How far do we go in monetizing services? Of course there is no end of work to be done in society. Years ago much work was done for love or obligation or just because it was there to be done. Over the years we have brought much of this work into the economy and called it job creation. This is a thorny area to discuss, but consider what happens to our national accounts when someone who once was a "stay at home mom" gets a job and contracts with a nanny, day care, maids, cleaning services, etc. GDP rises and the shape and nature of society changes. Elders who were cared for at home are now in "senior's residences" etc. GDP is boosted once again.
This is what a complex market society looks like. Sell one's talents in the workplace and use the money to buy a host of work that would otherwise have been done by the individual. It is a "win win" outcome. But.....when everything has a price something intangible is lost. Not saying to go back to "barefoot in the kitchen" but am saying that we should remember that society is about balance. Not all work has to be done via a transaction. A guaranteed annual income might allow for a lot of work to be done: without having to price each transaction (and without having to tax these transactions) Arthur -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Charles Brass Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 6:44 PM To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION Subject: Re: [Futurework] Manufacturing's Fall Arthur To suggest that people might no longer be needed as workers is to fundamentally confuse 'work' with 'job'. There is now, and always has been, more work to be done than we have people capable of doing it. What we might be facing is a bit of a crisis of knowing how to convert some of that work into a job (for which someone earns income) but if there is one thing the past hundred or so years has taught us it is that humans are endlessly capable of creating what we want. A hundred years ago, economics had no way of valuing services, now the service economy is much bigger than the physical economy. So long as we have an exchange based economy, we will find a way to value that exchange and that will put plenty of spending money in people's hands. -- Charles Brass mobile 0409 198 738 Quoting Arthur Cordell <[email protected]>: > Maybe the future is less about new jobs but more about some form of > guaranteed annual income. > > > > Sure there will be new jobs and people will fill them. But maybe there are > a host of people who are not needed in the economy as producers but are > needed as consumers. > > > > How do we get income to people who are no longer needed as workers? How do > we do this and still maintain the dignity of the individual? > > > > Arthur > > > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson > Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 10:47 AM > To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION > Subject: Re: [Futurework] Manufacturing's Fall > > > > The drift of Louis Uchitelle's article is utterly wrong. It's also > ridiculous to say, as Thea Lea says at the end, that you can't rebuild the > middle class without manufacturing. > > Manufacturing can look after itself -- as and when it's required by the > economy. If America or Western Europe don't do it, then the Chinese will -- > and supply the products to us cheaper than we can do. Why should > industrialization be extended in the advanced countries any more than it has > to? > > What's much more important is an altogether radicalized educational system > for the increasingly specialized jobs of tomorrow's world. In 1700 in the > UK, when parents had to pay for schooling for their children, literacy was > at 65%. It's only 75% now despite our state school system and enforced > attendance. I don't suppose the literacy rate in the US is any better. The > whole system needs a total overhaul -- unless we want the Chinese to beat at > that, too. > > Keith Hudson > > . > > At 09:45 21/07/2009 -0400, you wrote: > > > > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01CA09E8.05C9BBD0" > Content-Language: en-us > > July 21, 2009 NY Times > > > Obamas Strategy to Reverse Manufacturings Fall > > > > > By LOUIS > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/u/louis_uchitell > e/index.html?inline=nyt-per> UCHITELLE > > If the Obama administration has a strategy for reviving manufacturing, > Douglas Bartlett would like to know what it is. > > Buffeted by foreign competition, Mr. Bartlett recently closed his printed > circuit board factory, founded 57 years ago by his father, and laid off the > remaining 87 workers. Last week, he auctioned off the machinery, and soon he > will raze the factory itself in Cary, Ill. > > > > The property taxes are no longer affordable,Mr. Bartlett said glumly, so I > am going to tear down the building and sit on the land, and hopefully sell > it after the recession > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/r/recession_an > d_depression/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> when land prices hopefully > rise. > > > > Though manufacturing has long been in decline, the loss of factory jobs has > been especially brutal of late, with nearly two million disappearing since > the recession began in December 2007. Even a few chief executives, heading > companies that have shifted plenty of production abroad, are beginning to > express alarm. > > > > We must make a serious commitment to manufacturing and exports. This is a > national imperative,Jeffrey > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/i/jeffrey_r_imme > lt/index.html?inline=nyt-per> R. Immelt, chairman and chief executive of > General > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_electric_comp > any/index.html?inline=nyt-org> Electric, said in a speech last month, while > acknowledging that G.E. was enriched by its overseas operations too. > > > > President > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/i > ndex.html?inline=nyt-per> Obama, agreeing in effect, has declared, The > fight for American manufacturing is the fight for Americas future. > > > > The United States ranks behind every industrial nation except France in the > percentage of overall economic activity devoted to manufacturing 13.9 > percent, the World > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/w/world_b > ank/index.html?inline=nyt-org> Bank reports, down 4 percentage points in a > decade. The 19-month-old recession has contributed noticeably to this > decline. Industrial production has fallen 17.3 percent, the