Sandwichman wrote: > Thanks to Google Books, I'm now sifting through a century of economics > textbooks to document the rise, mutation and consolidation of the > lump-of-labor fallacy, which is falsely attributed as a "cherished > belief" of trade unions and workers. I have nearly 300 citations. Very > rarely does anyone point out the lack of evidence for the claim.
standard economics textbooks don't refer to evidence of any sort unless it fits their preestablished perspective. > Having now published two articles analyzing the contradictions and > unscientific basis of the claim, I patiently await the awakened > consensus of those in the economics field that perhaps there has > indeed been some bias in the past by economists with regard to the > issue of reduced working time. don't hold your breath. > Betting against a century of textbook lore, I've even offered a > $10,000 prize to anyone who can conclusively refute my debunking of > the fallacy claim. Now if only I could enlist the support of ten or > fifteen economics professors for a campaign to set the record straight > on the economics of working time. when are textbooks going to actually describe the political-economic ideas of Marx without gross distortion? (I picked up a _sociology_ book that was equally bad.) -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
