Actually the gender gap, at least in income is not narrowing by BLS
statistics, it is widening. ellen
>Shawgi A. Tell reproduces every tired leftist cliche about the U.S. labor
>market in just three paragraphs, an impressive achievement.
>
>>I think it is necessary to avoid focusing on the appearance of
>>things and move directly to the essence of matters. In terms of
>>unemployment, the so-called lowest unemployment rate in the last few
>>decades conceals numerous realities which have been thoroughly discussed
>>by many (e.g., Holly Sklar in Chaos or Community? 1995). If one sees only
>>4.6% unemployment without looking into the sort and kind of jobs being
>>created, forgets the bias of "official" data, focuses only on unemployment
>>as opposed to the jobless rate and so on then one will arrive at an
>>inaccurate impression of things. One will think that things are
>>actually going well when in fact the opposite is the case.
>
>The point isn't that "things are actually going well" - the point is that
>they're a lot better than they were 5 years ago. Real wages are rising, and
>the race and gender gaps are narrowing. Sure lots of shit jobs are being
>created, but that's not the whole story, or you wouldn't be seeing a pickup
>in the average wage.
>
>> For example, according to Dembo and Morehouse, the 1993 jobless
>>rate was nearly 14%. They also conclude that "With each succeeding
>>recovery period, the *Jobless Rate* has fallen less and less" (The
>>Underbelly of the U.S. Economy: Joblessness and the Pauperization of Work
>>in America, 1994).
>
>Yes, the official unemployment rate understates reality, but it always has,
>and the trend has been down. And, if the jobless rate, no matter how you
>slice it, is at a 24-year low, then Dembo & Morehouse's claim is no longer
>true. I think this needs to be recognized, explained, and analyzed for its
>political significance.
>
>> Besides other things the 4.6% unemployment rate masks the fact
>>that the productive forces continue to be destroyed by capitalism.
>>Technological developments are increasingly making the service sector look
>>more and more like the manufacturing sector.
>
>What does this mean? U.S. industrial production continues to rise, and
>manufacturing capacity (according to the Fed's industrial
>production/capacity utilization series) is expanding at the fastest rate in
>30 years. Besides, I thought capitalism was famous for expanding the
>productive forces at the expense of everything else.
>
>Doug
