The operative word is _empowered_. A labor explosion equivalent to the sit-down strikes of the '30s would be more apt to produce calling out the Army than an acceptance of a 24 hour week.
But the _need_ for radically shorter hours as the necessary basis of a humane society is too obvious to be worth arguing. The only question concerns the political means of achieving that end. Carrol -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 1:00 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] NYT column on Piketty book "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" "Carrol Cox" <[email protected]> wrote: > The phrase, "to introduce a system," implies an agent empowered to do so. > In the lack of such an agent isn't the phrase absurd? There is no lack of an agent so your question is mute. On the other hand, labor hours isn't a good basis for money since it can't be stored. There are also good reasons for having different rates of pay for those with special skills. -- Ron _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
