Just to be clear, I am not advocating promoting the destruction of labor movements or labor laws, not am I confused or surprised by the IMF push to create a labor market most conducive to profits. However, what interests me is that the IMF and its supporting cast have been busy developing indices of labor rigidity and correlating them with growth. These indices seems strange to me. For example, it is hard to imagine that Mexico has a rigid labor market when way more than half of workers work in the informal labor market and most unions work closely with the owners. So, I was looking to learn if there were people or articles that critically examined this line of attack.
Marty On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Jim Devine wrote: > the IMF has a point. The Free Market works best if absolutely all > aspects of human life conform to the assumptions of the > Walras-Arrow-Debreu model. > > But the world will never fit into this straight-jacket, not only > because of such matters as fundamental uncertainty and production > (left out of the WAD model) but because people are people, not > commodities. > > On 7/20/05, Michael Perelman wrote: > > All market failures are really failures to fully adopt market rules. When > > Reagan's > > the economy was tanking despite Reagan's "reforms" Jack Kemp explained that > > the > > problem was that the US had failed to adopt the gold standard. > > -- > Jim Devine > "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" -- Richard Feynman >
