Concerning the recalculation of the cost of job loss, I look forward to reading Eric's RRPE piece next month. IN the meantime, there appears to be no trend in his series. Gordon et al's efforts to attribute the major postwar macroeconmic events in the U.S. to a shifting balance of power between capital and labor, as measured by the cjl, thus seem to be in jeopardy. Most disturbing iis Eric's report of a exceptionally high cjl in 1983--27 percent-- when the economy was stagnating. Then 22 percent on average, 1952-59, and 24 percent on average, 1960-64: The Golden Age. If the rate of capital accumulation is a positive function of the rate of exploitation, and cjl measures the ability of capital to exploit labor, then these numbers appear to be a problem. Edwin Dickens
