---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 07:35:08 +0100 (BST) From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: uk-policy unemployment and inequality I am sure Gavin Cameron is right. If only we were all economists and diligent enough to read the excellent work of Steve Nickell we would understand the nature of unemployment better. But just for the busy and less gifted perhaps he could explain why David Chapman's 'work-spreading tax' falls foul of the 'lump of labour fallacy'. I understood that the fallacy was to believe that the amount of work was fixed. I don't see why a tax that has the effect of restricting the supply of labour (as the WST does?) sould be fallacious in this way. And surely if it is a wage subsidy as David Chapman suggests, it is the other side of the coin to Gavin Cameron's point that one of the explanations for high unemployment is high labour taxes or high minimum wages. ------------------------------------------------------------- Posted to uk-policy, a service of Nexus. http://www.netnexus.org/ Hosting and email provided by new media consultants On-Line Publishing Regards, Tom Walker ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ #408 1035 Pacific St. Vancouver, B.C. V6E 4G7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 669-3286 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