sharpest drop > during a recession since the 1930s. > > > > So far, however, Mr. Obamas administration has not come up with a formal > plan to address the rapid decline. Instead, it has pursued ad hoc > initiatives bailing out General > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corpor > ation/index.html?inline=nyt-org> Motors and Chrysler > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/chrysler_llc/index.ht > ml?inline=nyt-org> , for example, and pushing green energy by supporting the > manufacture of items like wind > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/w/wind_power/i > ndex.html?inline=nyt-classifier> turbines and solar panels. > > > > We want to make sure that we grow a manufacturing base for renewable > energy,said Matthew Rogers, a senior adviser in the Energy Department, > explaining that this is being accomplished in part by accelerating loan > guarantees from zeroin the Bush years. > > > > Xunming Deng, a physicist and the chairman of the Xunlight Corporation, sees > himself as a beneficiary of what he describes as the Obama administrations > more flexible loan guarantees. His factory in Toledo, Ohio, with 100 > employees, is in the early stages of making solar panels, and Dr. Deng is > already planning to quadruple the plants size. He has applied to the Energy > Department for a $120 million loan guarantee. If he gets it, he will not > have to pay the hefty fees charged for loan guarantees before Mr. Obama took > office. > > > > Getting rid of that fee makes the loan guarantee very attractive and very > helpful,Dr. Deng said. We cant grow as fast without it. > > > > Beyond energy, the administrations approach gradually outlines the elements > of a manufacturing policy what Lawrence > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/lawrence_h_sum > mers/index.html?inline=nyt-per> H. Summers, director of the National > Economic Council, described as a number of things to support manufacturing. > > The auto bailout, for all its improvisations, served notice that the > administration would probably rescue any giant manufacturer it deemed too > big (or too iconic) to fail, and would help the suppliers of failing giants > transition to other industries. > > > > The Buy America clause in the stimulus > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/united_state > s_economy/economic_stimulus/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> package > pointedly favors the purchase of American-made goods for infrastructure > projects. The Commerce Department is adding $100 million, more than double > the current outlay, to a program that helps American manufacturers operate > more effectively. And trade agreements negotiated by the Bush administration > agreements that would make the United States more open to imported > manufactured goods have been allowed to languish in Congress. > > The administrations policy is evolving in the right direction,said > Representative Sander M. Levin, Democrat of Michigan, who is particularly > concerned about auto imports. I think they have essentially shed the > political chains that prevented government from having a role in > manufacturing. They are working their way toward what makes sense. > > Not everyone agrees. > > > > Bush and Obama,Mr. Bartlett said scornfully, one is as bad as the other in > terms of manufacturing policy. > > > > He acknowledged that the recession was the immediate reason for the demise > of his familys business. But what really did it in, he said in an interview, > was the competition from less expensive Chinese circuit boards less > expensive, he argued, because the Chinese undervalue their currency and this > administration, like the ones before it, lets them get away with it. > > > > Our orders went from $8 million at an annual rate to $4 million, which was > not enough to make money,he said. > > > > Mr. Bartlett, who is co-chairman of an organization called the Fair Currency > Coalition, said that Chinese competitors charged only $1 for each printed > circuit board sold in this country, while he charged $1.40. Like many > economists and government officials, he says he believes the Chinese > currency is artificially undervalued. As a countermeasure, he said the Obama > administration should impose a 40 percent tariff on imported Chinese goods. > > > > I can compete against Chinese entrepreneurs, and Chinese labor cost is not > that big a factor,he said, but I cannot compete against the Chinese > governments manufacturing policies. > > > > Manufacturing has long been viewed as an essential pillar of a powerful > economy. It generates millions of well-paid jobs for those with only a high > school education, a huge segment of the population. No other sector > contributes more to the nations overall productivity, economists say. And as > manufacturing weakens, the country becomes ever more dependent on imports of > merchandise, computers, machinery and the like running up a trade deficit > that in time could undermine the > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/currency/dol > lar/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> dollar and the nations capacity to > sustain so many imports. > > > > One tactic for strengthening the manufacturing sector, in the > administrations view, would be a shift in tax policy. The research and > development tax credit, which is now subject to renewal by Congress, would > be made permanent, encouraging much more R.& D. among manufacturers, a > senior Commerce Department official argued. And foreign taxes paid on > profits earned overseas would not be deductible in this country until the > profits were repatriated, a restriction that might discourage locating > factories abroad. > > > > The goal is to arrest manufacturings dizzying decline. It was the pillar on > which we built the middle class,said Thea Lee, policy director for the > A.F.L.-C.I.O. > <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/america > n_federation_of_laborcongress_of_industrial_organizations/index.html?inline= > nyt-org> , and it is hard to see how you rebuild the middle class without > reviving manufacturing. > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > Keith Hudson, Bath, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org > <http://www.evolutionary-economics.org/> >, > <http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020 <http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/> > / <http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/> > > > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
