I agree fully with the aim of delinking benefits from employment. On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Robert Naiman <[email protected] > wrote:
> No, I am definitely not against cutting hours of work; in fact, I > suggested ways to do so. I suspect that in the U.S. a frontal assault > for cutting the official work week is not likely to succeed anytime in > the next twenty years. To the extent that that is true, I think that > argues for consideration of more oblique attacks on the length of the > work week. > > Another oblique attack on the length of the work week I would support: > increasing the social wage to delink benefits from full time > employment. More people would work less than forty hours in the labor > market if working forty hours weren't tied to benefits. > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Eugene Coyle <[email protected]> wrote: > > Robert, > > > > I like most of your list of good things to do -- teachers aides, > public transit, home health care. What's not to like? Sort of today's > list for what were once CCC or WPA programs. > > > > Tom Walker, as he often does, goes layers deeper in his response > to you. > > > > But I take it that you are not against cutting hours of work, simply > mentioning additional things you'd support. > > > > Gene > > > > > > On May 27, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > > >> How much could actual work hours be decreased by decreasing the > >> unwaged portion of the working day, through increases in the social > >> wage? > >> > >> Suppose that there were a big expansion in after-school programs, so > >> that 95% of school-age children were in them. Wouldn't working parents > >> have more free time as a result, helping to fulfill the dream of > >> "eight hours for what we will"? > >> > >> Suppose that there were a big expansion in money available to employ > >> home health care workers. Wouldn't that replace a lot of unwaged work? > >> > >> Suppose that there were a big expansion in the employment of teachers' > >> aides. Wouldn't that allow teachers to intervene more, reducing the > >> burden on working parents? > >> > >> What if child care were more subsidized? > >> > >> If public transportation infrastructure were improved, might this > >> reduce commute time? > >> > >> Might some of these and similarly-minded efforts to reduce unwaged > >> labor be easier to achieve than mandating a reduction in the waged > >> work week? Wouldn't they also disproportionately benefit those at the > >> bottom of the labor market? > >> > >> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Tom Walker <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> Tim is making the same argument that Galbraith made in The Affluent > Society. > >>> I don't see this argument as antithetical to the demand for shorter > hours, > >>> though. It seems to me he is doing a bit of unconventional framing as a > >>> conversation starter. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Eugene Coyle <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> In the NY Times of 5/27/2012 there is an essay by Tim Jackson, who is > a > >>>> prominent UK advocate of shorter working time, and associated with > The New > >>>> Economics Foundation and its demand for a 21 hour work week. > >>>> > >>>> Jackson makes a shocking error and compounds that with what is a > >>>> profoundly wrong-headed strategy to achieve his goals. > >>>> > >>>> The Opinion Piece is at > >>>> > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/27/opinion/sunday/lets-be-less-productive.html > . > >>>> > >>>> The error is this: He has confused "productivity gains" with > "working > >>>> faster." The examples he gives, of doctors seeing more patients an > hour, or > >>>> teachers teaching ever bigger classes, are not productivity gains but > >>>> speed-ups. If he'd used a factory example and talked of speeding up > the > >>>> line, perhaps the error would have jumped out at him. > >>>> > >>>> Jackson recommends a change, an overturning really, of the culture of > >>>> capitalism and would achieve that, it seems, by telling us it is a > good > >>>> idea. > >>>> > >>>> Sharply cutting the work week is attainable, has frequently been > achieved > >>>> before in the USA. Jackson's recommendation might follow, but cannot > lead a > >>>> sharp cut in hours. > >>>> > >>>> Gene > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> pen-l mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Tom Walker (Sandwichman) > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> pen-l mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Robert Naiman > >> Policy Director > >> Just Foreign Policy > >> www.justforeignpolicy.org > >> [email protected] > >> _______________________________________________ > >> pen-l mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > > pen-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > > -- > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
