the middle of August the knowware email address will expire. In the future, I can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm also cutting out list activity because of repetitive stress pain and the need to focus my efforts on my "lump of labor" chapter for a book on time, overwork and underemployment due to be published by Routledge in late 2000. Thanks to pen-l subscribers for the stimulating conversations over the years and thanks especially to Michael Perelman for maintaining the list. I'll be dropping in to have a look at the archives from time to time. address: #111 - 1035 Pacific Street Vancouver, B.C. V6E 4G7 telephone: (604) 669-3286 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/worksite.htm regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/worksite.htm
New Labour, Free Labour and lump labour (was Giddens' . . .)
Further to the despicable and revolting travesty of "employment policy analysis" by T. Boeri, R. Layard and S. Nickell in their Welfare to Work report to Prime Ministers Blair and D'Alema and the Council of Europe, I am forwarding three texts. The first is the central argument of the 1901 London Times series, The Crisis in British Industry, allegedly co-authored by William Collison, debonair scoundrel and publicist for the "National Free Labour Association", an organization whose main purpose was to supply scab labour for the strike-breaking but whose secondary role was to pose as a phony "Labour" political party, presumably to confuse working class voters and split the labour vote. I believe they actually ran candidates in an election around 1911. The second is the "lumpy bit" from the Boeri, Layard, Nickell (the latter two from the London School of Economics) report to the Council of Europe at http://www.palazzochigi.it/esteri/lisbona/dalema_blair/inglese.html Please note that the paragraphs presented here were emphasized by bold text in the report. The third text is a letter to the editor of the London Times, from Sidney and Beatrice Webb, responding to the Crisis in British Industry series. It should be remembered that the Webbs had considerable to do with the founding of the British Labour Party as well as the establishment of the London School of Economics. Sidney also co-authored a book in the 1890s on the economics of the eight-hour day. Beatrice was a prominant dissenting member of a Royal Commission on Unemployment, whose minority report was influential in establishing the social insurance benefits that the Boeri, Layard, Nickell report is bent on dismantling. 1. The Collison/Pratt hypothesis about the motive behind the movement for an eight-hour day (from "The Crisis in British Industry, London Times, November 28, 1901: It was hoped to "absorb" all the unemployed in course of time, not by the laudable and much-to-be-desired means of increasing the volume of trade, and hence, also, the amount of work to be done, but simply by obtaining employment for a larger number of persons on such work as there was already. The motive of this aspiration, however, was not one of philanthropy pure and simple. When all the unemployed had been absorbed the workers would have the employers entirely at their mercy, and would be able to command such wages and such terms as they might think fit. The general adoption of the eight hours system was to bring in a certain proportion of the unemployed; if there were still too many left the eight hours system was to be followed by a six hours system; while if, within the six, or eight, or any other term of hours, every one took things easy and did as little work as he conveniently could, still more openings would be found for the remaining unemployed, and still better would be the chances for the Socialist propaganda. 2. From the Report to Prime Ministers Blair and DAlema, WELFARE-TO-WORK AND THE FIGHT AGAINST LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT, by T. Boeri, R. Layard and S. Nickell: The welfare-to-work approach outlined above is incompatible with the view that full employment can be achieved only by reducing the number of persons in the labour market. Yet many people doubt whether society can actually provide jobs for more people. According to this popular wisdom (the so-called "lump-of-labour" fallacy), the number of jobs is fixed. Hence unemployment can only be reduced by redistributing the stock of jobs available across individuals and pushing people out of the labour force. This widespread belief lies at the root of the campaign for earlier retirement, and explains much of the pessimism about welfare-to-work policies for the unemployed. We discuss these issues at some length in our report. In the very short-run there is of course a limit to the number of jobs, which is set by the level of aggregate demand. But aggregate demand in Europe is rising and will continue to do so until it hits its long-run upper limit. This limit is set not by demand but by the effective supply of employable labour. And if the supply of labour rises the number of jobs responds. If history tells any lesson, it is that. 3. The Webb's reply to THE CRISIS IN BRITISH INDUSTRY: December 6, 1901 TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES. Sir, In the articles which you have lately published attacking trade unionism you expressly challenge reply, and you even infer that the absence of contradiction in your columns proves, not only the correctness of the allegations themselves, but also the validity of the deductions made from them. We venture therefore, to say that six years' detailed investigation into the actual working of trade unionism all over Great Britain convinced us that, as an institution, it has a good and (to those who will take the trouble to study the facts) a conclusive answer to your charges. But working men do not read The Times, any more than your Correspondent reads our Industrial
Engels' (non)reply to Wicksteed
"'To-Day' has become a mere 'symposium', i.e. a review in which everyone can write for and against socialism. Next No. a critique of 'Capital'! I was supposed to reply to this anonymous writer, but declined with thanks." -- Engels to Kautsky, Sept. 20, 1884. The critique in question was titled "Das Kapital. A Criticism by Philip H. Wicksteed". Does anyone happen to have an electronic copy of that article on hand that they could send me or know of the location of one on the web? I've already searched to no avail. Wicksteed's 1910 textbook, "The Common Sense of Political Economy", contains the most extraordinarily ornate and long-winded discussion of what he eventually admits to being reluctant to call the market for labour. This discussion concludes with a bizarre five-paragraph tirade against the "lump-of-labour" mentality of the working classes, the point of which would seem to be that, "When we understand that local distress is incidental to general progress, we shall not indeed try to stay general progress in order to escape the local distress, but we shall try to mitigate the local distress by diverting to its relief some portion of the general access of wealth to which it is incidental." I can't help but get the feeling, reading Chapter 8 of Wicksteed's textbook, that the poor sot "meant well". Wicksteed seems to be engaging a characteristically Fabian "rhetoric of courtship" -- conceding the "economic" ground to the most reactionary and rapacious representatives of capital in order that he may, at the last instance, append a plea for enlighted compassion as the best way of combatting such "misdirected sympathies" and "anti-social ways". Seen in this light, the third way politics of Blair, Giddens et.al., is classic Fabianism reduced to its absurd (and Orwellian!) conclusion -- a rhetoric that absolutely identifies reactionary means with "progressive" ends. In other words, I regret that Engels didn't reply. I suspect that Wicksteed missed the point about the labour theory of value and demolished a straw man of his own construction.
Re: Engels' (non)reply to Wicksteed
Michael Perelman wrote, As I recall this devastating critique of Marx, Wicksteed concentrated on Marx's lack of the theory of rent. I suspect that he never saw volume 3. Volume III was published in 1894, Vol. II in 1885. Therefore, Wicksteed could only have seen Volume I. (Unless Engels showed him the unpublished manuscripts ;-)) So I take it from the discrepency between the superlative adjective and the narrow focus that you weren't impressed? In his introduction to the collected works, Steedman writes that "some writers have regarded Bohm Bawerks later attack on the labour theory of value, of 1896, as inferior to that of Wicksteed."
