[PLUG-TALK] Chirac's shocker... Iraq.

[Paul Mullen]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 02:45:53AM -0800, Jeme A Brelin wrote:
> 
> > > Also, consider this argument: Unemployment is required to maintain the
> > > economic system.  The business press refers to this as "labor market
> > > flexibility" and it's a very desirable thing.  It's a decrease in job
> > > security that drives down demand for higher wages, better benefits,
> > > and shorter hours and drives up worker productivity.  If the system
> > > requires some people to not hold jobs, then those people are necessary
> > > to the system and should be paid for doing their part.
> >
> > Why should anyone be paid for sitting on they behind?
> 
> Um, the "why" is right there above.  It's just one argument couched in
> economic terms.  Read it again, if you didn't see the answer to your
> question.

Perhaps you could elaborate on what you mean by "the economic system." I
can certainly see how the money power enjoy a healthy degree of
unemployment (gotta have the workers fearing a fate worse than everyday
low wages), but I'm not sure I understand that *any* economic system
requires this.

> Don't confuse mercantilism with capitalism.  Capitalism is a
> post-Enlightenment economic theory.

It seems that if any discussions on this list are to be useful, a few
basic "operational definitions" need to be laid out. I strongly suspect
that what you (Jeme) consider as "capitalism" is far different from what
Joe Average (whoever he is) believes it to be. I think most folks
associate capitalism with a free market, which no one alive today has
likely ever seen in action.


Paul