quoth Krugman, in yesterday's NY TIMES: >For example, how do you feel about
the "living wage" movement, which in effect wants a large increase
in the minimum wage? That would certainly increase the incomes of the
lowest-paid workers; but it would also surely have at least some adverse
effect on the number of jobs available. <
it's interesting that he totally ignores the research that Bob Pollin and
others have done in answer to Krugman's previous criticism of living wages
along this line.
He continues > If you don't want a society in which everyone is
desperately trying to get ahead in a zero-sum status game, you might
advocate government policies that slow down the rat race: high tax rates,
generous health and unemployment benefits, long mandatory paid vacations,
maybe even a limit on individual working hours. In other words, you might
want to turn America into France. But France has an unemployment rate more
than twice as high as America's, largely because of those same government
policies. <
somehow, he forgets the way in which policies aimed at creating the Euro
encouraged this result, along with the many criticisms of the "US
flexibility good/France welfare state bad" hypothesis that have shown up in
places like CHALLENGE magazine.
finally> Is there any way out of the dilemma? Well, East Germany had full
employment without a rat race -- but it fell a bit short in the life and
liberty departments. I'd say that given the alternatives, the American
system, though not beautiful, still takes the prize. <
so, when all is said in done, scientific economics dredges up patriotism
and anti-communism.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine
