Hi Barry, Two quick things as I run out the door, first, to me, any meaningful unemployment figure should have a definition about employment that is a little better than one hour of paid work per month or some other totally irrelevant variant. For example, we might consider a "job" as one in which a person works a minimum 30 hours per week earning at least minimum wage. I have worked on jobs re piecework and commission that doesn't pay for the work done in the commonly understood way and that is not a job, it is an opportunity that may become a job. Secondly, re FutureWork and Ed Weiss who has asked were we are going on this list. I have read and posted directly to the root causes of unemployment, as have many others. Continually talking about futurework is very frustrating because if you read the archives, most everything has been said or argued. My frustration comes from the fact that the "real world" is not listening, doesn't want to listen, and apparently doesn't want to learn. Today in a List I subscribe to in Toronto and the Ottawa Citizen both talk about all the post secondary school graduates who are not working or can't find work in their training. If they are so educated and frustrated, why aren't they on this List. I would argue that many of these people may have degrees, but they are far from educated in the sense of using their skills and knowledge, along with others to debate and contribute to making change. Individuals such as yourself and others who have posted really great stuff to this list and have other private efforts are a rarity though the quality of the few makes up for the apathy of the many. Respectfully, Thomas Lunde ---------- > From: Barry Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Your emails to futurework > Date: December 7, 1997 9:09 PM > > Tom, > > I live in California and recently divorced a woman from Ottawa who came > here thinking it would be easy to make money. Well, she found out how > little can be read into statistics, especiallly those generated by > propagandists about unemployment. > > It's best to makeup you own catagories. What groups do you think should > be counted as unemployed? Since the economy can provide goods and > services with a nominal input of human labor why should we even worry > about jobs? Make the quantum leap, give up full-employment as a goal! > > Anyway, check my stuf at http://home.earthlink.net/~durable/ > > Barry
