> Charles Brown wrote: > > So the the lump of labor fallacy is a fallacy ?
Due to my ideological blinkers, I had a hard time getting my mind around Tom's emphasis on the LOL fallacy, so maybe it would help if I used an analogy to explain my understanding. I hope that Tom will correct me if I'm wrong. The idea of the LOLF is similar to the idea that "critics of capitalism are tools of the USSR" (replace USSR with al Qaeda today) or that "Marxists believe that relative prices are determined directly by relative labor-values." Establishmentarian types bring out this kind of assertion as being their (mis)understanding of what we think. It's also a strawperson that's used to discredit leftist critics. If you're a critic of capitalism, you suffer from Russophilia (or are soft on terrorism) or believe in the discredited "labor theory of value" (using the establishmentarian's definition). If you think that labor-hours per worker should be reduced, you suffer from the LOLF. But few or any critics of capitalism are Russophiliacs, terror-mongers, simplistic users of the LTV, or adherents of the LOLF. -- Jim Devine "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
