Keith,

 

Sorry about that, but the assumption is still true. A major mistake is
to look at the actions of others from our point of view - how else?

 

Yet, we should try to see things from the other's point of view. I
said: 

 

One of the Classical Political Assumptions is:
"People seek to satisfy their desires with the least exertion."


Seems to fit the makeup of human beings.

 

You responded:

 

"Not in our modern economy. People at the top end, already working
hard, work even longer hours to raise their status and make themselves
even more visible."

 

Are these people seeking to satisfy your desires with the least
exertion? Or satisfying their own? They have presumably decided this
is the best way to "raise their status and make themselves even more
visible."

 

If they find an easier way to accomplish their desires, will they not
take it?

 

You continued:


"People in the middle and those towards the bottom end, just like the
Luddites of old, resist labour-saving methods in order to justify and
retain the jobs that they have."



Again, they believe they are accomplishing their desires with the
least exertion so they may destroy the machines. You might go in a
different direction, but they were doing their best to accomplish
their desires with the least exertion. It seemed sensible to them at
the time.

 

I had a knockdown, drag out, fight with Hayek on this point. He
pointed out that people exert themselves tremendously to achieve their
desire to climb mountains. Of course the successful mountaineer is the
one who climbs with the least expenditure of exertion. That's the way
to get to the top. 

 

Both assumptions apply. To deny them puts a thinker at a disadvantage.
Your mention of "automation and computerization" are good examples of
the "least exertion" principle.

 

The ideas of "division of labour, hidden hand, comparative advantage"
still apply. They are not monetary concepts, but understandings of
human behavior.

 

You can think of the "unlimited desires" assumption as the reason why
we continually strive and the "least exertion" assumption as the
stimulus to all progress.

 

One must limit the assumptions one makes (something the Neos should
learn. (Economic texts are flooded with assumptions.). Bertrand
Russell said 'two assumptions are better than 16'.

 

Of course you know the two unspoken assumptions of all science.

 

"There is an order in the universe."

 

"The mind of Man can discover that order."

 

Without these, there can be no science.

 

Have a Right Good Christmas!

 

Harry

 

******************************

Henry George School of Los Angeles

Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91043

Tel: 818 352-4141

******************************

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith
Hudson
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 11:14 PM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Cc: Keith Hudson; Harry Pollard
Subject: Re: [Futurework] I like Ike. (sort of): Thomas Jefferson vs.
Larry Summers

 

Harry,

At 15:10 24/11/2009 -0800, you wrote:



One of the Classical Political Assumptions is:
"People seek to satisfy their desires with the least exertion."
Seems to fit the makeup of human beings.


Not in our modern economy. People at the top end, already working
hard, work even longer hours to raise their status and make themselves
even more visible.
People in the middle and those towards the bottom end, just like the
Luddites of old, resist labour-saving methods in order to justify and
retain the jobs that they have.

In hunter-gatherer times 100% of the people worked;
In agricultural times 90% of the people worked
In industrial times 80% of the people worked
In post-industrial times we are rapidly going through the 70%. 60%.
50% markers and are approaching a situation not far off in which only
about 30% will be needed to keep the system going -- the rest (if
they're lucky enough to have a job) are only doing one another's
laundry at present because we have far more people than we need.




We don't much like exertion and try to reduce it as much as possible,
so the idea of expanding the total amount of workseems to be a no-no.

The other Classical Assumption is:

Peoples desires are unlimited.

(It was actually Man seeks  .  .  .and Mans desires  .  .  .but Ive
politically corrected it.)

With unlimited desires, it seems that if we all worked 24 hours a day
we could never satisfy unlimited desires. So finding things to do is
no problem. Yet, we have involuntary unemployment. 

Perhaps, instead of trying to find work for people, we should
concentrate on why they can't find work when there is so much to be
done.

Well, the Classical Political Economists knew why, something that
seems to be beyond the present generation of neo-Classicals.


Many of the adages of the Classical economists -- division of labour,
hidden hand, comparative advantage -- still apply in principle but
they were only the money-measured adaptations of the social services
that people always did for one another (that is, when they knew one
another -- when they knew that, on balance, all effort would be
reciprocated in kind one day). Say, Smith, Ricardo etc hadn't the
slightest inkling of the increasing automation and computerization
coming along.

And we can have little idea of how it's all going to shake out. My own
view is that when cheap energy has gone for good and populations have
declined enormously (advanced countries' birth rates are already
showing the trend) then we'll be back to smaller communities and
substantial use of solar power again. The ultimate end of the
fantastic explosion of modern research into DNA will be the dawn of
DNA-based production methods, and when communities will be trading DNA
formulae and not having to haul goods halfway round the world.

Keith





Harry

 

******************************

Henry George School of Los Angeles

Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91043

Tel: 818 352-4141

******************************

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Sandwichman
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 7:17 PM
To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: [Futurework] I like Ike. (sort of): Thomas Jefferson vs.
Larry Summers

 

http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2009/11/i-like-ike-sort-of.html

 

In a speech he never gave, Ike quoted Thomas Jefferson: "If we can

prevent government from wasting the labors of the people under the

pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy."

 

Compare with Summers: "It may be desirable to have a given amount of

work shared among more people. But that's not as desirable as

expanding the total amount of work."

 

-- 

Sandwichman

_______________________________________________

Futurework mailing list

[email protected]

https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Keith Hudson, Saltford, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org
<http://www.evolutionary-economics.org/> >,
<www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020 <http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/> /
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/> >, <www.handlo.com
<http://www.handlo.com/> > 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to