Why should this surprise anyone? Every labour economist worth her salt
knows that unemployment and job loss is a major factor in family breakup
as is suicide, alcoholism, mental illness and crime, all of which are
correlated/related to the incidence of family breakup.
And where does this 'emerging consensus' come from that stable
labour markets are inefficient? Even the OECD backed off that hobbyhorse
in the face of conflicting evidence to the contrary. Indeed, 'churning'
labour markets are only even theoretically efficient in the secondary,
unskilled, labour market. For all jobs where co-operation between
workers, skill development, on-the-job learning, incentives through
promotion, etc. are important (the majority of jobs) excessive turnover
is a major deterrent to efficiency and extremely costly to the
employer. The case of Slovenia which I am familiar with is a case of a
highly rigid external labour market. However studies by Miroslav
Stanojevic have repeated shown that the Slovenes have developed many
institutions of labour market flexibility that are consistent with a
high degree of job security. At that, labour productivity has risen at
a steady rate of 3-4% per year for the last decade and a half or two
decades.
It would appear that it is not only positive results in China that
are totally ignored by the North American media, but also positive
results in Europe as well if they don't agree with the neoliberal
ideology. It is a sad commentary on our academic world that it appears
equally myopic.
Paul Phillips
Michael Perelman wrote:
Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers proposed an analogy between the supposed
rigidity of European labor markets and the stability of European families:
"The U.S. labor market, like its marriage markets, differs from Europe in having
substantially greater "churn"; in any given month in the United States, workers
are
more likely to be fired than are their European counterparts and those without a
match are more likely to be hired. There is an emerging consensus that
restrictions
on churning in European labor markets yield inefficient labor markets with "too
few"
job separations. We do not mean to suggest by analogy that Europe is afflicted
with
too few divorces."
Stevenson, Betsey and Justin Wolfers. 2007. "Marriage and Divorce: Changes and
their
Driving Forces." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21: 2 (Spring): pp. 27-52,
p. 50.
Although they downplay the seriousness of their analogy, they may actually be
on to
something. Economists also know that home ownership, which might also
contribute to
family stability, represents a barrier to labor mobility. In effect, the ideal
members labor force would be people without any attachments. Even better, these
workers sprout like mushrooms already formed, like an 18-years old, age and
expire
on the day of retirement.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com
--
Paul Phillips Professor Emertus, Economics University of Manitoba Home
and Office: 3806 - 36A st., Vernon BC, Canada. ViT 6E9 tel: 1 (250)
558-0830 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
