Jim D writes: (2) if the long-term growth rate of labor productivity accelerates, then a constant growth rate of real GDP can be associated with a falling growth rate of employment (labor-power demand). The growth rate of employment may fall below that of the labor force, causing unemployment to rise; more likely, unemployment won't fall. The possibility of the latter type of "jobless growth" might be happening now in the US as, to paraphrase the hype, "the information revolution is finally paying off as companies are finally figuring out how to use those PCs." However, the solution to this kind of "jg" would simply be to have faster growth of real GDP (ignoring the environmental effects of such acceleration). COMMENT: This explains why productivity growth which was faster than employment growth didn't produce unemployment in Doug H's historical examples. Consumption increased correspondingly. I'm surprised that Tom W. hasn't pointed out that the alternative to the increase in consumption is the contraction in the work week (the alternative pursued at the turn of the century in response to rising productivity). The implication here is that in the absence of a declining work week or rising standards of material consumption ANY productivity growth, accelerating or not, (even decelerating), will be jobless growth. Terry McDonough
