On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 14:56 -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
> BTW, it's interesting that Obama has said stuff that indicates that he
> knows of the limitations of the official unemployment rate. What used
> to be a staple of radical political economists (in contrast to the
> orthodox) has become mainstream. That, of course, why the BLS started
> calculating alternative unemployment rates (under Clinton). Who says
> there's no progress?

Yes it's a positive point.

> Maybe this happens in France, but so far the US BLS has not given in
> to this kind of political pressure. Reagan proposed modifying the
> official unemployment rate a little -- by counting
> domestically-employed military workers as part of the official labor
> force -- that lowered it a bit, but that change didn't last. (Thatcher
> was much, much more successful than Reagan at de-defining the
> unemployment rate.)

Did you look at the 1948-2008 graph I pointed to?

So far I still have exactly zero explanation for why the "inactive"
rate for men 25-54 went from 3% in 1948 to near 10% now (and without
much up and downs, pretty linear). Do you have one? Or any
(peer-reviewed or not) paper refering to this data?

Dean Baker wrote that the BLS is definitely "missing" some
population due to methodology, but that's far from all of the issue.

> Frankly, it's quite unlikely that unemployment -- however measured --
> will ever equal zero in the US, a capitalist country. As Kalecki
> pointed out (applying Marx's concept of the reserve army of the
> unemployed), the existence of unemployment gives employers power over
> workers, allowing profits to be produced. If unemployment goes down
> "too far" (by capitalist standards), it squeezes profits, so they
> punish us with inflation and more inflation.

I of course made up the 20% and 0% number :). 1% jobless rate for 25-54
means that "on average" a person is out of a job for less than 4 monthes
over the 30 years period so zero doesn't make much sense indeed.

Laurent



_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to