tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post6909577436853903161..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Dean Baker is Shrill!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-26904568383602164512009-10-28T15:00:22.659-04:002009-10-28T15:00:22.659-04:00rppe,
You have me confused here. Where is the ir...rppe,<br /><br />You have me confused here. Where is the irony? In the link to Randall Wray? Actually, Wray has been responding in a very reasonable way to Sandwichman over on his own blog, now that I have looked. Does not correspond with Sandwichman's strong complaints about his conduct at all. <br /><br />As I said before here, my take on the Hayden study is that there might have been a reduction in France of the unemployment rate of about 1% due to the work rules laws of 1998 and 2000, not sure. I think that would be less than the 350,000 number that S-man claims Hayden claims for it, but not substantially less so.<br /><br />Regarding the German case, they seem to have a mixed policy of encouraging work sharing and increased public funding support. It is true that Germany has been hit less hard by this recession than many other countries.rosserjb@jmu.eduhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09300046915843554101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-42412410653069687392009-10-28T13:15:52.052-04:002009-10-28T13:15:52.052-04:00Oh for the love of god and cute babies does anyone...Oh for the love of god and cute babies does anyone get god damned irony any more?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-48240146317578109912009-10-28T10:39:29.207-04:002009-10-28T10:39:29.207-04:00Walker, Now you've confused me to no end. I w...Walker, Now you've confused me to no end. I was under the impression that you are campaigning for fewer hours of individual work time as a means to more work for others. Now you say the Germans have it wrong. Is that only because their government is in some way funding the reduction of individual hours of work? I don't disagree with the basic contention of less work time for all leading to more work for others, but doesn't that mean that there will be an extra cost? I've always understood you to mean that the goal is less work, but equal pay, for the shorter hours that is. Have I been misunderstanding the entire argument?<br /><br />Also, here is a real life example of more work for a few, to their financial advantage, but less work for others (who could have worked some parts of the 80 hour weeks described.) <br /><br />"With Contract’s Help, Carnegie Crew Draws Big Pay" NY Times, last night and this morning.<br />http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/28/arts/music/28hands.html?_r=1&ref=artsJacknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-10972216182444809222009-10-28T07:46:59.315-04:002009-10-28T07:46:59.315-04:00What the Germans do is de facto a state-financed m...What the Germans do is de facto a state-financed measure. There is no tax credit involved - it's just plain state spending (o.k., formally it's social insurance, but that's a difference without a difference). And it sure as hell works only as long as that spending is kept up.<br /><br />You said that you are opposed to all this big-government stuff. In fact, you were building a barricade, waving a banner and shouting the slogan "Syndicalists, anarchists. libertarians and Austrians of the world, unite against your common oppressor, the big Leviathan and the parasitic tribe of opportunists feeding off of it: the academic economists of all stripes! They talk welfare, we answer: fare thee well!"<br />I'd be far more interested in learning from you why unions are not capable of making successful demands for, e.g., longer vacations in the U.S.Joergnoreply@blogger.com