There have been two supporting responses to the latest of my relentless nagging on the list on the subject of cutting working time. A breakthrough!
On Aug 3, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Jim Devine wrote in response to my ultimate question: <snip> > >> Coyle: Or is it time to introduce a drastic cut in the work week? > > good idea, but is there a political movement of sufficient strength to > push this program (hopefully without weekly pay-cuts)? did anyone > advocate this program as part of the Occupy movement? > -- Jim, as Tom Walker pointed out, the short answer to your question is "Yes." But I infer from your question that you think that such an advocacy would be good. But should not economists be talking about this "good idea" so as to bring it to the attention of a wide audience? How many economists brought it up at Occupy? That brings me to Raghu's response. (BYW, thanks to both of you for engaging on this issue.) Raghu wrote, in part: > I think you will find absolutely no argument on PEN-L - not even I > suspect from our resident Tea Partier David Shemano - about the > desirability of this. > > But I don't think it can be done by fiat overnight without causing > huge disruptions. It will have to be done gradually over a number of > years and therefore it is no solution to the immediate problem of > unemployment. I should clarify to agree that cutting working time is not an immediate solution to the problem of unemployment. But the unemployment the US faces is chronic (as well as cyclical) and needs a solution beyond fiscal and monetary steps. So even if we have an immediate problem, is it not a good idea to move immediately on the chronic problem? Gene Gene _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
