First of all, if you read my post, I in no way said training and education programs are a "scam", nor did I say that Phil Harvey said so. What I said was that any policy program to reduce joblessness that did not address the issue of job creation was insufficient. It does not mean that I am against education or training. It has nothing to do with whether or not there has been job creation since 1960 (plus your statement is really sloppy since it disregards so many things like population changes, unemployment differentials between different demographic groups, etc.). But in any case, I will support job creation as long as there is any unemployment at all. Brad, do you think human capital theory explains, e.g., wage or employment differentials by 'race'? Mat Forstater p.s. Don't "y'all" me please, Brad. -----Original Message----- From: Brad De Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, September 01, 1999 8:49 AM Subject: [PEN-L:10522] Re: Bonelessness... >>I have heard Phil Harvey of Rutgers Law School use this story on more than >>one occasion in public presentations. No matter how much dogs are trained >>to be good bone gatherers, as long as the number of bones remain fixed, >>there will still be dogs left without bones. Even if all dogs had excellent >>training, this still holds. So training may be good, but by itself it does >>not address chronic bonelessness. If affirmative action programs are >>instituted, some dogs may be assisted in getting bones, but others will be >>displaced, leading to continued bonelessness as well as resentment... >... > > >Do y'all allow your students to learn that employment in the United >States has risen from 66 million in 1960 to 133 million today? > >The U.S. economy has lots of problems, but a fixed and ungrowing >supply of jobs is not one of them. And to suggest that >education-and-training programs are a scam because there is a fixed >supply of jobs seems to me to be very, very, very wrong... > > >Brad DeLong >
