On Sep 24, 2014, at 1:03 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Marv Gandall <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sep 23, 2014, at 1:50 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Per the article you cited, the results seem rather mixed. > > I didn’t see this in the article, but perhaps a case can be made. In what > way, “mixed”? > > > > Well, inflation is up and unemployment is way down. Against that, you have > the lack of wage growth. I think the GDP numbers are hard to interpret one > way or another, but a negative "real GDP" number may merely be a reflection > of high inflation. > > I don't think a prolonged period of low unemployment is compatible with low > wage growth, so something will have to give. But it seems to me that this > could go either way.
It could. But the types of jobs that are being created are typically being filled by a low-paid, part-time, transient, dispersed “precariat” rather than by the highly concentrated, class conscious, full-time unionized industrial proletariat of a bygone era, so it’s not a given that lower unemployment will result in higher wage growth. Also, I don’t know that I would characterize the reduction in unemployment, while positive, as being “way down”. The relatively low jobless rate in Japan predates Abe assuming office in December 2012. The official rate was then 4.3%. At the end of last quarter, it had dropped to 3.7%. Inflation has risen more sharply, from near zero at the end of 2012 to over 2% now. That would be positive were wages keeping pace and contributing to a revival of consumer spending. But it represents a significant fall in real wages for those workers, probably a majority, whose wages have been stagnant or falling. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
